Midnight Meme Of The Day!

by Noah

At this point, it's obvious that anyone who votes for a Republican is completely comfortable with, among other nasty things, the concept of white supremacy. The party's endorsement of it used to have a behind closed doors aspect about it but, now, with Trump as their leader and frontman, they proudly put it on display every day. They call it "winning."

Good North Carolinians can make whatever excuses they want, but the fact is you are who you vote for and North Carolina is a red hat=hatred state until the good North Carolinians turn out in numbers that can change that perception. Case in point: Early voting in Tuesday's NC-09 Special Election went well for Dan McCready, the Democratic candidate, especially in suburban areas. McCready might have done better if he was more than just a Republican with a D next to his name but, as it was, his percentages ran ahead of his party's percentages in in the district in recent elections but a heavy Republican Party/White Supremacy Party turn out on election day, particularly in rural sections of the district won the race for their guy, Dan Bishop.

Bishop won overall by 2%. Grand Wizard-in-Chief Donald Trump immediately took credit for the victory due to his pre-election rally in Fayetteville but Trump glosses over the fact that a Republican won the district by 6% in the last election and that both he and fellow racist Mittens "Free Stuff" Romney pulled 12% when their names were on the ballot in recent years. That down-turning trend is a presidential approval poll all by itself.

Let's be sure not to make excuses for Repug voters in NC-9 (or anywhere else). Trump went to Fayetteville and gave his bizarro scorched earth litany of lies and the KKK fans eagerly gobbled it up. "He speaks like me," they say. Yup, he speaks white supremacy, misogyny, and hate of the month. You could say they must have no self-respect to be so easily led by the lies and steaming bullcrap laid out in detail at the first of my included links but, when the lies are what amount to your favorite bedtime stories... The bottom line is, as I said, you are who you vote for.

Now all we need are candidates that can motivate the decency of non-Republicans and out-inspire what the Republican Party has to offer their kind. I wait and I wait and I wait. "Surely tomorrow. Not today. Surely tomorrow."

IN-05 Is Very Similar To NC-09-- But Jennifer Christie Isn't Much Like Dan McCready

Last night, Team Blue was disappointed that their candidate in NC-09 was defeated by Team Red's candidate. In a gerrymandered R+8 suburban/rural district-- where Trump had beaten Hillary 54.4% to 42.8%-- Republican Dan beat Democratic Dan by less than 2 points. Democratic Dan outspent Republican Dan $5,810,131 to $1,471,452. So how-- and why-- did Democratic Dan get so close to winning but still fall short?

Democratic Dan is a Blue Dog who campaigned on a defensive, fairly uninspiring DCCC platform that opposed the Green New Deal, opposed Medicare-for-All and promised to not ban the sale of assault weapons. It was a Republican-lite strategy that was meant to take progressives for granted while luring moderate Republicans to vote for a right-of-center Democrat. The strategy worked in 2018-- almost entirely in less red districts-- but it usually flops the same way it came up short last night in North Carolina.

I want to introduce you to a very similar congressional district, in Indiana, the 5th. A big plurality of the votes in the congressional elections there come from Hamilton County, basically the affluent suburbs north of Indianapolis. The second largest number of votes come from northern Indianapolis itself (Marion County), a Democratic stronghold. All or part of 6 other counties make up the district-- which is almost 40% rural. in 2016, Trump beat Hillary 53.1% to 41.3%-- about the same 12 points Trump won by in NC-09. The progressive Democrat competing for the nomination in IN-05 has two advantages over Dan McCready. In 2020, this will be an open seat because Susan Brooks-- like so many of her constituents-- is sick of Trump, and retiring. And, perhaps more important, the Democrat with the best chance to win the open-seat race is running on a full-fledged progressive platform: Green New Deal, Medicare-for-All, rural investment, gun safety, consumer protection, equal pay for equal work, workers' rights, LGBTQ equality, Choice...

Meet Jennifer Christie, a mom of four young children, a scientist (environmental chemist), a science educator, a person of faith. Jennifer lost her mom, a nurse, to cancer. When she got sick, she lost her insurance coverage and before she died nearly lost her home due to medical expenses. Too many Americans know that story first-hand. Today, Blue America endorsed Jennifer Christie. She's a natural leader and we were impressed with her abilities and with the aspirations for her community that are behind her decision to run for Congress. Please take a look at what she had to say in the guest post below and consider contributing to her campaign by clicking on the 2020 Blue America congressional thermometer on the right. Remember, Dan McCready would only talk about abstract "access" to healthcare, the way the GOP and DCCC do. On her website, Jennifer wrote that "It’s time we simplify the process to allow for single-payer healthcare that guarantees health care for every American without exception. We have already proven that the Medicare system works. Guaranteeing health care as a human right is simply the right thing to do." Dan McCready said he was for universal background checks but against banning the sale of assault weapons. On her website, Jennifer writes "High-capacity magazines and military-style assault weapons have no place in the civilian world and should be banned." Clear as a bell!

Do you remember Dan Canon from the 2018 election cycle? It was Dan who introduced us to Jennifer and who recommends her highly. This morning he told us that "Jennifer is a unique blend that you rarely see in congressional candidates. She's got the courage to talk about the issues that really matter to progressives, and the small-town, Midwestern kindness that helps her connect with the undecided and win them over to our side."

Leadership
by Jennifer Christie

Someone recently asked me about leadership and what kind of leader I would be in Congress. I have been a leader in many areas of my life.  I’ve chaired committees for nonprofits, corporations, and community organizations. I’ve managed projects and people in multiple countries, taught students, and built a profitable business from the ground up while coaching many other women to do the same. By all traditional measures, I have been a leader most of my life. But position doesn’t really define a leader because we see people in high level positions who fail to lead every day.

A leader possess the universally respected qualities of honesty, integrity, and courage. Perhaps the most important characteristic, however, is kindness. When kindness is coupled with courage and honesty, real change can happen because a person who is both courageous and kind will travel the good path and bring many people with them.

I have watched for years as greed and corruption have driven decisions in Washington, and simply cannot sit by and watch any longer. My only motivation is to leave a better country and planet for our children. I am clear about who I serve and our purpose, and my votes are not for sale.

