#State Rep. Charlotte Warren

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Noah Berlatsky at Everything Is Horrible:

Democrats are really angry at their representatives. A Qunnipac poll found that 49% of Dem voters were dissatisfied with their representatives compared to only 40% satisfied. A CNN poll was even more dire, with 73% dissatisfied vs. 22% satisfied. Data for Progress had similar numbers: 67/29. A lot of commenters—both on the left and in the center—have tried to frame these numbers along ideological lines, as a battle between do-nothing spineless centrists and untrustworthy anti-D leftists (to use the more invidious stereotypes on each side). But this breakdown doesn’t really work, despite the fact that it would in some sense make people on every part of the ideological spectrum more comfortable. The demand for a more determined antifascism is not necessarily a left demand. And I think it would help everyone to recognize that, and think through what it means.

Not just the left

There is both empirical and anecdotal evidence that the fight harder/sit on your hands divide is not a left/right split. The empirical evidence is straightforward; if you’ve got 73% disapproval, or 67% disapproval, or even 49% disapproval, that’s not just leftists. I couldn’t find a good poll indicating what percentage of Democrats identify as leftist, but I think it’s fair to say that if the left was 73% of the party (or even 49%), we would win a lot more primary contests than we do. Normie Dems are called normie Dems because partisan Democrats are the bulk of the party. And if you have 73% (or even 49%) of Democrats saying they are angry at their reps, that has to mean that a lot (a lot) of normie Democrats are angry at their representatives.

The anecdotal evidence is pretty overwhelming as well. There are just a huge number of people who are not leftists who have expressed anger and frustration with the Democrats’ failure to forcefully and consistently oppose Trump. As a brief list: —J.B. Pritzker and other Democratic governors have been demanding that Chuck Schumer do more to oppose Trump. —Tom Nichols, a former Republican turned conservative Democrat, lambasted the Democrats in the Atlantic: “America does not need a 'resistance,' or stale slogans, or people putting those slogans on little paddles. It needs an opposition party that boldly defends the nation’s virtues, the rule of law, and the rights of its people.” —Charlotte Clymer, a consistent partisan Democrat who generally boosts people like Schumer and Pelosi, has been consistently criticizing the party since Trump’s term began. Recently for example she laid into the party for not standing up for Al Green when he heckled Trump during his Congressional address. “There is no credible excuse for the ten Democrats who voted to censure Congressman Al Green. None. It is a cowardly capitulation to asymmetrical warfare from the GOP out of fear, at best, and incompetent political opportunism at worst. And I will not forget those who tossed him aside. Ever.” —Bill Kristol, a longtime figure in the neoconservative movement and now an anti-Trumper, has also been kicking Democrats for their failure to resist effectively—and defending Al Green. “Am I the only person who was actually kind of happy to see, in a sea of Democrats waving little paddles with lame messages, someone literally standing up to Trump?" It’s also worth pointing out that some of the left representatives in Congress have not always been leaders against Trump, and have often sounded more wishy washy than Bill fucking Kristol. Every Democratic Senator, including Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, voted to confirm Marco Rubio as Secretary of State. Sanders rushed out early to say that RFK was “exactly correct” on food issues (though he didn’t vote to confirm him, thank god.) He also gave an interview in which he said that resistance to oligarchy needed to come from the public rather than from Congress—which, coming from a literal Senator, sounds more than a little like passing the buck.

[...]

So, what might it look like for Democrats to be more forceful and consistent in fighting for democracy?

First of all, they need to stop putting decorum above resistance—as Bill Kristol says, the Democrats should be rallying around and showing support for Al Green, not censuring him because he thought wearing pink and holding up little paddles was not sufficient pushback against fascism. They should be boosting and lifting up Jasmine Crockett for being outspoken and effectively channeling outrage; they shouldn’t be trying to shut her up. They should also stop babbling about bipartisanship or looking for ways to find common ground with fascist authoritarians who are currently intent on destroying the Constitution. Don’t vote for fucking Marco Rubio. Don’t look for nice things to say about antivax abusive ghoul RFK. Democrats should also use their power to obstruct more regularly, and link it more clearly to a principled stand against fascism. Progressive org Indivisible has been begging Democrats to refuse unanimous consent and to use quorum calls to slow down congressional business. They’ve also called on Democrats to refuse votes on any continuing budget resolution until and unless Trump and Musk cease illegally sequestering funds and destroying agencies without congressional approval. There are real limits on what Democrats can do in the minority; procedural tricks only go so far, especially since the majority can (and will) change the rules if they get too frustrated. (People cite Tommy Tuberville’s blanket hold on military appointments—but it’s worth remembering that Tuberville eventually lost that fight.) But there are other things Democrats can do. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, for example, hosted a know your rights session for undocumented people and others in ICE’s crosshairs. This so incensed Trump’s fascist border czar Tom Homan that he threatened to prosecute her. W3hat if every Democratic member of Congress shared that webinar with their constituents in solidarity? It’s possible that Homan would have a conniption, which is reason enough to try. There are other grassroots organizing efforts that Democrats could participate in as well. There is currently a nationwide effort to protest Tesla dealerships. Democratic elected officials could show up at these protests, which would probably bring them much more national media attention (not least because Musk and Trump would go apeshit.) Indivisible and some Democratic leaders like Minnesota Govenor Tim Walz are calling on Democrats to hold town halls in Republican districts now that GOP members are too afraid of backlash to hold their own. Again, this would be a good way for Democrats to speak to and encourage popular outrage and anger, rather than attempting to squash it. Finally, one important tool is the primary challenge. Representatives and Senators that refuse to oppose Trump’s agenda, who vote for his nominees, and who censor outspoken Democrats like Al Green, should face primary challenges. In the past, progressive Democrats have not necessarily had great success in unseating incumbents. But in the past, 60-70% of Democrats weren’t saying that they were upset with their leadership.

Noah Berlatsky has a spot-on column about the anger at most Congressional Dems over their inability to properly fight the fascist Trump regime. When Bill Kristol is doing a better job than most elected Dems at calling out the tyrannical excesses of Trumpism, it’s really messed up.

[noabuseofpower-tisfightback]

THE DEFUND POLICE MOVEMENT TAKES AIM AT FUSION CENTERS AND MASS SURVEILLANCE

THE DEFUND POLICE MOVEMENT TAKES AIM AT FUSION CENTERS AND MASS SURVEILLANCE

[plusorminuscongress]

New story in Politics from Time: Why a Massachusetts Primary Is the Latest Test of a New Progressive Strategy

This article is part of the The DC Brief, TIME’s politics newsletter. Sign up here to get stories like this sent to your inbox every weekday.

Ever since Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren dropped out of the Democratic presidential primary, the progressive movement has been in a state of flux. It had money and momentum, but no presidential candidate.

So in the months since Joe Biden cinched the nomination, progressives have pivoted to down-ballot elections, using their energy and cash to protect territory won in 2018 and support new progressive candidates targeting entrenched Democratic incumbents. They’re out to prove that the party’s left wing is still powerful—and much of the evidence supports their case. In recent months, three of the members of the progressive “Squad”—Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib—all beat back primary challenges, while progressive candidates like Jamaal Bowman and Mondaire Jones in New York, Cori Bush in Missouri, Marie Newman in Illinois and Kara Eastman in Nebraska all won competitive primaries.

The next test of this new, young progressive vanguard comes Tuesday in Massachusetts, where Alex Morse, the 31-year old mayor of Holyoke, Mass., is trying to unseat Rep. Richard Neal, chair of the powerful Ways & Means Committee. Like Bowman, Bush, Eastman and Newman, Morse is backed by Justice Democrats, a progressive group that supported Sanders’ campaign and has increasingly turned to promoting the next generation of grassroots insurgents.

“Bernie represented voters under 45 ideologically,” says Justice Democrats communications director Waleed Shahid. “These candidates represent them ideologically and demographically too. It’s a transition happening.”

Progressives say that defeating Neal would be the most consequential primary win since Ocasio-Cortez beat Joe Crowley, who was then the chair of the House Democratic caucus. Neal helms a powerful tax-writing committee, and Morse has spent much of his campaign arguing Neal’s position makes him a crucial impediment to key legislative priorities like Medicare for All or a Green New Deal. Morse recently hit $2 million in fundraising, with $1 million raised in August alone; 97% of those donations under $200.

“This is a race that’s arguably the most important Democratic primary in the House this year,” Morse says. “Every major piece of legislation needs to go through the Ways and Means committee.” Neal’s office did not immediately return a request for comment.

Make sense of what matters in Washington. Sign up for the daily D.C. Brief newsletter.

The race has been fraught with drama. In August, the University of Massachusetts, Amherst chapter of the College Democrats published vague allegations that Morse—a former guest lecturer at the school—had made students uncomfortable by messaging them on social media. Morse, who is gay, acknowledged having consensual adult relationships with college students but never any that he taught, and apologized for making anyone uncomfortable.

At first, the allegations made it seem like Morse was toast. But the tables turned when The Intercept reported that members of the College Democrats had spent months engineering the allegations to damage Morse’s campaign. (Chat logs reviewed by The Intercept revealed that at least one member of the College Democrats took part in the scheme because he sought an internship with Neal.) What seemed at first to be a downward spiral for a promising young progressive morphed into evidence of an establishment plot to destroy him.

Polling in the race has been scarce since that unlikely turn of events. But if Morse wins, it could be the most important progressive upset since Ocasio-Cortez’s victory—and further evidence of a movement that’s growing its power and sharpening its strategy.

