GEORGIA GOV RACE UPDATE - FED JUDGE ORDERS STATE TO PROTECT PROVISIONAL BALLOTS

GEORGIA GOV RACE UPDATE - FED JUDGE ORDERS STATE TO PROTECT PROVISIONAL BALLOTS:

EVERY VOTE SHOULD COUNT (VOTING RIGHTS).

MOST STATES (MARYLAND -PG COUNTY) HOLD PROVISIONAL BALLOTS UNTIL 13 DAYS AFTER ELECTION SO THEY CAN THROW AWAY CERTAIN BALLOTS.

STACEY ABRAMS IS A 21st CENTURY CHANGE AGENT.

I’M PROUD OF HER.


Post Sources AP, NBC News, Youtube


***** Judge orders Georgia to protect provisional ballots in Abrams-Kemp race

A federal judge has ordered Georgia take steps to ensure provisional ballots aren't improperly rejected and to wait until Friday to certify the results of the midterm elections that include an unsettled race for governor.

In a ruling late Monday, U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg ordered the secretary of state's office to establish and publicize a hotline or website where voters can check whether their provisional ballots were counted and, if not, the reason why.

And, for counties with 100 or more provisional ballots, she ordered the secretary of state's office to review, or have county election officials review, the eligibility of voters who had to cast a provisional ballot because of registration issues.

Totenberg also ruled that Georgia must not certify the election results before Friday at 5 p.m., which falls before the Nov. 20 deadline set by state law.

State elections director Chris Harvey testified at a hearing last week that the state had planned to certify the election results on Wednesday, a day after the deadline for counties to certify their results. He said that would allow preparations to begin for any necessary runoff contests, including one already projected in the race for the next secretary of state.

Current unofficial returns show Republican Brian Kemp leading by a margin that would make him the governor-elect. But Democrat Stacey Abrams insists that enough outstanding votes remain to be counted that could pull Kemp below the majority threshold and force a Dec. 4 runoff.

Totenberg acted in response to a lawsuit filed Nov. 5 by Common Cause Georgia. The suit accuses Kemp, the state's top elections official until he resigned as secretary of state last week, of acting recklessly after a vulnerability in Georgia's voter registration database was exposed shortly before the election.

Kemp's actions increased the risk that eligible voters could be illegally removed from the voter registration database or have registration information illegally altered, the lawsuit says.

Sara Henderson, executive director of Common Cause Georgia, said in an emailed statement that the ruling helps increase voter confidence in elections.

The secretary of state's office was reviewing the order and considering its options, spokeswoman Candice Broce said in an email.

Totenberg's order doesn't change the Tuesday deadline for counties to certify their results. But Abrams' campaign filed a lawsuit Sunday asking a federal court to push that deadline to Wednesday, while also requiring that elections authorities count certain provisional and absentee ballots that have been or would be rejected for "arbitrary reasons."

"I am fighting to make sure our democracy works for and represents everyone who has ever put their faith in it. I am fighting for every Georgian who cast a ballot with the promise that their vote would count," Abrams said in a statement explaining her refusal to end her bid to become the first black woman elected governor in American history.

Kemp's campaign retorted that Abrams' latest effort is "a disgrace to democracy" and ignores mathematical realities.

"Clearly, Stacey Abrams isn't ready for her 15 minutes of fame to end," said Kemp spokesman Ryan Mahoney.

As of Monday evening, a hearing had not been scheduled for arguments in the case, but Abrams' campaign was expecting a federal court in Atlanta to set a Tuesday hearing, given the time sensitivity.

Unofficial returns show Kemp with a lead of about 60,000 votes out of more than 3.9 million cast; Abrams would need a net gain of about 21,000 votes to force a Dec. 4 runoff. NBC has rated the race too close to call at this time.

The Georgia race, along with Florida's gubernatorial and Senate matchups that are requiring recounts, are among the final measures of a midterm election cycle that already has allowed Democrats to deal serious blows to President Donald Trump.

Democrats already have won the House, flipped seven governor's seats and reclaimed more than 300 state legislative seats in statehouses around the country. The GOP maintained its Senate majority, and could still expand it. But it's looking to hold the governor's mansions in Florida and Georgia to deny Democrats important gains in presidential battlegrounds ahead of the 2020 election.

Republicans have been governor in Georgia since 2003 and in Florida since 1999, and Trump has put a premium on the two states, endorsing both Kemp and Florida's GOP nominee Ron DeSantis when they were in competitive GOP primaries and then campaigning in person for them ahead of the Nov. 6 election.

Georgia's interim Secretary of State Robyn Crittenden on Monday directed county officials to count some provisional ballots that had been rejected because of voters' failure to provide their year of birth, provided the voter's identity and eligibility was still established.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported that the State Election Board asked Crittenden to send a letter instructing county election officials how to handle absentee ballots.

Republican Gov. Nathan Deal appointed Crittenden to replace Kemp, who resigned last week after declaring victory in the governor's race. He called his margin — 50.3 percent of the vote — "clear and convincing," but said he wanted Georgians to have confidence in the certification process.

Crittenden's directive was in line with one form of relief sought by the Abrams campaign lawsuit but rejected another.

When casting absentee ballots, voters have to sign an oath and have to write their address and year of birth. The lawsuit asked the judge to order that county election officials accept any absentee ballots on which there was missing or insufficient oath information as long as that doesn't "substantially obstruct" officials from verifying the absentee voter's identity.

The lawsuit says that at least 1,095 qualified voters who cast absentee ballots in Gwinnett County had them "arbitrarily and unlawfully rejected" because of missing or insufficient information.

Under Georgia law, any issues causing a voter to cast a provisional ballot must be remedied within three days of the election — Nov. 9 for this election. The lawsuit asks that county election officials be required to consider evidence proving eligibility through Wednesday at 5 p.m.

Crittenden's guidance to the counties noted that the Nov. 9 deadline for verifying the eligibility of provisional ballots was set by state law.

The lawsuit also asked that provisional ballots cast by a voter registered in another county be counted as if the voter had shown up at the wrong precinct. The lawsuit says that of the 1,556 provisional ballots Fulton County reported having rejected by Nov. 9, nearly 1,000 were disqualified because they were cast by voters whose registration records showed them registered in another county.

Further, the Abrams' campaign is asking that any of the court's orders in the case be applied retroactively to counties that already have certified their returns, meaning those counties would have to reopen their counting process using any new standards and then submit updated returns to the state.

MARYLAND’S GERRYMANDERING ORDERED UNCONSTITUTIONAL BY FED JUDGES (PG COUNTY)

MARYLAND’S GERRYMANDERING ORDERED UNCONSTITUTIONAL BY FEDERAL JUDGES (PG COUNTY):

VOTERS WHO DID NOT SUPPORT DEMOCRAT CANDIDATES WERE OFTEN PUNISHED POLITICALLY AFTER ELECTIONS.

CONGRESSIONAL MAPS MUST NOW BE REDRAWN PRIOR TO 2020 ELECTION.

FAIR ELECTIONS ARE WHAT DEFINES AMERICAN DEMOCRACY.

LEGAL CITIZENS OF ALL RACES SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO VOTE FOR CANDIDATES OF THEIR CHOICE WITHOUT FEAR.


Post Sources: Washington Post


**** Federal judges in gerrymandering case toss Maryland’s congressional voting map


Federal judges in Maryland on Wednesday blocked the state from using its congressional voting map in future elections, ordering political leaders to draw new electoral lines for contests in 2020.

The three-judge panel unanimously threw out the congressional map in a long-running partisan gerrymandering case. The decision gives Maryland officials until March to submit a new redistricting plan.

The judges acknowledged the inherently political redistricting process but declared the boundaries unconstitutional and intentionally designed to target Republican voters in the 6th Congressional District because of their political affiliation.

“When political considerations are taken into account to an extreme, the public perceives an abuse of the democratic process,” wrote Judge Paul V. Niemeyer of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. He was joined by U.S. District Judge George L. Russell III.

Chief U.S. District Judge James K. Bredar wrote a separate opinion agreeing with the overall judgment and declaring partisan gerrymandering “noxious, a cancer on our democracy.”

If the state is unable to meet the deadline for creating a new map, the court’s order establishes a commission that will create a map of its own.

The Wednesday ruling can be appealed directly to the Supreme Court, which in June avoided answering the question of when extreme partisan gerrymandering is unconstitutional in the Maryland case and in another map case from Wisconsin.

The office of Maryland Attorney General Brian E. Frosh (D), which defended the map, said Wednesday that it is reviewing its options. Legislative leaders declined to comment on the court’s order.

Republican Gov. Larry Hogan, who won reelection Tuesday, called the decision “a victory for the vast majority of Marylanders who want free and fair elections.”

“We remain steadfastly committed to moving forward in an open and transparent manner that is free of the partisan influence that has dominated the redistricting process in Maryland for far too long,” said Hogan, who has pushed for a constitutional amendment that would have an independent redistricting commission redraw boundaries.

At the core of the issue is the 6th District in Western Maryland, which was ­redrawn in 2011 to include parts of heavily Democratic Montgomery County. Democratic mapmakers moved hundreds of thousands of voters from Western Maryland out of the 6th District and added Democrats from Montgomery.

The lawsuit was brought by seven Republican voters who lived in the 6th District before the boundaries were reset.

In its ruling Wednesday, the three-judge panel declared the district unconstitutional and found that the state intended to lessen the influence of GOP voters by replacing them with Democrats in violation of the First Amendment right to political association.