Many will look at a midwestern mom of four children and under-estimate her. However, kindness and courage are weapons of change in an army of people equipped with faith and a greater purpose. Our campaign is full of people who are highly skilled, contagiously optimistic, and simply unstoppable.

So what kind of leader would I be? Simply put: I will fight for you like a mom fights for her kids. And I don’t know anything more powerful than a mother acting on behalf of her children. I will do it with kindness, courage, and an unwavering dedication to solving the Climate Crisis, Health Care for All, and claiming our democracy for the People.

NC-09-- The Greater Of Two Evils Candidate Wins

Nice outfits, ladies

Democratic pollsters showed their Dan winning by a hair. Republican pollsters showed their Dan winning by a hair. And non-partisan pollsters showed the race as too close to call. I had no doggie in this race. The last thing I was looking for was another yellow-bellied Blue Dog who had already announced that if elected he would vote against banning the sales of assault rifles, vote against Medicare-for-All and against the Green New Deal. There was only one thing that could turn out progressives in numbers big enough to make him win-- Trump hatred. (So... keep this factoid in mind from the new Washington Post/ABC News poll from yesterday: Independent voters-- crucial in a district like NC-09-- have turned on Trump. "Trump’s overall approval rating among independents is deeply underwater, with 36 percent approving of his job performance and 58 percent disapproving. That compares with a narrower negative split of 43 percent approval to 54 percent disapproval two months ago." Sensing Bishop-- who dressed identically to Trump on Monday night-- would lose, GOP Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) tried lowering expectations Tuesday morning. Although the NRCC and its allies have poured over $6 million into the race, Scalise called it "a very tough swing district," an odd way to describe a district with a PVI of R+8, where Trump beat Hillary 54.4% to 42.8%. Bishop won anyway, narrowly in a red, gerrymandered district like NC-09.

In the end, it was Republican Dan 96,081 (50.74%) and Blue Dog Dan 92,144 (48.66) with a few votes still to be counted. What it came down to was that Blue Dog Dan's win in Mecklenburg County (55.91%) wasn't big enough to overcome Republican Dan's win in Union County (59.95%).

In the end, it may have been Trump's last minute Monday night rally in Fayetteville that decided the race. The AP noted that Trump-- who brought Pence along too-- was "trying to prove his political clout by pushing" right-wing Republican Dan Bishop while using his divisive rhetorical, painting "a bleak picture of a nation that he claimed would be overrun with crime, poverty and immigrants if Democrats seize power in Washington."

While the stakes for the House are high, Trump's trademark rallies inevitably become more about him than the local candidate, as he uses the stage to settle political scores, sharpen attacks and take on perceived foes. With an eye to his own reelection next fall, he touted his administration's accomplishments but also urged voters to give him more time.

"That's why we need four more years," Trump said at the nearly 90-minute rally. "It's got to seed-- it's a plant. It has to grow. It has to grow those roots. That's why 2020 is just as important. Because they will try to take it away."

Trump's appearance Monday emerged as a test of the president's pull with voters. The special election could offer clues about the mindset of Republicans in the suburbs, whose flight from the party fueled the GOP's 2018 House election losses.

The president enjoys wide popularity within his own party, but a GOP defeat in a red-leaning state could, when combined with a wave of recent bad headlines, portend trouble for his reelection campaign. But before leaving Washington, Trump dismissed questions of whether a poor result for the Republican candidate would serve as a warning sign in next year's elections.

"No, I don't see it as a bellwether," Trump said.

After a light rally schedule of late, the president had plenty of new material to work with.

Chief among them was the White House's worries about the impact an economic downturn could have on a president who has made a strong economy his central argument for a second term. Trump advisers worry that moderate Republican and independent voters who have been willing to give him a pass on some of his incendiary policies and rhetoric would blame him-- and, in particular, his trade war with China-- for slowing down the economy.

Trump offered up a robust defense of the trade war with Beijing. He pushed for Congress to approve his new U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade deal. And he exaggerated the number of miles constructed on his promised border wall.

Trump has increasingly turned to culture-war issues to rev up his core supporters.

He's leveled harsh criticism at majority African American cities, like Baltimore, and delivered repeated broadsides against four liberal Democratic congresswomen of color. Those attacks have been cheered by Trump's advisers, who are bullish on running a campaign critical of Democrats they cast as socialist and unpatriotic.

Monday's rally was held just over 100 miles from the site of a Trump rally in July where "send her back" chants aimed at a Somali-born American congresswoman rattled the Republican Party and seemed to presage an ugly reelection campaign.

The chant was not heard Monday.

Previewing what will surely be his own reelection pitch, Trump repeatedly painted the Democrats as a party that has moved to the extreme left on issues like immigration, abortion and health care.

"You don't have any choice. You have to vote for me," Trump told the crowd. "What are you going to do: Put one of these crazy people running? They are so far left."

"Your way of life is under assault by these people," he claimed.

Trump also notably expressed his support for the Second Amendment against the backdrop of a recent spate of deadly mass shootings. It comes as congressional Democrats push for expanded background checks for gun purchases and as Trump has flip-flopped on the issue amid pressure from the National Rifle Association.

...The district has been held by the GOP since 1963. In 2016, Trump won the district by 11 percentage points. Should Bishop defeat Democrat Dan McCready, it could give Trump room to assert that he pulled Bishop over the top. If McCready prevails or Bishop wins by a whisker, it will suggest GOP erosion and raise questions about Trump's and his party's viability for 2020.

"This will tell us if Trump can carry candidates through suburban districts or not," said Sarah Chamberlain, president of the Republican Main Street Partnership, which represents moderate Republicans. If not, she said, the GOP must "work harder to address the concerns of suburban individuals, mainly women."

CNN's fact-checkers, led by Daniel Dale found at least 22 lies that Trump told during the Monday night rally to his base of morons. Although the election is bering held because the Republican Party was caught stealing the election in November and a bipartisan panel and a court threw out the results, Trump made up nonsense about Democrats stealing elections in California. "A lot of illegal voting going on out there, by the way, a lot of illegal voting," he claimed, a total lie. These were the other 21 lies Trump used in his speech:

China and Trade

China's economy

"I want China to do well and I hope they do well, but they've had now the worst year in 57 years," Trump said.