By Charlotte Alter on August 31, 2020 at 01:03PM

[janepwilliams87]

Mexican legal cannabis deadline extended again (Newsletter: April 20, 2020)

Lawmakers push for marijuana biz COVID funds; Congressional candidate grows cannabis; Sanders omits legalization from Biden action list

Subscribe to receive Marijuana Moment’s newsletter in your inbox every weekday morning. It’s the best way to make sure you know which cannabis stories are shaping the day.

(function() { window.mc4wp = window.mc4wp || { listeners: [], forms: { on: function(evt, cb) { window.mc4wp.listeners.push( { event : evt, callback: cb } ); } } } })();

Email address:

Leave this field empty if you're human:

Your support makes Marijuana Moment possible…

By starting a $10 per month pledge on Patreon—or about 45 cents per issue of this newsletter—you can help us rely less on ads to cover our expenses, hire more journalists and bring you even more marijuana news.

Chris Barker: “I donated in memory of Charlotte Figi, so that, in her honor, we can fight the disinformation that continues to be spread about the cannabis plant and enable others to experience the healing it can provide.”

https://www.patreon.com/marijuanamoment / TOP THINGS TO KNOW A bipartisan group of 34 members of Congress is calling on House leaders to include marijuana businesses in upcoming coronavirus relief legislation.

“Workers at state-legal cannabis businesses are no different from workers at any other small business—they show up to work every day, perform their duties, and most importantly, work to provide for their families. This lack of access will undoubtedly lead to unnecessary layoffs, reduced hours, pay cuts, and furloughs for the workers of cannabis businesses who need support the most.”

Mexico’s Supreme Court granted another request to extend the deadline for lawmakers to legalize marijuana. Coronavirus made it impossible to finalize an advancing cannabis bill by this month’s initially revised deadline, so now the legislature has until December 15. A growing number of congressional candidates are not only embracing marijuana policy reform but are openly and proudly acknowledging their own consumption and cultivation of cannabis. A reporter read Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) a list of issues that he campaigned on—including legalizing marijuana and reducing the prison population—and asked which he thinks former Vice President Joe Biden (D) will embrace if elected president. The senator didn’t include cannabis and criminal justice in his response. Reps. Joe Kennedy (D-MA) and Joyce Beatty (D-OH) are asking congressional leaders to end a policy that makes business owners with prior convictions—including for simple marijuana possession—ineligible for coronavirus relief funds. / FEDERAL The Food and Drug Administration sent a letter warning Nova Botanix LTD DBA CanaBD to stop claiming its CBD products can prevent and treat coronavirus. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) tweeted, “MA veterans legally use cannabis for pain, PTSD, & other ailments. As coronavirus worsens many health problems, the VA should let its providers recommend medical marijuana to patients during this pandemic.” Iowa Democratic Senate candidate Eddie Mauro is hosting a marijuana-focused town hall on Monday. The House bill to remove the 280E tax penalty on marijuana businesses got one new cosponsor for a total of 10. / STATES Illinois’s attorney general tweeted about contributing money for a documentary about “obstacles to research into medicinal cannabis as it relates cancer treatment.” Florida’s agriculture commissioner tweeted, “Hemp permits will soon be issued in Florida. This will give the state an economic boost, and provide our farmers with more ability to diversify during this challenging global climate.” North Carolina Democratic agriculture commissioner candidate Jenna Wadsworth tweeted, “I’ve been in support of cannabis legalization from the start of this campaign… Cannabis legalization could have large economic benefits for farmers, as well as rural communities. It could revitalize travel & tourism in those places, stimulate growth, hasten technological developments & widespread broadband access, & more.” Washington, D.C. psychedelics decriminalization activists are challenging a regulation that prevents people from signing ballot petitions circulated by themselves. A Michigan judge invalidated 15 marijuana business licenses after determining that regulators violated open meeting laws by considering proposals in secret, closed-door sessions. Alaska regulators approved emergency regulations allowing curbside marijuana pickup and loosening transportation restrictions during the coronavirus pandemic. New Mexico regulators are continuing to require medical cannabis producers to pay gross receipts taxes while the state Supreme Court reviews a lower court ruling saying that the businesses are exempt. Massachusetts regulators are working to educate the public on safe marijuana home cultivation practices. They also sent a letter to the state’s congressional delegation asking them to work to include cannabis businesses in upcoming coronavirus relief legislation. Kansas regulators said “the timeline and transition to a commercial program is unknown and still dependent on the state administrative rule and regulation approval and adoption process even though program acceptance by the USDA has already occurred.” Ohio regulators said that because the Drug Enforcement Administration federally descheduled CBD drug Epidiolex, it is also no longer a controlled substance under state law. A Pennsylvania representative authored an op-ed about his marijuana legalization bill. — Marijuana Moment is already tracking more than 1,000 cannabis bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. —

/ LOCAL Los Angeles, California regulators are being sued over the city’s “flawed” marijuana license approval process. Denver, Colorado regulators released 4/20-related social distancing guidelines. / INTERNATIONAL Canadian federal, provincial and territorial officials are discussing incorporating marijuana into a nationwide trade deal. / SCIENCE & HEALTH A study on the effect of marijuana legalization in Uruguay found that “in spite of the fact that there has not been a trend break with regard to the two types of crime examined, a more exacerbated growth of both rates in the treated unit may have been avoided.” A study found an “increase in audit fees incurred by banks located in legalizing states after cannabis legalization” and concluded that “the relation between banks’ audit fees and cannabis legalization was greater for banks having larger increases in banking activity, suggesting that audit fees increased primarily for banks that may be engaging in relationships with cannabis-related businesses.” / ADVOCACY, OPINION & ANALYSIS The International City/County Management Association published an article on marijuana regulation considerations for local governments. Fox News host Tucker Carlson criticized Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s (D) decision to close certain businesses but keep marijuana dispensaries open during the coronavirus pandemic, saying, “fire up a bowl and accept your fate.” / BUSINESS Little Green Pharma said it made the first export of Australian-produced medical cannabis oil to the UK. CannTrust Holdings Inc. will be delisted from the New York Stock Exchange on April 27. Akerna said that April 15, after many coronavirus stimulus payments were made, was “the biggest Wednesday in the history of legal cannabis,” with revenue up more than 50% compared to a normal Wednesday in 2020. Aleafia Health Inc. launched last-mile home delivery for medical cannabis products. Arkansas medical cannabis sales have surpassed 10,000 pounds since the launch of the program last year. / CULTURE Actor Seth Rogen spoke about how he has been smoking a lot of marijuana during the coronavirus quarantine.

Make sure to subscribe to get Marijuana Moment’s daily dispatch in your inbox.

(function() { window.mc4wp = window.mc4wp || { listeners: [], forms: { on: function(evt, cb) { window.mc4wp.listeners.push( { event : evt, callback: cb } ); } } } })();

Email address:

Leave this field empty if you're human:

The post Mexican legal cannabis deadline extended again (Newsletter: April 20, 2020) appeared first on Marijuana Moment.

from Updates By Jane https://www.marijuanamoment.net/mexican-legal-cannabis-deadline-extended-again-newsletter-april-20-2020/

[bigbirdgladiator]

