Tag Archives: gop

GOP Climate Hawk Narrowly Loses Senate Seat

Mother Jones

Unlike nearly every other Senate contest in the country, the New Hampshire race featured a Republican who has been outspoken about the need to combat climate change. Kelly Ayotte, the incumbent, was one of just five GOP senators to vote for a resolution acknowledging that humans are a significant cause of global warming, and she was the first GOP senator to come out in support of President Barack Obama’s Clean Power Plan. But that wasn’t enough to keep her seat; she was narrowly defeated by Democratic Gov. Maggie Hassan.

Ayotte’s environmental moderation earned her the ire of some on the right and even resulted in her potentially missing out on millions of dollars in independent ad buys from groups affiliated with the Koch brothers, according to the Intercept. But Hassan argued that Ayotte’s climate advocacy was too little, too late. Back in 2010, when Ayotte first ran for Senate, she told the editorial board of the Portsmouth-Herald that although there was evidence to show human activity affects climate change, “I don’t think the evidence is conclusive.” The same year, Ayotte signed onto a pledge sponsored by the Koch-backed group Americans for Prosperity, promising not to vote for any climate change legislation that would increase taxes. During a debate last month, Hassan criticized Ayotte for having “doubted whether climate change was real.”

“I was the first Republican in the country to support the president’s Clean Power Plan,” Ayotte shot back. “I’ve crossed party lines, even taken criticism from my own party to protect New Hampshire’s environment, and that goes back to my time as state attorney general.”

Environmental advocacy groups didn’t buy Ayotte’s rhetoric, and they threw their support behind Hassan, who as governor committed New Hampshire to an agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80 to 95 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Hassan said that combating climate change would be one of her top priorities should she win the Senate seat. In an interview this week, Melinda Pierce of the Sierra Club emphasized her group’s support for Hassan, arguing that Ayotte’s previous record on climate issues didn’t back up her recent positioning. “You can’t choose to green yourself up on one issue if the rest of your voting record doesn’t support broad action on climate change,” Pierce said.

NextGen Climate Action, a group run by billionaire Tom Steyer, spent more than $420,000 campaigning against Ayotte, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. NextGen sought to reach millennial voters by targeting ads on social media platforms, apps like Tinder, and X-box Live, according to Kate Corriveau, press secretary for NextGen in New Hampshire. The group also sent field teams to campuses across the state hoping to motivate students to vote.

Visit link:

GOP Climate Hawk Narrowly Loses Senate Seat

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on GOP Climate Hawk Narrowly Loses Senate Seat

Republicans Need to Abandon Angry White Guys

Mother Jones

What’s going to happen to the Republican Party after November 8? I’ve raised the possibility that if Trump loses massively, the party establishment might get serious about marginalizing the tea party caucus in Congress instead of being held endlessly hostage to them. Most of the responses to that suggestion have been skeptical. The more likely possibility is that tea partiers will increase their influence and the GOP will become even crazier and more obstructionist than ever.

That’s pretty much what apostate Republican Max Boot thinks:

Republican leaders like Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan may hope that after Trump’s inevitable defeat the party will return to their brand of conservatism — in favor of free trade and American leadership abroad, cutting government spending and taxes, a balanced approach to immigration, and making deals where possible with centrist Democrats. But that’s not a safe assumption anymore.

….Perhaps Trump will fade away after the election and the Republican Party will return to its Reaganite roots. But…survey findings suggest a strong possibility that instead the GOP, or at least a substantial portion of it, could continue veering toward the fringe, muttering darkly about how Trump was robbed of his rightful victory. If that is the case, then the Republican Party may not survive the Trump takeover.

I want to make this easy. There’s basically only one thing that matters for the GOP: whether they double down on being the white men’s party, or whether they take the painful but necessary steps necessary to broaden their appeal. That’s it. Everything else pales in comparison.