Facts First: China's official second-quarter GDP growth rate, 6.2%, was the worst since 1992, 27 years ago. Trump correctly cited this "27 years" statistic in July, but he then began changing it for no factual reason. On subsequent occasions, he has said "35 years," "61 years" and "54 years," among other figures.

Trade deficit with China

"China made $500 billion over the last number of years," Trump said.

Facts First: Trump refers to trade deficits as economic losses, and surpluses as gains, though this characterization is rejected by many economists. The US trade deficit with China has never been $500 billion; it was $381 billion last year when counting goods and services, $420 billion when counting goods alone.

Who is paying the tariffs on China

"Hundreds of billions of dollars have been and are coming into our country in the form of tariffs. And China is eating the cost, which the fake news doesn't want to tell you," Trump said.

Facts First: Economic studies have found that Americans shoulder most of the cost of tariffs.

In addition, "hundreds of billions" is an exaggeration, at least when it comes to what has been collected thus far. US Customs and Border Protection reports collecting $41.6 billion from all kinds of duties in the 2018 fiscal year and $34.6 billion in the 2017 fiscal year, and it says $25 billion has been produced by Trump's tariffs on China in particular.

The USMCA and Canada

"We need a vote on the USMCA. That's United States, Mexico and Canada. And they've already voted. They want it," Trump said.

Facts First: Mexico's Senate has voted to ratify the USMCA trade agreement, but Canada's Parliament has not held a vote.

The agreement is highly unlikely to be rejected by Parliament even if Justin Trudeau's Liberal government is ousted in the coming election, since the Conservative opposition party says it will "reluctantly" vote in favor. Still, the voting has not happened yet.

The USMCA and unions

Trump, urging House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to hold a vote on the USMCA, said, "The unions want it."

Facts First: American unions generally don't like Trump's North American trade agreement, a revised version of NAFTA. The AFL-CIO, a large labor federation made up of 55 unions, says changes must be made to the agreement before the federation could possibly be supportive; in a Fox News appearance in early September, AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka called its present incarnation "an unenforceable trade deal" that would be "a windfall for corporations and a disaster for workers."

As the New York Times has reported, the United Automobile Workers and United Steelworkers, among other unions, have also demanded changes.

Immigration

Democrat Dan McCready

Trump said that the Democratic candidate in the 9th District race, Dan McCready, "wants open borders."

Facts First: McCready does not support open borders. His website says he wants comprehensive immigration reform "that secures our border, respects our laws and protects our American values." He calls for the government to "reinforce physical barriers with the technology Dan used in the Marines, like infrared cameras and drones."

Democrats and borders

Trump said the Democrats refuse to work with him to fix immigration laws "because they want to have open borders."

Facts First: Some Democrats, including presidential candidates Elizabeth Warren and Julián Castro, have advocated a significant loosening of immigration law, including a decriminalization of the act of illegally crossing the border. But none of them have proposed literally opening the border to unrestricted migration.

During the Trump era, Democrats have voted for billions of dollars' worth of fencing and other border security measures.

Migrants and court

"You have a program, catch and release: you catch them and then you have to release them. And they're supposed to come back to court in the next three, four, five, six years, and nobody shows up," Trump said.

Facts First: While it is unclear what subset of migrants Trump was referring to, the majority of migrants do show up for court. In 2017, 89% of asylum seekers appeared in court to receive decisions on their cases. Among all kinds of migrants, 72% appeared in court.

Immigration laws

"What can be much more threatening than people that want to pour across our borders? And we have the worst laws-- we have the weakest laws in the history of any country. You can't do anything to stop 'em," Trump said.

Facts First: This is obviously inaccurate hyperbole. Current US immigration laws are not even close to the weakest they have been in the history of this country: the US government did not make a broad effort to control the flow of people entering the country until the late 1800s, more than a century after the country's founding.

There are clearly numerous tools at the government's disposal to stop people from illegally entering the country, from physical barriers to Border Patrol apprehensions. Trump frequently complains that asylum seekers must be released and granted a legal process, but that is also the case in other countries.

The border wall

Trump said "we're putting up miles and miles" of the border wall.

Facts First: No new miles of wall had been built during Trump's presidency as of August, Customs and Border Protection told CNN's Geneva Sands. Sixty miles of existing barriers have been replaced.

Overdose deaths and the border

Trump, talking about the opioid crisis and drug smuggling, said, "100,000 people a year die from what comes across our southern border."

Facts First: The "100,000" figure is an exaggeration, though we don't have an exact figure for overdose deaths connected to the southern border. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has issued a preliminary estimate that there were 68,557 drug overdose deaths of any kind in 2018, an estimated 47,590 of them involving any kind of opioid and an estimated 31,897 involving synthetic opioids including fentanyl. It is obviously not true that all of these drugs came from Mexico; Trump himself has repeatedly said that a significant portion of trafficked fentanyl comes through the mail from China.

Economy

Asian unemployment

Trump said Asian Americans are at the best unemployment numbers "we've ever had."

Facts First: The unemployment rate for Asian Americans was 2.8% in August-- higher than the 2.6% rate in December 2016, Barack Obama's last full month in office.

Women's unemployment

Trump said, "The unemployment numbers for women are the best they've been now in 72 years."

Facts First: This was another exaggeration. It has been 66 years since the women's rate has been as low as it has been this year-- it was 3.6% in August, 3.4% in April-- not 75 years.

We might omit this if it were a one-time slip, but Trump habitually exaggerates many positive statistics, including women's unemployment rates, even though the accurate figure is still impressive. In fact, according to our previous fact checking work at the Toronto Star, Trump exaggerated on women's unemployment in this kind of manner 37 times between the inauguration and June 2 of this year.

Manufacturing jobs

"And by the way: 600,000 manufacturing jobs in this country. Remember? 'You would need a magic wand, you can't do that anymore.' Well, we did it," Trump said.

Facts First: The economy has added 485,000 manufacturing jobs since January 2017, when Trump took office, official data shows. The number is 512,000 jobs added if you go back to November 2016, the month of Trump's election.

