Tag: Trumps

Trump’s beer track advantage over Ron DeSantis

[ad_1]
Trump has a 17-point lead among Republicans without a college degree (up from a 10-point lead in February). And while DeSantis still leads among voters with a four-year degree, 40 percent to 28 percent, Trump has significantly cut into what was a 29-point deficit with those voters in the past month.
Even were he not able to make inroads on DeSantis’ turf, Trump has an inherent advantage. A decades-long realignment has pushed college-educated voters toward Democrats — an already-existing trend that Trump accelerated — making the GOP’s “beer track” the larger cohort among Republican primary voters. Such divides defined the 2016 GOP presidential primary, propelling Trump to a once-unlikely nomination and, ultimately, the presidency.
It’s obviously still early in the 2024 contest: DeSantis isn’t even a declared candidate yet, and most of the new polls were conducted prior to the news that Trump may soon face criminal charges in New York related to an alleged hush-money payment he made during his 2016 campaign to hide an extramarital affair. Other potential legal troubles loom on the horizon.
Moreover, though the overall trends have been good for Trump, there’s little consensus in the national polling, with some surveys showing him and DeSantis essentially neck-and-neck, while others suggest the former president has a firm grasp on his third straight GOP nomination.
But even if the campaign hasn’t officially started, the recent polling trends do provide positive data for Trump and troubling numbers for DeSantis.
Of the three major media and academic surveys released in the past two weeks — from CNN, Monmouth University and Quinnipiac University — two of them have trend data showing a Trump bump over the past month.
In addition to the Quinnipiac survey, the Monmouth poll released this week showed Trump leading the Florida governor by 1 point, erasing a 13-point, head-to-head disadvantage with DeSantis compared to the school’s February poll. (Similarly, among the full field of candidates, Trump led DeSantis by 14 points in the new poll, compared to a tie last month.)
Some of the most dramatic swings toward Trump came among the groups where DeSantis had his biggest advantages. In the February Monmouth poll, DeSantis’ lead over Trump in the two-way matchup was 28 points among voters who make $50,000 a year or more. But he only leads Trump now by 2 points in this group, a 26-point swing. (Trump has a double-digit lead among Republican voters making less than $50,000 a year.)

The Monmouth poll, however, still shows DeSantis with a large lead among voters with college degrees, 62 percent to 30 percent — similar to his advantage among this group last month.
A CNN poll out last week was better for DeSantis, showing the two men neck-and-neck. DeSantis led Trump by 18 points among white voters with college degrees, though other candidates received significant support among this bloc, including former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (14 percent) and former Vice President Mike Pence (8 percent).
There’s also a large sample, rolling tracking poll from the online firm Morning Consult, which shows Trump with a much larger — and growing — lead over DeSantis, underscoring some of the variance among the public survey data, but still with the trend moving in Trump’s direction.
While the same class divide among Republicans exists as in 2016, polls suggest it’s even bigger now. In the 28 states where the TV networks commissioned entrance or exit polls in the 2016 caucuses and primaries, Trump was backed by 47 percent of voters without college degrees, compared to 35 percent of those with college degrees.
What might be even better news for Trump is that the beer track vote is growing as a share of the GOP electorate. While college graduates made up a majority of Republican caucus-goers and primary voters in recent cycles, larger political realignments will likely mean that in most states, GOP voters without college degrees will outnumber those who have graduated from college next year.
There are some other key differences between 2016 and 2024. Trump was the outsider candidate in his first campaign, but he now runs stronger among voters who most closely identify with the Republican Party. In the Monmouth poll, he leads DeSantis by 18 points among those who describe themselves as “strong Republicans,” while he trails among independents who lean toward the GOP.
Similarly, Trump’s support is strongest now among the most conservative voters. In the Quinnipiac poll, he leads DeSantis among “very conservative” voters by 21 points, and in the Monmouth poll, it’s a 25-point advantage when surveyed as a head-to-head contest.
In 2016, by contrast, Trump actually lost “very conservative” voters in the aggregated entrance and exit polls to the runner-up, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), 41 percent to 37 percent.
Another 2016 split that isn’t apparent this time — at least not yet — is along gender lines. Trump beat Cruz among men by 19 points in 2016, according to the entrance and exit polls, compared to a 10-point Trump advantage among women.
But in the most recent 2024 polls, Trump runs as well among women, if not better. In each of the three recent polls — those from CNN, Monmouth and Quinnipiac — Trump has a larger lead among women than among men, though the differences are not always statistically significant. Haley, the only woman to declare her candidacy, also runs stronger with female voters in primary polling.
For now, however, the greatest divide with potential to define the 2024 Republican primary is class. Don’t expect the most educated Republicans to fall in love with Trump, or the “beer track” to abandon him en masse. But any marked shifts among these groups in the coming months could make the difference.
[ad_2]
#Trumps #beer #track #advantage #Ron #DeSantis
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 25, 2023
New Yorkers cautious ahead of Trump’s likely indictment in hush money case

