There will be a special election on February 21, 2023 for Virginia's 4th District seat in the U.S. Congress, vacated by the untimely death of Rep Donald McEachin just a few weeks after he was re-elected. Democrat Jennifer McClellan won the primary a few weeks ago, and will be facing off against Republican Leon Benjamin.
State Senator McClellan lost her primary bid for governor in last year's election that ultimately led to Glenn Youngkin being elected. Where one door closes, another one opens?
I do not reside in the 4th District, but see that it is a Democratic stronghold, so she may easily win without outside support, but thought I'd put it out there for your consideration, Robert. During her bid for governor, I had listened to some of her speeches, and read about her accomplishments. I was impressed.
One way I deal with post election stress disorder and related anxiety (which began after the 2016 election) is writing postcards via lists sent to me by: postcardstovoters.org I will find out if there will be a postcards campaign for Jennifer and report back later in the day. I wrote many postcards for Jade Harris and Aaron Rouse in recent weeks.
The people who run the postcards program will not definitely say the will have a project for Jennifer McClellan because it’s too many weeks away and gives information to her opponent.
Oh, I thought the last election WAS for the Congressional Seat. I didn't realize there is one more election to go. Turn out, Virginia 4th District! We need this powerful representative and voice in Congress. She will represent Virginia with distinction. VOTE!!! ELECT JENNIFER McCLELLAN!
How can George Santos be seated in Congress when he wasn't elected? No-one voted for an uneducated liar! They voted for the fiction that he promoted, creating his false identity of being a part of each group he looked to for support: LGBT, Jews, financial and real estate worlds, educated professionals , etc. His background was a lie; his sexual preference in question, his home address unreliable and his increased income unexplained. The fact that Congress can't proceed without a speaker of the house is a gift of time to stop Santos from being seated!
Everyone in the House yesterday—even Nancy Pelosi—was a representative-elect. That was how the clerk referred to them. So Santos has that status and can vote.
Ouch! For the moment we can actually identify worse representative-elect folks who are doing more than voting for a House Speaker. Many here in Colorado certainly take no comfort in our gun toting Lauren Boebert, as we dream of 2024 and 600 more votes to let her return to her failed restaurant.
Oh for the good old days...when active sedition was at least frowned on. How she managed to get elected and then re-elected is an abiding mystery. Doesn't seem like getting an education was a priority either:
It appears the Brazilian Government has been looking for him for years. Now that they’ve found him, there may very well a one-way ticket to Brazil will be handed to Mr Santos!
1.. The Constitution does not require the House Speaker be elected by a majority. According to the Washington Post, there were times in the 1850s when the Speaker was chosen by a plurality.
2. Biden v DeSantis? Despite being nearly twice his age, Joe Biden just might be more dynamic than Ron DeSantis.
3. Thank you for your comments about my Political Notes and, in particular, the Note about Wisconsin's Judge Protasiewicz.
Very much enjoy your Notes. Is this a possible way forward in the House: how about Jeffries gets his Dem colleagues to choose the sanest R House member and vote en bloc for that person to be Speaker? The Dems would just need a handful of Rs to go along. And a 'moderate' R as Speaker could defang the R extremists holding the House hostage. And, with luck, shut them up and out.
I listen to White Flag, the "Woke" Joe Walsh podcast (among many others) and he stresses that Dems should NOT work with Rs to seat a speaker, unless it's a Dem speaker. Why should Dems cooperate in an operation that will lead to investigations of Hunter Biden, Fauci, The Jan. 6th Committee, etc? Let America see what the Rs stand for; they dug this hole; let them claw their way out.
I don't think anything can be done with a small group of an opposing party. Any agreement, in my opinion, would require something formal and large numbers from each party.
Apologies, Leonard, for the inquiry near a day after your post, which I am only first reading now.Throughout this spectacle, I have wondered if the Constitution allows for a Democrat to be elected as Speaker when the Republicans hold a (slim) majority in the House. On Tuesday, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (NY) secured more votes than McCarthy in the first ballot (212 to 203, respectively); though not the 218 required, as I understand it. Still, is it possible for Jeffries, or another Democrat, to secure the Speakership if "chosen by a plurality," in the 118th Congress? I realize the likelihood is not great though still wonder if the Constitution allows for this. Thoughts? (What then of the House minority leader role, Jean?)