“The massive and unnecessary reshuffling of the Sixth District, involving one-half of its population and dictated by party affiliation and voting history, had no other cause than the intended actions of the controlling Democratic officials to burden Republican voters by converting the District” into a Democratic one, Niemeyer wrote in his 59-page opinion.

The court ruling came a day after Democrat David Trone defeated Republican Amie Hoeber by a wide margin in that district, in what was considered the most competitive of Maryland’s House contests.

In a deposition in the case, former governor Martin O’Malley, a Democrat, was blunt about the partisan mapmaking he oversaw, saying Democratic leaders intentionally redrew the districts to try to give their party an advantage.

“Yesterday’s results confirm what we’ve been saying all along. The 6th District isn’t really competitive for Republicans,” said attorney Michael B. Kimberly, who represents the group of Maryland Republicans.

The ruling rejected the argument from the attorney general’s office that Democratic leaders intended only to make the 6th District more competitive.

“It is impossible to flip a seat to the Democrats without flipping it away from the Republicans,” Niemeyer wrote. “There can be no doubt that at every stage of the process, the State’s Democratic officials who put the 2011 redistricting plan in place specifically intended to flip control of the Sixth District from Republicans to Democrats and then acted on that intent.”

The ruling applies to the entire Maryland congressional map as drawn in 2011, but the challengers have proposed a modification at the border between the 6th and 8th districts that could address the court’s concerns without affecting the shape of the other districts.

Before the ruling Wednesday, state Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr. (D-Calvert) cast doubt on the possibility of an independent commission without a sign-on from other states — Virginia, Pennsylvania and North Carolina — to ensure Maryland Democrats are not at a political disadvantage on Capitol Hill.

“To put that in play without all of those states having to abide by the same rules is not going to happen,” Miller said.

STACEY ABRAMS WON’T CONCEDE; DEMANDS RUN-OFF, I CONCUR

STACEY ABRAMS WON’T CONCEDE; DEMANDS RUN-OFF, I CONCUR:

VOTES ARE STILL BEING COUNTED & THE MARGIN IS VERY SLIM.

THUS A RUN-OFF SHOULD BE ALLOWED.

STACEY WORKED EXTREMELY HARD TO GAIN VOTER CONFIDENCE.

IT’S NOT ABOUT RACE......IT’S ABOUT WINNING WITH INTEGRITY.

EVERY BALLOT CAST FOR STACEY SHOULD COUNT.

THE ENTIRE WORLD IS WATCHING 2018 GEORGIA GUBERNATORIAL RACE.


Post Sources: CNN, Youtube


***** Stacey Abrams refuses to concede Georgia governor's race, hoping for runoff


Democratic candidate Stacey Abrams is not conceding the Georgia governor's race to Republican candidate Brian Kemp, arguing that the high stakes contest is too close to call with the possibility of a runoff next month.
Kemp is currently ahead of Abrams by nearly 68,000 votes with 99% of precincts reporting, according to CNN election results. But he only has 50.4% of the vote. If neither candidate receives 50%, there will be a runoff in early December.

"I'm here tonight to tell you votes remain to be counted. There's voices that are waiting to be heard," Abrams, who would be the nation's first black female governor, told supporters early Wednesday morning gathered in Atlanta.

Kemp told supporters he is confident of his victory.

"There are votes left to count. But we have a very strong lead. And folks, make no mistake, the math is on our side to win this election," he said.

According to a statement provided to CNN by her campaign, Abrams is holding off on conceding to see if a runoff is possible.

The campaign cited several specific places in the state that could play a role in a scenario to force the runoff, including three of the state's largest counties that "have reported only a portion of the votes that were submitted by early mail" and four other large counties that "have reported exactly 0 votes by mail," according to the campaign. Together, it said, the seven counties "are expected to return a minimum of 77,000 ballots."

"These counties also represent heavily-Democratic leaning constituencies, and the majority of those votes are anticipated to be for Stacey Abrams," the statement read. The campaign also said absentee ballots could make a difference.

"Across our state, folks are opening up the dreams of voters in absentee ballots, and we believe our chance for a stronger Georgia is just within reach," Abrams said Wednesday morning.

Voters rights issues have taken front and center in the the high-profile gubernatorial race between Kemp, the GOP secretary of state, and Abrams, a state representative.

Democrats have accused Kemp of a conflict of interest as he refused to step away from his post overseeing state elections while he campaigned for governor.

Last month, a federal judge ruled Georgia election officials had to stop rejecting absentee ballots with voters' signatures that didn't appear to match signatures on record.

On Sunday, Kemp's office opened an investigation into the Georgia Democratic Party for what it said was an attempted hack of the state's voter registration system, without providing proof. Georgia Democrats flatly denied the allegation.

He dismissed critics alleging that he weaponized state law to suppress the minority vote as "outside agitators."

A lawsuit filed Tuesday in a Georgia federal court by five state voters asked a judge to strip Kemp of his powers over the midterm election -- including any potential runoffs.

Voters in the Peach State also faced long lines and malfunctioning machines during Tuesday's vote.

LARRY HOGAN (R-MD) IS RE-ELECTED, DEFEATS BEN JEALOUS (D)

LARRY HOGAN (R-MD) IS RE-ELECTED, DEFEATS BEN JEALOUS (D):

JEALOUS WAITED TOO LATE TO GAIN MOMENTUM.

DEMS TRIED TO USE FAKE PROVISIONAL BALLOTS & FAKE SAME DAY VOTER REGISTRATION/ BALLOTS & STILL LOST.

WHETHER YOU LIKE HIM OR NOT, HOGAN WON THIS ELECTION FAIRLY.

CONGRATS


Post Sources: The Intercept, NY Times


***** WHY BEN JEALOUS LOST THE MARYLAND GOVERNOR’S RACE


LAST NIGHT, BEN JEALOUS, the Democratic candidate for governor in Maryland, lost his race to incumbent Republican Gov. Larry Hogan, 56 percent to 43 percent.

Jealous would have been Maryland’s first African-American governor and was running on one of the most left-wing policy platforms in the country,

Although polls had been showing Hogan with a significant lead for months, progressives hoped a strong blue wave on Election Day could bring about a major upset. After all, Democrats outnumber Republicans by a 2-1 ratio in Maryland.

But Jealous didn’t lose because he ran on issues like “Medicare for All,” a $15 minimum wage, and legalizing marijuana. In fact, voters in Maryland largely agree with Jealous on his signature policy issues.

A Goucher College survey released in mid-September found that 54 percent of Maryland residents hold a favorable opinion on “Medicare for All” or single-payer health care, with 33 percent holding an unfavorable view. Support for other key parts of Jealous’s plan polled even higher. Seventy-one percent of Marylanders support raising the statewide minimum wage to $15 dollars per hour, with just a quarter of residents against it.

This was actually a substantial jump from February, when Goucher found 66 percent of Marylanders supported the $15 minimum wage. On legalizing marijuana for recreational use, 62 percent of Maryland residents support it, with just one-third opposed.

A Hobbled Campaign

The primary reason Jealous lost is that his campaign couldn’t pull in the necessary funds to compete effectively. Despite winning 22 out of 24 counties in the state’s crowded Democratic primary, the Jealous campaign’s own internal polling revealed that as of July, one-third of Maryland voters, and one-quarter of the state’s Democratic voters, did not know who Jealous was. He had never run for office before, but had earned the teachers union’s endorsement in the primary, which many believe helped secure him his June victory.

Meanwhile, Hogan started out with a big fundraising advantage and a high approval rating. Although Jealous assumed he could turn things around after Labor Day, by then it was too late to change the narrative.

At the end of August, Hogan had $9.4 million to spend for his re-election campaign, compared to Jealous’s mere $385,000. And the gap never closed. In the final two weeks of the campaign, Hogan had almost 12 times more cash than Jealous, or $3.3 million to the Democrat’s $275,000. Few people wanted to donate to a race that seemed uncompetitive, which in turn made it even less competitive as the weeks went on.

While Hogan’s campaign and the Republican Governors Association have blasted negative ads against Jealousnonstop since July, Jealous’s campaign didn’t run its first TV ad until mid-September, and the Democratic Governors Association didn’t run their first ad against Hogan until late October. Jealous couldn’t afford to compete on television, or even really through mailers.

The Jealous campaign understood that it needed to invest more in on-the-ground organizing to make up for the complacency that gripped Democrats in 2014, when Hogan eked out his upset victory. So this year, 70 Democratic organizers were hired to work across the state, compared to 15 field organizers for the state’s Democrat-coordinated campaign in 2014.

But even Jealous supporters noted that his campaign was making it difficult to rally support for his team. On his campaign website, there was nowhere for supporters to order lawn signs, bumper stickers, or other paraphernalia to demonstrate support — unlike on Hogan’s website, where such ordinary purchases were made prominently visible and available. Supporters had to ask around to learn that they had to show up in person at a campaign office to get any swag. That information wasn’t even available on the website.

And while Democratic candidates across the country have been leaning on new media platforms like viral two-minute online-only campaign ads, the Jealous campaign relied predominantly on awkward and less popular tools like Facebook Live.

Lack of Endorsements

The Washington Post has been writing favorably about Hogan for years, so much so that a reader wrote a letter to the editor in June asking, “Seriously, has Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan (R) changed his name? Apparently so, at least according to The Post. In nearly every reference to the governor, The Post’s writers insist on referencing him with a new first name of ‘popular,’ as in the popular Maryland governor.”