[ad_1]
New York: New Yorkers are voicing mixed feelings amid the possibility of Donald Trump’s indictment, with some expressing confidence that law enforcement agencies will be able to maintain order in the city while others apprehensive of how the situation will unfold if criminal charges are brought against the former US president.
A grand jury is weighing whether to indict Trump, 76, over hush money payments made to a porn star to keep quiet about an alleged affair during the 2016 presidential campaign.
Barricades have come up at several points near the courthouses in Lower Manhattan as well as outside the office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg where police personnel are manning the premises as it was expected that Trump could be indicted by a Manhattan grand jury this past week.
“Barricades are being set up around Manhattan Criminal Court as our nation awaits an announcement on whether President Donald J. Trump will be INDICTED despite having committed NO CRIME,” a Trump email said.
The area outside the courthouses wore a deserted look Friday as the week wrapped up without the grand jury indictment that could charge Trump.
While Trump has called on his supporters to protest against the indictment, there were no demonstrators outside the courthouses as the week concluded.
There are expectations that the grand jury could meet Monday, when pro-Trump supporters, as well as protestors, could gather again in lower Manhattan, along with hordes of camera persons and journalists, intently waiting for the possible indictment and keeping an eye on its aftermath.
On Friday it was business as usual in and outside the court premises as New Yorkers went about their business, tourists stopped by the imposing court stairs to click pictures, newly-wed couples posed for photos after their marriage ceremonies in the court and police and a handful of media persons stood nearby monitoring developments.

Parimal Prasad, part of a marriage party that came out of the courthouse, said Trump should be indicted and “treated just like any other citizen.”
“If the court finds him guilty, he should be behind bars,” he said.
Prasad said he is not too concerned about the possibility of violence and protests if and when Trump is indicated “because the law enforcement agencies will take care of that.”
Another resident, who did not wish to give his name, said Trump’s indictment is “long-overdue” and voiced hope that “things will be safe” in and around the city.
Benjamin, a student at New York University, who lives across the road from the criminal courthouses, said he has noticed a “lot of hysteria” over the past few days about Trump.
“I’ve lived in the area for about four years and have never seen this much preparation around the courthouses,” he said.
He cited the January 6 Capitol riots and other lapses by Trump during his presidency.
He also said that he is “very concerned” about large-scale protests in the eventuality that Trump is indicted.
“Protests and riots are no stranger to New York City.”
“I feel like what will come to him will come to him,” he said and added, “I hope justice prevails.”
[ad_2]
#Yorkers #cautious #ahead #Trumps #indictment #hush #money #case
( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

March 25, 2023
Court rejects Trump’s urgent bid to keep lawyer’s records from special counsel

[ad_1]

After setting middle-of-the-night deadlines for filings in the dispute, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday afternoon declined Trump’s request for a stay of Howell’s ruling, ordering attorney Evan Corcoran to provide records to a Washington-based grand jury assigned to the special counsel’s probe.
The appeals court’s full order was not released, so it was not immediately clear whether Corcoran would be required to testify in addition to providing documents. But a summary of the D.C. Circuit’s order indicated that prosecutors had prevailed and that stay requests from the Trump camp were denied.
It’s also unclear whether the panel provided any time for Trump to challenge the decision before the full bench of the appeals court or to seek relief from the Supreme Court.
Howell ruled on Friday that Trump’s attorney-client privilege had to yield to the grand jury’s need for Corcoran’s testimony and records, given evidence that the attorney had been used to advance a crime. Smith’s probe is exploring potential obstruction of justice of the classified-documents investigation, as well as illegal retention of classified information and theft of government records, according to court filings.
The appeals court’s order on Wednesday — from Judges Cornelia Pillard, J. Michelle Childs and Florence Pan — didn’t identify Corcoran or the case at issue but made clear that the government was on the winning side of the case in Howell’s court and in the appeals court’s new ruling.
Pillard is an appointee of President Barack Obama as is Howell, the District Court judge who ruled in the dispute. Childs and Pan are appointees of President Joe Biden.
Spokespeople for Trump, his campaign and Smith did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Wednesday on the appeals court’s decision.
“Prosecutors only attack lawyers when they have no case whatsoever,” Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign said in a statement on Tuesday night that also assailed what it called “illegal” leaks about the closed-door court fight. “These leaks are happening because there is no factual or legal basis or substance to any case against President Trump.”