Trump's "magic wand" comment was a reference to a remark Barack Obama made at a PBS town hall in 2016. Obama scoffed at Trump's promises to bring back what Obama called "jobs of the past" without providing specifics on how he would do so.

Contrary to Trump's frequent claims, though, Obama didn't say manufacturing jobs could not be created at all or created in large numbers; Obama boasted of how many were being created during his presidency, saying, "We actually make more stuff, have a bigger manufacturing base today than we've had in most of our history."

Accomplishments

Right to Try

"They've been trying to get this for 45 years," Trump said of the program that seeks to make it easier for terminally ill patients to access experimental medications.

Facts First: There had not been a 45-year push for a federal Right to Try law, experts said. Similar laws have been passed at the state level only since 2014, after the Goldwater Institute, a libertarian think tank, began pushing for them.

Veterans Choice

Trump took credit for passing the Veterans Choice program that allows some veterans to be reimbursed for seeing doctors outside the VA system: "We passed something that they've wanted to do for half a century. We passed VA Choice."

Facts First: The Choice program, a bipartisan initiative led by Bernie Sanders and the late John McCain, was signed into law by Barack Obama in 2014. In 2018, Trump signed the VA Mission Act, which expanded and changed the program.

Energy production

"We ended the last administration's cruel war on American energy. The United States is now the number one producer of oil and natural gas anywhere in the world," Trump said.

Facts First: The US has not just "now" become the world's top energy producer: it took the top spot in 2012, under Obama, the very president he accused of perpetrating the "war."

"The United States has been the world's top producer of natural gas since 2009, when US natural gas production surpassed that of Russia, and it has been the world's top producer of petroleum hydrocarbons since 2013, when its production exceeded Saudi Arabia's," the Energy Information Administration says.

Pre-existing conditions

"We'll always protect patients with pre-existing conditions, always," Trump said.

Facts First: We usually don't fact-check promises, but this one has already proved untrue. The Trump administration and congressional Republicans have repeatedly put forward bills and lawsuits that would weaken Obamacare's protections for people with pre-existing conditions. Trump is currently supporting a Republican lawsuit that is seeking to declare all of Obamacare void. He has not issued a plan to reinstate the law's protections for people with pre-existing conditions if the suit succeeds.

The decline in overdose deaths

"Last year we saw the first nationwide decline in drug overdose deaths in nearly 31 years," Trump said.

Facts First: This was another of Trump's regular exaggerations of numbers that are already impressive. There was a rare decline in overdose deaths in 2018, according to preliminary data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics-- but it was the first in since 1990, or 28 years ago, not "nearly 31 years" ago.

Foreign affairs

Payments to Iran

Trump claimed that the US "paid" Iran "$150 billion" as part of the 2015 nuclear agreement.

Facts First: The money in question was Iranian money frozen in foreign financial institutions because of sanctions, not US government money-- and experts say the total was significantly lower than $150 billion. You can read a fuller fact check here.

NATO spending

Trump said that, "until President Trump," military spending by non-US NATO members was declining. "The NATO cost of-- spending was going like this," he said, moving his hand in a downward sloping motion.

Facts First: Military spending by NATO members had increased for two years prior to Trump's presidency. According to official NATO figures, spending increased by 1.8% in 2015 and 2.8% in 2016, before Trump took office.

Trump-era increases have been bigger-- 6% in 2017 and an estimated 3.8% in 2018-- and Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has credited Trump for his role in prompting the increase. But the upward trend started two years before Trump's tenure began.

In 2014, NATO countries who were not yet meeting the alliance guideline of spending 2% of their Gross Domestic Product on defense re-committed to meeting the target. Spending began rising after that.

All But 40 Democrats Are Co-Sponsoring The Ban On Assault Weapons. These Are The 40

Last February David Cicilline (D-RI) introduced H.R. 1296, an assault weapons ban. He has 196 co-sponsors, including six who signed on Tuesday-- Marc Veasey (New Dem-TX), Katie Porter (D-CA), Susan Wild (New Dem-PA), Josh Gottheimer (Blue Dog-NJ... incredible what a primary from the left will do with an asshole like him), and Chris Pappas (New Dem-NH). There are still no Republicans co-sponsoring Cicilline's bill. Only 40 Democrats are still refusing to co-sponsor it. And these are the Democrats who are still refusing to back banning military grade assault weapons:

• Colin Allred (New Dem-TX)
• Cindy Axne (New Dem-IA)
• Sanford Bishop (Blue Dog-GA)
• Anthony Brindisi (Blue Dog-NY)
• Cheri Bustos (New Dem-IL)
• Joaquin Castro (New Dem-TX)
• Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO)
• T.J. Cox (D-CA)
• Henry Cuellar (Blue Dog-TX)
• Sharice Davids (New Dem-KS)
• Pete DeFazio (D-OR)
• Abby Finkenauer (D-IA)
• Joe Cunningham (Blue Dog-SC)
• Lizzie Fletcher (New Dem-TX)
• Jared Golden (D-ME)
• Vicente Gonzalez (Blue Dog-TX)
• Josh Harder (New Dem-CA)
• Katie Hill (New Dem-CA)
• Kendra Horn (Blue Dog-OK)
• Andy Kim (D-NJ)
• Ron Kind (New Dem-WI)
• Conor Lamb (D-PA)
• Elaine Luria (New Dem-VA)
• Ben McAdams (Blue Dog-UT)
• Tom O'Halleran (Blue Dog-AZ)
• Nancy Pelosi (Bad Leader-CA)
• Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)
• Kurt Schrader (Blue Dog-OR)
• Kim Schrier (New Dem-WA)
• Terri Sewell (New Dem-AL)
• Elissa Slotkin (New Dem-MI)
• Greg Stanton (New Dem-AZ)
• Bennie Thompson (D-MS)
• Xochitl Torres Small (Blue Dog-NM)
• Abigail Spanberger (Blue Dog-VA)
• Haley Stevens (New Dem-MI)
• Mike Thompson (Blue Dog-CA)
• Lauren Underwood (D-IL)
• Jeff Van Drew (Blue Dog-NJ)
• Filemon Vela (Blue Dog-TX)

During the 2018 cycle, I spoke to many of the freshmen on this last, one of whom-- Jared Golden-- we even endorsed (what a mistake and I apologize and will do my best to make up for it with him this cycle). But the rest of them couldn't fool me. I smelled the cowardice and deceit on them and Blue America refused to endorse any of the rest of them. Actually one we did endorse and then unendorsed very quickly. But yesterday I spoke with one of them. I asked her why she was not backing Cicilline's bill. I was very polite. She wasn't. Maybe she was having a bad day, but started screeching at me like a mad-women and accused me of pushing her too far towards the far left. (Banning assault weapons is "far left?" We'll get to that in a moment.) She seemed to indicate she will co-sponsor "the f**king bill" but that if she loses her election... it's my fault. She seemed so distraught that I didn't tell her what I was thinking, which was that if she couldn't help her constituents understand why banning assault rifles was good policy, she didn't belong in Congress anyway.