The constitution says, simply, "The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers". It makes no other rules. Every description of the selection process I have read describes the majority election process as a tradition or a custom. The representatives, sitting informally as they do before they are sworn in (which apparently can't happen until a Speaker is chosen) could certain agree (vote, presumably) to select a speaker who gets the most votes even if he or she does not get the majority of the votes. In formal terms, the Speaker is selected by and presides over the entire House of Representatives. The Party leaders (Majority and Minority Leaders) are selected by the members of their Party and lead their Party in the House of Representatives.
The Speaker does not have to be an elected representative at all. He/she does not even have to be a member of a party. That's the reason you see and hear ideas like Liz Cheney or Donald Trump as Speaker - or more reasonable non-elected options as well.
Just a word of caution about those tax returns. I am a tax lawyer and together with my colleagues we have taken a look at them (I would not go so far as to say we have "examined" them --- the individual returns alone are about 500 to 600 pages each). I see nuggets there, mysteries, items worthy of follow up -- but smoking guns, not so much. Yes, he claimed zero in charitable deducs in 2020 and yes he earned a fair amount of money in India and China yet seems to have paid no taxes there (very odd, especially in India), and yes he showed lots of tax losses (real estate is heavily favored in the Code; it is common for investors to earn a handsome living while showing negative numbers on their returns). I have yet to see a persuasive rationale for all the media hyperventilating about these returns. The real issue is the abject failure of the Internal Revenue Service to perform a serious and sustained audit. And no, I don't believe that can be justified by the persistent underfunding of the agency. IRS is indeed underfunded but it couldn't manage a timely audit of the President of the United States -- please, give me a break.
Thanks for the perspective. The returns do raise issues to be audited. I am not a tax lawyer but understand that Trump took deductions for things like "cost of goods sold" for holding companies. How can that be? Is that a pass through item? Large "loans" to his kids with non-market interest rates look like gifts.
But the real story is that he is a billionaire who paid no taxes most years. That might be legal, but it is wrong. And if it was legal, why did Trump lie about how much he paid in taxes?
I'm not convinced he is a billionaire. Certainly I would not believe that on the basis of information coming from him.
As for the deductions and the loans to kids, let's see the specifics. It is possible to lend funds to family members without those loans constituting gifts. I yield to no one in my contempt for this bozo, but it actually helps him if the allegations are not provable. Also, criminal tax fraud is very, very hard to establish.
Loans to family are not illegal, and don't create tax issues if they are on market rates and terms and are documented and paid in accordance with the documents. Under IRC Section 7872, Below-Market Rate term loans generate imputed income taxable to the borrower (unless secured by a qualified mortgage) if the total payments to be made under the term loan is less than the total payments that would be made using the Applicable Federal Rate, (which are often less than the Market Rate). All of the imputed income is recognized in the first year of the loan. For demand loans, the imputed income is recognized each year. The interest rate used to determine imputed income is specified in IRC Section 7520, and depends on the length of the term loan. One would need to examine Trump's children's tax returns to see how they reported the interest.
That is what I kept wondering. And, why if all the other Presidents in recent history had their taxes audited in their first two years in office, why were Trump’s not audited? There are so many questions.
I am not a tax attorney and my view is Trump has proven the tax laws have to be revamped and that he took over and above advantage of the deductions and lack of an audit.
In the 1970s and n980s I worked for a CPA and among other things I prepared tax returns. One of our clients was involved in many enterprises ( many real estate limited partnerships, casino in Las Vegas, movie producer, other enterprises I can't recall). His tax return was very complex. This was before computerized accounting. He was audited. We never heard anything from the IRS. After a significant amount of time we asked "what happened to the audit?" No one could tell us. Finally, his books were found hidden in someone's drawer. Not audited. I realize he was not the POTUS, but...
Your list of the fruits of "six years of political terrorism" on the part of the Trump Republicans is indeed a frightening assessment of the chaos that "threatens the stability of the federal government and the well-being of every American." What's going on is way beyond the usual turmoil of partisan politics. These jackasses have declared war on the American people and we should recognize that fact in framing our response to the Republican Party's continuous assaults on the Constitution and the sanctity of the Rule of Law.