In an order on Tuesday night, the three-judge appeals panel granted a short-term “administrative” stay and also asked Trump’s attorneys to specify the precise set of documents at issue by midnight and for Smith’s team to respond by 6 a.m. Wednesday to the Trump team’s demand for a longer stay of Howell’s ruling.
Howell’s secret order on Friday required Corcoran to testify about matters he and Trump had claimed were subject to attorney-client privilege. Her order relied on the “crime-fraud exception,” which permits investigators to pursue evidence that would ordinarily be privileged but contains evidence of likely criminal conduct.
As chief judge, Howell supervised all disputes arising from grand jury proceedings happening in Washington. That responsibility passed on Friday to U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg, who succeeded Howell as chief, but only after Howell issued the potentially momentous privilege ruling in the Trump-related legal fight.
Proceedings related to the classified-documents grand jury, including efforts by prosecutors to compel Corcoran’s testimony, are occurring under seal — typical for nearly all grand jury proceedings.
However, the appeals court’s docket provides bare-bones details about the case, identifying when the lower-court battle began — Feb. 7 — and confirming that it stems from a grand-jury-related ruling Howell issued on Friday.
The grand jury probe of Trump, helmed by Smith, is an outgrowth of a monthslong battle between the National Archives and Trump to obtain hundreds of government records stashed at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida after leaving office. Trump’s aides returned 15 boxes of records in January 2022, including some that bore classification markings. As a result, the Archives brought in the Justice Department to pursue whether Trump had retained additional classified material.
In May 2022, the Justice Department subpoenaed Trump’s office, demanding the production of any other classified materials he might possess at Mar-a-Lago. Justice Department officials traveled in early June to Mar-a-Lago, where they briefly interacted with Trump and picked up a folder of records deemed classified. Trump’s team then certified that they had thoroughly searched the premises and turned over remaining classified documents.
But the department developed evidence suggesting that this wasn’t the case, leading to an Aug. 8, 2022, FBI search of the property, where dozens of additional documents with classification markings were discovered.
Corcoran, who was Trump’s primary point of contact with the Archives and the Justice Department, has faced scrutiny for his involvement in efforts to certify that Trump had returned all potentially classified materials.
The legal maneuvering in Washington comes as Trump’s lawyers are also awaiting a potential indictment of their client in an unrelated case in New York, an investigation by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg into details of a hush money payment made in 2016 to the porn actress Stormy Daniels

[ad_2]
#Court #rejects #Trumps #urgent #bid #lawyers #records #special #counsel
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 23, 2023
McCarthy pushes back against Trump’s calls for protests: ‘We want calmness out there’

[ad_1]

The ex-president on Truth Social called for his followers to “Protest, take our nation back,” when attacking the investigation and its chief investigator Saturday. But the top House Republican sought to smooth over Trump’s wording, in a throwback to a frequent GOP tactic during his four years in the White House, suggesting he likely meant to “educate” people about the actions by Bragg.
“I think President Trump, if you talked to him, doesn’t believe that either. I think the thing that you may misinterpret when President Trump talks and someone says that they can protest, he’s probably referring to my tweet: educate people about what’s going on. He’s not talking in a harmful way, and nobody should.”
McCarthy, however, said in a follow-up question that he has not spoken to Trump, but he has spoken to Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), chair of the House Judiciary Committee and its weaponization subpanel.
But not all agreed with McCarthy.
Just feet away from the stage where McCarthy and other members of leadership argued against protests, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) told reporters that people have the right to protest, though she denounced any potential political violence in reaction to a possible Trump indictment.
“I don’t think there’s anything wrong with calling for protests. Americans have the right to assemble, the right to protest. And that’s an important constitutional right. And he doesn’t have to say peaceful for it to mean peaceful. Of course, he means peaceful,” Greene told reporters. “Of course, President Trump means peaceful protests.”
Greene, an ardent Trump loyalist who supported McCarthy during his speakership race, similarly attacked the probe as “corrupt” and a “witch hunt,” while comparing it to what happens in communist countries.
And she also defended the California Republican’s response when asked directly about it, saying that while “people have the right to choose,” that she’s “said the same thing” as McCarthy. (Greene noted she won’t go to New York to protest, instead planning to go to Trump’s rally in Waco, Texas, later this month.)

Looming over Trump’s latest protest remarks are memories of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot in 2021, when he encouraged followers to turn out to protest the presidential election results.
Nevertheless, Republicans do seem in agreement that they oppose Bragg’s efforts, with McCarthy already issuing various tweets over the past two days vowing to have relevant committees probe whether federal funds “are used to facilitate the perversion of justice by Soros-backed DAs across the country,” referencing billionaire liberal donor George Soros.
NBC News reported Friday that law enforcement and security agencies across various levels of government were preparing for the possibility of an indictment as early as this week, including taking security precautions in the event of violent outbursts.
When pressed whether such funds are really used that way, he said he doesn’t know but plans to probe the matter to find out.
“I don’t know, did you read my tweet?” McCarthy asked one reporter asking about where he believes the funds come from. “I said I need to investigate. So I don’t have I don’t have the answers.”
When asked if there is any evidence the DA could obtain that could convince him that charges were warranted, McCarthy deflected by hammering the DA as being politically motivated. And he also argued that Trump, if he is ultimately indicted, isn’t barred from running for president under the Constitution when asked if it would be appropriate for him to continue campaigning.
And there could be more action coming from the new majority in the coming days.
“I talked to Chairman Jim Jordan today. I think you’ll see action tomorrow,” said McCarthy.
[ad_2]
#McCarthy #pushes #Trumps #calls #protests #calmness
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 20, 2023
Trump’s supporters should be able to protest ‘peacefully,’ Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly says

[ad_1]

Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) leave the chamber at the Capitol in Washington, Wednesday, March 15, 2023. | J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo
Former President Donald Trump’s supporters should be able to protest “peacefully” if Trump is arrested for his involvement in possibly paying hush money during his 2016 presidential campaign, Sen. Mark Kelly said Sunday.
Trump’s supporters, “have First Amendment rights, and they should be able to exercise those peacefully,” Kelly (D-Ariz.) said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” But law enforcement officials should be prepared to “make sure it doesn’t rise to the level of violence,” he added.
Kelly pointed out that levying charges against the former president would be “unprecedented,” acknowledging that “there’s certainly risks involved” in doing so. However, “we’re a country of laws and nobody is above the law,” Kelly said.
[ad_2]
#Trumps #supporters #protest #peacefully #Democratic #Sen #Mark #Kelly
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 19, 2023
Can Trump’s ‘Straight Man’ Lighten Up?

[ad_1]
At the last gridiron he attended in 2018, Pence found himself as the punchline, not its deliverer. Trump, who had agreed to speak that year, took aim at Pence: “I really am proud to call him the apprentice.” Trump told the crowd that to prepare, he had talked to some “of the funniest people around the White House, starting with my No. 2: Mike Pence! Oh, I love you, Mike. Some of you may think that Mike is not a comedian, but he is one of the best straight men you’re ever going to meet. … He is straight!”
Pence sat with Karen to Trump’s left, red-faced and seemingly embarrassed by his boss’ potshot
Since then Pence has struggled to emerge from Trump’s shadow. In recent months, he has done more than perhaps any of his GOP competitors to distinguish himself from Trump — on his actions on January 6, on his wobbling support for aid for Ukraine, on not committing to backing Trump as the nominee.
Pence is not the first national politician who has struggled to let his full self into public view. There was Mitt Romney, who popular culture and commentators portrayed as stilted and awkward in his 2012 presidential bid. But Greg Whiteley’s 2014 Netflix documentary “Mitt” revealed him in more intimate moments as a mischievous wit. And Bob Dole, the former presidential candidate from Kansas, had a dust bowl-dry sense of humor that didn’t always register. Pence, for his part, is well aware of the Dole parallel, according to Atterholt, who has urged Pence to let his more gregarious self shine through. “Here’s a situation where these attributes are extremely flattering, and they’re unfortunately hidden,” he told me.

On June 19, 2003, then-Congressman Pence made a speech on the floor of the House honoring the 25th birthday of Garfield.
|
CQ Roll Call via AP Images
It’s doubtful Pence would ever try a Sununu-style roast of Trump. But can he dial up the heat, even a little? After all this is a guy who went out of his way to celebrate the creator of Garfield on the House floor. Garfield!
But for this humor gambit to actually work, Pence will have to embrace it and not just at a single inside-the-Beltway event. Whether Pence can let the world see this authentically goofy and charming part of his life story could be a decisive factor in how he fares in the up close and personal crucible of campaigning in early primary states such as Iowa. For a man who improvised his way through thousands of hours of calls from radio listeners, who can dash off a compelling caricature of a new acquaintance in a matter of seconds, who can deadpan his way through a speech on the stump, it’s not impossible to imagine that person doing well in a presidential campaign.
Can Mike Pence become the candidate Americans want to have a non-alcoholic beer with? That is a question only Pence can answer, Atterholt told me. “It’s not his staff who is holding him back,” he said.
Mike Pence Imitates George W. Bush

Last November, in a Raleigh hotel conference room, at the end of an interview with Pence, I asked Pence to give me a taste of his vaunted “Dubya” imitation.

“Well, you got to be in the moment,” Pence demurred.
“You got to give him two minutes,” Marc Short, his longtime senior adviser, urged Pence. “Tell him the story of you going to the immigration meeting.”
Pence conceded and told me a story about going to the Oval Office to meet Bush during the immigration reform debate in 2006, during which Pence had co-authored a guest-worker proposal that was going to be part of the final package.
“President said, ‘Do you mind if I ask you a personal question?” Pence recounted, nailing W.’s Crawford, Texas, twang. “Well, I noticed you’re not exactly from a border state,” Pence’s W. continued. It was legitimately funny. But despite the laughs he got, Pence didn’t milk the moment. He quickly dropped the mimicry and shifted back to his more familiar earnest mode.
We soon said our goodbyes and then he ducked out to a donor lunch, and then a Senate campaign event.
I haven’t seen much evidence of his lighter side since that encounter. But he’s got a show Saturday night.
[ad_2]
#Trumps #Straight #Man #Lighten
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 11, 2023
Trump’s CDC director says Fauci shut down debate on Covid’s origin

[ad_1]