Ever hear of Mike Turner? He's a Republican congressman who represents Montgomery County, Ohio. That's Dayton, a city where served as mayor from 1993 'til 2001. He was elected to Congress in 2003 and never has much of a problem being reelected in his R+4 district where Trump beat Hillary 51.3% to 44%. And he's been a gun-nut kind of guy. The NRA gives him money and graded him an A last year. Sunday, his daughter was across the street from the shooting mayhem in Dayton. Tuesday he said he will now back legislation that "prevents the sale of military-style weapons to civilians, a magazine limit, and red flag legislation." This is his full statement, further than what any of these 40 Democrats above seems to be willing to say:

I strongly support the Second Amendment, but we must prevent mentally unstable people from terrorizing our communities with military style weapons. I will support legislation that prevents the sale of military style weapons to civilians, a magazine limit, and red flag legislation. The carnage these military style weapons are able to produce when available to the wrong people is intolerable.

We must pass red flag legislation to quickly identify people who are dangerous and remove their ability to harm others. Too often after mass shootings, we hear there were early warning signs that were ignored.

I believe these are necessary steps forward in protecting our country and a testament to American values, which include protecting human life.

I understand not every shooting can be prevented or stopped from these measures, but I do believe these steps are essential.

This weekend, a shooter wearing body armor opened fire in downtown Dayton with a weapon he had modified to be able to hold 100 rounds of ammunition. Dayton Police ran towards the shooter and neutralized him in less than thirty seconds, saving countless lives. In those few seconds, the shooter was able to murder nine people, injure at least 27, and deeply impact the entire community. If the police had not been present and able to instantly respond, the casualties would have been astronomical.

This tragedy must become a catalyst for a broader national conversation about what we can do to stop these mass shootings. I look forward to continuing this debate with my colleagues in Congress, as well as discussing these measures with the President during his trip to Dayton.

Progressive Democrat Kara Eastman is campaigning on several planks that she feels will help her neighbors in Omaha and one is sane gun policies. The Republican incumbent in her district comes from a very different mindset. "Donald J Bacon," she told me yesterday, "believes 'GUN CONTROL IS A RECIPE FOR ONLY THE CRIMINALS HAVING GUNS.' He is a member of the NRA and has taken thousands of dollars from the gun lobby. Once again, rather than representing the residents of the Nebraska Second, Bacon aligns himself with special interest groups. He has more interest in protecting them, than in protecting our children."

Eva Putzova-- a progressive Democrat like Kara-- is running against an "ex"-Republican, Blue Dog Tom O'Halleran. He's one of the handful of Democrats opposed to banning assault weapons, a good enough reason by itself to help Eva replace him in Congress. She made it clear that she and O'Halleran are on different planets when it comes to gun safety. "I support Representative David Cicilline's legislation banning the sale and possession of  military-style assault weapons. How many innocent people must be slaughtered by these weapons of war that have no place in civilian society? Gilroy, El Paso and Dayton, are just the latest in a long series of attacks on civilians by hate-filled individuals, including white supremacists, with easy access to assault weapons. No other nation in the civilized world experiences this mayhem on a regular basis like we do because citizens in those countries do not have access to these deadly weapons. In addition to a ban, we need a federal buy-back program that can take existing weapons off the street."

The next congressional election is the NC-09 election to fill the seat that the GOP was caught trying to steal last November. It's in a month. It's a lesser of two evils choice between a generally reactionary Blue Dog, Dan McCready and an especially vile Trump-supporting neo-fascist, Dan Bishop. They both suck, but Bishop is worse. When it comes to this assault weapon ban, though... neither would back it. On Monday, the Charlotte Observer observed that "neither Democrat Dan McCready nor Republican Dan Bishop would ban the kind of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines used in the shootings in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio."

“The fact is that the gun violence is new, the prevalence of guns in America is not,” Bishop told the Observer Monday. “Which means its not the guns that caused it. It is societal ills . . . and the problem must be approached comprehensively.”


...Some Democrats-- including Rep. Alma Adams of Charlotte-- have called for a ban or moratorium on the sales of assault-style weapons. McCready does not.

“I think the best way to deal with assault weapons is to implement comprehensive background checks,” he said Monday.

One in five gun buyers avoids a background check, according to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. McCready favors ending exceptions such as the “gun show loophole” that allows buyers to purchase weapons from a private seller without a background check.

Bishop, who was recently endorsed by the National Rifle Association, wouldn’t go that far.

“I’ve not heard of any proposal around that subject that has any explicable purpose other than leading to the creation of a national gun registry, which is anathema,” he said.

McCready said Trump’s tweets and rhetoric have fueled the acrimony in the country. The president’s recent comments about four Democratic congresswomen helped trigger the Charlotte City Council’s resolution last month to “strongly condemn” his “racist and xenophobic comments.”

“It clearly does,” contribute to divisiveness, McCready said.

Bishop said he doesn’t believe “the president deserves any particular blame for coarsening the debate or precipitating gun violence.” He points to comments like those of New York Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez likening border facilities to “concentration camps.”

He said the president’s language is no better or worse than that of his critics.

Bishop launched a new TV ad Monday describing McCready and congressional Democrats as “crazy liberal clowns.” It was a theme he turned to in responding to tweets about the shootings by some of those same Democrats.

When Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan tweeted that Trump incites violence with his own tweets, Bishop retweeted it, saying, “Crazy clown show continues.” When Ocasio-Cortez responded to Trump’s address by tweeting that white supremacy, not video games, caused mass shootings, he tweeted, “More crazy clowns. CRAAAZYYY.”