If they continue on their current course, the presidency is going to get further and further out of reach. Eventually they won’t be able to hold on to the Senate or the House either. They’ve simply run out of ways to increase the white vote and suppress the non-white vote, and the demographics of America just flatly don’t support a party that’s increasingly loathed by women and minorities.

Lindsey Graham’s critique of four years ago is famous: “We’re not generating enough angry white guys to stay in business for the long term.” Republicans need to print this on a hat and start wearing it at all times. The Southern Strategy worked great for half a century, but nothing lasts forever. It’s time to abandon it.

Taken from: 

Republicans Need to Abandon Angry White Guys

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Republicans Need to Abandon Angry White Guys

Trump Just Proposed He and Clinton Take Pre-Debate Drug Tests

Mother Jones

At a packed rally in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, on Saturday morning, GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump again denied the slew of sexual misconduct allegations that have emerged against him this past week. But then he changed the subject to one of his favorite talking points: Hillary Clinton’s stamina. This time, though, Trump took it further, implying that Clinton took performance-enhancing drugs before the presidential debates. He proposed that they each should be drug-tested prior to the debate this Wednesday.

“I think she is actually getting pumped up,” he said. “She’s getting pumped up for Wednesday night.” Trump then added, “We’re like athletes, right? Look, I beat 17 senators, governors, all these people….Athletes, they make them take a drug test. I think we should take a drug test prior to the debate. Why don’t we do that?”

It may be a pointless question, but what evidence did Trump produce that Clinton is pulling a Lance Armstrong? He claimed that at the start of the last debate she was “was all pumped up” but by the end “she could barely reach her car.” By the way, Trump has yet to make good on his promise to produce his full medical records.

Link:  

Trump Just Proposed He and Clinton Take Pre-Debate Drug Tests

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Trump Just Proposed He and Clinton Take Pre-Debate Drug Tests

Mike Pence and the Failure of the Republican Establishment

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

When Mike Pence took the stage for the vice-presidential debate, he was not there only as Donald Trump’s second; he was also representing the Republican establishment that has cravenly acquiesced to Trumpism. As something of a surrogate for the entire GOP, Pence, the governor of Indiana, often tried to sidestep Tim Kaine’s pointed criticisms of Trump. But he could not avoid defending his running mate on key matters—and cleaning up after the GOP’s acerbic nominee.

Pence claimed that it was untrue that he and Trump had praised Russian strongman Vladimir Putin. (They have both called him a strong leader.) He said that Trump would not support legislation to punish women who obtain abortions. (Trump has said that “some form of punishment” would be necessary if abortion were made illegal.) He declared that Trump would implement “broad-shoulder” leadership in foreign affairs and adopt a muscular stance against Russia’s military intervention in Syria. (Trump has said Russian airstrikes in Syria were “okay” with him.) He denied that Trump has called for spreading nuclear weapons to nations they don’t currently possess them. (Trump has.) Pence scoffed at Kaine’s insistence that Trump has hurled abuse and invective on the campaign trail and asserted it was Hillary Clinton who was mounting an “insult-driven” campaign. He defended the Trump Foundation—which has been cited for various violations and which Trump has apparently used for his own personal and pay-to-play ends—while attacking the Clinton Foundation falsely for spending only 10 percent of its funding on charitable work. (The figure is close to 90 percent.) All the thrusts and parries aside, Pence’s most important role was serving as normalizer-in-chief.