I'm appalled that no one has taken steps to remove McCarthy and his personal effects from the Speaker's office. His arrogant move to occupy that space despite his failure to win election to the post speaks volumes about the depraved character of the man and his demented cronies. After reading your excellent analysis of the caucus circus, it's hard not too agree with Robert Reich's conclusion in The Guardian, January 3, 2023, that fueled by the hate, racism, and intolerance of its anti-democracy base, the Republican Party "no longer has a legitimate role to play in our system of self-government. It is over."
Thank you Robert. So many balls in the air. Love ¨...the hellscape known as Twitter¨ How many more senseless deaths this year for and by anti-vaxxers? I still mourn those lost because of -rump's lies. It seems that so many in the U.S. have short attention spans when it comes to the travesties created by the GOP. Perhaps it's because each day brings a new one. The Christmas holidays over here in Spain don't end on December 25th. Tomorrow is the Kings Day and the Maji come to talk with the children, followed by an incredible parade that goes right past our door. The magic of this helps with the angst of the daily GOP circus back home. Felicidades a ti y a todos los aquí presentes 🌟
Hi Robert--how about Jeffries gets his Dem House colleagues to choose the sanest R House member and vote en bloc for that person to be Speaker? The Dems would just need a handful of Rs to go along. And a 'moderate' R as Speaker could defang the R extremists holding the House hostage. And, with luck, shut them up and out.
I think that Democratic support would ensure no Republican support, which would mean a losing candidate. But I think everyone agrees that it is the best solution, if Republicans would allow it to happen!
This is such a great idea. Last night commentators dismissed the idea in favor of Dems sitting back and enjoying the chaos. I think that’s wrong headed. Dems just need what 5 or 6 moderate Repubs to pull this off. Why not?
1. DeSantis, Abbott, and their accomplices for their human trafficking stunts?
2. Trump and the many accomplices and people who funded the Jan 6 insurrection? The January 6 Committee provided DOJ with their evidence and recommendations. Why is all of this taking so long?
3. I know the IRS is badly understaffed with very antiquated systems. Should the IRS Commissioner under trump be investigated.
I live in Ohio. Half of our population are Democrats and half are female. We feel hopeless. Our state is overrun by the GOP. Our state Supreme Court is similar to Wisconsins. Our state is so gerrymandered that Dems have very little chance. Please excuse any poor grammer or spelling errors. What are we to do?
Hamlin’s heart failure likely resulted from the impact to his chest at just the wrong millisecond, with catastrophic effects to the functioning of his heart, according to Sanjay Gupta’s analysis on CNN. Prayers the young man can recover.
One big reason for the anomalous Latino election results in FL is the masterful job the GOP did on Spanish language radio, hitting Democrats for being Socialists. Since most of those non-Cuban and non-Puerto Rican Latinos were fleeing exactly that (hi, Venezuela), and haven't been here long enough to be sophisticated about American political messaging, they recoiled and voted GOP.
"The slant in the article in The Hill is deft. The author can claim she kinda-sorta-tried to be fair—but she wasn’t. The author wanted to write a story about Biden being old—and accomplished that goal."
Very important critique, which invites the question, How did we lose the House of Representatives and how can we regain it? Was it Garland's failure to indict? Was it Manchinema's stalling of the anti=poverty legislation within Build Back Better? How did we fail to have national messaging about the mess that we knew would unfold under seditionists? Why was Katy Porter--of all people--talking about inflation (other than that voters were told it was the biggest issue)? Why wasn't climate collapse front and center in a national strategy about saving the House? Was it because none of those who failed to certify the election and hold House seats were held legally acccountable?
Heather Cox Richardson posted this quote today which I believes captures exactly where the Republican Party is today. “ John Boehner said of the extreme faction: “What they’re really interested in is chaos.… They want to throw sand in the gears of the hated federal government until it fails and they’ve finally proved that it’s beyond saving.” And they are tied tightly to right-wing media: “Every time they vote down a bill, they get another invitation to go on Fox News or talk radio,” this for me is a true statement. I guess all Americans need to ask themselves if they are willing to let representatives Jim Jordan, Majorie Taylor Greene, Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert manage the House of Representatives
I have great hope for my granddaughter's future who at the age of only 2 1/2 can already count to 218. It seems that qualifies her as being smarter than the presently leading Republican candidate for Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Reading the article cited herein, I feel we must push back to support the separation of church and state. The comments throughout the article seem to highlight the conflicts between church communities with some holding to the notion of preaching about the religious teaching while others are eager to label their preaching as inherently political.