Adams, who just returned to Charlotte from a trip to the border near El Paso, said she wants a moratorium on the sale of assault-style weapons.

“Why do we need assault weapons on the street anyway?” she said. “Those are weapons of war.”

Adams said it’s time for Congress to do something.

“We can’t continue to just sit around and say, ‘We’re going to pray about it,’” she said. “The Lord expects us to do something.”

UPDATE: Two More Co-Sponsors

On Tuesday, August 13, two more New Dems, Cindy Axne (IA) and Joaquin Castro (TX), brother of the anti-gun presidential candidate, signed onto Cicilline's bill as co-sponsors. By the way, that leaves Abby Finkenauer alone with white supremicist dirtbag Steve King as the only members of Iowa's delegation to the House supporting the NRA position. And she claims to be less GOP-lite than Axne! Is your member of Congress on the list above? Most of them are susceptible to pressure on this and I'd say we could get half of them onto the legislation within a month. A dozen especially good targets for loud complaints. These 12 will flip with as few as 10-15 constituents calls:

• Colin Allred (New Dem-TX)
• Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO)
• T.J. Cox (D-CA)
• Pete DeFazio (D-OR)
• Lizzie Fletcher (New Dem-TX)
• Jared Golden (D-ME)
• Josh Harder (New Dem-CA)
• Katie Hill (New Dem-CA)
• Kim Schrier (New Dem-WA)
• Terri Sewell (New Dem-AL)
• Haley Stevens (New Dem-MI)
• Lauren Underwood (D-IL)

Suggestion if you call any of them: be polite but be firm. Don't start by threatening not to vote for them.

Republicans Only Have 13 Women In The House

Guess which party is havin' a meetin'

After the North Carolina Republican Party got caught trying to steal the NC-09 House seat last November, the election of far right Trumpist sociopath, Mark Harris was invalidated and a special election called for September 10. Citizens of a district going from Charlotte to Fayetteville will have had no representation in Congress for nearly a year. The Democrat in the race is, politically, a worthless Blue Dog, Dan McCready and his GOP opponent, Dan Bishop, is even worse-- a right-wing psychopath who made a name for himself as author of the legislation to deny transgender children bathrooms.

There are only 13 Republican women in the House, a shockingly low number likely to bear some of the responsibility for the output of such a horrifying GOP agenda, even more extreme than normal. Women have been encouraged to run in open-seat primaries and against Democrats, weakly by the NRCC and strongly by Elise Stefanik' and her pro-women leadership initiative E-PAC. [Spoiler: last cycle, Stefanik raised money by screaming about electing women-- for example, $10,000 each from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, UPS, Goldman Sachs, the Laborers Union, Ernst & Young-- but in the end she contributed to 54 right-wing men and just 20 women. She's a phony; keep reading.] When it came time to sign up for the NC-09 race, 4 women qualified as candidates. The votes of all 4 combined didn't add up to the transgender bathroom bill guy.

• Transgender Bathroom Bill Guy- 14,178 (47.7%)
• Leigh Thomas Brown- 2,624 (8.8%)
• Stevie Rivenbark- 892 (3.0%)
• Fern Shubert- 433 (1.5%)
• Kathie Day- 190 (0.6%)

Two other crazy right-wing lunatics, Stony Rushing (5,820 votes) and Matthew Ridenhour (5,065 votes) also finished significantly ahead of Brown. The biggest outlay of outside money ($1.3 million) was spent on behalf of Brown by the National Association of Realtors-- with this ad-- but to no avail. The ad was too positive and uplifting, not what Republican primary voters expect to hear in North Carolina. They were more interested in Dan Bishop's negative ugly messaging against AOC and socialism and his image as someone for trans-fats and against transgender students. This is the ad the Club for Growth, which was backing Stony Rushing, ran to smear Brown:





Did the NRCC or Stefanik rush to her defense? Not a chance. On Sunday Laura Barrón-López and Mealnie Zanona, reporting for Politico wrote that "Before Leigh Brown ran for a vacant House seat in North Carolina earlier this year, she got plenty of encouragement from Republicans in Washington eager to grow the ranks of GOP women in Congress. Then Brown jumped into a crowded Republican primary-- and the people who had given her hope were nowhere to be found. Among those who disappeared, she said, was Rep. Elise Stefanik, who launched an initiative this year to elect more Republican women."

“That's a little frustrating to have initial conversations and then follow up and be ghosted,” Brown said in an interview with Politico. “I put my real estate business on hold. I've dinged my own reputation in order to put myself forward as a public servant, and then you find out exactly how lonely it is to run for office.”

Stefanik acknowledged Brown’s account during a brief exchange in the Capitol last week but declined to elaborate.

The Republican Party has ramped up its efforts to recruit female candidates for the 2020 election, following the brutal midterm that decimated the ranks of GOP women. But Brown’s experience highlights an enduring challenge for the party: translating widespread concern about the dearth of women in the House Republican Conference into significant campaign support and, ultimately, victories by female candidates.

GOP consultants and candidates acknowledge their recruitment and resources lag far behind Democrats. And no centralized group exists to provide hiring advice, social media guidance, press training, or messaging tactics to candidates. Democrats, on the other hand, have the behemoth EMILY’s List network, as well as groups focused on recruiting immigrants, women of color, female veterans and more.

“The support structure needs to be more than the idea that you can get some PAC dollars from random PACs out there,” Brown said. “I didn't know how to hire. I'm an outsider to this.”

Republicans are not blind to the problem. A growing number of outside GOP groups are dedicated to boosting female candidates since the House GOP’s official campaign arm doesn’t play in primaries. “Winning for Women” launched a new super PAC in response to the devastating losses Republicans suffered in 2018.

And after watching her party swear in a 29-member class of House freshmen that included 28 men, Stefanik repurposed her leadership PAC, known as E-PAC, to focus on backing women in primaries. She told Politico at the time that “we are at a crisis level for GOP women.”