President Donald Trump and his political lieutenants are privately hoping that former President George W. Bush will endorse Joe Biden this cycle, creating a bizarre confluence of interests with an increasing number of Democrats who are hoping for the same.To Team Trump, a Bush endorsement of Biden would allow them to hitch a formerly unpopular GOP president and the personification of dynastic politics to the Democratic Party’s 2020 ticket. They believe that Bush’s backing would drive the progressive wing of the party into a tizzy, especially if the Democratic nominee were to accept and promote it, creating internal strife for Biden at a time when he needs unity. According to two people familiar with his private remarks on the matter, Trump has said it would be “fun” if he could effectively run against both Bush and Biden. These sources with knowledge of the president’s thinking say he views both Biden and Bush as emblematic of the political establishment that he successfully ran against in the last election, and that Trump continues to harbor a visceral distaste for members of the Bush family and administration.“We would LOVE him to officially endorse Biden,” messaged a source close to the White House adding it “would be such a gift to us” citing the 43rd president’s legacy on trade, big government policies, and “constant war.”One senior Trump campaign official even said that some on the team “desperately” wanted the 43rd president of the United States to come out for Biden 2020, as it would make for easy messaging fodder. “I imagine we want it about as much as a lot of Biden people would not want it,” the official said.The New York Times reported Saturday that, among other Republicans struggling with an endorsement decision, the former president would not support Trump’s re-election efforts, citing people familiar with the situation. A spokesman for Bush told The Texas Tribune that the Times’ assertion was “false.”Bush certainly left the White House as a deeply unpopular figure, under the cloud of disastrous wars, various scandals, and a cratered economy. But his standing has improved in his years away from the political scene, including among Democratic voters. And on the few occasions he has waded back into public life, he has conveyed a more socially conscious approach to national affairs, including offering his recent support for ending systemic racism in police forces. Over time, the previously unthinkable has begun to happen, with prominent Democrats warming up to him and—now—the idea that an endorsement from him could provide an assist to the Democrats’ White House chances. “Our task is to build the broadest coalition possible,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), a leading House progressive and former co-chair of Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) presidential campaign, told The Daily Beast about a hypothetical endorsement. “I began my career in public service running against Bush’s war in Iraq in 2004. But no one doubts his commitment to tolerance and inclusiveness.”Khanna argued that Bush is in a “different moral league” than Trump, particularly in regard to the latter’s fondness for promoting “divisiveness” and “fearmongering.” “His endorsement would help to highlight the enormous stakes in 2020 for our democracy,” he said. Former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a top Biden booster, said he would “welcome” the endorsement, arguing that the public embracing of a high-profile Republican could have an electoral upside in critical swing states. “Ninety percent of Trump’s vote is the base. And the base isn’t going to care what George Bush says,” Rendell said. “Then there’s the 10 percent of Independents, suburban Republicans that stuck with him. … The question is: what effect does a George Bush endorsement have with them? I’d say, it adds weight to the entire picture that’s growing. I don’t think there’s any blowback on our side.”Ellen Defends Laughing It Up With George W. Bush at Cowboys GameIt is unclear if Bush will end up endorsing anyone for president this year, and he could very well sit on the sidelines and merely refuse to publicly support Trump’s reelection. According to a New York Times story published this weekend, Bush “won’t support the re-election of Mr. Trump.” But a Bush spokesperson told The Texas Tribune that the detail in the Times’ piece was “false.”Bush is hardly a Republican turncoat, having fundraised for conservative House and Senate candidates in the 2018 midterm elections in an effort to help preserve GOP congressional majorities—which, had it been successful in the House, would have preserved Trump’s sway on Capitol Hill. But his distaste for Trump has been evident for some time. And, in this case, the animus goes both ways. Two White House officials said they simply couldn’t care what Bush did or didn’t do ahead of this election, casting him as a trivial media obsession. “Elections are about the future, not the past,” said Ed Brookover, a former senior Trump adviser during the 2016 race. “President Bush performed well during his two terms, but people judge today’s candidates in today’s world. President Trump receives support from many voters who supported President Bush, as well as voters he pulled into his own orbit. President Trump’s policies and actions represent a new brand of leadership, which America has been needing for quite a while.”Dubya Was Bad, but the Donald Might Be Worse: Richard ClarkeFor Biden, the risks of accepting a Bush endorsement are fairly clear. The association with the Iraq War (which Biden supported), the use of torture, and the handling of Hurricane Katrina, alone, represents a heaping of political baggage that could outweigh any benefit. And some progressives were clear that they would struggle with having a president they had deeply reviled in their proverbial corner. “George W. Bush is a war criminal who lied to the American people in order to illegally invade a country. If nothing else, for that reason alone, I would never support accepting his endorsement,” said Charlotte Clymer, a LGBTQ activist who previously backed Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and has since thrown her weight behind Biden. But even Clymer found a bigger upside to the idea of an endorsement for party purposes, saying she wouldn’t be surprised to see Biden accept it “in order to remove our greatest national security threat in modern history: Donald Trump.”And among more establishment Democrats, the choice to welcome a potential boost from Bush now was seen as a no-brainer. “No one can ever accuse me of being a fan of former President George W. Bush,” said Jim Manley, a longtime senior Democratic Senate aide who served as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s spokesman during the latter Bush years. “But as far as I’m concerned, it would be fantastic if he were to come out and support the vice president. It would serve as a powerful rebuke to the current president.”James Carville, a former top adviser to President Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign who is now advising the pro-Biden Democratic group American Bridge, responded enthusiastically about the prospect of a Bush endorsement for the presumptive Democratic nominee.“I fought with these guys during impeachment, I fought with these guys on the Iraq War, I fought with these guys left and right,” Carville said. “We’re in a different situation now. We have a deadly pathogen that’s infected this country and we got to get rid of it.”Put another way, Carville said: “What did Churchill say? ‘If Hitler invaded hell, I would side with the devil.’” Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.

from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/3h5KtLQ

[worldtopnewsoftheday]

President Donald Trump and his political lieutenants are privately hoping that former President George W. Bush will endorse Joe Biden this cycle, creating a bizarre confluence of interests with an increasing number of Democrats who are hoping for the same.To Team Trump, a Bush endorsement of Biden would allow them to hitch a formerly unpopular GOP president and the personification of dynastic politics to the Democratic Party’s 2020 ticket. They believe that Bush’s backing would drive the progressive wing of the party into a tizzy, especially if the Democratic nominee were to accept and promote it, creating internal strife for Biden at a time when he needs unity. According to two people familiar with his private remarks on the matter, Trump has said it would be “fun” if he could effectively run against both Bush and Biden. These sources with knowledge of the president’s thinking say he views both Biden and Bush as emblematic of the political establishment that he successfully ran against in the last election, and that Trump continues to harbor a visceral distaste for members of the Bush family and administration.“We would LOVE him to officially endorse Biden,” messaged a source close to the White House adding it “would be such a gift to us” citing the 43rd president’s legacy on trade, big government policies, and “constant war.”One senior Trump campaign official even said that some on the team “desperately” wanted the 43rd president of the United States to come out for Biden 2020, as it would make for easy messaging fodder. “I imagine we want it about as much as a lot of Biden people would not want it,” the official said.The New York Times reported Saturday that, among other Republicans struggling with an endorsement decision, the former president would not support Trump’s re-election efforts, citing people familiar with the situation. A spokesman for Bush told The Texas Tribune that the Times’ assertion was “false.”Bush certainly left the White House as a deeply unpopular figure, under the cloud of disastrous wars, various scandals, and a cratered economy. But his standing has improved in his years away from the political scene, including among Democratic voters. And on the few occasions he has waded back into public life, he has conveyed a more socially conscious approach to national affairs, including offering his recent support for ending systemic racism in police forces. Over time, the previously unthinkable has begun to happen, with prominent Democrats warming up to him and—now—the idea that an endorsement from him could provide an assist to the Democrats’ White House chances. “Our task is to build the broadest coalition possible,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), a leading House progressive and former co-chair of Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) presidential campaign, told The Daily Beast about a hypothetical endorsement. “I began my career in public service running against Bush’s war in Iraq in 2004. But no one doubts his commitment to tolerance and inclusiveness.”Khanna argued that Bush is in a “different moral league” than Trump, particularly in regard to the latter’s fondness for promoting “divisiveness” and “fearmongering.” “His endorsement would help to highlight the enormous stakes in 2020 for our democracy,” he said. Former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a top Biden booster, said he would “welcome” the endorsement, arguing that the public embracing of a high-profile Republican could have an electoral upside in critical swing states. “Ninety percent of Trump’s vote is the base. And the base isn’t going to care what George Bush says,” Rendell said. “Then there’s the 10 percent of Independents, suburban Republicans that stuck with him. … The question is: what effect does a George Bush endorsement have with them? I’d say, it adds weight to the entire picture that’s growing. I don’t think there’s any blowback on our side.”Ellen Defends Laughing It Up With George W. Bush at Cowboys GameIt is unclear if Bush will end up endorsing anyone for president this year, and he could very well sit on the sidelines and merely refuse to publicly support Trump’s reelection. According to a New York Times story published this weekend, Bush “won’t support the re-election of Mr. Trump.” But a Bush spokesperson told The Texas Tribune that the detail in the Times’ piece was “false.”Bush is hardly a Republican turncoat, having fundraised for conservative House and Senate candidates in the 2018 midterm elections in an effort to help preserve GOP congressional majorities—which, had it been successful in the House, would have preserved Trump’s sway on Capitol Hill. But his distaste for Trump has been evident for some time. And, in this case, the animus goes both ways. Two White House officials said they simply couldn’t care what Bush did or didn’t do ahead of this election, casting him as a trivial media obsession. “Elections are about the future, not the past,” said Ed Brookover, a former senior Trump adviser during the 2016 race. “President Bush performed well during his two terms, but people judge today’s candidates in today’s world. President Trump receives support from many voters who supported President Bush, as well as voters he pulled into his own orbit. President Trump’s policies and actions represent a new brand of leadership, which America has been needing for quite a while.”Dubya Was Bad, but the Donald Might Be Worse: Richard ClarkeFor Biden, the risks of accepting a Bush endorsement are fairly clear. The association with the Iraq War (which Biden supported), the use of torture, and the handling of Hurricane Katrina, alone, represents a heaping of political baggage that could outweigh any benefit. And some progressives were clear that they would struggle with having a president they had deeply reviled in their proverbial corner. “George W. Bush is a war criminal who lied to the American people in order to illegally invade a country. If nothing else, for that reason alone, I would never support accepting his endorsement,” said Charlotte Clymer, a LGBTQ activist who previously backed Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and has since thrown her weight behind Biden. But even Clymer found a bigger upside to the idea of an endorsement for party purposes, saying she wouldn’t be surprised to see Biden accept it “in order to remove our greatest national security threat in modern history: Donald Trump.”And among more establishment Democrats, the choice to welcome a potential boost from Bush now was seen as a no-brainer. “No one can ever accuse me of being a fan of former President George W. Bush,” said Jim Manley, a longtime senior Democratic Senate aide who served as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s spokesman during the latter Bush years. “But as far as I’m concerned, it would be fantastic if he were to come out and support the vice president. It would serve as a powerful rebuke to the current president.”James Carville, a former top adviser to President Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign who is now advising the pro-Biden Democratic group American Bridge, responded enthusiastically about the prospect of a Bush endorsement for the presumptive Democratic nominee.“I fought with these guys during impeachment, I fought with these guys on the Iraq War, I fought with these guys left and right,” Carville said. “We’re in a different situation now. We have a deadly pathogen that’s infected this country and we got to get rid of it.”Put another way, Carville said: “What did Churchill say? ‘If Hitler invaded hell, I would side with the devil.’” Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.