Redfield said Fauci, who led the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the time, and Collins left him out because Redfield suspected the coronavirus had leaked from the Chinese lab.
Fauci, who was not at the hearing, dismissed Redfield’s accusation as “completely untrue.”
“No one excluded anyone,” he told POLITICO after the hearing.
“And the idea of saying that he was not wanted there because he had a different opinion … there were several people on the call who had the opinion that it might have been an engineered virus,” said Fauci, who retired from his government post at the end of last year.
Collins, who is now a science adviser to President Joe Biden, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. He has previously said he shares Fauci’s view that the virus likely came from nature, but that a lab leak was possible.
Redfield thought the highly infectious nature of the virus distinguished it from other coronaviruses and made it unlikely to have evolved naturally, he told representatives.
Fauci and others said it most likely came from a natural spillover from animals, as was the case with other coronaviruses, such as SARS and MERS, Redfield said.
The former CDC director said he later found out he was excluded from a Feb. 1, 2020, conference call with Fauci and Jeremy Farrar, a U.K. scientist who at the time led the Wellcome Trust, and other conversations that resulted in the publication of an article in Nature in March 2020 dismissing the possibility of the virus originating in a lab. Farrar is now the World Health Organization’s top scientist.

Fauci told POLITICO he was not involved in the drafting of the article.
But Republican representatives at the hearing accused Fauci of having orchestrated it to deflect attention from U.S. funding research at the Wuhan lab.
“I think Dr. Fauci and Dr. Collins got caught with their hands in the cookie jar. They got caught supercharging viruses in an unsecured Chinese lab,” said James Comer (R-Ky.), chairman of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee.
Fauci has repeatedly denied that the NIH financed so-called gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab. That research aims to make viruses either more lethal or more transmissible or both to find ways to combat them.
Some Democratic representatives at the hearing warned that accusing Fauci of ill motives would further erode trust in government health officials, threatening public health.
“I want the facts, but I hope and say to my colleagues on the other side: We cannot go down a dangerous path by pushing unfounded conspiracies about Dr. Fauci and other long-serving career public health officials,” said Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.).
[ad_2]
#Trumps #CDC #director #Fauci #shut #debate #Covids #origin
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 9, 2023
Once an albatross around Trump’s neck, Jan. 6 is now taboo in the GOP primary

[ad_1]

If any subject is verboten in the early stages of the Republican presidential primary, it’s the insurrection that once served as a defining point in 2024 frontrunner Donald Trump’s career. Whereas Republicans once talked openly about it being disqualifying for the former president, today it is little more than a litmus test in GOP circles of a candidate’s MAGA bona fides. None of them want any part of it.
For a primary candidate, said Scott Walker, the former Republican governor of Wisconsin, going after Trump for Jan. 6 is “a huge risk.”
The Jan. 6 avoidance is not just in DeSantis’ book. Mike Pence, the former vice president and likely presidential candidate, is preparing to resist a grand jury subpoena for testimony about Trump’s efforts to overturn the election, seeing only political landmines in testifying. Nikki Haley, asked on a podcast recently if she would describe the riot at the Capitol as an “insurrection, a riot, or a coup,” went instead with a more banal — and safer — description: “a sad day in America.”
In the primary, said Dave Carney, a national Republican strategist based in New Hampshire, “I don’t think January 6th will come up, period.”
The insurrection wasn’t always destined to be taboo in GOP primary politics. In the immediate aftermath, the riot appeared to provide an opening not only for Trump’s loudest critics in the party, but also for more mainstream, otherwise-Trumpian Republicans seeking to distinguish themselves from him ahead of 2024.
It was Haley, the former U.N. ambassador, who once said she was angry and “disgusted” with Trump and told Republican National Committee members that his “actions since Election Day will be judged harshly by history.” Pence made his first post-presidential break with Trump by declaring that he and Trump might never “see eye to eye” on the insurrection. DeSantis once openly criticized “the rioting and disorder” at the Capitol.
“The calculation was that this is clearly indefensible, he’s not going to have a place in the party going forward,” said one Republican strategist and former congressional aide. “That clearly hasn’t happened … January 6th is advantageous for Trump in a Republican primary now. Nobody’s going to hit him on January 6th.”
The advantages for Trump, if they do exist, were in plain view at the gathering of conservatives at the Conservative Political Action Conference. At the yearly confab — held this year outside of Washington — some attendees wore their connection to Jan. 6 as a badge of honor and found sympathetic ears.

