We start today with
Jennifer Rubin of
The Washington Post reporting that Democrats did better among Latino and rural voters during the midterm elections than was expected.
The moderate think tank Third Way looked at 10 states and categorized counties there as urban, rural or suburban. It found that a flock of Democratic candidates outperformed President Biden’s results from 2020 in rural counties, including Pennsylvania Gov.-elect Josh Shapiro (who improved upon Biden’s 2020 showing by 15.2 points), Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (10.4 points), Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (8.8 points), Pennsylvania Sen.-elect John Fetterman (7.2 points), and Sens. Michael Bennet (Colo.) and Mark Kelly (Ariz.), both of whom beat Biden’s showing by more than 6 points.
In the Kansas gubernatorial race, Third Way reported: “[Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly] outperformed Biden in every Kansas county. Kelly saw an average 22.7-point leftward swing from Biden in 2020 in rural counties, and she had similarly strong swings in urban, suburban, and exurban counties compared to 2020.”[...]
It’s an uphill fight for Democrats in some rural areas, but not impossible. “If they don’t think you care, and you don’t show up, you’re just affirming their view,” Ryan said. He added, “People may disagree with you on certain issues, whether it’s being pro-choice or antiabortion or pro-death penalty or whatever your views are on immigration, but if they feel you’re genuinely concerned about how they’re doing economically, they’ll still consider voting for you.
I can’t remember any of the exact quotes from President Obama on this subject but I do remember him explaining the importance of losing a district or geographic area by 20% instead of, say, 35% or 40% can have a big effect on a statewide race or for the Electoral College.
Stuart Rothenberg of
Roll Call points out that while Number 45’s popularity within the Republican base is fading (ever so slightly), the Republican establishment still remains unpopular.
Like other political analysts, I have come to believe over the past few years that a large chunk of the GOP — maybe a third or even more — retains its allegiance to Trump, and that will not change.
But over the past two midterms (2018 and 2022), the last presidential election and a handful of other events (including an abortion
referendum in Kansas and
special elections), signs of Trump’s growing weakness are undeniable.
That doesn’t mean that Trump’s hold on the GOP has disappeared or that he can’t win the Republican presidential nomination in 2024. A crowded Republican contest would improve Trump’s prospects, and he has demonstrated that he can create an “us versus them” message that resonates in conservative and Republican circles.
A substantial chunk of Republican voters still believe that the party’s establishment is as bad, if not worse, than liberals and Democrats. They believe the
Mitch McConnells (
sic) of the world feign support for the MAGA movement but only care about protecting their positions of power.
Lindsey McPherson, also of
Roll Call, says that the five Republican Congressmen who have already come out against voting for Kevin McCarthy as House Speaker have formed a steadfast bloc against McCarthy and expects that bloc to grow,
Reps.
Andy Biggs of Arizona,
Bob Good of Virginia,
Matt Gaetz of Florida,
Matt Rosendale of Montana and
Ralph Norman of South Carolina have all broadcast plans to vote against McCarthy.
Leaving the rules discussion, where no final decisions were made, Biggs and Norman said they remained unmoved in their resolve to oppose McCarthy and expect their bloc of five will remain united in the Jan. 3 floor election and likely expand before then.
“It will grow,” Norman said. Biggs has stepped up as an alternative candidate and is planning to vote for himself. He said he expects the other four to vote for him too, which Norman confirmed is his plan.
“I trust all four of the bloc,” Biggs said.
Orion Rummler of The19thNews writes about yesterday’s meeting of the House Oversight Committee about the dangers of escalating anti-LGBTQ rhetoric even
after last month’s mass shooting at Club Q.
Anderson and Slaugh recounted the horror they lived through — and tied what they experienced during the Club Q shooting to growing
anti-LGBTQ+ political rhetoric. During expert testimony, leading LGBTQ+ researchers and activists beseeched lawmakers to recognize the harm that such rhetoric and legislation fueled by it has caused. That, they say, includes the loss of life seen in Club Q.
“To the politicians and activists who accused LGBTQ people of grooming children and being abusers, shame on you,” Anderson said. “Hate speech turns into hate action, and actions based on hate almost took my life from me at 25 years old.”
Haynes read samples of hateful comments that he said the club has received since the shooting, including one message that read, “All gays should die.”