As many Republicans say—some in public, some in private—Trump is at best not a serious man and at worst a threat to the nation. He is arrogant, impulsive, and erratic, a loudmouth and boorish know-it-all who doesn’t know nearly as much as he believes. He has mocked the disabled. He exhibits no discipline. He threatens war too readily and expresses admiration for tyrannical leaders (especially Putin). He shows signs of a troubled and troubling personality. He cannot admit error and doesn’t take advice. (After the first debate, his aides had to complain about Trump’s lack of preparation and poor performance to New York Times reporters in order to get his attention.) He is a serial purveyor of outlandishly false claims and crackpot conspiracy theories, including birtherism (which he hardly renounced). He changes positions on a whim. He denies saying what he has already said (or doesn’t remember). He routinely derides minorities and denigrates and body-shames women. He attacked a Gold Star family and equated his business career with the sacrifice of military service. (He also likened trying to avoid STDs while sleeping around in the 1970s with serving in Vietnam.) He speaks and tweets recklessly. He has encouraged violence. He has threatened to undermine electoral democracy. He has egged on Russia to hack the United States. He refuses to disclose key information about his business dealings and finances, which include hefty loans from overseas banks. He runs a crooked foundation. He is no model family guy. He has been accused of fraud in several lawsuits. He stiffed working-class contractors. He exploited the tax system to live like a billionaire—which he may well not be—while possibly paying no federal taxes.

Many GOP leaders realize all this and earlier in the presidential campaign expressed their anti-Trump views. House Speaker Paul Ryan criticized Trump for making “racist” remarks. Sen. Marco Rubio called the celebrity mogul “dangerous,” insisting that he was a “con man” unqualified to be president. Texas Gov. Rick Perry said Trump “is without substance when one scratches below the surface. He offers a barking carnival act that can be best described as Trumpism: A toxic mix of demagoguery and mean-spiritedness and nonsense that will lead the Republican Party to perdition if pursued.” Top Republicans considered Trump harmful to their party—his campaign was alienating the voting blocs GOPers had hoped to court: women, Latinos, African Americans—and to the national political discourse. Many believed that a President Trump could jeopardize the country’s well-being.

Yet most of the GOP top-dogs have jumped on the Trump trolley, even though they see an unstable and risky fellow is at the helm. Ryan, Rubio, and Perry are now official endorsers of Trump. So is Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who refuses to talk about Trump. (“Because I choose not to,” he explains.) Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), whose wife and father were insulted by Trump and who tried to define himself as a principled conservative by not endorsing Trump at the GOP convention in July, eventually kissed the ring. On Monday night, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) declared that Trump “absolutely” was a role model. (After that remarked sparked a social media controversy, Ayotte, who is in a tight reelection battle, claimed she had misspoke.) And consider the pathetic case of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). Trump started his presidential campaign by blasting McCain for being a loser who was captured in Vietnam. And yet McCain says he is supporting Trump.

All these Republicans know that Trump was unfamiliar with the nuclear triad. They know that he is lying when he says he knows more about ISIS than the generals. (Before the first presidential debate, while on Facebook Live, I asked Rep. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, a prominent Trump supporter, if she thought that Trump was better informed about ISIS than the US military leadership. She kept attempting to change the subject. I pressed her repeatedly. She would not answer the question—for the obvious reason.) Most GOP leaders know that a Muslim ban is a stupid idea, an act of bigotry that cannot be implemented and that would be counterproductive to the effort against violent extremism. (Pence tweeted last year that it was “offensive and unconstitutional.”) They also are smart enough to realize that encouraging supporters to chant “lock her up” demeans the national debate and undermines political stability. In another setting, they probably would acknowledge that such ignorance, arrogance, and bullying ought to be a disqualification for anyone seeking to become the commander in chief.

Still, most of the GOP elite—including elected Republican officials and the brass and staff at the Republican National Committee—have accepted Trump, and Pence is the grand marshal of this parade. A former House member and a stalwart conservative, he was a wise pick for Trump, for he had the cred to legitimize Trump. And Pence has enthusiastically tried to wrap the cloak of normalcy around the former reality television star. As a loyal No. 2, he repeatedly makes excuses for Trump’s conduct—even when it contradicts Pence’s core principles. In 1990, Pence ran for Congress and lost in a race that was notably marked by a barrage of nasty ads from Pence’s side. Afterward, he swore off such tactics and wrote a confessional article in which he denounced negative campaigning. “First, a campaign ought to demonstrate the basic human decency of the candidate,” he opined. “That means your First Amendment rights end at the tip of your opponent’s nose—even in the matter of political rhetoric.” He added that negative attacks are “wrong” because they distract voters from the important issues. He claimed that after his loss in the 1990 election, he underwent a “conversion” on the topic of negative ads: “A campaign ought to be about the advancement of issues whose success or failure is more significant than that of the candidate.”