Perhaps they should be identified as PACs when indoctrinating parishioners with political views. Or, perhaps they should pay taxes. Well, that would probably get them more engaged. Never mind.
There will be a special election on February 21, 2023 for Virginia's 4th District seat in the U.S. Congress, vacated by the untimely death of Rep Donald McEachin just a few weeks after he was re-elected. Democrat Jennifer McClellan won the primary a few weeks ago, and will be facing off against Republican Leon Benjamin.
State Senator McClellan lost her primary bid for governor in last year's election that ultimately led to Glenn Youngkin being elected. Where one door closes, another one opens?
I do not reside in the 4th District, but see that it is a Democratic stronghold, so she may easily win without outside support, but thought I'd put it out there for your consideration, Robert. During her bid for governor, I had listened to some of her speeches, and read about her accomplishments. I was impressed.
Here are some links about her. Hope they help!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_McClellan
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/virginia-track-send-first-black-woman-congress-rcna62185
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/jennifer-mcclellan-wins-virginia-democratic-primary-for-congress/ar-AA15ziSB
One way I deal with post election stress disorder and related anxiety (which began after the 2016 election) is writing postcards via lists sent to me by: postcardstovoters.org I will find out if there will be a postcards campaign for Jennifer and report back later in the day. I wrote many postcards for Jade Harris and Aaron Rouse in recent weeks.
Thank you, Linda!
The people who run the postcards program will not definitely say the will have a project for Jennifer McClellan because it’s too many weeks away and gives information to her opponent.
Thanks for asking anyway.
Sounds good!
Oh, I thought the last election WAS for the Congressional Seat. I didn't realize there is one more election to go. Turn out, Virginia 4th District! We need this powerful representative and voice in Congress. She will represent Virginia with distinction. VOTE!!! ELECT JENNIFER McCLELLAN!
McEachin won in the 2022 midterms for U.S. Congress; he died two weeks later. Thus, the special election in February 2023.
How can George Santos be seated in Congress when he wasn't elected? No-one voted for an uneducated liar! They voted for the fiction that he promoted, creating his false identity of being a part of each group he looked to for support: LGBT, Jews, financial and real estate worlds, educated professionals , etc. His background was a lie; his sexual preference in question, his home address unreliable and his increased income unexplained. The fact that Congress can't proceed without a speaker of the house is a gift of time to stop Santos from being seated!
HIs citizenship definitely needs to be confirmed or denied.
Everyone in the House yesterday—even Nancy Pelosi—was a representative-elect. That was how the clerk referred to them. So Santos has that status and can vote.
Ouch! For the moment we can actually identify worse representative-elect folks who are doing more than voting for a House Speaker. Many here in Colorado certainly take no comfort in our gun toting Lauren Boebert, as we dream of 2024 and 600 more votes to let her return to her failed restaurant.
I still cannot think of anyone in their right mind posting a picture of her four children holding rifles in front of a Christmas tree.
Oh for the good old days...when active sedition was at least frowned on. How she managed to get elected and then re-elected is an abiding mystery. Doesn't seem like getting an education was a priority either:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/boebert-ged-months-before-election/
Education seems not to be high on the Republican list of valuable assets.
So just think how interesting it will be if it is eventually determined that he was not eligible to vote!
LOL. But I think his vote would still count. Be a very interesting question, though if the speaker won by only one, with Santos’ vote.
And the Brazilians wish to extradite him! Incredible.
I find it all quite horrifying.
It appears the Brazilian Government has been looking for him for years. Now that they’ve found him, there may very well a one-way ticket to Brazil will be handed to Mr Santos!
And lo and behold, he showed up as a Republican Congressman. Jailbirds of a feather flock together.
1.. The Constitution does not require the House Speaker be elected by a majority. According to the Washington Post, there were times in the 1850s when the Speaker was chosen by a plurality.