from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/3h5KtLQ

[usuallyleftnight]

President Donald Trump and his political lieutenants are privately hoping that former President George W. Bush will endorse Joe Biden this cycle, creating a bizarre confluence of interests with an increasing number of Democrats who are hoping for the same.To Team Trump, a Bush endorsement of Biden would allow them to hitch a formerly unpopular GOP president and the personification of dynastic politics to the Democratic Party’s 2020 ticket. They believe that Bush’s backing would drive the progressive wing of the party into a tizzy, especially if the Democratic nominee were to accept and promote it, creating internal strife for Biden at a time when he needs unity. According to two people familiar with his private remarks on the matter, Trump has said it would be “fun” if he could effectively run against both Bush and Biden. These sources with knowledge of the president’s thinking say he views both Biden and Bush as emblematic of the political establishment that he successfully ran against in the last election, and that Trump continues to harbor a visceral distaste for members of the Bush family and administration.“We would LOVE him to officially endorse Biden,” messaged a source close to the White House adding it “would be such a gift to us” citing the 43rd president’s legacy on trade, big government policies, and “constant war.”One senior Trump campaign official even said that some on the team “desperately” wanted the 43rd president of the United States to come out for Biden 2020, as it would make for easy messaging fodder. “I imagine we want it about as much as a lot of Biden people would not want it,” the official said.The New York Times reported Saturday that, among other Republicans struggling with an endorsement decision, the former president would not support Trump’s re-election efforts, citing people familiar with the situation. A spokesman for Bush told The Texas Tribune that the Times’ assertion was “false.”Bush certainly left the White House as a deeply unpopular figure, under the cloud of disastrous wars, various scandals, and a cratered economy. But his standing has improved in his years away from the political scene, including among Democratic voters. And on the few occasions he has waded back into public life, he has conveyed a more socially conscious approach to national affairs, including offering his recent support for ending systemic racism in police forces. Over time, the previously unthinkable has begun to happen, with prominent Democrats warming up to him and—now—the idea that an endorsement from him could provide an assist to the Democrats’ White House chances. “Our task is to build the broadest coalition possible,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), a leading House progressive and former co-chair of Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) presidential campaign, told The Daily Beast about a hypothetical endorsement. “I began my career in public service running against Bush’s war in Iraq in 2004. But no one doubts his commitment to tolerance and inclusiveness.”Khanna argued that Bush is in a “different moral league” than Trump, particularly in regard to the latter’s fondness for promoting “divisiveness” and “fearmongering.” “His endorsement would help to highlight the enormous stakes in 2020 for our democracy,” he said. Former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a top Biden booster, said he would “welcome” the endorsement, arguing that the public embracing of a high-profile Republican could have an electoral upside in critical swing states. “Ninety percent of Trump’s vote is the base. And the base isn’t going to care what George Bush says,” Rendell said. “Then there’s the 10 percent of Independents, suburban Republicans that stuck with him. … The question is: what effect does a George Bush endorsement have with them? I’d say, it adds weight to the entire picture that’s growing. I don’t think there’s any blowback on our side.”Ellen Defends Laughing It Up With George W. Bush at Cowboys GameIt is unclear if Bush will end up endorsing anyone for president this year, and he could very well sit on the sidelines and merely refuse to publicly support Trump’s reelection. According to a New York Times story published this weekend, Bush “won’t support the re-election of Mr. Trump.” But a Bush spokesperson told The Texas Tribune that the detail in the Times’ piece was “false.”Bush is hardly a Republican turncoat, having fundraised for conservative House and Senate candidates in the 2018 midterm elections in an effort to help preserve GOP congressional majorities—which, had it been successful in the House, would have preserved Trump’s sway on Capitol Hill. But his distaste for Trump has been evident for some time. And, in this case, the animus goes both ways. Two White House officials said they simply couldn’t care what Bush did or didn’t do ahead of this election, casting him as a trivial media obsession. “Elections are about the future, not the past,” said Ed Brookover, a former senior Trump adviser during the 2016 race. “President Bush performed well during his two terms, but people judge today’s candidates in today’s world. President Trump receives support from many voters who supported President Bush, as well as voters he pulled into his own orbit. President Trump’s policies and actions represent a new brand of leadership, which America has been needing for quite a while.”Dubya Was Bad, but the Donald Might Be Worse: Richard ClarkeFor Biden, the risks of accepting a Bush endorsement are fairly clear. The association with the Iraq War (which Biden supported), the use of torture, and the handling of Hurricane Katrina, alone, represents a heaping of political baggage that could outweigh any benefit. And some progressives were clear that they would struggle with having a president they had deeply reviled in their proverbial corner. “George W. Bush is a war criminal who lied to the American people in order to illegally invade a country. If nothing else, for that reason alone, I would never support accepting his endorsement,” said Charlotte Clymer, a LGBTQ activist who previously backed Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and has since thrown her weight behind Biden. But even Clymer found a bigger upside to the idea of an endorsement for party purposes, saying she wouldn’t be surprised to see Biden accept it “in order to remove our greatest national security threat in modern history: Donald Trump.”And among more establishment Democrats, the choice to welcome a potential boost from Bush now was seen as a no-brainer. “No one can ever accuse me of being a fan of former President George W. Bush,” said Jim Manley, a longtime senior Democratic Senate aide who served as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s spokesman during the latter Bush years. “But as far as I’m concerned, it would be fantastic if he were to come out and support the vice president. It would serve as a powerful rebuke to the current president.”James Carville, a former top adviser to President Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign who is now advising the pro-Biden Democratic group American Bridge, responded enthusiastically about the prospect of a Bush endorsement for the presumptive Democratic nominee.“I fought with these guys during impeachment, I fought with these guys on the Iraq War, I fought with these guys left and right,” Carville said. “We’re in a different situation now. We have a deadly pathogen that’s infected this country and we got to get rid of it.”Put another way, Carville said: “What did Churchill say? ‘If Hitler invaded hell, I would side with the devil.’” Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.

from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/3h5KtLQ

[tendance-news]

President Donald Trump and his political lieutenants are privately hoping that former President George W. Bush will endorse Joe Biden this cycle, creating a bizarre confluence of interests with an increasing number of Democrats who are hoping for the same.To Team Trump, a Bush endorsement of Biden would allow them to hitch a formerly unpopular GOP president and the personification of dynastic politics to the Democratic Party’s 2020 ticket. They believe that Bush’s backing would drive the progressive wing of the party into a tizzy, especially if the Democratic nominee were to accept and promote it, creating internal strife for Biden at a time when he needs unity. According to two people familiar with his private remarks on the matter, Trump has said it would be “fun” if he could effectively run against both Bush and Biden. These sources with knowledge of the president’s thinking say he views both Biden and Bush as emblematic of the political establishment that he successfully ran against in the last election, and that Trump continues to harbor a visceral distaste for members of the Bush family and administration.“We would LOVE him to officially endorse Biden,” messaged a source close to the White House adding it “would be such a gift to us” citing the 43rd president’s legacy on trade, big government policies, and “constant war.”One senior Trump campaign official even said that some on the team “desperately” wanted the 43rd president of the United States to come out for Biden 2020, as it would make for easy messaging fodder. “I imagine we want it about as much as a lot of Biden people would not want it,” the official said.The New York Times reported Saturday that, among other Republicans struggling with an endorsement decision, the former president would not support Trump’s re-election efforts, citing people familiar with the situation. A spokesman for Bush told The Texas Tribune that the Times’ assertion was “false.”Bush certainly left the White House as a deeply unpopular figure, under the cloud of disastrous wars, various scandals, and a cratered economy. But his standing has improved in his years away from the political scene, including among Democratic voters. And on the few occasions he has waded back into public life, he has conveyed a more socially conscious approach to national affairs, including offering his recent support for ending systemic racism in police forces. Over time, the previously unthinkable has begun to happen, with prominent Democrats warming up to him and—now—the idea that an endorsement from him could provide an assist to the Democrats’ White House chances. “Our task is to build the broadest coalition possible,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), a leading House progressive and former co-chair of Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) presidential campaign, told The Daily Beast about a hypothetical endorsement. “I began my career in public service running against Bush’s war in Iraq in 2004. But no one doubts his commitment to tolerance and inclusiveness.”Khanna argued that Bush is in a “different moral league” than Trump, particularly in regard to the latter’s fondness for promoting “divisiveness” and “fearmongering.” “His endorsement would help to highlight the enormous stakes in 2020 for our democracy,” he said. Former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a top Biden booster, said he would “welcome” the endorsement, arguing that the public embracing of a high-profile Republican could have an electoral upside in critical swing states. “Ninety percent of Trump’s vote is the base. And the base isn’t going to care what George Bush says,” Rendell said. “Then there’s the 10 percent of Independents, suburban Republicans that stuck with him. … The question is: what effect does a George Bush endorsement have with them? I’d say, it adds weight to the entire picture that’s growing. I don’t think there’s any blowback on our side.”Ellen Defends Laughing It Up With George W. Bush at Cowboys GameIt is unclear if Bush will end up endorsing anyone for president this year, and he could very well sit on the sidelines and merely refuse to publicly support Trump’s reelection. According to a New York Times story published this weekend, Bush “won’t support the re-election of Mr. Trump.” But a Bush spokesperson told The Texas Tribune that the detail in the Times’ piece was “false.”Bush is hardly a Republican turncoat, having fundraised for conservative House and Senate candidates in the 2018 midterm elections in an effort to help preserve GOP congressional majorities—which, had it been successful in the House, would have preserved Trump’s sway on Capitol Hill. But his distaste for Trump has been evident for some time. And, in this case, the animus goes both ways. Two White House officials said they simply couldn’t care what Bush did or didn’t do ahead of this election, casting him as a trivial media obsession. “Elections are about the future, not the past,” said Ed Brookover, a former senior Trump adviser during the 2016 race. “President Bush performed well during his two terms, but people judge today’s candidates in today’s world. President Trump receives support from many voters who supported President Bush, as well as voters he pulled into his own orbit. President Trump’s policies and actions represent a new brand of leadership, which America has been needing for quite a while.”Dubya Was Bad, but the Donald Might Be Worse: Richard ClarkeFor Biden, the risks of accepting a Bush endorsement are fairly clear. The association with the Iraq War (which Biden supported), the use of torture, and the handling of Hurricane Katrina, alone, represents a heaping of political baggage that could outweigh any benefit. And some progressives were clear that they would struggle with having a president they had deeply reviled in their proverbial corner. “George W. Bush is a war criminal who lied to the American people in order to illegally invade a country. If nothing else, for that reason alone, I would never support accepting his endorsement,” said Charlotte Clymer, a LGBTQ activist who previously backed Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and has since thrown her weight behind Biden. But even Clymer found a bigger upside to the idea of an endorsement for party purposes, saying she wouldn’t be surprised to see Biden accept it “in order to remove our greatest national security threat in modern history: Donald Trump.”And among more establishment Democrats, the choice to welcome a potential boost from Bush now was seen as a no-brainer. “No one can ever accuse me of being a fan of former President George W. Bush,” said Jim Manley, a longtime senior Democratic Senate aide who served as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s spokesman during the latter Bush years. “But as far as I’m concerned, it would be fantastic if he were to come out and support the vice president. It would serve as a powerful rebuke to the current president.”James Carville, a former top adviser to President Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign who is now advising the pro-Biden Democratic group American Bridge, responded enthusiastically about the prospect of a Bush endorsement for the presumptive Democratic nominee.“I fought with these guys during impeachment, I fought with these guys on the Iraq War, I fought with these guys left and right,” Carville said. “We’re in a different situation now. We have a deadly pathogen that’s infected this country and we got to get rid of it.”Put another way, Carville said: “What did Churchill say? ‘If Hitler invaded hell, I would side with the devil.’” Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.