With that noble tenet in mind, Pence went on to win a House seat. Yet as Trump’s sidekick, Pence has had to put his principles in a blind trust and kick his clean-campaigning values to the curb. It is without question that in modern times Trump has been the nastiest major-party presidential candidate. He bullied and name-called his way to the GOP nomination, and he has maliciously assaulted Hillary Clinton, labeling her a criminal, claiming in fact-free and sexist fashion that she does not possess sufficient “stamina” or a “presidential look,” and, most recently, accusing her of cheating on her husband (without offering any evidence). And Pence has been Trump’s defender at each turn. To make the situation even more ludicrous, Pence has lashed out at Democrats when they have criticized Trump, saying, “I don’t think name calling has any place in public life.” Unless you’re on the ticket with the best name-caller of all time. Pence, it seems, is playing the Michael Palin part in Monty Python’s famous Dead Parrot sketch: denying the obvious to an infinitely absurd degree. At the debate, he continued to depict Trump as the victim of harsh assaults.

With such a performance, Pence essentially speaks for the GOP elite, refusing to acknowledge the reality of Trump. Many Trump-accepting Rs will say that they have no choice because they find Clinton so odious. Oh, they don’t believe the balderdash about Benghazi or the conspiracy theories about the Clinton Foundation, and they don’t think the the email controversy is a capital crime. In fact, many of them feel more comfortable with Clinton’s centrist foreign policy reflexes than Trump’s inconsistent stances and Putin-coddling. Their problem is not with Clinton; it’s with their own voters.

During the Obama years, the GOP base has been encouraged to believe the worst about President Barack Obama—he’s a secret socialist Kenya-born Muslim who is plotting to destroy America!—and that hatred has been easily transferred to Clinton, who in the 1990s, with her husband, was the primary target of right-wing loathing. Republican elites cannot get on the wrong side of this raging Clinton animus. Nor can they stand against the bigotry and populist anti-government antipathy within their party that they have fueled or played footsie with. One example: in 2012, Mitt Romney eagerly embraced Trump, when the real estate developer was going full birther. (Romney, earlier this year, was one of Trump’s chief antagonists. But he has gone silent in recent months. A Romney confidant tells me that Romney reached the conclusion that further attacks from him could well help Trump.) Another example: three years earlier, when a couple thousand tea partiers gathered on Capitol Hill to protest Obamacare, they questioned Obama’s citizenship, depicted him as Sambo, and called him a traitor. Referring to Obamacare, the crowd shouted, “Nazis! Nazis!” The entire House Republican leadership, led by Rep. John Boehner, was there, and Boehner did not admonish the crowd for its excessive rhetoric. He got into the spirit, calling Obamacare the “greatest threat to freedom I have seen.”

By exploiting instead of addressing the anti-Obama fever within their party, Republicans leaders helped set the foundation for Trump’s towering candidacy. And with his nomination came crunch time. The choice was this: keep trying to ride the tiger or denounce the beast within. Not prepared to confront a plurality, if not a majority, of the GOP base and trigger a bloody all-out civil war that could well put their own political careers at risk, Republican poobahs had only one course of action: to pretend that Trump is acceptable. They did not have the courage, spunk, or fortitude to take on the forces they had encouraged. So now many GOPers must make believe that Trump would be a fine president and offer a neverending series of excuses and rationales—that is, when they cannot avoid talking about him.

This is not ideological. Trump is no conservative hero for whom Republicans must fall in line. Michael Reagan this week said that neither Nancy Reagan nor his father Ronald Reagan would have supported Trump. But doing so is no problem for Pence, who proudly describes himself as a Reagan conservative. Pence also is self-proclaimed evangelical who is now crusading for a fellow who has not practiced family values. And he has had to put aside bedrock policy principles—free trade and support for the Iraq war—to saddle up with Trump.