The committee, representing the House’s investigative authority, is returning to Republican leadership next year. Wednesday’s hearing is the final full committee hearing on the agenda before Democrats cede their leadership.
Paul Krugman of
The New York Times gives an overview of why there has been a decay in “the “peace through trade” doctrine of economic diplomacy.
So is this the end of peace through trade? Not exactly — but it’s a doctrine that has lost a lot of force lately, for several reasons.
First, the idea that trade fosters peace may be true only for democracies. The United States briefly
invaded Mexico in 1916 in an unsuccessful attempt to capture Pancho Villa; such a thing would be hard to conceive nowadays, with Mexican factories such integral parts of the North American manufacturing system. But are we equally sure that the similarly deep integration of Taiwan into China’s manufacturing system rules out any possibility of invasion?
And unfortunately,
authoritarianism has been rising in many countries around the world for quite a while. That’s partly because some fragile democracies have collapsed, partly because some autocracies — especially China — have opened up economically although not politically and partly because some of these autocracies (again, especially China) have experienced rapid economic growth.
What about the idea that growing integration with the world economy would itself be a force for democratization? That idea was a key pillar of economic diplomacy in some Western nations, notably Germany, which bet heavily on the doctrine of
Wandel durch Handel — transformation through trade. But even a glance at Vladimir Putin’s Russia or Xi Jinping’s China shows that this doctrine has failed: China began opening up to international trade more than 40 years ago, Russia 30 years ago, but neither shows any signs of becoming a democracy or even a nation with strong rule of law.
Gustavo Arrellano of
The Los Angeles Times says that protesting Los Angeles City Council member Kevin de León is necessary, but there is also a good possibility that an escalation of the protests against de León could backfire.
I’m all for protesters taking their grievances to politicians — a good public shaming is always healthy for democracy. If anyone needs rhetorical rotten tomatoes thrown at him right now, it’s De León. Letting him have it at council meetings is not just the 1st Amendment at its finest — it’s a civic duty. Even picketing outside his home,
like Black Lives Matters members have, is a part of the political playbook used by both parties.
But there’s a limit when you encounter a
sinvergüenza — a shameless scoundrel — like De León. Escalating actions to the lengths of this past week will convince few, if any, to take the side of the Reedys of L.A. and will strengthen De León’s hand by allowing him to play the victim card.
In a news release, De León demanded that his harassers knock it off, stating that their campaign against him, “is a dangerous pattern that must end before more serious harm or loss of life occurs” — an over-the-top assertion that he can now wrap himself in.
His persecution narrative is now pushing people who might not like the longtime politico — but who care for disruptive protests even less — to rally by his side.
Nicholas Florko of STATnews reports an eight-part series that details the refusal of many state prisons to treat its inmates for hepatitis C.
For more than two years, STAT endeavored to document the number of incarcerated people who died due to complications from hepatitis C, part of a broad investigation into prisons’ failures to prevent avoidable death and suffering related to the condition.
Prison systems fought our attempts at every turn.
This undertaking underscores how easy it is for prisons to hide the true reason why people die behind bars, and how useless the existing data is for determining whether people in prison are dying from preventable conditions. The overwhelming difficulty of the task raises questions about whether and how family members or community advocates could ever use the information to sound the alarm about especially dangerous facilities, help families and friends figure out if a death was preventable, or pinpoint inadequate care for certain diseases. [...]
In fact, STAT was only able to document the number of people who died of hepatitis C after crafting an agreement with the federal government to analyze the death data submitted by state prisons pursuant to the federal Death In Custody Reporting Act. That data is housed at the University of Michigan and is typically only available to Ph.D. researchers who are approved by the Department of Justice — an option unavailable to the average American. For our research, the DOJ withheld names and other demographic information.
Robin Givhan of
The Washington Post muses on the intersections of religion, sex, identity, creativity, and music as she reviews “Spirit in the Dark: Religion in Black Music, Activism and Popular Culture,” now on exhibit at the National Museum of African American History and Culture.
Some religious folks move with breathtaking certainty to fight for laws and rules that always seems to involve making someone else feel less welcome in their school, in their community, in this world. They claim to have the answers to impossible questions. They aren’t so much interested in understanding the nuances and contradictions of theology as they are in carving out a how-to guide for a certain kind of life. They are focused on judgment more than mercy and when they talk about loving the sinner but hating the sin, it’s just a way to excuse themselves for doling out punishment and vitriol and calling it Christianity.