2. Biden v DeSantis? Despite being nearly twice his age, Joe Biden just might be more dynamic than Ron DeSantis.
3. Thank you for your comments about my Political Notes and, in particular, the Note about Wisconsin's Judge Protasiewicz.
Very much enjoy your Notes. Is this a possible way forward in the House: how about Jeffries gets his Dem colleagues to choose the sanest R House member and vote en bloc for that person to be Speaker? The Dems would just need a handful of Rs to go along. And a 'moderate' R as Speaker could defang the R extremists holding the House hostage. And, with luck, shut them up and out.
I listen to White Flag, the "Woke" Joe Walsh podcast (among many others) and he stresses that Dems should NOT work with Rs to seat a speaker, unless it's a Dem speaker. Why should Dems cooperate in an operation that will lead to investigations of Hunter Biden, Fauci, The Jan. 6th Committee, etc? Let America see what the Rs stand for; they dug this hole; let them claw their way out.
Agree
Better yet How about they get six republicans to cross over and vote for Jeffries!
I don't think anything can be done with a small group of an opposing party. Any agreement, in my opinion, would require something formal and large numbers from each party.
I'd love to see Liz Cheney get the Speaker's gavel.
Apologies, Leonard, for the inquiry near a day after your post, which I am only first reading now.Throughout this spectacle, I have wondered if the Constitution allows for a Democrat to be elected as Speaker when the Republicans hold a (slim) majority in the House. On Tuesday, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (NY) secured more votes than McCarthy in the first ballot (212 to 203, respectively); though not the 218 required, as I understand it. Still, is it possible for Jeffries, or another Democrat, to secure the Speakership if "chosen by a plurality," in the 118th Congress? I realize the likelihood is not great though still wonder if the Constitution allows for this. Thoughts? (What then of the House minority leader role, Jean?)
The constitution says, simply, "The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers". It makes no other rules. Every description of the selection process I have read describes the majority election process as a tradition or a custom. The representatives, sitting informally as they do before they are sworn in (which apparently can't happen until a Speaker is chosen) could certain agree (vote, presumably) to select a speaker who gets the most votes even if he or she does not get the majority of the votes. In formal terms, the Speaker is selected by and presides over the entire House of Representatives. The Party leaders (Majority and Minority Leaders) are selected by the members of their Party and lead their Party in the House of Representatives.
The Speaker does not have to be an elected representative at all. He/she does not even have to be a member of a party. That's the reason you see and hear ideas like Liz Cheney or Donald Trump as Speaker - or more reasonable non-elected options as well.
Thanks for reminding me of this. It's helpful to remember in the context of my query.
Thank you for your kind attention to detail in responding to my curiosity.
Just a word of caution about those tax returns. I am a tax lawyer and together with my colleagues we have taken a look at them (I would not go so far as to say we have "examined" them --- the individual returns alone are about 500 to 600 pages each). I see nuggets there, mysteries, items worthy of follow up -- but smoking guns, not so much. Yes, he claimed zero in charitable deducs in 2020 and yes he earned a fair amount of money in India and China yet seems to have paid no taxes there (very odd, especially in India), and yes he showed lots of tax losses (real estate is heavily favored in the Code; it is common for investors to earn a handsome living while showing negative numbers on their returns). I have yet to see a persuasive rationale for all the media hyperventilating about these returns. The real issue is the abject failure of the Internal Revenue Service to perform a serious and sustained audit. And no, I don't believe that can be justified by the persistent underfunding of the agency. IRS is indeed underfunded but it couldn't manage a timely audit of the President of the United States -- please, give me a break.
Thanks for the perspective. The returns do raise issues to be audited. I am not a tax lawyer but understand that Trump took deductions for things like "cost of goods sold" for holding companies. How can that be? Is that a pass through item? Large "loans" to his kids with non-market interest rates look like gifts.
But the real story is that he is a billionaire who paid no taxes most years. That might be legal, but it is wrong. And if it was legal, why did Trump lie about how much he paid in taxes?
I'm not convinced he is a billionaire. Certainly I would not believe that on the basis of information coming from him.
As for the deductions and the loans to kids, let's see the specifics. It is possible to lend funds to family members without those loans constituting gifts. I yield to no one in my contempt for this bozo, but it actually helps him if the allegations are not provable. Also, criminal tax fraud is very, very hard to establish.