As a result, it was unsurprising when the Washington Post gave its endorsement to Hogan, praising him for having the “agility and sense to govern as a moderate — that disappearing breed of American politician.” The Post dismissed Jealous’s plans as mostly “politically unrealistic” and “unwise.” But more staggering was the Baltimore Sun, which endorsed Jealous in the primary but endorsed Hogan in the general election, despite literally acknowledging in its own endorsementthat Hogan’s “actions in office have too often treated [Baltimore] as an afterthought, if not with outright contempt.” (Hogan’s decision to cancel the Red Line light rail, a project that had been in the works for a decade and to which the federal government was going to contribute $900 million, was a disastrously cruel move for the long-neglected city.)

Outside Maryland, the national press was also largely uninterested in Jealous’s general election challenge, especially when compared to the attention paid to Stacey Abrams and Andrew Gillum, black candidates running to be Georgia’s and Florida’s first African-American governors, respectively. The Maryland race was deemed uncompetitive, and thus less exciting to cover.

During the primary, most of Maryland’s Democratic establishment lined up behind Rushern Baker, the outgoing county executive in Prince George’s County. (Kevin Kamenetz, the county executive for Baltimore County was also a frontrunner, and had raised more money than other candidates in the primary, but he died unexpectedly of cardiac arrest six weeks before the election.)

After Jealous won, several dozen Maryland Democrats announced their support for Hogan, though most were older white men who hadn’t served in office for years. Others had received political appointments from the governor, or had records of supporting Republican candidates in the past.

Jealous did end up securing endorsements from the Democratic Party’s current elected officials, but some were much slower to voice their support, and many remained muted in their enthusiasm. The long-serving state Senate president, Mike Miller, was a prime example. He was guarded in his support for Jealous, while being enthusiastic in his praise for Hogan’s work. Ike Leggett, the outgoing executive of affluent Montgomery County, at first withheld his endorsement of Jealous over tax issues that he said would hurt his wealthy constituents. When he finally did endorse Jealous in in mid-October, he did so in the world’s most half-hearted way. When the Washington Post asked him if Jealous would be a better governor than Hogan, Leggett declined to say yes. “That’s a good question,” he said. “I’m simply for the Democratic nominee.” About 45 percent of Montgomery County ended up voting for Hogan.

It’s unlikely that vocal enthusiasm from Leggett and Miller could have really changed Jealous’s fundraising numbers in a substantial way, but they certainly didn’t help.

Jealous also tamped down enthusiasm from some otherwise natural allies. Despite running on one of the most progressive platforms in the country, he didn’t even try to court some of the newly established Democratic Socialists of America chapters or get their endorsements. He also upset a lot of leftists over the summer, when he disavowed socialism in a way that not even Barack Obama did during the eight years he was blasted for being on the left. After Hogan called Jealous a “far-left socialist” in an interview, a different reporter followed up by asking Jealous if he identified as a socialist. Jealous responded, “Are you fucking kidding me?” The Republican Governors Association funded a TV ad this summer that featured Jealous saying, “Go ahead, call me a socialist,” cutting off the rest of his sentence, in which he went on to say, “It doesn’t change the fact that I’m a venture capitalist.” The Jealous campaign demanded that local stations pull the ad for being false and too misleading.

Larry Hogan Was a Better Campaigner

Hogan’s schtick of acting moderate was largely successful, in part due to the light press coverage his administration has received over the past four years. Over the summer, for example, he earned glowing national headlines by recalling Maryland’s four National Guard troops from the southern U.S. border — thus appearing to be someone willing to stand up to Trump and his family separation policy — but his actual record on immigration was far more hostile and overlooked. Hogan also moved to the left when he felt he needed to politically: In July, he announced a new student debt relief plan and announced he would no longer take donations or an endorsement from the National Rifle Association. In 2014, he took the gun lobby’s money and endorsement, and also received an A- rating.

It also helped that while Maryland voters are generally Democratic, they’re not always very progressive. Fifty-six percent of Marylanders think their state taxes are “too high,” and Hogan spent the bulk of his campaign emphasizing that he’d continue to cut taxes and that Jealous would significantly raise them. While the Jealous campaign was banking on major turnout in the city of Baltimore to push him over the edge, in the end, nearly one-third of Baltimore went for Hogan, up from 22 percent in 2014.

In the Maryland legislature, however, Democrats maintained their veto-proof majority. Republicans had targeted eight Democratic seats and hoped to flip five, but failed. Baltimore’s three largest suburban counties will now also be led by Democrats, with Anne Arundel and Howard counties flipping blue.

GET OUT THE VOTE TODAY (YOUR CIVIC & GODLY DUTY)

NOV 6, 2018 - GET OUT THE VOTE:

VOTING IS A CIVIC DUTY AND A GODLY DUTY.

IF YOU DON’T VOTE TODAY, DON’T COMPLAIN LATER.


Post Sources: MSNBC, Youtube

CUOMO EASILY DEFEATS CYNTHIA NIXON; WON’T RUN AGAINST TRUMP IN 2020

ANDREW CUOMO EASILY DEFEATS CYNTHIA NIXON; WON’T RUN AGAINST TRUMP IN 2020:

CUOMO IS A POWERFUL POLITICIAN WHO RECOGNIZES THAT TIMING IS EVERYTHING.

CUOMO KNOWS TRUMP REMAINS A FORMIDABLE BUSINESS LEADER TO CAMPAIGN AGAINST.


Post Sources: Democrat and Chronicle, Fox News, USA Today, Youtube


***** How New York Gov. Cuomo was able to crush Cynthia Nixon in the Democratic primary


Gov. Andrew Cuomo left little to chance in his Democratic primary fight against Cynthia Nixon, a race that drew national attention.

Cuomo, a master at using the levers of power in government, turned all the resources of his campaign and office to his advantage.

He was able to use more than $21 million in campaign spending to tout his record over the past eight years and beat back attacks on scandals that have rocked his administration to land a blowout victory Thursday over the neophyte Nixon.

"We have provided real-life progressive solutions. You cannot have the word 'progressive' without the word 'progress.' It doesn’t work," Cuomo said at a news conference Friday.

Cuomo beat Nixon 66 percent to 34 percent in the primary, on par with his primary victory over Zephyr Teachout in 2014.

Turnout up

The margin of victory came amid a surge in voter turnout: 24 percent of total enrolled Democrats cast a ballot on Thursday compared to 10 percent in 2014.

Cuomo was able to galvanize union support that eluded him in 2014 and that aided turnout along with a Democratic base that is more engaged following President Donald Trump's election.

Turnout was also boosted by heavily contested primaries in the New York City area, in particular, that led to seven Democratic incumbents in the Senate to lose their seats — a remarkable result in a state where incumbents rarely lose.

The Democrats' ire was directed mainly at the former eight-member Democratic Independent Conference, who had aligned with Republicans over much of the past seven years in the Senate, drawing criticism that they blocked progressive legislation.

Six of the eight ex-IDC members lost in primaries, including its former leader Jeff Klein, D-Bronx, who spent $2 million on his race but still fell to Alessandra Biaggi in a race that stretched into Westchester.

“Voters again made it clear that this is a new day and politics as usual are no longer acceptable," said Sen. Andrea Stewart-Cousins, D-Yonkers, who heads the mainline Democratic Conference and brokered a unity deal with Klein in April that didn't stave off IDC challengers.

Cuomo's power

It wasn't just that Cuomo blanketed the airwaves with television ads and ads on social media.

He used the power of his office to boost his standing, which drew criticism from his foes, but nonetheless helped him.

"When others were underestimating us, he did not — and he spent accordingly," Nixon said at the opening of her concession speech.

Nearly 1 million property-tax rebate checks were sent out before the primary, when they typically don't go out until late fall and through the winter.

Cuomo's office said the process became more efficient, so the checks went out earlier this year.

Others saw it different.

"The Senate was complaining most loudly about delays in the checks in previous years, and this year’s earlier posting could be seen as a response to those complaints that conveniently serves the governor’s interests as well," said E.J. McMahon, who heads the fiscally conservative Empire Center for Public Policy.

Cuomo will face Republican candidate Marc Molinaro on the November ballot, as well as several third-party candidates, including Green Party candidate Howie Hawkins, Libertarian candidate Larry Sharpe and Serve America Movement candidate Stephanie Miner.

Cuomo's aggressiveness also came with peril.
He held a huge ceremony the Friday before the primary to tout the opening of the second span of the Gov. Mario Cuomo Bridge in the Hudson Valley, only for the span's opening to be delayed several days.

And in the days leading up to the primary, Cuomo's campaign was embroiled in controversy over an anti-Semitic mailer it sent out about Nixon -- which the campaign later admitted was inappropriate.

Winning voters

Cuomo used the massive power of his office to his benefit.

Cuomo has the disposal of a state fleet of aircraft, allowing him to make multiple stops per day to discuss policy, make announcements and in recent months bash the Trump administration — which played well with Democrats in the primary.

Cuomo took 195 trips in state planes and helicopters in 2017, the New York Times reported earlier this month, which was significantly more than other big-state governors.

State agencies also put out a series of mailers ahead of the primary, including one from the Department of Motor Vehicles that encouraged residents to vote with the line.

"Governor Andrew M. Cuomo is expanding access and opportunity to New Yorkers to register to vote,” one read, according to the New York Post.