Micki Witthoeft, the mother of Ashli Babbitt — the protester shot and killed by Capital police at the riot as she tried to break down a door inside the building — appeared on set with Donald Trump Jr. outside the convention’s main stage. There were two booths in the CPAC exhibition hall focused on Jan. 6 defendants. And it was standing room only for a breakout session at the conference titled: “True Stories of January 6: The Prosecuted Speak.” Speakers included Jan. 6 defendants Brandon Straka, Simone Gold, West Virginia legislator Derrick Evans, John Strand and Geri Perna, the aunt of Matthew Perna, who died by suicide after pleading guilty to four charges related to the Capitol riot.
In the halls, it wasn’t unusual to bump into people who were protesting on Capitol Hill on Jan. 6. Deborah Gordon, a retiree from Maryland, said it was “disgusting” that politicians didn’t talk about Jan. 6 more. “I was there,” Gordon said. Bruce Cherry, the chair of Seminole County Republican executive committee in Florida, said it was important to reelect Trump “to pardon those people.” Melissa Cornwell, who attended CPAC from Beaumont, Texas, called Jan. 6 a “non-event,” adding that the “real insurrection” was the riots that followed the death of George Floyd in 2020.
If anything, the tone and tenor of the conference suggested that Republican presidential candidates may feel pressure from corners of the base to talk about Jan. 6 in positive terms — and rally to the defense of people arrested following the riot.
“I can tell you that just interacting with a lot of the activists here, there is concern that the violations of protocol and civil rights around the Jan. 6 issue haven’t gotten sufficient attention from the Congress, and that’s really a matter for us in the House majority more so than 2024 candidates,” Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) said on the sidelines of CPAC.
Already, the Trump world attacks on potential 2024 contenders for not being sufficiently supportive of the Jan. 6 protesters are coming. Alex Bruesewitz, a Republican strategist and influencer close to the Trumps, said others who could seek the nomination have shown they “don’t care” about Jan. 6 defendants “because they’re going to lose out on the Wall Street money, they hate Trump and his base.” Bruesewitz himself was summoned by the Jan. 6 committee but reportedly pleaded the Fifth when asked to testify about the events on that day. He once said he would help pay for the legal defense of accused Capitol rioters, while Trump has suggested pardoning some Jan. 6 defendants and even collaborated on a song with some of them.
CPAC has grown increasingly aligned with Trump, making it difficult to assess how representative its gathering is of broader Republican politics. Indeed, last August, the conference featured a fake jail cell where a convicted Capitol rioter sat, fake cried, and prayed with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.). Still, the crowd assembled there was full of precisely the kind of hardline activists critical to presidential contenders in a GOP primary.
In the broader GOP ecosystem, even more moderate Republicans see little upside in mentioning the riot.
“I’m not trying to downplay January 6th and how terrible it was, but really, a lot of us just want to move past this guy, right?” said Mark Graul, a Republican strategist who worked on George W. Bush’s 2004 campaign. “We want to move past him, and move past the awfulness, which culminated on January 6th. That was the peak of Trump awfulness.”
But Graul added that anyone running to be the GOP standard-bearer understood the calculations that come with it.
“We’re still in this stage where if you’re running for the Republican nomination, you’re going to need to get votes from people who voted for Donald Trump,” he said.
Indeed, polls show that there just isn’t much of a constituency in the GOP primary for anyone criticizing Trump on Jan. 6. More than two years after the riot, the share of Republicans who disapprove of Trump supporters taking over the Capitol building has fallen to 49 percent, from 74 percent in 2021, according to a recent Economist/YouGov poll. And even if Republicans didn’t like what they saw that day, a majority of them don’t blame Trump.
Two years ago, Walker said, Jan. 6 was worthy of condemnation. He said so at the time. But it makes no sense for presidential candidates to be talking about it now, he added, when most people have moved on.
Anymore, he said, “Nobody cares.”
Natalie Allison contributed to this report.

[ad_2]
#albatross #Trumps #neck #Jan #taboo #GOP #primary
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 6, 2023
Trump’s loosening grip on GOP defines early 2024 campaign

[ad_1]

The Kentucky Republican is far from the only one-time Trump ally who’s staying away from the former president, despite his lead in every major poll so far. Some are looking more seriously at his would-be rivals like DeSantis or Gov. Nikki Haley. Others are intentionally staying on the sidelines but privately hoping he stumbles. That sentiment is deepening throughout the Republican Party — but no segment of the party illustrates the shift as vividly as the House GOP, whose members almost universally backed Trump in both previous races.
As of March 1, fewer than 20 House Republicans have formally endorsed Trump in the four months since he declared his third campaign, according to a POLITICO analysis. Roughly another dozen have publicly supported Trump in some way, though short of a formal endorsement. Just one member of House leadership, Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), is included in those endorsements.
For now, Trump’s campaign doesn’t appear concerned about their tally of congressional support. Members of Trump’s team are in regular contact with lawmakers and they expect to roll out more endorsements soon, according to an adviser to Trump.
“We have an upcoming slate of national and statewide endorsements that will show the unmatched strength of President Trump’s campaign,” Steven Cheung, a Trump spokesperson, said in a statement.
“Our current list of powerful endorsers far outweighs and dwarfs any other campaign or prospective campaign in support.”
The widespread hesitancy would not be notable in another era — or if a former president was not already in the race. But in this instance, the lack of public support is perhaps the clearest sign yet that members feel Trump’s support is no longer a prerequisite for political survival. Trump’s vengeance is now barely registering as a threat, after years as one of the most dominant forces in politics.
“I’m the last person that would worry about that,” Massie said of possible retribution for not supporting Trump. “It backfires. You can’t attack too many of your own party.”
Of course, the presidential primaries don’t begin for a year, and the field has yet to fully take shape. So far, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley is the only other prominent declared GOP presidential candidate. DeSantis is not expected to launch a bid until the spring at the earliest, while Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) has said he is still mulling over the decision. Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, former Vice President Mike Pence and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo are other possible candidates.