from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/3h5KtLQ

[justsimplylovely]

President Donald Trump and his political lieutenants are privately hoping that former President George W. Bush will endorse Joe Biden this cycle, creating a bizarre confluence of interests with an increasing number of Democrats who are hoping for the same.To Team Trump, a Bush endorsement of Biden would allow them to hitch a formerly unpopular GOP president and the personification of dynastic politics to the Democratic Party’s 2020 ticket. They believe that Bush’s backing would drive the progressive wing of the party into a tizzy, especially if the Democratic nominee were to accept and promote it, creating internal strife for Biden at a time when he needs unity. According to two people familiar with his private remarks on the matter, Trump has said it would be “fun” if he could effectively run against both Bush and Biden. These sources with knowledge of the president’s thinking say he views both Biden and Bush as emblematic of the political establishment that he successfully ran against in the last election, and that Trump continues to harbor a visceral distaste for members of the Bush family and administration.“We would LOVE him to officially endorse Biden,” messaged a source close to the White House adding it “would be such a gift to us” citing the 43rd president’s legacy on trade, big government policies, and “constant war.”One senior Trump campaign official even said that some on the team “desperately” wanted the 43rd president of the United States to come out for Biden 2020, as it would make for easy messaging fodder. “I imagine we want it about as much as a lot of Biden people would not want it,” the official said.The New York Times reported Saturday that, among other Republicans struggling with an endorsement decision, the former president would not support Trump’s re-election efforts, citing people familiar with the situation. A spokesman for Bush told The Texas Tribune that the Times’ assertion was “false.”Bush certainly left the White House as a deeply unpopular figure, under the cloud of disastrous wars, various scandals, and a cratered economy. But his standing has improved in his years away from the political scene, including among Democratic voters. And on the few occasions he has waded back into public life, he has conveyed a more socially conscious approach to national affairs, including offering his recent support for ending systemic racism in police forces. Over time, the previously unthinkable has begun to happen, with prominent Democrats warming up to him and—now—the idea that an endorsement from him could provide an assist to the Democrats’ White House chances. “Our task is to build the broadest coalition possible,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), a leading House progressive and former co-chair of Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) presidential campaign, told The Daily Beast about a hypothetical endorsement. “I began my career in public service running against Bush’s war in Iraq in 2004. But no one doubts his commitment to tolerance and inclusiveness.”Khanna argued that Bush is in a “different moral league” than Trump, particularly in regard to the latter’s fondness for promoting “divisiveness” and “fearmongering.” “His endorsement would help to highlight the enormous stakes in 2020 for our democracy,” he said. Former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a top Biden booster, said he would “welcome” the endorsement, arguing that the public embracing of a high-profile Republican could have an electoral upside in critical swing states. “Ninety percent of Trump’s vote is the base. And the base isn’t going to care what George Bush says,” Rendell said. “Then there’s the 10 percent of Independents, suburban Republicans that stuck with him. … The question is: what effect does a George Bush endorsement have with them? I’d say, it adds weight to the entire picture that’s growing. I don’t think there’s any blowback on our side.”Ellen Defends Laughing It Up With George W. Bush at Cowboys GameIt is unclear if Bush will end up endorsing anyone for president this year, and he could very well sit on the sidelines and merely refuse to publicly support Trump’s reelection. According to a New York Times story published this weekend, Bush “won’t support the re-election of Mr. Trump.” But a Bush spokesperson told The Texas Tribune that the detail in the Times’ piece was “false.”Bush is hardly a Republican turncoat, having fundraised for conservative House and Senate candidates in the 2018 midterm elections in an effort to help preserve GOP congressional majorities—which, had it been successful in the House, would have preserved Trump’s sway on Capitol Hill. But his distaste for Trump has been evident for some time. And, in this case, the animus goes both ways. Two White House officials said they simply couldn’t care what Bush did or didn’t do ahead of this election, casting him as a trivial media obsession. “Elections are about the future, not the past,” said Ed Brookover, a former senior Trump adviser during the 2016 race. “President Bush performed well during his two terms, but people judge today’s candidates in today’s world. President Trump receives support from many voters who supported President Bush, as well as voters he pulled into his own orbit. President Trump’s policies and actions represent a new brand of leadership, which America has been needing for quite a while.”Dubya Was Bad, but the Donald Might Be Worse: Richard ClarkeFor Biden, the risks of accepting a Bush endorsement are fairly clear. The association with the Iraq War (which Biden supported), the use of torture, and the handling of Hurricane Katrina, alone, represents a heaping of political baggage that could outweigh any benefit. And some progressives were clear that they would struggle with having a president they had deeply reviled in their proverbial corner. “George W. Bush is a war criminal who lied to the American people in order to illegally invade a country. If nothing else, for that reason alone, I would never support accepting his endorsement,” said Charlotte Clymer, a LGBTQ activist who previously backed Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and has since thrown her weight behind Biden. But even Clymer found a bigger upside to the idea of an endorsement for party purposes, saying she wouldn’t be surprised to see Biden accept it “in order to remove our greatest national security threat in modern history: Donald Trump.”And among more establishment Democrats, the choice to welcome a potential boost from Bush now was seen as a no-brainer. “No one can ever accuse me of being a fan of former President George W. Bush,” said Jim Manley, a longtime senior Democratic Senate aide who served as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s spokesman during the latter Bush years. “But as far as I’m concerned, it would be fantastic if he were to come out and support the vice president. It would serve as a powerful rebuke to the current president.”James Carville, a former top adviser to President Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign who is now advising the pro-Biden Democratic group American Bridge, responded enthusiastically about the prospect of a Bush endorsement for the presumptive Democratic nominee.“I fought with these guys during impeachment, I fought with these guys on the Iraq War, I fought with these guys left and right,” Carville said. “We’re in a different situation now. We have a deadly pathogen that’s infected this country and we got to get rid of it.”Put another way, Carville said: “What did Churchill say? ‘If Hitler invaded hell, I would side with the devil.’” Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.

from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/3h5KtLQ

[plusorminuscongress]

New story in Politics from Time: Warren’s New Campaign Finance Plan Is Putting Rivals Like Biden and Buttigieg on the Spot

In a new campaign finance plan released Tuesday, Sen. Elizabeth Warren announced that she will continue to reject big donors and corporate funding throughout the 2020 general election, if she’s the Democratic nominee, and challenged her opponents to disclose their big donors as well.

“If Democratic candidates for President want to spend their time hobnobbing with the rich and powerful, it currently legal for them to do so,” Warren wrote. “But they shouldn’t be handing out secret titles and honors to rich donors.”

It was a shot across the bow at opponents like former Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Kamala Harris, and South Bend, Ind. Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who continue to accept money from big donors and hold the closed-door fundraisers that had been the hallmark of almost every major campaign until the Sanders 2016 presidential run.

Warren’s new plan was released just a day after Buttigieg drew blowback from online progressives for comments about his fundraising strategy. “My competitors can go with whatever strategy they like, but we’re going to make sure that we have the resources to compete because we we are going up against the sitting President of the United States,” Buttigieg told Snapchat’s Peter Hamby. “He has tremendous amounts of support and allies at his back, and we’re not going to beat him with pocket change.”