But neither Stefanik nor Winning for Women supported Brown, who faced nine other Republicans in the North Carolina race-- including three other women, each of whom finished with fewer than a thousand votes. The National Association of Realtors threw $1.3 million behind Brown as she presented a more moderate tone than her conservative opponents, and View PAC, a group focused on electing more GOP women since 1997, endorsed her.

Brown also spoke to Winning for Women before she filed and received strong encouragement. But once she announced her candidacy, she never heard from them again. Winning for Women’s super PAC said it has limited resources and stresses candidate viability.

...[A] number of Washington Republicans, including Stefanik and Winning for Women, have coalesced around a different female candidate in another special North Carolina race this year: Joan Perry.

Perry’s success in an upcoming July 9 runoff will be the first real test of Republicans’ new efforts to propel female candidates through primaries. But Perry begins the race at a disadvantage: She finished with 15 percent of the vote in the April primary, behind the first-place candidate, Greg Murphy, who earned 23 percent.

If Perry fails, it will highlight the limits of Republicans’ cash-only strategy-- and amplify the party’s woman problem heading into 2020. [It will also highlight how bad GOP recruiting is when the best woman they could find is so obviously unsuited for Congress and who couldn't come up with a better ad than this pathetic attempt to run against AOC and Bernie. Has anyone asked her how she feels about the total abortion bans in Alabama, Georgia and Missouri?]





“Donors are taking it seriously. Outside groups are taking this seriously. The party is taking it seriously,” said Olivia Perez-Cubas, a spokeswoman for the Winning for Women Action Fund. “It would be awesome if the first election after the midterms, Republican voters chose a woman. It would send a strong message.”

Indeed, Republican leaders have made replenishing their ranks of female lawmakers a top priority in 2020. The issue could take on even greater urgency if Rep. Liz Cheney, the No. 3 Republican in the House, decides to run for an open Senate seat in Wyoming.

The party’s leader, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (CA), has already contributed to New York state Assemblywoman Nicole Malliotakis, who is running to unseat freshman Democratic Rep. Max Rose-- even though the rest of the GOP field has yet to take shape.

[Note: Michael "Mikey Suits" Grimm is expected to run, win the primary and lose the general.]

...[A]ccording to recent data collected by The Associated Press, just 38 of 172 declared Republican House challengers for the 2020 elections were women, or around 1 in 5. That compares with 84 of 222 declared House Democratic challengers, nearly 2 in 5.

Part of the problem, critics say, is that there is little concert between the groups set up to help Republican women. And they limit where they get involved to vacant, open Republican-leaning seats or swing districts currently held by Democrats-- while deliberately shying away from backing challengers to male incumbents.

...The key to getting Republicans to commit to a cohesive effort to boost women candidates isn’t just convincing them that it’s good for the party’s image, but that women will make better candidates in general elections against Democrats, VIEW PAC’s Conway said.

"People need to put their thumbs on the scale during the primary to make the nominee be the person most likely to be able to win in November,” Conway said. “And the Republicans have not done enough of that.”

"The key to getting Republicans to commit to a cohesive effort to boost women candidates isn’t just convincing them that it’s good for the party’s image, but that women will make better candidates in general elections against Democrats." Yes, but that will never happen inside a party that seems to think that a way one women is a good strategy to turn out their base voters. Maybe not passing abortion bans with no exceptions for rape or incest in every state that Republicans control would be good messaging too?

Dan v Dan in North Carolina-- It Doesn't Matter Who Wins, Not Even A Little; Both Candidates Suck

Dan the crackpot Republican vs Dan the untrustworthy Blue Dog

No one is forcing me to write this post but if there's one congressional race whose outcome I could care less about, it's the re-do for NC-09, a swingy district that borders South Carolina and shoots from Colonial Heights in Charlotte to Savoy Heights in Fayetteville. The 9th was severely redistricted in 2016, and now encompasses rural areas to the east of Charlottesville as well as the Fayetteville part of the district. The African-American population went from 13% to 20% but the overall political lean remained Republican. The PVI was R+8 and is still R+8. In 2012 Romney took the district 55.4% to 43.8% and in 2016 Trump beat Hillary 54.4% to 42.8%.

What shook things up there is that far right crackpot Mark Harris, a Trumpist, stole the Republican primary from relatively mainstream conservative incumbent Robert Pittenger. On May 8, 2028, Harris was declared the primary winner, with 17,302 votes (48.5%) to Pittenger's 16,474 (46.2%). By the time the scope of Harris' vote theft operation became known, Pittinger seemed tired of the whole process and just let it slide. There wasn't much of a primary on the Democratic side, the DCCC having already picked a very conservative, Republican-lite Blue Dog, Dan McCready as the candidate. He spent close to $700,000 to Fernando Cano's $41,000 and crushed him on primary day 38,098 (82.8%) to 7,922 (17.2%). It may have scared Harris that on primary day more people voted for McCready than for he and Pittinger combined.

Harris kept the firm on that had stole the primary election for him so that it could also steal the general. Harris claimed a 139,246 (49.3%) to 138,341 (48.9%) victory, but on November 27 (2018), the North Carolina State Board of Elections, which is comprised of four Democrats, four Republicans, and one independent member, voted unanimously not to certify the results and Harris wasn't sworn in. After Harris' ballot-tampering was proved beyond a reasonable doubt, the state Board of Elections threw out the results and declared there would be a new election. Harris knew he couldn't run but he endorsed another neo-fascist crackpot and Trumpist like himself, Stony Rushing, AKA Boss Hogg. Club for Growth endorsed state Senator Dan Bishop, author the state's "bathroom bill," who decisively beat 9 other primary candidates last Tuesday. He needed 30% to avoid a run-off and he took 14,178 votes (47.7%) to Rushing's 5,820 (19.6%) and will face McCready on September 10. Whoever wins that, will have just over a year before being forced to compete in the 2020 general election.

So that's where we are. The Republicans have a terrible right-wing nut and the Democrats have a Blue Dog who has the potential to do more harm from inside the party to the progressive movement than any Republican serving in the minority ever could. Both candidates suck. If I lived in the district I wouldn't consider voting for either. AP ran a piece yesterday by Emery Dalesio, North Carolina Candidates On The Attack In Election Redo. Yawn. Dalesio wrote that they both launched their new campaigns Wednesday "deflecting questions about controversial policies and refusing to rule out a bid for higher office in the near future."