Cuomo, though, credited his strong record and apathy toward Trump as the reason for his success on Primary Day.

uomo targeted Trump more than Nixonduring the campaign, touting his experience in office compared to Nixon.

He said Friday he understands the sentiment of voters, pointing to his record that includes a higher minimum wage, paid-family leave, free SUNY tuition for income-eligible students and a property-tax cap.

His primary ticket all won: Lt. Gov. Kathy Hochul beat New York City Councilman Jumaane Williams; and Tish James, the New York City public advocate, won a four-candidate race for attorney general.
"A progressive Democrat, a Democrat in New York state. These are not ivory tower academics. These are not pontificators," Cuomo said Friday.

"New York Democrats, these are hard-working men and women. They are middle class; they are working families. They have real problems, and they need real help in life."

AYANNA PRESSLEY DEFEATS MIKE CAPUANO INCUMBENT (POLITICAL UPSETS)

AYANNA PRESSLEY, NEWBIE DEFEATS MIKE CAPUANO INCUMBENT (POLITICAL UPSETS):

FIRST IN GEORGIA (STACEY ABRAMS); NOW IN MASSACHUSETTS.

SUPER CANDIDATE OBAMA HAS ENDORSED STACEY ABRAMS.

WAKE UP DEMOCRATS, BLACK VOTERS CAN NOT BE REPLACED.

THE BLACK VOTE IS STILL LOYAL AND POWERFUL.

NO PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE WINS WITHOUT A PERCENTAGE OF BLACK VOTES.


Post Sources: CNN, NY Times, Politically Georgia, TIME, Yahoo News, Youtube


***** Another Democratic incumbent upset by primary challenger -- this time in Massachusetts


Democratic Rep. Mike Capuano has conceded defeat to Boston city councilor Ayanna Pressley in the Massachusetts primary for his US House seat Tuesday, the latest upset to rock the Democratic Party and showcase a restive base eager for change.

Pressley's win comes less than three months after Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ousted the No. 4-ranking House Democrat, Rep. Joe Crowley of New York, in a primary.

In his concession speech, Capuano said the district was clearly upset with the status quo and that he shared those feelings.

"I will tell you, I'm sorry it didn't work out but this is life and this is OK. America is going to be OK," Capuano said, adding, "Ayanna Pressley is going to be a good congresswoman and Massachusetts will be well served."

Unlike Ocasio-Cortez, Pressley did not argue that Capuano was too moderate. In fact, she said, the two would vote the same way. Instead, the 44-year-old Pressley -- already a rising star in Democratic politics -- cast the race as about Democrats' need for a new, more assertive style in the Donald Trump era.

"This is a fight for the soul of our party. This is a fight for the future of our democracy," Pressley said at a recent canvassing event in Cambridge. "We might vote the same way, but we will lead differently. These times require and this district deserves bold, activist leadership."

Ocasio-Cortez tweeted her support for Pressley on Tuesday night, writing "Congratulations to my sister in service, @AyannaPressley, on continuing her historic path into Congress tonight."

Pressley is now poised to become the only black member of Massachusetts' mostly male congressional delegation.

She'd argued on the campaign trail that systemic inequalities had worsened in a district that was once represented by John F. Kennedy and where the majority of voters are nonwhite.

"It's about who I listen to and it's about who I govern with. And there are a lot of people in this district who feel left out and left behind and ignored -- and it's not just women, it's not just people of color," Pressley told CNN in a recent interview. "It runs the gamut. And I think after a generation, the district deserves a choice."

The race was just one of a slate of contested primaries in Massachusetts on Tuesday. Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Republican Gov. Charlie Baker -- both heavily favored to win re-election -- both got general election opponents.

Secretary of state Bill Galvin -- Massachusetts' longest-serving statewide official, in office since 1995 -- fended off a Democratic primary challenge from Boston city councilor Josh Zakim, who conceded.

The race focused on Massachusetts' voting laws: Galvin highlighted changes that modernized the laws early in his tenure. But those laws now lag Democrats' preference nationally for same-day and automatic voter registration -- which Zakim has pushed. Galvin has since endorsed those changes, too -- but Zakim has cast him as being slow to do so.

Zakim had influential supporters, including Boston Mayor Marty Walsh and US Rep. Seth Moulton. Zakim also picked up the Massachusetts Democratic Party's official endorsement. But Galvin, a well-known figure who has previously been the leading statewide vote-getter, coasted on Tuesday.

JEMELE HILL - FOOLISH ACTIVIST - FIRED BY ESPN

JEMELE HILL - FOOLISH ACTIVIST - FIRED BY ESPN:

JEMELE RUINED A GREAT JOB WITH ESPN TO HELP DEMOCRATS IN 2020.

SHE WAS HIRED AS A SPORTS COMMENTATOR NOT A POLITICAL ACTIVIST.

WILL DEMOCRAT LEADERS WHO HATE TRUMP NOW OFFER JEMELE A $10 MILLION CONTRACT??

IT’S NOT ABOUT VIOLATING FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

EVEN IF YOU DON’T LIKE TRUMP, HE IS STILL THE ELECTED U.S. PRESIDENT JUST AS OBAMA WAS.

THINK SMARTER BLACK YOUNG PEOPLE.

IF YOU WANT TO BE AN ACTIVIST, SAVE MONEY AND THEN LEAVE YOUR JOB AMICABLY FIRST.

YOU CAN NOT BE AN POLITICAL ACTIVIST AT WORK IN CORPORATE AMERICA UNLESS YOU WERE HIRED UPFRONT TO BE A PAID POLITICAL COMMENTATOR.

PERIOD.


Post Sources: NY Daily Post, Bleacher Report, ESPN, Fox News, Sports Illustrated, Your Black World, Youtube


***** Jemele Hill is out at ESPN


Jemele Hill needed to be out at ESPN. Hill knew it. ESPN president Jimmy Pitaro knew it. And, now, Jemele Hill is out at ESPN.

The marriage between ESPN and Hill — the controversial sports commentator who waded into politics and sparred with President Donald Trump — has long been stuck in irreconcilable differences. Since leaving “SportsCenter” earlier this year, she has barely worked, making a divorce the obvious conclusion.

A buyout of her reported $2.5 million per year contract has been completed and her last day will be Friday, according to sources.

On Saturday night, the author James Miller, who wrote a book about ESPN, first tweeted the newsof the breakup, calling it “amicable.” The timing, on a Saturday evening, was fortunate for Hill and ESPN in an attempt to lessen the news coverage of what had been a huge national story, both in politics and in sports. There had been rumblings last week of buyout talks between the two sides.

It is quite simple as to why the buyout happened: Hill wants to continue her involvement in politics, and ESPN wants out of politics.

Pitaro has made it clear ESPN is a sports network and does not want to be associated with politics, so he agreed to a buyout with Hill, according to sources. ESPN had no use for Hill on any of its programs after her ill-fated 6 p.m. “SportsCenter”with her former partner, Michael Smith, failed to deliver ratings. She first left Smith behind by quitting the show before the executive in charge of the program, Norby Williamson, had a chance to replace her. She would have been removed.

Nearly one year ago, on Sept. 11, 2017, Hill called Trump “a white supremacist who has largely surrounded himself [with] other white supremacists.” Though it broke ESPN’s social media rules about commenting on politics unrelated to sports, then-network president John Skipper failed to suspend Hill. The White House called for Hill to be fired.

A little more than a month later, Skipper decided to suspend Hill after she criticized Cowboys owner Jerry Jones’ anthem stance by tweeting, “Change happens when advertisers are impacted. If you feel strongly about JJ’s statement, boycott his advertisers.” She was off television for two weeks. ESPN called it a second offense. Hill said she regretted that she had “painted ESPN in an unfair light.”

Pitaro recently said he thinks the biggest misperception of ESPN is that it is political, and now he is putting action behind his words. Though the network’s on-air programming is mostly apolitical, it is hard to ask viewers to disassociate stances they read on social media when ESPN personalities are on TV, radio or writing for its website.

Nearly one year ago, on Sept. 11, 2017, Hill called Trump “a white supremacist who has largely surrounded himself [with] other white supremacists.” Though it broke ESPN’s social media rules about commenting on politics unrelated to sports, then-network president John Skipper failed to suspend Hill. The White House called for Hill to be fired.

A little more than a month later, Skipper decided to suspend Hill after she criticized Cowboys owner Jerry Jones’ anthem stance by tweeting, “Change happens when advertisers are impacted. If you feel strongly about JJ’s statement, boycott his advertisers.” She was off television for two weeks. ESPN called it a second offense. Hill said she regretted that she had “painted ESPN in an unfair light.”

Pitaro recently said he thinks the biggest misperception of ESPN is that it is political, and now he is putting action behind his words. Though the network’s on-air programming is mostly apolitical, it is hard to ask viewers to disassociate stances they read on social media when ESPN personalities are on TV, radio or writing for its website.

OMAROSA SINGLE-HANDEDLY DERAILS ANY CHANCE OF TRUMP’S RE-ELECTION (OUCH)

OMAROSA SINGLE-HANDEDLY DERAILS ANY CHANCE OF TRUMP’S RE-ELECTION (OUCH):

DEMOCRATS & GOP LEADERS WHO HATE TRUMP CAN THANK OMAROSA.

TRUMP IS NOT A POLITICIAN BUT HE LEARNS THE HARD WAY HOW DIRTY THE GAME OF POLITICS IS PLAYED.