Progressives online slammed him immediately. “Small-dollar grassroots campaigns, aka what Buttigieg insults here as ‘pocket change,’ out-fundraise him by millions,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez tweeted in responses. “Our nation’s leaders should be working to end the era of big money politics, not protect it.”

But Warren has so far raised an impressive haul despite rejecting big-money donations. The campaign announced in October that they’d raised $24.6 million in the third quarter from 943,000 donations, including roughly a third who donated to the campaign for the first time (the average grassroots donation was $26, the campaign said.) Senator Bernie Sanders, who also refuses corporate donations, raised even more that quarter: $25.3 million from 1.4 million contributions. And big donors doesn’t necessarily translate into top fundraisng numbers. Buttigieg raised $19.1 million last quarter, falling short of his Q2 haul. Biden raised $15.2 million, and Harris raised $11.6 million.

In addition to vowing to reject donations over $200 from executives at big tech companies, banks, private equity firms and hedge funds, Warren’s new plan would aim to make it illegal for federal candidates to accept corporate PAC money, close the loophole that allow foreign corporations to influence U.S. politics, ban lobbyist bundling and forbid the selection of ambassadors based on campaign donations.

The issue of campaign finance will likely come front and center at Tuesday night’s debate, as Warren enters the debate stage after month of rising in the polls.

By Charlotte Alter on October 15, 2019 at 12:17PM

[lorajackson]

Team Trump ‘Desperately’ Wants Bush to Endorse Biden. Some Dems Love the Idea, Too.

President Donald Trump and his political lieutenants are privately hoping that former President George W. Bush will endorse Joe Biden this cycle, creating a bizarre confluence of interests with an increasing number of Democrats who are hoping for the same.To Team Trump, a Bush endorsement of Biden would allow them to hitch a formerly unpopular GOP president and the personification of dynastic politics to the Democratic Party’s 2020 ticket. They believe that Bush’s backing would drive the progressive wing of the party into a tizzy, especially if the Democratic nominee were to accept and promote it, creating internal strife for Biden at a time when he needs unity. According to two people familiar with his private remarks on the matter, Trump has said it would be “fun” if he could effectively run against both Bush and Biden. These sources with knowledge of the president’s thinking say he views both Biden and Bush as emblematic of the political establishment that he successfully ran against in the last election, and that Trump continues to harbor a visceral distaste for members of the Bush family and administration.“We would LOVE him to officially endorse Biden,” messaged a source close to the White House adding it “would be such a gift to us” citing the 43rd president’s legacy on trade, big government policies, and “constant war.”One senior Trump campaign official even said that some on the team “desperately” wanted the 43rd president of the United States to come out for Biden 2020, as it would make for easy messaging fodder. “I imagine we want it about as much as a lot of Biden people would not want it,” the official said.Bush certainly left the White House as a deeply unpopular figure, under the cloud of disastrous wars, various scandals, and a cratered economy. But his standing has improved in his years away from the political scene, including among Democratic voters. And on the few occasions he has waded back into public life, he has conveyed a more socially conscious approach to national affairs, including offering his recent support for ending systemic racism in police forces. Over time, the previously unthinkable has begun to happen, with prominent Democrats warming up to him and—now—the idea that an endorsement from him could provide an assist to the Democrats’ White House chances. “Our task is to build the broadest coalition possible,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), a leading House progressive and former co-chair of Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) presidential campaign, told The Daily Beast about a hypothetical endorsement. “I began my career in public service running against Bush’s war in Iraq in 2004. But no one doubts his commitment to tolerance and inclusiveness.”Khanna argued that Bush is in a “different moral league” than Trump, particularly in regard to the latter’s fondness for promoting “divisiveness” and “fearmongering.” “His endorsement would help to highlight the enormous stakes in 2020 for our democracy,” he said. Former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a top Biden booster, said he would “welcome” the endorsement, arguing that the public embracing of a high-profile Republican could have an electoral upside in critical swing states. “Ninety percent of Trump’s vote is the base. And the base isn’t going to care what George Bush says,” Rendell said. “Then there’s the 10 percent of Independents, suburban Republicans that stuck with him. … The question is: what effect does a George Bush endorsement have with them? I’d say, it adds weight to the entire picture that’s growing. I don’t think there’s any blowback on our side.”Ellen Defends Laughing It Up With George W. Bush at Cowboys GameIt is unclear if Bush will end up endorsing anyone for president this year, and he could very well sit on the sidelines and merely refuse to publicly support Trump’s reelection. According to a New York Times story published this weekend, Bush “won’t support the re-election of Mr. Trump.” But a Bush spokesperson told The Texas Tribune that the detail in the Times’ piece was “false.”Bush is hardly a Republican turncoat, having fundraised for conservative House and Senate candidates in the 2018 midterm elections in an effort to help preserve GOP congressional majorities—which, had it been successful in the House, would have preserved Trump’s sway on Capitol Hill. But his distaste for Trump has been evident for some time. And, in this case, the animus goes both ways. Two White House officials said they simply couldn’t care what Bush did or didn’t do ahead of this election, casting him as a trivial media obsession. “Elections are about the future, not the past,” said Ed Brookover, a former senior Trump adviser during the 2016 race. “President Bush performed well during his two terms, but people judge today’s candidates in today’s world. President Trump receives support from many voters who supported President Bush, as well as voters he pulled into his own orbit. President Trump’s policies and actions represent a new brand of leadership, which America has been needing for quite a while.”Dubya Was Bad, but the Donald Might Be Worse: Richard ClarkeFor Biden, the risks of accepting a Bush endorsement are fairly clear. The association with the Iraq War (which Biden supported), the use of torture, and the handling of Hurricane Katrina, alone, represents a heaping of political baggage that could outweigh any benefit. And some progressives were clear that they would struggle with having a president they had deeply reviled in their proverbial corner. “George W. Bush is a war criminal who lied to the American people in order to illegally invade a country. If nothing else, for that reason alone, I would never support accepting his endorsement,” said Charlotte Clymer, a LGBTQ activist who previously backed Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and has since thrown her weight behind Biden. But even Clymer found a bigger upside to the idea of an endorsement for party purposes, saying she wouldn’t be surprised to see Biden accept it “in order to remove our greatest national security threat in modern history: Donald Trump.”And among more establishment Democrats, the choice to welcome a potential boost from Bush now was seen as a no-brainer. “No one can ever accuse me of being a fan of former President George W. Bush,” said Jim Manley, a longtime senior Democratic Senate aide who served as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s spokesman during the latter Bush years. “But as far as I’m concerned, it would be fantastic if he were to come out and support the vice president. It would serve as a powerful rebuke to the current president.”James Carville, a former top adviser to President Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign who is now advising the pro-Biden Democratic group American Bridge, responded enthusiastically about the prospect of a Bush endorsement for the presumptive Democratic nominee.“I fought with these guys during impeachment, I fought with these guys on the Iraq War, I fought with these guys left and right,” Carville said. “We’re in a different situation now. We have a deadly pathogen that’s infected this country and we got to get rid of it.”Put another way, Carville said: “What did Churchill say? ‘If Hitler invaded hell, I would side with the devil.’” Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.

Source link

The post Team Trump ‘Desperately’ Wants Bush to Endorse Biden. Some Dems Love the Idea, Too. appeared first on Land of Fathers.

Team Trump ‘Desperately’ Wants Bush to Endorse Biden. Some Dems Love the Idea, Too. published first on http://landofourfathers.com/

[96thdayofrage]

Preliminary data show high case counts among Black residents in emerging hotspots, including New Orleans, New York, Detroit, Milwaukee, Charlotte and Albany, Georgia. There are also reports from cities, including St. Louis and Nashville, that predominantly Black neighborhoods have been slow to receive testing sites and equipment compared to white, affluent areas.

COVID-19 is a perfect storm of systemic inequities operating together to worsen existing vulnerabilities. Widespread testing, for example, is still not happening, and tests are being rationed with only the sickest, often at death’s door, being provided diagnostic tests to determine if they have the virus. Health care workers are doing heroic work under unimaginable conditions, but stories like that of Rana Mungin — a 30-year-old Black woman and Brooklyn teacher who was turned down three times before receiving a COVID-19 test and was in a coma, clinging for her life — is a warning sign of a system under stress and poised to reproduce known racial inequities in health care services.

With little to no race or ethnicity data being reported on who has been tested and a well-documented history of racial bias shaping health care decisions, a group of doctors and researchers called on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization to report these numbers for COVID-19 testing. Several Democratic leaders including Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Rep. Ayanna Pressley followed with a similar request to Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar. Biases are more likely to shape decisions under stressful situations, and with a system overwhelmed, such biases may enter the equation when health care workers have to make difficult decisions about who qualifies to be tested.

The same is true for determining who has access to other limited health care resources like ventilators. Recently, I awoke to a heartbreaking email from a public health colleague in a hard-hit state. He was seeking guidance on how to make equitable decisions on ventilators because current crisis standards of care, which are guidelines that state health departments use for these types of public health emergencies, will likely further disadvantage the already disadvantaged — including Black patients that have underlying health conditions that may worsen their prognosis for survival.

Physicians shouldn’t be placed in these positions in a nation that has the resources to coordinate a rapid and equitable response to the demands of this pandemic. Instead, the Trump administration has dragged its feet in using the Defense Production Act to ramp up production of badly needed ventilators and other medical supplies. All along the way, the president has failed as a leader by calling the COVID-19 threat a hoax, and criticizing requests for medical supplies and demanding praise in return for federal aid from Democratic governors in states hit hard by the virus.