Loans to family are not illegal, and don't create tax issues if they are on market rates and terms and are documented and paid in accordance with the documents. Under IRC Section 7872, Below-Market Rate term loans generate imputed income taxable to the borrower (unless secured by a qualified mortgage) if the total payments to be made under the term loan is less than the total payments that would be made using the Applicable Federal Rate, (which are often less than the Market Rate). All of the imputed income is recognized in the first year of the loan. For demand loans, the imputed income is recognized each year. The interest rate used to determine imputed income is specified in IRC Section 7520, and depends on the length of the term loan. One would need to examine Trump's children's tax returns to see how they reported the interest.
That is what I kept wondering. And, why if all the other Presidents in recent history had their taxes audited in their first two years in office, why were Trump’s not audited? There are so many questions.
I am not a tax attorney and my view is Trump has proven the tax laws have to be revamped and that he took over and above advantage of the deductions and lack of an audit.
Good luck with revamping the tax laws. Trump or no Trump (even 3 no trump), Congress only knows how to make those laws worse.
In the 1970s and n980s I worked for a CPA and among other things I prepared tax returns. One of our clients was involved in many enterprises ( many real estate limited partnerships, casino in Las Vegas, movie producer, other enterprises I can't recall). His tax return was very complex. This was before computerized accounting. He was audited. We never heard anything from the IRS. After a significant amount of time we asked "what happened to the audit?" No one could tell us. Finally, his books were found hidden in someone's drawer. Not audited. I realize he was not the POTUS, but...
Your list of the fruits of "six years of political terrorism" on the part of the Trump Republicans is indeed a frightening assessment of the chaos that "threatens the stability of the federal government and the well-being of every American." What's going on is way beyond the usual turmoil of partisan politics. These jackasses have declared war on the American people and we should recognize that fact in framing our response to the Republican Party's continuous assaults on the Constitution and the sanctity of the Rule of Law.
I'm appalled that no one has taken steps to remove McCarthy and his personal effects from the Speaker's office. His arrogant move to occupy that space despite his failure to win election to the post speaks volumes about the depraved character of the man and his demented cronies. After reading your excellent analysis of the caucus circus, it's hard not too agree with Robert Reich's conclusion in The Guardian, January 3, 2023, that fueled by the hate, racism, and intolerance of its anti-democracy base, the Republican Party "no longer has a legitimate role to play in our system of self-government. It is over."
Matt Gaetz has.
Thank you Robert. So many balls in the air. Love ¨...the hellscape known as Twitter¨ How many more senseless deaths this year for and by anti-vaxxers? I still mourn those lost because of -rump's lies. It seems that so many in the U.S. have short attention spans when it comes to the travesties created by the GOP. Perhaps it's because each day brings a new one. The Christmas holidays over here in Spain don't end on December 25th. Tomorrow is the Kings Day and the Maji come to talk with the children, followed by an incredible parade that goes right past our door. The magic of this helps with the angst of the daily GOP circus back home. Felicidades a ti y a todos los aquí presentes 🌟
Hi Robert--how about Jeffries gets his Dem House colleagues to choose the sanest R House member and vote en bloc for that person to be Speaker? The Dems would just need a handful of Rs to go along. And a 'moderate' R as Speaker could defang the R extremists holding the House hostage. And, with luck, shut them up and out.
I think that Democratic support would ensure no Republican support, which would mean a losing candidate. But I think everyone agrees that it is the best solution, if Republicans would allow it to happen!
Better yet How about they get six republicans to cross over and vote for Jeffries
This is such a great idea. Last night commentators dismissed the idea in favor of Dems sitting back and enjoying the chaos. I think that’s wrong headed. Dems just need what 5 or 6 moderate Repubs to pull this off. Why not?
Why haven’t there been indictments and arrests:
1. DeSantis, Abbott, and their accomplices for their human trafficking stunts?
2. Trump and the many accomplices and people who funded the Jan 6 insurrection? The January 6 Committee provided DOJ with their evidence and recommendations. Why is all of this taking so long?
3. I know the IRS is badly understaffed with very antiquated systems. Should the IRS Commissioner under trump be investigated.
Thank you.