In a bit of guerrilla theater, Bishop appeared outside McCready’s campaign headquarters with a cardboard cutout of the Democrat. Bishop described McCready as a liberal who has been as mum as the prop when it comes to talking about his views on current issues.

“I think what voters expect and need is contrast and clarity on issues,” Bishop said. “So that’s exactly what we’re going to do is be clear about the issues from my perspective and we invite Dan McCready to be clear about where he stands.”

Both candidates dodged questions, however.

At his own news conference minutes after Bishop spoke, McCready refused to pledge not to run for U.S. Senate next year. Bishop said McCready is using the congressional election to angle for a 2020 shot against Republican Senate incumbent Thom Tillis.

Bishop, meanwhile, deflected questions about his sponsorship of the headline-grabbing “bathroom bill,” which cost the state billions in projected economic activity. The 2016 law known as House Bill 2 voided anti-discrimination protections for LGBT people and also directed transgender people to use public bathrooms matching their sex at birth.

“HB2 is an old issue and there’s a lot of fantasy about it, including a lot in the media, but I think voters are tired of hearing about it,” Bishop said. “We’ve got a lot of new issues in this campaign we’ve talk about.”

McCready cited a 2017 analysis by The Associated Press estimating that the law cost North Carolina more than $3.76 billion, primarily from businesses that decided to skip intended moves to the state.

“His agenda is nothing but a track record of making things worse for people here in North Carolina,” McCready said of Bishop.

Bishop said he agrees with President Donald Trump that the country should build a wall on the Mexican border and that the current high rate of Central American citizens seeking asylum in the United States amounts to an emergency.

McCready responded that he supported comprehensive immigration reform, one version of which passed the U.S. Senate in 2013 but died in the House as Republican hard-liners opposed legal status for immigrants living in the country illegally.

“It’s absolutely important that we secure the border,” McCready said. “It’s also important that we uphold American values at the border.”

That's how McCready talks-- very general terms that allows the listener to read whatever he or she wants into it. I've watched slippery Blue Dogs like him for years and years. They never make good Representatives. Never! But speaking on Thom Tillis, the current Republican senator who has to face the voters in 2020, he just got a primary challenge from the right, announced on Sean Hannity's Hate Talk radio show. The wing nut running is Garland Tucker III, formerly a very wealthy Never-Trumper but now claiming to be the defender of Trumpanzee from Tillis, who hasn't always been loyal enough.

The White House, which is sending Pence to North Carolina next week to help shore up Tillis, and the NRSC are sticking with Tillis. NRSC spokeswoman Joanna Rodriguez didn't mince any words: "This primary is nothing more than an opponent of the president’s agenda with money to burn teaming up with a past-his-prime political consultant [Carter Wrenn] who is desperate to cash a paycheck."

Tucker is a big right-wing donor who backed Scott Walker, then Rubio, then Ted Cruz and finally Kasich before finally facing up to the fact that his party had been taken over by the fascists and that Trump was the nominee. He mostly writes $1,000 checks to garden variety conservative candidates but he spent major money on Scott Walker and Walker's PAC.

Tucker already has his first ad up on Fox-- attacking Tillis for not being slavishly committed to Trump:





The Raleigh News & Observer reported that Tucker only voted for Trump in 2016 because he saw him as the lesser of two evils. (In other words, he decided to vote for someone he recognized as evil to be president. There's something wrong with that-- which is why I would never consider voting for either Dan McCready or Dan Bishop in the NC-09 congressional special election.)

Tucker, who turns 72 in June, called the federal debt “immoral” and criticized votes by Tillis to raise the debt ceiling and go over budget spending caps. In 2015 and 2018, Tillis voted yes on budget deals that raised the spending caps. Sen. Richard Burr, North Carolina’s senior senator, voted no on both. In February, the federal debt reached $22 trillion, up $2 trillion from when Trump took office in 2017.

Tucker, who founded Triangle Capital Corporation in the early 2000s and was on the board when it was sold last year, is putting his own money into the campaign as it ramps up fundraising. He would not disclose how much he has committed to spend.

“I’m committed to do whatever it takes to get the operation up and going,” he said.

He has donated to Republican candidate for years, including giving $2,600 to Tillis’ first Senate campaign in 2014, according to federal election records. He said Tillis ran on “a good solid conservative platform. In a couple very important areas, he’s really failed to deliver.”

Despite that record of Republican giving, the National Republican Senatorial Committee called Tucker’s campaign a “quixotic adventure for a wealthy, out-of-touch liberal.”

The Tillis campaign and its allies have tagged Tucker as an “anti-Trump activist” for a September 2016 opinion piece he wrote for the News & Observer. In it, Tucker outlined his concerns about Trump, whom he called a “flawed candidate,” and expressed doubts about his character, temperament and consistency on policy. But Tucker said he would vote for Trump over Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton.


“I wouldn’t retract anything I said in that,” Tucker said. “Since then, it has been one of the most pleasant surprises I’ve ever seen. Trump’s policies, forget the tweets and any noise around him, his policies are right in line with my conservative heroes.

“I’m really pleased he got elected and I shudder to think there’s any chance he might not get re-elected.“
 Carter Wrenn, the longtime Republican political strategist who is working for Tucker, said the early television ads are aimed at giving Republican voters a choice.

“Garland needs to become well known. We need to say to voters here’s where Garland stands, here’s where Tillis stands,” Wrenn said. “If you’re a challenger to an incumbent senator, not unusual to try to go on television early.”

Elect any of these guys to Congress-- to the Senate or to fill the laughably empty NC-09 seat-- and you get more of this... more and more and more and more. Something needs to be done to break this cycle. And it's NOT just about Trump and impeachment. It's about polarization and enforced, systemic deadlock and, as Steyer says, a broken system. If the corrupt political parties don't give you a choice, don't vote in their elections. Boycott their elections. Starting with NC-09 in September. It's a good place to begin, because it makes no difference at all. Imagine if no one showed up. Cheri Bustos and Nancy Pelosi want to primaries? How about if we delegitimize their hold on the Democratic Party by ignoring their wretched general election candidates? No more lesser-of-two-evils elections.