Equity — not petty politics — should be the guiding principle in this emergency, and that means resources should be targeted to where they are needed most. Ventilators, for example, should be prioritized for distribution to known hotspots like New York City, New Orleans, Detroit and areas that will likely experience a surge in severe coronavirus cases because of chronic health inequities and under-resourced health care systems, common in the South.

Long before COVID-19, Black communities were experiencing deep health and economic inequities that are only intensified by a public health crisis of this magnitude. African Americans experience higher rates of diabetes, hypertension and respiratory illnesses associated with COVID-19 death not because Black people are inherently sicker, but because systemic racism has created the conditions for these health inequities to develop. Concentrated poverty, substandard housing, lack of health insurance, employment discrimination, poor water and air quality, and the day-to-day stress of living in a society that devalues our humanity all work together to chip away at our health.

Combine these health inequities with resistance among Republican governors to implement stay-at-home orders that public health experts have said are needed to slow the spread of the virus, and we have the conditions for COVID-19 to explode in the South, where close to 60 percent of all Black people in the U.S. live and where the majority of states in the region have not expanded Medicaid. Alabama’s GOP Gov. Kay Ivey, for example, in initially refusing to issue a stay-at-home order, stated that she didn’t want to “choke” business, and proudly proclaimed the state was unlike Democratic-led Louisiana, New York and California, which have stay-at-home orders in place. Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee were also among holdout states that refused to promptly issue statewide shelter-in-place orders.

Inept government leadership in this pandemic is costing lives, and the slow and uncoordinated federal response is having domino effects across the country. Those impacts will be deeper and greater for Black and Brown workers, many of whom are already struggling to make ends meet, have no health care coverage, and have jobs where they are expected to work while everyone else is sheltering at home to flatten the curve and avoid being infected by the virus.

Moreover, Black Americans make up 40 percent of the homeless population, who are especially vulnerable to a pandemic where the public is being asked to stay home as a protective measure. In prisons and jails, where Black people are disproportionately among those incarcerated, these environments are ticking time bombs for an outbreak of COVID-19 due to the difficulty of maintaining social distance in close quarters, unsanitary conditions, and the number of people regularly moving in and out.

Leadership at all levels of government needs to rise to the level of this crisis and do so with a focus on health equity and racial justice. That means widespread universal testing with no age restrictions, free COVID-19 testing and treatment provided to anyone diagnosed, and targeted outreach to communities of color to allay fears of not having access to treatment or receiving an astronomical health bill after a hospital stay.

But there are other critical policy solutions that should be considered as part of an equitable COVID-19 response and recovery plan, including immediate action to release incarcerated people, permanent paid sick and family leave for all workers, Medicare for All, housing for the unsheltered and a federal jobs guarantee in the face of massive unemployment. Enacting these policies would begin to address the depths of racial inequities that are intersecting with the COVID-19 crisis and set the stage for a reset as the pandemic subsides.

We’re learning in this crisis that we desperately need better planning, leadership, a focus on our shared humanity and targeted strategies to reach, connect with and care for the populations and communities that will experience the most economic harm and loss of health and life. Racial health inequities are not a foreign concept in public health and it should concern all of us that the most basic step for addressing them — reporting racial data — has been largely ignored in local, state and federal reporting on COVID-19. Without an approach that actively addresses the many ways that systemic racism is already shaping outcomes in this pandemic, Black communities will be left without the resources to address the compounding impacts of COVID-19 as the rest of the country recovers and pushes forward.

With intentional policies and actions that prioritize racial equity now, government leaders and policymakers can avoid repeating mistakes of the past. They can reject calls to go back to “business as usual” and seize the moment to usher fundamental change that addresses the generations of neglect and political malpractice that created the pre-existing health, social and economic conditions that are being magnified in this tragedy.

[itsfinancethings]

“I’m above the ground,” Joe Biden said in Los Angeles the morning of Super Tuesday. The Democratic presidential candidate gripped a styrofoam cup of ice cream in his left hand, the city’s mayor looking over his shoulder, a crowd of locals pressing in around him. “You’ve not yet buried me yet,” he added with a crooked grin. “I’m not dead.”

Far from it. On the biggest day of voting in the 2020 Democratic primary, Biden’s presidential hopes came roaring back to life. The March 3 elections in 14 states and American Samoa capped a whirlwind few days that reordered the Democratic primary, catapulting Biden back into contention and potentially ahead of Sen. Bernie Sanders in the delegate count, depending on the full results of primaries in California and Texas, the two biggest prizes of the night.

The result sets up a pitched battle for the party’s nomination between two starkly different candidates and visions for the future: a contest between Biden, a former Vice President with broad support among moderates, African Americans and Democratic officials, and Sanders, an independent democratic socialist with a grassroots army that has diversified this election cycle to encompass growing numbers of Latinos. Depending on the outcome of Super Tuesday and the delegate-rich primaries over the next two weeks, the pair could be forced to slug it out all the way to the party’s convention in Milwaukee in July. Biden’s allies, however, hoped that his momentum would become unstoppable and Sanders would continue to fade.

It was a prospect that scarcely seemed possible even a week ago, after Sanders won the most votes in the first three contests in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada, prompting some observers to declare him the prohibitive front-runner. But after a brutal start, Biden’s resounding win in the Feb. 29 South Carolina primary set off a rapid chain of events—the withdrawal of two top rivals, who threw their support behind him, and a raft of other key endorsements—that cemented him as the Democratic establishment’s pick to take on Sanders.

The results on Super Tuesday ratified his surge. As of late in the evening, the former Vice President had won Alabama, Arkansas, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Virginia. Many of his victories appeared to be by large margins, enabling him to sweep up large swaths of delegates, which are allocated proportionally to candidates that receive at least 15% of the vote.

Sanders was projected to win California, Colorado and Utah in addition to his home state of Vermont. Texas was too close to call with about 60% of precincts reporting, and Sanders and Biden were also locked in a tight battle in Maine.

“They don’t call it Super Tuesday for nothing!” Biden exulted as he rallied supporters in Los Angeles Tuesday evening, flanked by his wife and sister, whom he momentarily confused with one another. “People are talking about a revolution? We started a movement!”

Two more major candidates, Elizabeth Warren and Mike Bloomberg, struggled to pick up delegates, squelching their hopes of a comeback and raising questions about whether they would remain in the race. Bloomberg, the billionaire former New York mayor, had spent more than half a billion dollars building a massive, Super Tuesday-focused campaign operation, but ended up winning only the territory of American Samoa—good for four delegates. And while Warren had professed to be in it for the long haul, she couldn’t even manage to win her home state of Massachusetts, where she appeared on track to finish third.

“Was this not exactly what I told you was going to happen?” a senior Biden campaign official joked. But nearly as stunning as the speed of Biden’s turnaround, from left for dead to back on top, was the fact that it didn’t seem to be the result of anything the candidate himself did. Instead, the party came to him.

Biden made some changes to his campaign after his fourth-place showing in Iowa on Feb. 3, only to fare even worse in the next contest, coming in fifth in the Feb. 11 New Hampshire primary. He came in second in the Feb. 22 Nevada caucuses but earned just 20% of the vote and 9 delegates there.

Biden’s debate performances continued to be decent but uneven, and his campaign was in danger of running out of money. He couldn’t afford to place major advertising buys, build out a ground game or even poll the Super Tuesday states. But he benefited from events outside his control. Bloomberg’s poor debate performances discouraged moderates still looking for a deus ex machina. And Sanders’s early successes alarmed rank-and-file Democrats looking for a nominee who could steer toward the center in November.

All the while, Biden kept insisting that the largely African American electorate of South Carolina would stick with him. And in the end, with an assist from the endorsement of influential South Carolina Rep. Jim Clyburn, they did. Biden’s nearly 30-point South Carolina victory opened the floodgates. He raised $15 million in three days and saw his two main rivals, Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar, drop out and endorse him, along with a parade of Democratic Party elders and elected officials.

Exit polls indicated that Biden’s strongest voter demographics, African Americans and older Democrats, provided the base for his victories, bolstered by a late-breaking surge of educated suburban moderates. An unusual proportion of the electorate, more than 40%, told pollsters they made their decision of how to vote in the last few days, an indication of the uncertainty and angst that have marked this primary as Democrats grapple with the existential question of how best to take on President Trump in November.

Sanders worked hard to expand the passionate movement he began to build in 2016, reaching out to minority voters and making his own electability pitch based in large part on his strength among young voters. But turnout to date has not supported his contention that he can vastly expand the electorate, and voters in most of the Super Tuesday states appeared unconvinced. Exit polls showed voters prioritizing a candidate they thought could win over one who agreed with their views by a 2-to-1 margin.

Votes were still being counted in California, the biggest Super Tuesday prize in terms of delegates, where Sanders hoped to run up the score. “I tell you with absolute confidence,” he told a cheering crowd in his hometown of Burlington, “we are going to win the Democratic nomination.” He proceeded to draw a sharp contrast between his record and Biden’s, pointing out their divergent positions on the Iraq war, entitlement cuts, “disastrous trade agreements” and consumer protection.

Sanders’s grassroots fundraising remains unparalleled: the campaign announced it had raised $46.5 million in February from more than 2.2 million donations. His backers argued he would benefit going forward from a one-on-on contrast with Biden, which they said would illuminate the policy differences between the two men. “What we have is a two-person race,” New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, a Sanders supporter, said on MSNBC.