Woe, are they. Their right to, what, is under attack? Christmas trees glow in front of the White House and the Capitol and all across Washington. The entertainer Yolanda Adams sang “Silent Night” at the 100th National Christmas Tree Lighting. The president and first lady presided along with the vice president and second gentleman. There is no war on Christianity, there never has been, but some of the faithful seem to be in a pitched battle against their neighbors.
Everyone struggles. How do we forget that so easily? People turn to religion seeking comfort and guidance. And surely it provides both. It also helps people find common ground, not by agreeing on everything but recognizing the fuzzy, tenuous nature of our existence — that endless search for meaning that everyone is slowly, plodding toward.
“Spirit in the Dark” highlights all the tensions, contradictions and questions religion fosters, many of which have led to some of the country’s most provocative and profound creativity and activism.
Come on, Aretha.
YouTube Video
Kori Schake writes for War On the Rocks warning of the dangers of dragging the military into politics.
American respect for its military is plummeting. It has dropped by 22 points in the past five years in surveys conducted by the Reagan Foundation. In their
recently released poll, less than half of respondents have a great deal of trust and confidence in America’s military. Unless both civilian and military leaders take corrective actions to repair the breach, this will impede recruiting, diminish unit cohesion, and damage the bond between the military and the public it serves.
As concerning as the drop itself is the reason. 62 percent of respondents said they were losing trust and confidence because the military leadership is becoming overly politicized. Nor is the attitude partisan: 60 percent of Democrats gave that answer, as did 60 percent of Independents and 65 percent of Republicans. Only 35 percent of respondents expressed confidence in the military’s ability to act in a professional and nonpolitical manner.
If America wants to retain a military that recruits from all parts of the citizenry and brings them together into an effective fighting force, it should both correct that public perception and better insulate the military from being a pawn in partisan political disputes. This will require more discipline from military leaders and greater recognition by politicians of the damage they are doing to our national security by castigating the professionalism and non-partisan commitment of America’s soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and their leaders. Military leaders should stick to the core functions of the profession and master saying “that’s a more appropriate question for the secretary of defense.” Politicians should stop hiding behind uniforms when enacting unpopular policies, and expend their efforts on passing relevant legislation in areas urgently in need of attention.
Not one mention of the playing of Fox News on military bases and installations.
Nektaria Stamouli of POLITICO Europe writes that a Turkish court has sentenced Mayor of Istanbul, Ekrem Imamoğlu, to two years in prison and is banned from holding political office.
The mayor, who belongs to the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), is expected to appeal the verdict. However, it is not clear if the appeal will be considered before the presidential and parliamentary elections in June of next year.
Polls indicate a drop in Erdoğan’s approval ratings as
inflation has soared to more than 84 percent.
In March 2019, in a watershed moment in Turkish politics, Imamoğlu was elected mayor of Istanbul, the country’s economic and cultural powerhouse. It was a big blow to Erdoğan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP), which had controlled the city for a quarter-century.
The AKP pushed to cancel the election results, citing irregularities. As a result, the election was repeated a few months later and Imamoğlu
won again.
He was charged with insulting senior public officials after he described canceling the first election as an act of “foolishness” in November 2019. The mayor denied insulting the electoral council, arguing that his comments were a
response to Interior Minister Süleyman Soylu calling him “a fool” and accusing him of criticizing Turkey during a visit to the European Parliament.
Finally today,
Leonard Pitts, Jr. of the
Miami Herald writes his final column.
Well, as Carol Burnett used to say, I’m so glad we had this time together.
I’ve written about 1.6 million words as a columnist. This 600 or so will be the last. I’m retiring for a few reasons. One is that, while I’ve managed to squeeze out four novels between column deadlines, my dream was always to write books full time. I turned 65 in October, so if not now, when?
Another reason is that a column, for me, at least, is an act of emotional investment — and I’m emotionally exhausted. They say you know when it’s time. That’s true. And it is. [...]
Tomorrow, I will wake up for the first time in 46 years without a deadline to meet. It’s going to feel strange. I’ve always considered this podium a great privilege: Everyone has an opinion, after all, but precious few get to have their voices magnified — much less be paid for it. I tried to use that privilege to sound alarms about human rights, democracy, gun violence, the misinformation crisis and more. The fight on all those fronts goes on.
Have a good day, everyone!