Pence is the GOP’s primary justifier for Trump—his only serious, brand-name surrogate. (Rudy Giuliani and Chris Christie have become clownish Trumpbots.) This is his job. And as unattractive as it might look from the outside, this might be a better position than losing gubernatorial candidate, for his reelection prospects were dim. (All this national attention could be helpful should he run for president in 2020 or 2024.) So when Trump says Obama was the “founder” of ISIS, Pence explains what Trump really meant. When Trump says Clinton’s Secret Service detail should be removed, Pence explains what Trump really meant. When Trump falsely claims the Clinton started the racist birther allegation, Pence explains what Trump really meant. He has regularized Trump’s cruelty, bigotry, vulgarity, and say-anything dishonesty.

In 1964, Republicans adopted this slogan in support of presidential candidate Barry Goldwater: “In your heart, you know he’s right.” Fifty-two years later, it’s pretty clear that for many elite Republicans, this mantra does not apply in this election. In green rooms across Washington, DC, Republicans admit that and shake their heads, upset that their party has reached this (sad!) point. In their heart, they know that Trump is wrong for the White House. They just don’t have the guts to do anything about it.

Original article – 

Mike Pence and the Failure of the Republican Establishment

Posted in ATTRA, bigo, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Prepara, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Mike Pence and the Failure of the Republican Establishment

A Silicon Valley Billionaire Just Challenged Donald Trump in the Best Way Possible

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman just made Donald Trump an offer that should entice the GOP nominee who claims to have donated millions to veterans: If Trump releases his tax returns by October 19, the date of the last presidential debate, Hoffman will donate up to $5 million to veteran groups.

The original idea came from a crowd-funding campaign started by Peter Kiernan, a veteran of the Marines who was once deployed to Afghanistan. Kiernan said he would donate to 10 veteran’s groups should Trump release his taxes and began raising money to do so on Crowdpac.com.

In a Medium post published on Monday afternoon, LinkedIn co-founder Hoffman expressed his support for Kiernan’s campaign, and upped the ante by promising to quintuple the final total raised by Kiernan, up to $5 million.

Kiernan explained his reasoning on the campaign’s site. “Any servicemember who has ever held a security clearance has been subjected to a rigorous background check, including personal finances, affiliations, and drug activity…To be the Commander-in-Chief of this group, you should be held to the same standards.”

In his post, Hoffman also noted both the tactic and the actual dollar amount should have special significance to the GOP nominee: In 2012, Trump offered Barack Obama $5 million to release his college transcripts, his passport applications, and other documents.

As BuzzFeed points out, Hoffman’s intentions might not just be about the 2016 election. He was an early investor in Crowdpac, the site hosting Kiernan’s crowd-funding campaign, so he potentially stands to benefit financially from raising the site’s profile.

In January, Trump skipped a Republican primary debate in Iowa and instead held a fundraiser for veterans during the same time slot. (He initially claimed to have donated $6 million from the event to veteran charities, but his campaign has significantly decreased that estimate following reports suggesting the initial figure was inflated.) But the nominee has also been adamant about keeping his tax returns from the public eye: Though he promised to release them in May, he has since reversed his position, saying he would withhold the records because he was being audited by the IRS. (The agency has said that’s not necessary.)

As Hoffman explains, the proposal “gives Trump a strong incentive to act but doesn’t reward him directly for something he should have already done. Instead, men and women to whom all Americans owe a great debt of gratitude will benefit from any positive action he takes.”

This article is from: 

A Silicon Valley Billionaire Just Challenged Donald Trump in the Best Way Possible

Posted in FF, G & F, GE, Hoffman, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on A Silicon Valley Billionaire Just Challenged Donald Trump in the Best Way Possible

This GOP Candidate Questions Whether the Civil War Should Have Been Fought

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The most important congressional primary on Tuesday wasn’t House Speaker Paul Ryan’s cakewalk in Wisconsin. It was in neighboring Minnesota’s 2nd District, where Republicans are scrambling to retain the seat held by retiring Rep. John Kline. Their new nominee: Jason Lewis, a talk radio host who founded an Ayn Rand social network and has a history of making inflammatory comments about slavery and women.