EVENTUALLY FICKLE MAINSTREAM MEDIA PUNDITS WILL TURN ON OMAROSA.

SHE WILL PAY FOR HER SALACIOUS, TWO-FACED BEHAVIOR.

LIFE CAN BE LONELY AT THE TOP, EVEN LONELIER AT THE BOTTOM.


Post Sources: Chicago Tribune, CNN, Fox News, PBS News, Politico, Youtube


****** Trump campaign files arbitration action against Omarosa, who was not the first outgoing staffer offered a cushy job


Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. And, perhaps, your potential leakers closer yet.

President Donald Trump's political operation has made a regular practice of providing soft landing-pads for discarded staffers, offering nebulous jobs at big salaries to aides who have been pushed out of his West Wing.

The revelation this week that former White Houseassistant Omarosa Manigault Newman was offered a high-paying job on Trump's re-election campaign in return for signing a non-disclosure agreement was the clearest demonstration yet of how a slot in the Trump orbit is being used to take care of loyalists — and protect against potential liabilities.

Manigault Newman, who contends in her new book that she was offered a hush-money contract with the Trump campaign paying $15,000 a month, is hardly the first erstwhile staffer to find a lucrative off-ramp in the expanse of pro-Trump political organizations. The former staff members have found a wide range of rehabilitation within Trump's orbit: his re-election campaign, the Republican National Committee, and outside groups that support both him and Vice President Mike Pence.

Keith Schiller, the president's former bodyguard who served for eight months as director of Oval Office operations, has been paid the same $15,000 by the Republican National Committee as a security consultant for its national convention — in 2020 in Charlotte.

John McEntee, Trump's former personal aide, is paid 14,000 a month by the Trump re-election campaign.

One-time Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski joined Pence's Great America PAC in May, and former press secretary Sean Spicer was announced in June to replace him as the "senior advisor and spokesman" for pro-Trump super PAC America First Action.

Manigault Newman told MSNBC's "Hardball" on Monday, "They told me I could work from home, I didn't have to come in if I didn't want to. ... I could choose between the RNC, America First or the Trump campaign." She says she said no.

Now she has released a book filled with unsavory White House inside stories — Trump says the ones about him are false — and has been playing recordings of the president and others on TV.

That's exactly what he wanted to avoid, and his presidential campaign filed an arbitration action against her on Wednesday, alleging she had breached a confidentiality agreement she had signed.

The outside groups have also become magnets for Trump backers who were not brought into the administration, like Katrina Pierson and Trump daughter-in-law Lara Trump.

The all-in the-family approach to taking care of stalwarts is nothing new. But the systematic approach with which Trump White House veterans have been offered plush gigs is.

According to aides, it reflects a reality that for some the lucrative private sector jobs that are typically available to exiting White House officials never materialized, while for others, it serves as a way keep them nearby and quiet.

Some current and former staffers have struggled to find post-White House jobs — given the conflicted feelings on the Trump administration in Washington — making the campaign or a super PAC an attractive paycheck.

And Trump, despite his reality-television catch-phrase, is loath to fire anyone from his inner circle, preferring to keep receiving their public and private adoration.

"When Gen. Kelly came on board he told me she was a loser & nothing but problems," Trump tweeted about Manigault Newman on Monday. "I told him to try working it out, if possible, because she only said GREAT things about me - until she got fired!"

MEXICAN IMMIGRANTS vs AFRICAN IMMIGRANTS (DEMOCRATS DISCRIMINATE & DIVIDE)

MEXICAN IMMIGRANTS vs AFRICAN IMMIGRANTS (DEMOCRATS DISCRIMINATE & DIVIDE):

WE ARE ALL ONE BUT DEMOCRATS APPEAR TO FIGHT MORE FOR MEXICAN IMMIGRANTS THAN BLACKS.

IS IT BETTER TO SEPARATE BLACK CHILDREN FROM FAMILIES THAN MEXICAN CHILDREN FROM FAMILIES?

DEMOCRATS ALSO ENDORSE TAKING JOBS FROM YOUNG BLACK MEN TO GIVE TO MEXICAN IMMIGRANTS.

YET DURING EACH MAJOR ELECTION DEMOCRATS SEEK THE BLACK MAJORITY VOTE.

IF WE ARE ALL ONE, WHY CAN'T BOTH AFRICAN & MEXICAN IMMIGRANTS BENEFIT FROM FAIR, UNBIASED IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT??


Post Sources: Bloomberg, Daily Republic, Youtube


******** Liberals say immigration enforcement racist, but Black men most likely to benefit


Donald Trump’s election victory over Hillary Clinton seemed to herald a new era for border security and immigration enforcement. But his polarizing and occasionally ignorant comments about immigrants have handed his adversaries a convenient pretext for stymying compromise on immigration reform: racism.

Left-leaning advocacy groups and a host of Democrats all too often shy away from the specifics of the debate and instead lean on cries of bigotry, resorting to claims like that of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who has described Trump’s approach to immigration reform as an effort to “make America white again.”

Claims that immigration enforcement equals racism ignore the reality that the group most likely to benefit from a tougher approach to immigration enforcement is young black men, who often compete with recent immigrants for low-skill jobs.

This dynamic played out recently at a large bakery in Chicago that supplies buns to McDonald’s. Some 800 immigrant laborers, most of them from Mexico, lost their jobs last year after an audit by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The Cloverhill Bakery, owned by Aryzta, a big Swiss food conglomerate, had to hire new workers, 80 percent to 90 percent of whom are African-American. According to the Chicago Sun Times, the new workers are paid $14 per hour, or $4 per hour more than the (illegal) immigrant workers.

In this case, and in many others, the beneficiaries of immigration enforcement were working-class blacks, who are often passed over for jobs by unscrupulous employers.

The labor force participation rate for adult black men has declined steadily since the passage of the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act, which ushered in a new era of mass immigration. In 1973, the rate was 79 percent. It is now at 68 percent, and the Bureau of Labor projects that it will decline to 61 percent by 2026.

The Obama White House in 2016 produced a 48-page report acknowledging that immigration does not help the labor force participation rate of the native-born. It concluded, however, that “immigration reform would raise the overall participation rate by bringing in new workers of prime working age.”

Although the report used the term “new workers,” Democrats may also be tempted by the prospect of new voters. But they should be aware that in courting one group, they risk losing others.

African-Americans tend to be a reliable voting bloc for the Democratic Party, but they have repeatedly indicated in public opinion surveys that they want significantly less immigration.

A recent Harvard-Harris poll found that African-Americans favor reducing legal immigration more than any other demographic group: 85 percent want less than the million-plus we allow annually, and 54 percent opted for the most stringent choices offered – 250,000 immigrants per year or less, or none at all.

These attitudes are rational.

In a 2010 study on the social effects of immigration, the Cornell University professor Vernon Briggs concluded: “No racial or ethnic group has benefited less or been harmed more than the nation’s African-American community.”

The Harvard economist George Borjas has found that between 1980 and 2000, one-third of the decline in the employment among black male high school dropouts was attributable to immigration. He also reported “a strong correlation between immigration, black wages, black employment rates, and black incarceration rates.”

University of Notre Dame professor Stephen Steinberg argued in a 2014 paper on neoliberal immigration policies and their effects on African-Americans that thanks to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, “African-Americans found themselves in the proverbial position of being ‘last hired.’” Steinberg also noted that “immigrants have been cited as proof that African-Americans lack the pluck and determination that have allowed millions of immigrants from Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean to pursue the American dream.”

The struggles of black men obviously cannot all be linked to immigration, but it’s clear that the status quo does not benefit them.

As elected leaders consider changing our immigration laws, the interests of America’s most vulnerable citizens shouldn’t be overlooked. The first step toward honest reform is for the Democratic Party to admit that while liberal immigration enforcement might help them win new voters, it also harms and disenfranchises their most loyal constituency.

GOP LEADERS vs TRUMP & PUTIN - "THESE HOES AIN'T LOYAL" (TWO PARTIES MORPH INTO ONE)

GOP LEADERS vs TRUMP & PUTIN - "THESE HOES AIN'T LOYAL"):

TRUMP HELPS GOP WIN IN 2016 & THEY TURN ON HIM.

IT'S NOT REALLY ABOUT PUTIN, RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE, NOR ELECTION FRAUD.

INSTEAD IT IS JUST DIRTY POLITICS AS USUAL PREPARING FOR THE 2020 ELECTION.

GOP TOP BRASS FINALLY REVEALS TWO PARTY GOV'T NO LONGER EXISTS.......TRUMP IS JUST A SCAPEGOAT.

DEMOCRATS AND THE GOP HAVE MORPHED INTO ONE GOV'T.

WHICH POLITICAL PARTY WINS IN 2020?

BOTH PARTIES WILL WIN BECAUSE THEY HAVE MORPHED INTO ONE.


Post Sources: ABC News, NBC News, NY Times, CNN, Youtube


***** Republicans Rebuke Trump for Siding With Putin as Democrats Demand Action


For nearly two years, Republicans have watched uncomfortably, and often in silence, as President Trump has swatted away accusations that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential race, attacked his own intelligence agencies and flattered President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.

On Monday, even for members of his own party, Mr. Trump apparently went too far.

The president’s extraordinary news conference with Mr. Putin in Helsinki, Finland, stunned Republicans across the ideological spectrum and the party’s political apparatus, leaving them struggling to respond after the president undermined his national intelligence director, blamed both the United States and Russia for poor relations between the two countries and seemingly agreed to Mr. Putin’s suggestion that Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, cooperate with Russia.

Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, declared, “No prior president has ever abased himself more abjectly before a tyrant.” Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker and Trump adviser, declared the news conference “the most serious mistake of his presidency.” Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican presidential nominee and current Senate candidate from Utah, called it “disgraceful and detrimental to our democratic principles.”

The effect extended far beyond official Washington. One local official — Chris Gagin, the chairman of the Republican Party in Belmont County, Ohio — resigned his post, announcing on Twitter that he “did so as a matter of conscience, and my sense of duty.” Neil Cavuto, a Fox Business Network host, called Mr. Trump’s performance “disgusting,” adding, “I’m sorry, it’s the only way I feel. It’s not a right or left thing to me, it’s just wrong.”

Yet no Republican in Congress pledged any particular action to punish Mr. Trump, such as holding up his nominees or delaying legislation, nor did any Republican promise hearings or increased oversight.

It was left to Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, to demand actual action. He called for increased sanctions on Russia; for Mr. Trump’s national security team to testify before Congress; for defense of the Department of Justice and other intelligence agencies; and for Mr. Trump to press Mr. Putin to extradite the 12 Russian intelligence agents who were indicted Friday.

“In the entire history of our country, Americans have never seen a president of the United States support an adversary the way President Trump has supported President Putin,” Mr. Schumer said.

He added: “A single, ominous question now hangs over the White House: What could possibly cause President Trump to put the interests of Russia over those of the United States? Millions of Americans will continue to wonder. The only possible explanation for this dangerous behavior is the possibility that President Putin holds damaging information over President Trump.”

Republican leaders largely tempered their remarks, confining their backhanded comments to denunciations of Russia and expressions of faith in American intelligence agencies. But even they appeared to have given up hope that they could shape the actions of an erratic and unpredictable president.

Senator John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, concluded that Mr. Trump was unable to distinguish between the fact that Russia had interfered in the election and the accusation — as yet unproven — that the Trump campaign had colluded with Russia.

“In the president’s mind, I think he’s conflating different things — the meddling and the collusion allegations for which there does not appear to be any evidence,” Mr. Cornyn said.

Representative Peter T. King, Republican of New York and a former chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, who has defended Mr. Trump amid the Russia inquiry, was not quite as charitable: “I understand in the bigger picture the president genuinely feels that he can establish better relations with Russia the way Nixon did with China,” Mr. King said in an interview, “but the nuance eludes him.”

And as to Mr. Trump’s openness to having Russia cooperate with Mr. Mueller’s investigation, Mr. King said, “It would be like bringing ISIS into a joint terrorism task force.”

At least one Republican, Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, veered from the script and delivered a full-throated defense of Mr. Trump: “I think it’s a good idea to have engagement, and I guess I don’t quite understand all of the people who have gone completely deranged criticizing the president.”

Elected Republicans have been uneasy about Mr. Trump’s unorthodox views toward Russia and his willingness to embrace Mr. Putin since Mr. Trump first grabbed the attention of the party as its primary contest heated up in summer 2015. Many thought that once he was in office, surrounded by Washington’s national security experts, Mr. Trump would adopt the wary stance that has guided previous American presidents.

Instead, time and again he has defied those expectations, as he repeatedly called into question the collective conclusions of the C.I.A., the F.B.I. and other intelligence agencies, and ignored his own advisers’ advice in seeking a personal relationship with Mr. Putin.

For most Republicans on Capitol Hill and around the country, Mr. Trump’s stance toward Mr. Putin, coupled with his recent attacks on the United States’ allies in Europe, have presented a challenge: either defend the post-World War II international order, and risk angering a president who is immensely popular with their voters, or hold their tongues.

That challenge is especially tricky for Republican leaders, who must work closely with Mr. Trump and are especially reluctant to criticize him in public.

Hours passed on Monday before Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, commented. During a rare hallway interview in the Capitol, he uttered three terse sentences: “The Russians are not our friends. I’ve said that repeatedly, I say it again today. And I have complete confidence in our intelligence community and the findings that they have announced.” He refused to answer questions.

Speaker Paul D. Ryan was a bit more pointed. “The president must appreciate that Russia is not our ally,” he said in a carefully worded statement. “There is no moral equivalence between the United States and Russia, which remains hostile to our most basic values and ideals.”

Democrats wanted more than carefully calibrated statements.

“This is a disgraceful moment. The president’s party knows better,” John Kerry, the former secretary of state and senator, wrote in a statement. “America needs them to speak out with clarity and conviction not just in this news cycle, but until there’s common sense governing America’s foreign policy.”

Senator Brian Schatz, Democrat of Hawaii, suggested on Twitter that if Republicans “were serious,” they would pass a long-stalled legislation protecting the jobs of special counsels such as Mr. Mueller.

But Republican leaders did not appear ready to go beyond measured phrases. Mr. Cornyn told reporters that it was “wishful thinking” to expect Mr. Putin to agree to the extradition of the 12 Russian agents. “Much of what Senator Schumer’s asking for, I think we’ve already done,” he added.

As Republican leaders struggled to come up with tactful ways to respond to a stunning news conference, responses from some of their colleagues signified a moment when Republicans could not defend their president.

Mr. McCain’s was undoubtedly the harshest.

“It is tempting to describe the press conference as a pathetic rout — as an illustration of the perils of under-preparation and inexperience,” said Mr. McCain, who has brain cancer.

“But these were not the errant tweets of a novice politician,” he continued. “These were the deliberate choices of a president who seems determined to realize his delusions of a warm relationship with Putin’s regime without any regard for the true nature of his rule, his violent disregard for the sovereignty of his neighbors, his complicity in the slaughter of the Syrian people, his violation of international treaties and his assault on democratic institutions throughout the world.”

Mr. McCain’s fellow Republican senator from Arizona, Jeff Flake, released his own rebuke: “I never thought I would see the day when our American President would stand on the stage with the Russian President and place blame on the United States for Russian aggression. This is shameful.”

Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican Alaska, struck a mournful tone: “Sadly President Trump did not defend America to the Russian president, and for the world to see. Instead, what I saw today was not ‘America First,’ it was simply a sad diminishment of our great nation.”

Senator Ben Sasse, Republican of Nebraska and a frequent critic of Mr. Trump, echoed the sentiment. “Everyone in this body should be disgusted by what happened in Helsinki today,” he said Monday in a speech on the Senate floor.

Even for congressional Republicans used to avoiding commenting on the president’s outbursts, Mr. Trump’s performance in Helsinki was difficult to ignore. For those who are accustomed to speaking out against Mr. Trump, and those whose impending retirements have freed them to do so, it was yet another occasion for public hand-wringing.

Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee, the retiring chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said that he “did not think this was a good moment for our country.”

It was, he added, a very good moment for Mr. Putin.

“It was almost an approval, if you will, a public approval by the greatest nation on earth towards him,” Mr. Corker told reporters. “I would guess he’s having caviar right now.”

STACEY ABRAMS - ANOTHER BLACK WOMAN IS POISED TO MAKE HISTORY (GEORGIA)

STACEY ABRAMS - ANOTHER BLACK WOMAN IS POISED TO MAKE HISTORY (GEORGIA):

THE WORLD OF POLITICS FINALLY RECOGNIZES BLACK WOMEN ARE POLITICAL GOLD JUST LIKE OBAMA.

BLACK MEN SHOULD NOT BE JEALOUS..........JUST SUPPORT BLACK WOMEN SO ALL OF AMERICA CAN BECOME STRONGER.

IT'S NOT ABOUT LIGHT SKIN vs DARK SKIN.

IT'S NOT ABOUT DEMS vs GOP.........IT'S ABOUT EQUALITY vs POVERTY.

IT'S NOT ABOUT DEMS vs GOP......... IT'S ABOUT PRIVILEGE vs OPPORTUNITY.

I PREDICT ABRAMS WILL BECOME GEORGIA'S FIRST BLACK WOMAN GOVERNOR.

GET OUT THE VOTE AND CONGRATS TO STACEY.


Post Sources: CNN, 11Alive, Youtube


******** Stacey Abrams wins Democratic primary in Georgia. She could become the nation's first black woman governor.


Stacey Abrams will win the Democratic primary in Georgia's gubernatorial race Tuesday, CNN projects, becoming the first black woman in the nation to hold a major party's nomination for governor.

If she wins in November, she will become the country's first Black female governor.

The former state House minority leader defeated former state Rep. Stacey Evans, who ran a campaign that tried to appeal to moderates and independent voters.

Abrams, who grew up in Gulfport, Mississippi, as one of six children, told CNN's Kyung Lah in an interview before the election she was aware that "as an African-American woman, I will be doing something no one else has done."

In the interview, Abrams also recounted a story about being rejected as a high school student at the gates of the Georgia Governor's Mansion at an event honoring the state's top students.

"In front of the most powerful place in Georgia, telling me I don't belong there, that's resonated for me for the last 20 years. The reality is having a right to be places does not always mean that you'll gain admission," she said.

Abrams' status as an African-American with strong progressive support, as well as Georgia's status as an early primary and marquee general election state, made her campaign a major draw for national Democratic figures.

Hillary Clinton and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders endorsed Abrams, and New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker and California Sen. Kamala Harris went to Georgia to campaign for her.