Sanders’s strong base and delegate haul still gives him a shot to win the nomination. But Tuesday marked a dramatic shift in momentum. “Basically the entire month of February was a perfect storm for Bernie Sanders,” says Addisu Demissie, a California-based strategist who managed the campaign of Sen. Cory Booker. “And then the first three days of March were a perfect storm for Joe Biden and may have reversed all of that. It’s hard to believe how much has changed.”

With reporting by Alana Abramson and Philip Elliott/Washington, Charlotte Alter/Los Angeles, Katy Steinmetz/Oakland and Lissandra Villa/Houston.

[theliberaltony]

via Politics – FiveThirtyEight

In the lead-up to Super Tuesday’s delegate-rich array of contests, FiveThirtyEight is digging into our primary forecast to explore what the race looks like in the 14 states and one territory that will cast ballots. Nathaniel Rakich already previewed Maine, Massachusetts and Vermont, so I’m looking at what our forecast has to say about North Carolina and Virginia.

Unlike the three New England states, where Sen. Bernie Sanders is favored across the board, these two states are shaping up to be pretty competitive contests. In both states, it seems as if Sanders and former Vice President Joe Biden will battle it out for first place.

Sanders’s breadth of support in both states puts him in the best position to maximize his delegate haul, while the math is a little fuzzier for Biden. For one thing, Biden’s fortunes seem to be more inextricably linked to former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s performance. But remember, things could still shift in these states depending on how things play out in South Carolina. After all, North Carolina and Virginia are also in the South, so South Carolina’s results could be indicative of voting patterns in many parts of these states. North Carolina and Virginia have fairly analogous outlooks in part because they contain some similar regions, including affluent and highly educated urban-suburban pockets, sizable African American populations and large rural areas.

First up, North Carolina. Our forecast has Biden as a very slight favorite to win the state, with about a 1 in 2 (49 percent) chance, while Sanders has about a 3 in 10 (30 percent) shot at victory. Bloomberg has about a 1 in 5 (19 percent) chance of winning. Other candidates’ overall chances of winning are slight: Sen. Elizabeth Warren has a 1 percent chance and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg has less than a 1 percent shot.

Thirty-eight of North Carolina’s 110 pledged delegates will be allocated based on the statewide results. Our model forecasts Biden to get 26 percent and Sanders to get 23 percent of the statewide vote, on average. Bloomberg, however, is a close third at 20 percent. Warren, Buttigieg and Sen. Amy Klobuchar are all further back, with projected vote shares of 10 percent, 8 percent and 5 percent, respectively. (Philanthropist Tom Steyer and Rep. Tulsi Gabbard are forecast to win just 4 and 1 percent apiece.)

Our forecast for North Carolina’s 13 congressional districts — which together award 72 delegates — has Biden ahead in eight districts and Sanders up in three, though they’re running neck and neck in about half the districts.1 Remember, candidates must win at least 15 percent of the vote both statewide and in individual districts to win delegates. As things stand now, it looks like only Biden, Sanders and Bloomberg are likely to finish above that mark in most districts, though we can’t count out Warren or Buttigieg.

It’s a three-way race across North Carolina

Average forecasted vote share for the top six Democratic presidential candidates in North Carolina congressional districts, according to the FiveThirtyEight model as of 2:00 p.m. on Feb. 28

District Biden Sanders Bloomberg Warren Buttigieg Klobuchar NC-01 34% 19% 24% 7% 6% 3% NC-02 22 24 17 11 11 7 NC-03 28 21 22 8 8 5 NC-04 23 24 18 10 11 7 NC-05 25 25 22 11 8 4 NC-06 28 24 20 10 7 4 NC-07 25 23 21 10 9 5 NC-08 29 23 22 10 7 4 NC-09 25 25 20 11 9 5 NC-10 27 23 22 11 7 4 NC-11 22 25 20 12 9 6 NC-12 30 22 20 9 7 4 NC-13 26 25 22 11 7 4 State 26 23 20 10 8 5

Much of the district-level variation is due in part to the demographic factors we outlined earlier. For instance, Biden tends to have an advantage in districts with large numbers of African American. Two of his three strongest seats are the 1st Congressional District, which is in eastern North Carolina and 43 percent black, and the 12th Congressional District, which is home to Charlotte and 36 percent black. (North Carolina’s population as a whole is about one-fifth African American.)

Sanders tends to do best in whiter areas, but he’s decently strong everywhere regardless of demographic differences. Warren also doesn’t have much variation in her support, though with her relatively high support among college-educated voters, you’d think her best chances lie in the well-educated and university-laden Research Triangle, covered by the 2nd and 4th districts. Buttigieg also does better with college-educated voters, so it’s not surprising that the only districts in which he clears 10 percent are the 2nd and 4th.

On election night, keep an eye on how Biden and Bloomberg are doing relative to each other. Their district-level forecasted vote share is stronger than their statewide vote share in many of the same districts, so if one underperforms, we’d expect the other to overperform in those areas (especially as both candidates’ support tends to come from more moderate voters and African American voters, with some overlap there). That could have ramifications for delegate hauls, too, because should one gain at the other candidate’s expense, the underperformer could fall below 15 percent and out of the running for delegates in those districts.

To the north, Virginia is another highly competitive piece of the Super Tuesday puzzle. Our forecast gives Biden a slight edge in the Old Dominion, with almost a 1 in 2 (47 percent) chance of winning. Meanwhile, Sanders has a roughly 2 in 5 (37 percent) shot and Bloomberg has a 1 in 7 (14 percent) chance. Again, the overall chances someone else wins Virginia outright are low: Both Buttigieg and Warren have about a 1 in 100 (1 percent) shot.

Thirty-four of Virginia’s 99 pledged delegates will be allocated based on the statewide results. Our model forecasts Biden (26 percent) and Sanders (25 percent) to each win about a quarter of the statewide vote, on average. Bloomberg is a close third — he’s projected to receive 19 percent. Buttigieg, Warren and Klobuchar are farther back at 11 percent, 9 percent and 6 percent, respectively. (Steyer and Gabbard are projected to win 1 percent.)

Meanwhile, our forecast for Virginia’s 11 congressional districts — together worth 65 delegates — suggests that it’s possible that Virginia could have four candidates who meet the 15 percent threshold in at least a district or two, which could muddle the delegate situation. Sanders, Biden and Bloomberg are at or above 15 percent in each of Virginia’s districts, according to our average forecasted vote share, but Buttigieg is around the 15 percent mark in three districts, too.

Four candidates could pick up delegates in Virginia

Average forecasted vote share for the top six Democratic presidential candidates in Virginia congressional districts, according to the FiveThirtyEight model as of 2:00 p.m. on Feb. 28

District Biden Sanders Bloomberg Buttigieg Warren Klobuchar VA-01 25% 25% 19% 11% 9% 6% VA-02 28 26 21 9 9 4 VA-03 36 21 23 7 6 3 VA-04 35 21 23 8 7 4 VA-05 29 23 23 9 8 5 VA-06 27 26 23 8 9 4 VA-07 26 26 20 11 9 5 VA-08 21 27 15 14 11 8 VA-09 27 25 24 8 9 4 VA-10 19 28 15 15 11 9 VA-11 20 28 15 14 11 8 State 26 25 19 11 9 6

Notably, Biden’s forecasted vote share varies more across Virginia districts than in North Carolina. His estimates range from 19 percent in the 10th Congressional District, which contains some highly affluent suburbs of Washington, D.C., to 36 percent in the 3rd Congressional District, a majority-minority seat centered on Newport News and Norfolk in the southeast. And just as in North Carolina, Biden is strongest in the two seats with large shares of African American voters — the 3rd and 4th districts are more than 40 percent black.

Once again, Bloomberg tends to mirror Biden’s strength in individual districts but with a slightly lower floor. Biden and Bloomberg don’t do as well in the 8th, 10th and 11th districts, which cover most of northern Virginia near the nation’s capital, and this seems to have opened a possible path to delegates for Buttigieg. More than half of these districts’ adult residents hold bachelor’s degrees or higher, and they all have median household incomes north of $100,000, placing them among the 10 richest districts in the country.

However, Sanders is in an enviable position, averaging between 21 and 28 percent everywhere. The breadth of his support across a demographically diverse set of Virginia districts — similar to North Carolina — gives Sanders the best chance of getting at least a slice of the delegate pie across the commonwealth. Warren’s support is fairly consistent across much of Virginia, though her best chance of cracking 15 percent appears to come in the highly-educated and affluent territory in which Buttigieg also looks strong, so that might be a bit of a delegate melee.

As the returns come in, be sure to once again watch Biden and Bloomberg. And keep an eye on the wealthy and highly educated suburbs of Washington, D.C. If Buttigieg, Warren or even Klobuchar hope to outperform their forecasted vote shares statewide and at the district level, that’s where we’d expect to see them make major gains. At the same time, if that trio of candidates fragment the vote in those districts, they could help Sanders — as well as Biden or Bloomberg to some extent — by reducing the number of candidates who win delegates and helping maximize the delegate haul for candidates who do win more than 15 percent.

North Carolina and Virginia have the third- and fourth-most pledged delegates up for grabs on March 3, behind only California and Texas. The race to win overall looks close in each state and a number of candidates potentially could grab at least a few delegates across the states’ 24 districts.