I live in Ohio. Half of our population are Democrats and half are female. We feel hopeless. Our state is overrun by the GOP. Our state Supreme Court is similar to Wisconsins. Our state is so gerrymandered that Dems have very little chance. Please excuse any poor grammer or spelling errors. What are we to do?
Listen to MIchael Moore’s Rumble podcast series called Blue Dots in a Red Sea. 12 parts. He has great ideas for you, Arlene.
I echo those that are telling you to listen to Michael Moore's Blue Dots in a Red Sea! He will help you see that all is not lost!
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/rumble-with-michael-moore/id1490354763
Arlene - PLEASE listen to Michael Moore’s Blue Dots in a Red Sea series of podcasts. It will help keep you sane!
Hamlin’s heart failure likely resulted from the impact to his chest at just the wrong millisecond, with catastrophic effects to the functioning of his heart, according to Sanjay Gupta’s analysis on CNN. Prayers the young man can recover.
We all saw it happen on television. The miracle is that it doesn't happen more often given the violence of the hits.
Leanna Wen in WaPo said it happens more often with impacts from baseballs or softballs, or hockey pucks. Whoda thought?
CNN has a good article explaining this condition here:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/03/health/cardiac-arrest-heart-attack-heart-failure-explainer-wellness/index.html
One big reason for the anomalous Latino election results in FL is the masterful job the GOP did on Spanish language radio, hitting Democrats for being Socialists. Since most of those non-Cuban and non-Puerto Rican Latinos were fleeing exactly that (hi, Venezuela), and haven't been here long enough to be sophisticated about American political messaging, they recoiled and voted GOP.
Good point.
"The slant in the article in The Hill is deft. The author can claim she kinda-sorta-tried to be fair—but she wasn’t. The author wanted to write a story about Biden being old—and accomplished that goal."
Very important critique, which invites the question, How did we lose the House of Representatives and how can we regain it? Was it Garland's failure to indict? Was it Manchinema's stalling of the anti=poverty legislation within Build Back Better? How did we fail to have national messaging about the mess that we knew would unfold under seditionists? Why was Katy Porter--of all people--talking about inflation (other than that voters were told it was the biggest issue)? Why wasn't climate collapse front and center in a national strategy about saving the House? Was it because none of those who failed to certify the election and hold House seats were held legally acccountable?
Good questions but gerrymandering was the biggest reason for the loss of the house. Messaging can’t overcome that.
Illegal maps in OH as well.
Heather Cox Richardson posted this quote today which I believes captures exactly where the Republican Party is today. “ John Boehner said of the extreme faction: “What they’re really interested in is chaos.… They want to throw sand in the gears of the hated federal government until it fails and they’ve finally proved that it’s beyond saving.” And they are tied tightly to right-wing media: “Every time they vote down a bill, they get another invitation to go on Fox News or talk radio,” this for me is a true statement. I guess all Americans need to ask themselves if they are willing to let representatives Jim Jordan, Majorie Taylor Greene, Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert manage the House of Representatives
Robert, you and Len convinced me! Donated to Janet Protasiewicz just now. I figure I’ll be writing postcards come March!
Me, too! “Janet for Justice”
I have great hope for my granddaughter's future who at the age of only 2 1/2 can already count to 218. It seems that qualifies her as being smarter than the presently leading Republican candidate for Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Reading the article cited herein, I feel we must push back to support the separation of church and state. The comments throughout the article seem to highlight the conflicts between church communities with some holding to the notion of preaching about the religious teaching while others are eager to label their preaching as inherently political.
Perhaps they should be identified as PACs when indoctrinating parishioners with political views. Or, perhaps they should pay taxes. Well, that would probably get them more engaged. Never mind.
To follow up on your Axios observations. Here, you can find a NY Times piece by Jennifer Medina regarding DeSantis and Florida’s Hispanic Evangelicals: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/03/us/politics/trump-desantis-hispanic-evangelicals.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
Thanks for the links!
Thanks, John. Medina’s piece is exactly why we must push back especially in Fl.
The new civics training program for teachers here claims it’s a “ misconception
that our Founders desired strict separation of church and state.”
Kathy, where is the “here?” Are you in Florida? Or, speaking of another location and new civics training?
I’m in Florida.