The Republican race, meanwhile, could be headed to a runoff, with none of the six candidates -- including Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle and secretary of state Brian Kemp -- currently holding a majority of the vote.

If no candidate tops 50%, the top two will advance to a one-on-one runoff on July 24 to decide who will take on Abrams.

KANYE WEST WAS RIGHT ABOUT 400 YRS OF SLAVERY BEING A “CHOICE FOR BLACK PEOPLE” (TRUTH HURTS)

KANYE WEST WAS RIGHT ABOUT 400 YRS OF SLAVERY BEING A “CHOICE FOR BLACK PEOPLE”:

WILL HIS LATEST CONTROVERSIAL COMMENTS BE THE FINAL NAIL TO SEAL KANYE'S COFFIN?

I'M SURE MY PERSONAL BLOG POST ON THIS TOPIC WILL ANGER SOME PEOPLE TOO.

BLACK PEOPLE ARE STILL IN SLAVERY NOT DUE TO RACISM, BUT BECAUSE WE REFUSE TO WORK TOGETHER FOR THE COLLECTIVE GOOD.

WHAT KANYE SAID WASN’T POPULAR BUT IT'S DEFINITELY TRUE…….HE IS FINALLY WAKING UP.

SLAVERY HAS BEEN ABOLISHED SO WHY CAN'T BLACK PEOPLE SUPPORT ONE ANOTHER & WORK TOGETHER IN THE 21st CENTURY FOR THE COLLECTIVE GOOD?

WHEN BLACK PEOPLE WAKE UP AND THINK FOR THEMSELVES THEY ARE LABELED “MENTALLY UNSTABLE” OR AS “TROUBLEMAKERS” WHO NEED TO BE DESTROYED.

REAL LEADERS CAN'T BE AFRAID TO SPEAK THE TRUTH.

21st CENTURY BLACK LEADERS DON'T WANT TO REALLY HELP THE BLACK COMMUNITY, THEY JUST WANT FAT POCKETS.

BLACK PEOPLE ARE STILL IN SLAVERY NOT DUE TO RACISM, ONLY BECAUSE WE REFUSE TO WORK TOGETHER.

BLACK MEN ARE JEALOUS OR INSECURE OF BLACK WOMEN SO THEY RUN OFF TO WHITE WOMEN & LATINO WOMEN.

BLACK WOMEN OFTEN TRY TO TEAR DOWN OTHER BLACK WOMEN.

BLACK VOTERS STILL LARGELY VOTE DEMOCRAT WITHOUT PROPERLY VETTING THEIR OWN CANDIDATES.

BLACK LEADERS FREQUENTLY IGNORE THE PLIGHTS OF IMPOVERISHED BLACK YOUTH, ESPECIALLY IMPOVERISHED YOUNG BLACK MEN.

BLACK POLITICIANS & BLACK BUSINESS OWNERS ARE ONLY IN IT FOR PERSONAL GAIN NOT TO HELP OTHERS.

THOUSANDS OF YOUNG BLACK MEN ARE WRONGLY INCARCERATED ANNUALLY YET BLACK LEADERS KEEP PARTYING AND LAUGHING.

BLACK SENIOR CITIZENS ARE THROWN AWAY LIKE BAGS OF TRASH.

MANY OLDER MARRIED BLACK MEN PREY UPON LOW INCOME SINGLE WOMEN AND USE THOSE WOMEN FOR SEX, OFTEN RESULTING IN MORE BABIES.

MANY BLACK CHURCH LEADERS FLEECE BLACK CONGREGANTS FOR MONEY YET DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT BLACK COMMUNITIES.

BLACK RETIRED SOLDIERS OVER THE AGE OF 60 ARE FORCED TO TAKE MEDICATIONS WHICH LEAD TO A SLOW DEATH.

BLACK AFRICANS COME TO AMERICA AND IDENTIFY AS BEING ONE STEP ABOVE BLACK AMERICANS.

THUS THE BLACK AMERICAN COMMUNITY IS STILL IN SLAVERY 400 YEARS LATER BY CHOICE.

I REPEAT.

WHAT KANYE SAID WASN’T POPULAR BUT IT'S DEFINITELY TRUE…….HE IS FINALLY WAKING UP.

BLACK PEOPLE ARE STILL IN SLAVERY NOT DUE TO RACISM, BUT BECAUSE WE REFUSE TO WORK TOGETHER FOR THE COLLECTIVE GOOD.

WHEN BLACK PEOPLE WAKE UP AND THINK FOR THEMSELVES THEY ARE LABELED “MENTALLY UNSTABLE” OR AS “TROUBLEMAKERS” WHO NEED TO BE DESTROYED.


Post Sources: CNN, Kanye West, Breakfast Club, NY Times, RNB Philly, The Hill, TMZ, Youtube


****** Kanye West just said 400 years of slavery was a choice


Tuesday brought us two Kanyes.

The first was a man who opened up about his mental health, his family, and his art in a nearly-two hour interview with radio host Charlamagne Tha God.

The second was a Kanye who appeared at the TMZ headquarters where he had this to say:

"When you hear about slavery for 400 years ... ...

For 400 years? That sounds like a choice."

The rapper went on to add:

"You were there for 400 years and it's all of y'all. It's like we're mentally imprisoned."

Provocative statements are second nature to the 40-year-old rapper. And this week he's been making headlines left and right, including proclaiming his love for President Trump.

But when he made his off-handed remark about slavery, TMZ employee Van Lathan took him to task for it.

An employee confronts him

"While you are making music and being an artist and living the life that you've earned by being a genius, the rest of us in society have to deal with these threats to our lives," Lathan said.

"We have to deal with the marginalization that's come from the 400 years of slavery that you said for our people was a choice."

Lathan added, "Frankly, I'm disappointed, I'm appalled, and brother, I am unbelievably hurt by the fact that you have morphed into something to me, that's not real."

Kanye tries to explain

As his words lit Twitter on fire, Kanye tried to explain what he meant. Here is his series of tweets Tuesday evening:

"[T]o make myself clear. Of course I know that slaves did not get shackled and put on a boat by free will.

My point is for us to have stayed in that position even though the numbers were on our side means that we were mentally enslaved."

And then Kanye quickly made it about Kanye:

"[T]he reason why I brought up the 400 years point is because we can't be mentally imprisoned for another 400 years.

We need free thought now.

Even the statement was an example of free thought. It was just an idea.

Once again I am being attacked for presenting new ideas."

STORMY DANIELS SAGA & ROBERT MUELLER DRAMA WILL NOT IMPEACH TRUMP (FAKE NEWS)

STORMY DANIELS SAGA & ROBERT MUELLER DRAMA WILL NOT IMPEACH TRUMP (FAKE NEWS):

DEMOCRATS ARE HOPING TO IMPEACH TRUMP WITH DANIELS & MUELLER MESS BUT IT’S FUTILE.

TRUMP IS NOT A POLITICIAN. HE’S A POWERFUL NY BUSINESSMAN WITH MANY GREAT CONNECTIONS.

STORMY DANIELS WAS NOT RAPED AND SHE IS NOT A SEXUAL ASSAULT VICTIM.

HIRING GIULIANI IS A STRATEGY TO STOP THE BLEEDING YET FORCES DEMS TO REVEAL THEIR IMPEACHMENT STRATEGY.

TRUMP’S STRATEGY OF MAKING DEMS REVEAL ALL THEIR FUTURE PLANS AGAINST HIM IS WORKING.

IF DEMOCRATS WANT TO REGAIN POWER THEY NEED TO FIND AN AMAZING CANDIDATE FOR 2020.

DEMOCRATS STOP WASTING TIME WITH FAKE NEWS MESS AND PREPARE FOR 2020.

REAL VOTERS DON’T CARE ABOUT FAKE NEWS MESS.

DEMS SHOULD FIND A GOOD CANDIDATE & DEVELOP HIM OR HER INTO A GREAT CANDIDATE LIKE OBAMA.

NEITHER CORY BOOKER, NOR KAMALA HARRIS STAND A CHANCE AGAINST TRUMP.

MAYBE ANDREW CUOMO OR KIRSTEN GILIBRAND BUT THAT’S IT.

I REPEAT.

TRUMP IS NOT A POLITICIAN. HE’S A POWERFUL NY BUSINESSMAN WITH MANY GREAT CONNECTIONS.

STORMY DANIELS SAGA & ROBERT MUELLER DRAMA WILL NOT IMPEACH TRUMP.

TRUMP IS MAKING DEMOCRATS LOOK FOOLISH AND THEY’RE GOING TO LOSE TO GOP AGAIN IN 2020.

BECAUSE OF WASTING ENERGY ON FAKE NEW MESS.

REAL VOTERS DON’T CARE ABOUT FAKE NEWS MESS.


Post Sources: Fox News, NY Mag, CNN, Al Jazeera, TIME, Washington Post, Youtube


***** Meet the 7 Lawyers Advising Trump on Robert Mueller and Stormy Daniels


President Donald Trump is shaking up his legal team, again.

As negotiations continue with special counsel Robert Mueller on the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, the president has added a new lawyer and is considering making other changes.

The newest addition to the legal team has garnered attention for burnishing Trump on cable TV. Former federal prosecutor Joseph diGenova previously argued on Fox News that the Russia investigation was part of a “brazen plot” by FBI and Department of Justice staffers to frame Trump.

Trump’s legal team also reached out in recent days to noted D.C. powerhouse Ted Olson, solicitor general under President George W. Bush, but he declined within hours of the news becoming public. Trump is also reportedly in discussions with Emmett Flood, a veteran D.C. lawyer who worked with Bill Clinton during the impeachment.