Republicans had fought hard to nominate someone other than Lewis in the swing district, which voted narrowly for President Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012. Kline backed Lewis’ Republican opponent, businesswoman Darlene Miller. But Lewis won the district GOP’s endorsement and cruised past Miller by nearly 20 points, setting up a November showdown with Democrat Angie Craig. The suburban Minneapolis district is a must-win for Democrats hoping to take back the House, a goal that would require flipping 30 seats currently held by Republicans. That’s a long shot right now. But it becomes a bit likelier when the GOP fields controversial candidates like Lewis in swing districts.

Lewis’ past comments have been a gold mine for critics. In his 2011 book, Power Divided Is Power Checked: The Argument for States’ Rights, he questioned the wisdom of the Civil War, arguing that it had been fought over states rights, not slavery, and changed the nation’s constitutional framework for the worse. In his book, he proposed a constitutional amendment that would help restore what he believed had been lost, by allowing any state to peaceably leave the Union. And in a 2011 interview, Lewis declined to say whether the Civil War should have been fought, suggesting, as he had in the book, that there were better alternatives to ending slavery that President Abraham Lincoln could have considered.

Lewis has also taken heat for comments he made about women on his radio show. Many of the old episodes have been taken down from his website, but in a segment after the 2012 election that was unearthed by the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Lewis went off on “ignorant” voters who he believed had sold their votes for free birth control. “You’ve got a vast majority of young single women who couldn’t explain to you what GDP means,” he said on his radio show in 2012. “You know what they care about? They care about abortion. They care about abortion and gay marriage. They care about The View. They are non-thinking.”

He added, “I never thought in my lifetime where you’d have so many single, or I should say, yeah, single women who would vote on the issue of somebody else buying their diaphragm. This is a country in crisis. Those women are ignorant in, I mean, the most generic way. I don’t mean that to be a pejorative. They are simply ignorant of the important issues in life. Somebody’s got to educate them.”

And in another 2012 segment, he said the “white population” of the United States was “committing cultural suicide” by not having more kids. “Other communities are having three, four, five, six kids—gee, guess what happens after a while, folks?”

Lewis has kept busy outside of the talk radio arena. Two years ago, he launched a new online community called Galt.io, which describes itself as “a members-only network of makers inspired by ‘Galt’s Gulch’ from Ayn Rand’s classic novel ‘Atlas Shrugged.'” Galt.io members earn “Galtcoins” for participating in the community and can “invest” them in different causes on the site, in order to promote various political agendas. According to the site, “Galt.io is part stock exchange, part social network and truly a society of people committed to changing the direction of our country.”

Continue reading – 

This GOP Candidate Questions Whether the Civil War Should Have Been Fought

Posted in FF, GE, Jason, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on This GOP Candidate Questions Whether the Civil War Should Have Been Fought

#ReplaceTrump? Sorry, Republicans, You’re Stuck With Him.

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

With the Trump campaign in turmoil after a week filled with gaffes, bizarre feuds, and rumors of despondent staff (and it’s only Wednesday!), anti-Trump Republicans have once again begun floating the idea that Donald Trump could be replaced as the GOP nominee.

No. He can’t.

Party insiders might have been able to flex their political muscle to keep Trump from the nomination in the first place, but once the Republican National Convention last month formally nominated Trump, the mechanisms by which they can dump him evaporated—no matter how much anyone wants it to be otherwise. Speculation about the possibility that Trump could be removed began to build this morning after ABC’s John Karl reported that senior GOP officials were discussing how to replace Trump on the ballot should he withdraw from the race.