In interviews with nearly 20 House Republicans, many cited the uncertainty in the field as reason to keep quiet for now.
“We don’t know what it’s going to look like at the end of the day,” said Rep. Ann Wagner (R-Mo.), whose suburban St. Louis district took a hard lurch to the left in the Trump era. “People should be keeping their powder dry.”
Some went even further, suggesting it might be time for the party to move on — even as they refrained from invoking the former president’s name.
“Primaries really need to be involved in a conversation about the future of the party,” said centrist Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.), when asked if he planned to endorse in the race. He warned against a “coronation.”
“I’m for generational change in both parties,” said Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.), a McCarthy ally and one-time Trump supporter who said he probably would not endorse in the race.
“With Governor DeSantis’ book coming out this week — I’m seeing him a lot these days,” said Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), who also attended the Florida governor’s recent retreat. “I’ll look forward to hearing from him a little more.”
Each of them endorsed Trump in 2020.
Diminished threat of a vengeful Trump
Few Republicans are willing to openly speculate whether Trump’s current tepid level of support on Capitol Hill is an omen for the next two years. What is clear, though, is that crossing Trump is considered far less threatening.
Trump has been crusading since his 2016 election to remake the Republican Party in his image and oust any members who resist. In the past two years alone, he has sought retribution on GOP members who voted for impeachment (only two of the 10 were reelected last year) and those who supported a bipartisan infrastructure package.
And if Trump wasn’t driving the revenge train himself, his supporters waded in on his behalf. The House Republicans who voted to create a commission to investigate the Jan. 6 attacks saw a surge in primary challengers, and many who won saw their primary margins dive dangerously even though they were facing under-funded opponents.
But the specter of those tough races don’t seem to have driven members toward Trump for political inoculation.
“I’m not planning on endorsing anybody,” said Rep. Michael Guest (R-Miss.), who was forced into a surprise primary runoff in 2022 after a challenger weaponized his vote for the Jan. 6 commission. “It’s too early at this point.”
And while Trump has the field mostly to himself so far, few of the GOP lawmakers interviewed said they’ve heard from him or his team directly. One notable exception: Rep. William Timmons (R-S.C.) said he received a call from home-state Sen. Lindsay Graham, a top Trump ally.
Timmons said the decision was easy for him, despite the other South Carolinans who are likely to get in the race. “Trump’s Trump. Cross him at your peril.”
But not all his colleagues assessed the situation similarly. Another South Carolina Republican, Rep. Ralph Norman, endorsed Haley when she launched her bid last month. Norman served with her in the South Carolina state House but was previously a devoted ally of Trump.
As a sign of respect, Norman said he called the former president before he endorsed but did not fear any political repercussions: “Donald Trump was magnanimous and he understood, and I will never have a negative word about Donald Trump.”
He’s far from the only House Republican who feels like they’re forced to choose sides between long-time friends and colleagues.
“I consider Tim Scott a friend,” said Rep. David Schweikert, who is not yet sure if he will endorse this cycle. The Arizona Republican served with both Scott and DeSantis in the House. “Ron is someone we also used to hang out with. I have great respect for him.
Multiple GOP members said Trump and his team had not conducted any extensive congressional outreach yet. Some members said they received emails from Trump’s political operation but not any specific endorsement requests.
“I haven’t gotten a call from him, or Nikki Haley, or Gov. DeSantis or Mike Pompeo or Tim Scott or any of the other folks,” said Rep. Brian Mast (R-Fla.). That seems to be true across the GOP conference. Rep. Chuck Fleischmann (R-Tenn.), who has also refrained from an endorsement so far, said he didn’t know anyone in his delegation who had gotten calls yet on the subject: “That decision will probably be made easier for me when the asks are made.”
Trump’s House loyalists
So far, Trump and his inner circle don’t seem to be sweating its lack of Hill endorsements. Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.), who endorsed Trump even before his third campaign became official, said he hasn’t been asked to dial up any of his on-the-fence colleagues but is ready to when asked: “I’ve never hidden it, and I’m not going to hide it now.”
And it’d be tough to find a House Republican more loyal to Trump than Van Drew: the New Jersey lawmaker switched parties in his first term as a Democrat after some personal wooing from Trump a week before his first impeachment vote.
“When I was going through a really difficult time, some real challenges, He was there,” Van Drew said. “Despite what people say about him, any time that guy’s looked me in the eye — rough around the edges as he may be — he’s always told me the truth.”
Rep. Wesley Hunt (R-Texas), is another GOP lawmaker who was quick to endorse Trump’s comeback bid, in part because of the former president’s support in own political career.
“He’s been very good to me. Loyalty matters to him, loyalty matters a lot to me,” Hunt said. After he lost his first race in 2020, Trump stuck by him and was critical to helping Hunt survive a 10-person primary two years later. “It made a huge difference in my race.”
Olivia Beavers, Meridith McGraw, Anthony Adragna and Daniella Diaz contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
#Trumps #loosening #grip #GOP #defines #early #campaign
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 2, 2023
Farm state Republicans raise alarm over Trump’s new China trade proposal

