Tuesday • May 24 • 2022
Vol.XIV • No.XXI
Manchester, N.H.
Voters prefer a Congressional candidate who believes that all voters should show a photo ID before casting a ballot.
The candidate supporting photo ID requirements is preferred by 70% of White voters, 68% of Hispanic voters, and 56% of Black voters.
Eighty-eight percent (88%) of Republicans prefer the candidate supporting photo IDs. Independents, by a 62% to 10% margin, agree. Among Democrats, 50% prefer the candidate supporting photo ID while 32% take the opposite view.
This could be a significant challenge for Democrats in the 2022 midterm elections. The “For the People Act” effectively banned the use of photo ID requirements for elections. Virtually all Democrats in Congress have voted for that legislation.
Advocates of the “For the People Act,” argue that the bill would not technically ban photo ID requirements. In their view, the legislation simply provides a workaround for people who don’t have photo IDs. Anybody would be allowed to vote by providing a sworn, written statement to an election official stating that they are eligible to vote. However, only 19% of voters consider that an acceptable substitute. Seventy-three percent (73%) are opposed.
Read the rest here.
Scott Brown has decided on a return to the political arena. Good luck with that.
Former Sen. Scott Brown announced on Wednesday he is resigning as head of New England Law Boston and plans to "re-engage in the political arena."
Why it matters: There are a few potentially attractive opportunities for the former Massachusetts Republican — who has strong name recognition and is an ally of former President Trump — in his new home state of New Hampshire.
- Republican Gov. Chris Sununu has long been courted by the GOP to run for the U.S. Senate against incumbent Democrat Maggie Hassan. If Sununu ultimately chooses to do so, Brown would have an opening to possibly replace him as governor.
- Brown could potentially try to get in the race against Hassan in 2022, although some GOP strategists told Axios his closeness to Trump could hurt his chances.
- More of a long-shot: running for president in 2024 boosted by his residency in the first primary state, connection to Trump and recent experience in foreign affairs.
The backdrop: Brown served as Trump's U.S. ambassador to New Zealand and Samoa from 2017 until December 2020.
All that Brown has going for him is his decision to hitch his wagon to the Trump campaign back in 2016, an opportunistic move at best. Unfortunately, Brown is not Trump.
Brown's rise to the national spotlight came as ObamaCare made its way through Congress in early 2010. At that moment, Massachusetts voters faced a rare opportunity in the special election to replace the late Senator Ted Kennedy, who had died of cancer. By rejecting Democrat and heir apparent Martha Coakley, who would have been the decisive 60th Senate vote in favor, Massachusetts voters might defeat ObamaCare. Brown promised to vote against ObamaCare, and in a shocking upset, defeated Coakley.
But Brown hadn't come to his anti-ObamaCare strategy right away, initially billing himself as someone who could help break the gridlock in Washington. I suspect that even now Brown doesn't realize that the voters who put him in office for his brief Senate career were voting for gridlock. In any case, Brown never got his chance to vote against ObamaCare (or break his promise and vote in favor of it — a real possibility). Employing something called "deem and pass," the House voted to accept the Senate's version of the ObamaCare bill as its own, thus eliminating the need for a Senate vote on the reconciliation of two competing versions.
Shortly afterward, Brown went back to talking about breaking gridlock and reaching across the aisle. He hasn't won an election since. And what does he say now?
Brown added he is looking forward “to re-engaging in the political arena in support of candidates and causes who share my vision of re-building the Republican Party and moving our country beyond the partisan gridlock — goals that were incompatible with my role as the leader of a non-partisan academic institution.”
Great. With the 2020 election having been stolen, our voices censored by a big tech/government coalition, and our constitutional rights under attack as never before, Brown wants to reach across the aisle. Nice to know that Brown would like to make the death of America a bipartisan effort.
This is what the teachers unions claims is teaching “accurate history.” pic.twitter.com/0NdI9okxzD
— James Lindsay, LOL (@ConceptualJames) August 11, 2021
How Many Other Andrew Cuomos Are Elites Covering For? It's always Democrats or big dollar Democrat donors who get the cover, and it's been going on for quite a long time.
Covering for elite misconduct is a perpetual problem in the media; it didn’t start with Cuomo. As Federalist Political Editor John Daniel Davidson wrote on Tuesday, the media did the same with Harvey Weinstein, Jeffrey Epstein, and Theodore McCarrick. Don’t forget Bill Clinton or Roman Polanski, either.
“Everyone knew. No one cared. No one said anything until forced to. Then the feigned shock and outrage, the concern about the treatment of women, the hand-wringing and Me Too-ing, the performances on social media,” Davidson wrote. “As long as sexual harassment, assault, abuse, even the sex trafficking of underage girls stays quiet, then [the media] stay quiet, too.”
The media provided the same cover in the ’80s and ’90s for Ted Kennedy. Allegedly drunkenly rubbing his genitals against an unwitting waitress in the private room of a restaurant in the infamous “waitress sandwich” episode wasn’t enough to get the media’s attention. Nor was plummeting his car off a bridge and leaving a woman for dead in the passenger seat as it sank to the bottom of a pond.
The media framed the “accident” as something Kennedy’s political opponents would use against him in campaigns — your stereotypical “Republicans pounce” spin. “His big heart, sharp mind, and boundless energy were gifts he gave to make our democracy a more perfect union,” Bill Clinton would later say, with Barack Obama adding that Kennedy was “the greatest United States senator of our time.”
Read the rest here.
Thread:
UN routinely warns us that we have just a few years left until catastrophe:
— Bjorn Lomborg (@BjornLomborg) August 8, 2021
In 1972, half a century ago, Maurice Strong, first UN Environment Programme director warned that
the world had just 10 years to avoid catastrophehttps://t.co/W7mxpVeXJd pic.twitter.com/Ve4QEoWmPa
Doomed seems a bit pessimistic. I'll hold out for hope until the results of the 2022 midterms are in.