But that’s just it: Trump would have to drop out. He couldn’t be replaced against his will.

A Republican lawyer who has advised the Republican National Committee in previous election cycles told Mother Jones that there are zero options for the party to remove Trump.

“It seems that some outlets/blogs had some misleading headlines, insinuating that Trump could be ‘replaced,’ but that would be an incorrect assessment of the ABC interview,” the lawyer, who requested that his name not be printed, told Mother Jones in an email. “There’s no process under the Rules of the Republican Party for removing a nominee.”

Another GOP insider, attorney Henry Barbour (the nephew of former RNC chair Haley Barbour), was more succinct when asked to be interviewed about the possibility of the GOP replacing the man it crowned as nominee just two weeks ago.

“This is an absurd question,” he wrote in an email. “Sorry.”

The former RNC lawyer said there is a mechanism by which Trump can be replaced, if he voluntarily drops out. Rule 9 of the party’s internal rules stipulates that if a presidential or vice presidential nominee leaves the ticket, the 168 members of the RNC—not voters or delegates—would select a new nominee.

“This is all very hypothetical, but the key point is that the nominee can’t be ‘replaced,'” the lawyer says. “Rule 9 is only intended for filling a vacancy.”

But time is running out for the party to replace Trump even if he steps aside voluntarily. State deadlines for certifying names on the ballot are fast approaching, meaning that Trump’s name would likely remain on some states’ ballots even if he withdrew from the race. Texas, a must-win state for Republicans if they hope to take the White House, has an August 26 deadline for withdrawing. As the Daily Beast noted Wednesday, next week is the deadline for removing Trump from the ballot in reliably red Arkansas and Oklahoma, and swing state North Carolina needs the candidate’s name to be certified by this Friday, August 5.

See original article: 

#ReplaceTrump? Sorry, Republicans, You’re Stuck With Him.

Posted in Crown, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on #ReplaceTrump? Sorry, Republicans, You’re Stuck With Him.

Kremlin Spokesman Says Vladimir Putin "Has Never Had Any Contacts With Trump"

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

After days of speculation about Donald Trump’s relationship with Vladimir Putin—generated by the GOP nominee’s own wildly conflicting statements on the subject—the Russian President has finally weighed in: According to Putin’s press secretary, the leader has never met nor spoken to the GOP nominee.

In the past, Trump has boasted of knowing and communicating with Putin. But last week, Trump sharply reversed himself, telling reporters, “I don’t know anything about him.” In an ABC News interview that aired on Sunday, George Stephanopoulos confronted Trump with instances in 2013, 2014, and 2015 when Trump contradicted himself.

On Monday, in response to an inquiry from NBC News, Putin’s press secretary, Dmitry Peskov, set the record straight on behalf of his boss. “President Putin has never had any contacts with Trump, never spoken to him, including by telephone,” Peskov told the network. “The same goes for all of his staff. We don’t have dealings with them.”

Peskov also added a comment about Trump’s statements that US intervention to help Ukraine take back control of Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014, could lead to a third world war: “We’re trying not to comment on that, not to get involved in their internal affairs. Regretfully, Russia-bashing is becoming a habit in American elections,” Peskov told NBC.

From:

Kremlin Spokesman Says Vladimir Putin "Has Never Had Any Contacts With Trump"

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Kremlin Spokesman Says Vladimir Putin "Has Never Had Any Contacts With Trump"

Congressman wants EPA officials on the no-fly list

Don’t Fly Like An Eagle

Congressman wants EPA officials on the no-fly list

By on Jul 8, 2016Share

You’ve got to hand it to him for creativity.

Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.) has proposed an amendment that would ban employees of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from using taxpayer money to fly … because environmental regulators in coach is really the battle we need to be fighting right now. You can think of it as a sort of no-fly list for greens, as Politico reports.