[ad_1]
“There are serious trade disparities that should rightfully be raised, but we should be honest about the potential economic impact to rural America,” said Rep. Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.).
Another farm state Republican lawmaker was more blunt when asked about how Trump’s new trade proposal could impact the U.S. agriculture economy, calling it “fucking suicide” for rural communities.
Trump’s last tariff war with China originally targeted China’s steel dumping but provoked crippling retaliatory tariffs on U.S. agricultural exports to China — hitting farmers who were already struggling financially. Rural families, especially on small farms, felt the economic toll. Farms increasingly defaulted on their loans as China looked to Brazil and other foreign markets for farm exports, even after Trump spent $28 billion in federal funds on bailout payments. Trump eventually signed a trade deal with Beijing that he claimed would result in China purchasing $50 billion in U.S. farm goods, something China has failed to live up to. Tariffs on billions of dollars on Chinese goods put in place by Trump remain today. The Biden administration, which is reviewing the tariffs, has made no moves to ease them in the past two years.
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), a staunch Trump ally, cautioned against new trade moves that could hurt American agriculture. “I can understand what he’s doing — China is our biggest adversary,” Tuberville said. “But we’ve got to be careful about tariffs on farmers.”
Some GOP lawmakers begrudgingly went along with Trump’s last tariff war with Beijing, in support of the general goal to punish China for intellectual property theft, steel dumping, broader state subsidies and a wide range of other malign actions. But they now caution that the process of disentangling the country’s complex economic relationship with China requires far more nuance than what Trump is proposing.
“It’s important that we take a protective posture with regard to the sort of predatory practices of China,” said Rep. Rick Crawford (R-Ark.). But “I also know we have such a great deal invested in China, probably trillions of dollars,” Crawford continued, adding that the unwinding of those investments will need to be conducted “forthrightly” and “aggressively” while also protecting the U.S. agriculture economy.
Some farm state lawmakers, however, lauded parts of Trump’s plans. Rep. John Rose (R-Tenn.), a former state agriculture commissioner, said the proposal to revoke China’s preferred nation trading status “makes some sense.” Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), a potential 2024 presidential contender himself, said tariffs are “the only angle we have to protect our markets from their unfair practices.” Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.) said he supported tariffs on Chinese goods, especially given that “they’re already not meeting their obligations under the previous trade agreement.”
And there are a swath of Republican lawmakers who are still uneasy about publicly criticizing the former president, given his pull among a vocal slice of the party. Asked by POLITICO about Trump’s plan, more than a dozen pro-Trump Republicans said they didn’t want to weigh in since they hadn’t seen the proposal yet.

Max Miller (R-Ohio), a former Trump aide who is now on the House Agriculture Committee, said he backed Trump’s previous tariffs on China but he wanted to “look at the language” of any new tariff proposals.
|
Drew Angerer/Getty Images
Rep. Max Miller (R-Ohio), a former Trump aide who is now on the House Agriculture Committee, said he wanted to “look at the language” of any tariff proposals “and who it’s really going to hurt and who it’s really going to affect.”
“Sometimes it provides a big relief to the bigger consumers within our country,” Miller said. “But sometimes it’s the little guy and the little woman at the end who really take on that burden sharing of actually having the tariff cost them more money.”
Miller, who has endorsed Trump’s 2024 presidential bid, said he backed Trump’s previous tariffs on China. “I’m supportive of those tariffs,” Miller said, but added, he’s “a little bit different, more free trade individual myself.” Miller went on to say the “Milton Friedman model I believe is the best way for economic prosperity of the entire world,” referring to one of the most well-known advocates of free market trade — a belief system largely shunned by the former president.
Trump’s campaign didn’t consult key agricultural groups before rolling out his new trade plans — even conservative-leaning groups he was close to during his presidency.

Livestock are seen on a farm on Feb. 24, 2023 in Quemado, Texas.
|
Brandon Bell/Getty Images
Trump relied on the American Farm Bureau Federation during his initial trade war with China, as he argued farmers were doing their patriotic duty by helping to carry the financial burden on his larger effort to punish China for its economic tactics. But Zippy Duvall, the ag lobby’s president, said Trump aides hadn’t asked him about the former president’s new trade proposal. A Trump spokesperson didn’t respond to an inquiry regarding the Republican pushback to the plans or whether the campaign had reached out to any agriculture groups about it.
Some Republicans said that while they haven’t yet seen or reviewed Trump’s proposal, they’re generally leery of enacting new tariffs on China, given the likely backlash on U.S. farm exports.
“I like free trade. I think that’s what our country is built upon and the sooner we can get back to that, I think it’s going to help our farmers and ranchers,” said Rep. Mark Alford (R-Mo.), a pro-Trump freshman who represents a rural stretch of Missouri.
“I really don’t have a lot of comment on this at this point, because it’s all speculation, right?” House Agriculture Chair G.T. Thompson (R-Pa.) said.
Asked if he would support new tariffs on China in general, Thompson replied, “I still think we’re resolving the impact of tariffs now.”
Steven Overly contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
#Farm #state #Republicans #raise #alarm #Trumps #China #trade #proposal
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 1, 2023