The news contradicts Trump’s tweet on the subject earlier this month, in which he declared that he was not seeking to change his legal representation.

The Russia probe is not the only matter on which Trump is getting legal advice.

The president’s private lawyers are also currently working through separate lawsuits:

They are suing porn star Stormy Daniels for violating a hush agreement about her alleged affair with the president, while also defending Trump in a defamation lawsuit for calling former “Apprentice” contestant Summer Zervos a liar after she accused Trump of sexual assault.

Former Playboy model Karen McDougal is also suing the parent company of the National Enquirer, whose chief executive is friendly with Trump, seeking to be released from a legal agreement that bars her from speaking about an alleged affair with the president as well. Trump’s lawyers are not involved in that case.

~ Here’s a look at the lawyers representing Trump in the various matters.

~ Don McGahn

McGahn is the current White House counsel, the top lawyer tasked with advising the president on legal issues about policies and legislation. But McGahn has been at the center of controversies over Trump’s challenged travel ban, executive orders and the scandal surrounding former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s tenure in the White House, and Trump at one point handed off responsibility of Russia-related issues to his personal attorney. Before becoming White House counsel, McGahn was Trump’s lawyer on the campaign, and he previously served as a commissioner with the Federal Election Commission. McGahn reportedly threatened to quit when Trump asked him in 2017 to fire Mueller, and the president backed down.

~ Ty Cobb

A former federal prosecutor and a white-collar defense lawyer at the law firm Hogan Lovells in Washington, D.C., Cobb was at one point in charge of overseeing the legal strategy and media response to investigations into the Trump campaign’s alleged collusion with Russia. Trump has reportedly considered firing Cobb, who repeatedly said during 2017 that the Russia investigation would be finishing soon and encouraged the president to cooperate with Mueller. In September, Cobb was overheard by a reporter talking openly at a Washington restaurant about the investigation.

~ John Dowd

A noted white collar defense attorney in Washington, Dowd joined Trump’s legal team in June. He argued in December that a president cannot obstruct justice, a controversial legal theory that many experts disagree with. And in March, he told a reporter that he hopes Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein will shut down the Russia investigation, a break from Cobb’s talk of cooperating with Mueller. The remark led to questions about whether the president’s legal strategy on the Russia investigation was moving to a more aggressive stance.

~ Michael Cohen

Cohen is a personal lawyer, spokesperson and close confidant of Trump’s. He’s been working for Trump for years, closely enough that he has hired his own lawyer to help him with the Russia probe. He’s known as a particularly aggressive advocate on Trump’s behalf, Trump’s “pit bull or consigliere,” as ABC puts it, for threatening legal action against critics, yelling at reporters and vigorously defending his boss on Twitter.

~ Jay Sekulow

Sekulow is on Trump’s personal legal team advising him on Russia issues, and one of the lawyers who often appears in television hits. On Sunday on ABC, Sekulow said of Donald Trump Jr.’s Russian meeting, “Well, I wonder why the Secret Service, if this was nefarious, why the Secret Service allowed these people in.” The Secret Service responded and said it did not vet the meeting. Sekulow is Chief Counsel for the American Center for Law & Justice and hosts his own talk show, and before joining Trump’s team he had spent his legal career representing conservative groups.

~ Joseph diGenova

Trump added Joseph diGenova, a Washington lawyer and former U.S. attorney, to his legal team in March. Two months earlier, diGenova had gone on Fox News and endorsed the conspiracy theory that the FBI and Justice Department framed Trump. “There was a brazen plot to illegally exonerate Hillary Clinton and, if she didn’t win the election, to then frame Donald Trump with a falsely created crime,” he said. “Make no mistake about it: A group of F.B.I. and D.O.J. people were trying to frame Donald Trump of a falsely created crime.” It also emerged that during the investigation of President Bill Clinton in 1997, diGenova published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal arguing that sitting presidents can be indicted, a legal question that may take on new relevance under Mueller’s investigation.

~ Marc Kasowitz

Trump’s personal attorney, Kasowitz has represented Trump for years, including in divorces, bankruptcy cases and the sexual misconduct allegations that surfaced during the presidential campaign. He’s known for a fiery temper—in an email outburst published by ProPublica, Kasowitz told an unidentified person, “”F–k you… And you don’t know me, but I will know you. How dare you send me an email like that. I’m on you now. You are f–king with me now. Let’s see who you are. Watch your back b—h.” Kasowitz then reportedly left Trump’s legal team, but he has recently been working with Trump on the Zervos lawsuit.

DEMOCRATS ARE IGNORING 2018 ELDERLY VOTERS, BUT WHY? (TAX CREDIT HOUSING)

DEMOCRATS ARE IGNORING 2018 ELDERLY VOTERS, BUT WHY?

SENIOR CITIZEN VOTERS REMAIN LOYAL VOTERS.

ISSUES WHICH CONCERN SENIOR CITIZENS INCLUDING MEDICARE AND QUALITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ARE BEING OVERLOOKED.

TOO MANY SENIORS RESIDE IN RAGGEDY, OVER PRICED TAX CREDIT APARTMENTS MANAGED BY SLUMLORDS (MARYLAND).

IF SENIORS COMPLAIN THEY ARE THREATENED WITH BEING PLACED IN A NURSING HOME UNTIL THEY DIE.

WHERE ARE THE POLITICIANS WHO STILL CARE ABOUT SENIORS?


Post Sources: New York Magazine, The Atlantic, WTVR, Youtube


******* Elderly White Voters Are Starting to Turn on the GOP


One of the many odd features of American politics, circa 2018, is that the primary beneficiaries of our nation’s social safety net are also the core supporters of the party that wants to slash it. No age group derives a bigger benefit from our welfare state than America’s elderly; but no cohort is as susceptible to the cultural paranoia and racial resentment that sustain the modern right, either. Thus, conservatives can’t shrink “big government” without retaining the allegiance of the voters who stand to lose most from the erosion of social insurance.

The tensions inherent to this arrangement grew conspicuous during last year’s fight over Obamacare repeal — when congressional Republicans tried to pass a health-care bill that would have drastically increased the cost of health insurance for older, working-class voters in rural America (a core GOP constituency) while dramatically lowering premiums for 20-something city-dwellers (an overwhelmingly Democratic demographic). Many purple-district Republicans voted for the bill, anyway, effectively betting that it was more politically hazardous to thwart the ideological goals of their big-dollar donors, than to betray the material interests of their gray-haired voters.

This may have been costly mistake.

According to polling from Reuters/Ipsos, the percentage of college-educated white voters who say “health care” is their top issue rose from 8 percent in 2016 to 21 percent today; over that same period, the demographic went from favoring a Republican Congress by ten points, to backing a Democratic one by two.

Of course, this shift isn’t solely the product of health-care politics. While older whites with college diplomas have swung left by 12 points since 2016, those without bachelor’s degrees have remained solidly in the GOP’s camp.

If material self-interest were the only force pushing older whites out of the Republican tent, one might expect “working class” elderly whites to be leading the exodus. Nevertheless, the Ryan agenda does seem to have played a role in alienating college-educated white Republicans, whose educational backgrounds already rendered them a less-than-ideal audience for Trump’s anti-intellectual shtick. As Reuters reports:

John Camm has been a Republican since the Nixon Administration, but the 63-year-old Tucson accountant says he will likely support a Democrat for Congress in November. He is splitting with his party over access to health insurance as well as its recent overhaul of the nation’s income tax system. He also supports gun control measures that the party has rejected.

“I’m a moderate Republican, and yet my party has run away from that,” Camm said. “So give me a moderate Democrat.”

… Voters between the ages of 60 and 65 are particularly worried about healthcare, said Brigid Harrison, a political scientist at Montclair State University in New Jersey, because they are paying ever higher private health insurance premiums and are not yet eligible for Medicare.

Polling on this fall’s elections have consistently demonstrated that the Democratic base is more energized than the Republican one. In the face of this grim data, Republicans have sought consolation in the fact that core Democratic constituencies (like nonwhite and younger voters) have historically failed to turn out for midterms in high numbers.

But the Democrats’ turnout advantage in the past year’s special elections put a dent in that hope — and the leftward lurch of elderly whites all but eviscerates it. Older, college-educated whites are among the most reliable voters in the nation. And in many of this fall’s most competitive districts, such voters account for nearly 10 percent of the population, according to Reuters’ analysis. Republicans were already at risk of losing the House due to shifts in turnout patterns, alone — but if those shifts are accompanied by significant defections among reliable GOP constituencies, the party could suffer historic losses up and down the ballot.

“The real core for the Republicans is white, older white, and if they’re losing ground there, they’re going to have a tsunami,” political scientist Larry Sabato told Reuters. “If that continues to November, they’re toast.”

Remarkably, even as Republicans have lost ground with this key demographic — and Democratic candidates have won improbable special election victories while painting their Republican opponents as enemies of Medicare and Social Security — Paul Ryan has persisted in calling for sweeping cuts to entitlement spending. Meanwhile, House Republicans are preparing a symbolic vote on a “balanced budget” amendment — a gesture meant to appease die-hard fiscal conservatives, but that seems just as likely to help Democrats put a spotlight on the potential costs of the Trump tax cuts to ordinary Americans, not least those who are relying on Uncle Sam’s largesse to get them through their golden years.