Not content merely to force EPA employees to ride Greyhound, Rep. Hudson also proposed an amendment that would prohibit EPA funds from being used to buy firearms. While it’s hardly common for water quality inspectors to pack heat, a small number of EPA officers do carry weapons for enforcement purposes. In 2009, for instance, armed EPA agents helped apprehend fugitive Larkin Baggett, the owner of a Utah chemical company who had been sentenced to 20 years in prison for illegal dumping and other environmental crimes.

As for pretty much anyone else carrying AR-15s, well, Hudson sees no problem there.

Here’s the text of the amendment:

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Follow this link: 

Congressman wants EPA officials on the no-fly list

Posted in alo, Anchor, ATTRA, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Congressman wants EPA officials on the no-fly list

Paul Ryan Wants to Increase the Medicare Eligibility Age to 67

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Republicans announce a lot of health care plans. All of them are essentially the same, “a familiar hodgepodge of tax credits, health savings accounts, high-risk pools, block granting of Medicaid, tort reform, and interstate purchase of health plans.” Today, after months of cogitating, House Republicans have finally agreed on yet another a health care plan. It’s not a hodgepodge, however, it’s a “backpack.” Beyond that, however, it should sound pretty familiar:

In place of President Barack Obama’s health law, House Republicans propose providing Americans with refundable tax credits….catastrophic insurance….health-savings accounts….plans offered in other states….fee-for-service insurance through a newly created Medicare insurance exchange not a voucher! not a voucher! absolutely positively not a voucher! -ed.….pay taxes on the value of whatever health insurance employers provide.

Hmmm. There’s no mention of high-risk pools or tort reform or Medicaid block grants. What the hell is going on here? Who was responsible for—oh, wait. Maybe the Wall Street Journal just did a crappy job of describing it. Let’s check in with the Washington Post:

The GOP plan floats a variety of proposals….refundable tax credit….health savings accounts….“high-risk pools”….Medicaid funds would be handed to the states either as block grants or as per-capita allotments.

Now we’re talking. Every single buzzword is there except for tort reform. But maybe I should check in with Reuters:

The Republican proposal would gradually increase the Medicare eligibility age, which currently is 65, to match that of the Social Security pension plan, which is 67 for people born in 1960 or later….The Republican plan includes medical liability reform that would put a cap on non-economic damages awarded in lawsuits, a measure aimed at cutting overall healthcare costs.

Tort reform is there after all! And as an extra added bonus, the Medicare eligibility age goes up to 67! Hallelujah!

How could this possibly have taken more than five minutes to write? It’s identical to every health care plan ever proposed by Republicans. There is, of course, no funding mechanism, possibly because Republicans know perfectly well that it will do nothing and therefore require no funding. But here’s my favorite bit of well-hidden snark from the Washington Post account:

The most significant omission from the Republican health-care plan, though, is to what degree it will maintain — or, more likely, reduce — insurance coverage for Americans….Asked about the plan’s effect on coverage, a Republican leadership aide said Monday, “You’re getting to the dynamic effect of the plan and we can’t answer that until the committees start to legislate.”

But there is a significant clue in the GOP plan that it anticipates a surge in the ranks of the uninsured. Before the Affordable Care Act, the federal government’s primary mechanism for compensating health providers for delivering care to the uninsured was through “disproportionate share hospital” payments, or DSH, which are allocated to facilities that treated large numbers of the uninsured.

Under Obamacare, DSH payments were set to be phased out because coverage rates were expected to increase dramatically….The Republican plan would repeal those cuts entirely.

Bottom line: this is just the usual conservative mush. It would accomplish nothing. It would insure no one. It would wipe out all the gains of Obamacare. Millions of people would have their current health care ripped away from them, all so that Republicans can repeal the 3.8 percent tax on high-earner investment income that funds Obamacare.

And just for good measure, it will also raise the Medicare eligibility age to 67. Because apparently, the old hodgepodge just wasn’t quite Scrooge-like enough.

Follow this link: 

Paul Ryan Wants to Increase the Medicare Eligibility Age to 67

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Paul Ryan Wants to Increase the Medicare Eligibility Age to 67