#New York election results 2022 | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

ivan-fyodorovich-k · 6 months

Text

I will be curious to read the vituperative denials of the validity of this article's analysis, which is pasted below the cutoff:

“Are you better off today than you were four years ago?” That question, first posed by Ronald Reagan in a 1980 presidential-campaign debate with Jimmy Carter, has become the quintessential political question about the economy. And most Americans today, it seems, would say their answer is no. In a new survey by Bankrate published on Wednesday, only 21 percent of those surveyed said their financial situation had improved since Joe Biden was elected president in 2020, against 50 percent who said it had gotten worse. That echoed the results of an ABC News/Washington Post poll from September, in which 44 percent of those surveyed said they were worse off financially since Biden’s election. And in a New York Times/Siena College poll released last week, 53 percent of registered voters said that Biden’s policies had hurt them personally.

As has been much commented on (including by me), this gloom is striking when contrasted with the actual performance of the U.S. economy, which grew at an annual rate of 4.9 percent in the most recent quarter, and which has seen unemployment holding below 4 percent for more than 18 months. But the downbeat mood is perhaps even more striking when contrasted with the picture offered by the Federal Reserve’s recently released Survey of Consumer

The survey provides an in-depth analysis of the financial condition of American households, conducted for the Fed by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago. Published every three years, it’s the proverbial gold standard of household research. The latest survey looked at Americans’ net worth as of mid-to-late 2022 and Americans’ income in 2021, comparing them with equivalent data from three years earlier. It found that despite the severe disruption to the economy caused by the pandemic and the recovery from it, Americans across the spectrum saw their incomes and wealth rise over the survey period.

The rise in median household net worth was the most notable improvement: It jumped by 37 percent from 2019 to 2022, rising to $192,000. (All numbers are adjusted for inflation.) Americans in every income bracket saw substantial gains, with the biggest gains registered by people in the middle and upper-middle brackets, which suggests that a slight narrowing of wealth inequality occurred during this time. In particular, Black and Latino households saw their median net worth rise faster than white households did—though the racial wealth gap is so wide that it narrowed only slightly as a result of this change.

A big driver of this increase was the rising value of people’s homes—and a higher percentage of Americans owned homes in 2022 than did in 2019. But households’ financial position improved in other ways too. The amount of money that the median household had in bank accounts and retirement accounts rose substantially. The percentage of Americans owning stocks directly (that is, not in retirement accounts) jumped by more than a third, from about 15 to 21 percent. The percentage of Americans with retirement accounts went from 50.5 to 54.3 percent, a notable improvement. And a fifth of Americans reported owning a business, the highest proportion since the survey began in its current form (in 1989).

Americans also reduced their debt loads during the pandemic. The median credit-card balance dropped by 14 percent, and the share of people with car loans fell. More significantly still, Americans’ median debt-to-asset, debt-to-income, and debt-payment-to-income ratios all fell, meaning that U.S. households had lower debt burdens, on average, in 2022 than they’d had three years earlier.

The gains in real income (in this case, measured from 2018 to 2021) were small—median household income rose 3 percent, with every income bracket seeing gains. But that was better than one might have expected, given that this period included a pandemic-induced recession and only a single year of recovery.

The picture the survey paints, then, is one of American households not only weathering the pandemic in surprisingly good shape, but ultimately also emerging from it in better financial shape than they were going in. And that, in turn, points to the effect of the U.S. policy response to the crisis: Stimulus payments, enhanced unemployment benefits, the child-care tax credit, and the moratorium on student-loan payments boosted household income and balance sheets, helping people pay down debt and increase their savings. In the process, these policies mildly narrowed inequality.

The U.S. government’s aggressive response to the pandemic, including Biden’s stimulus spending, also helped the job market recover all its pandemic-related losses—and add millions of jobs on top. The resulting tight labor market has been a huge boon to lower-wage workers. In fact, because the Fed survey’s income data end in 2021, it understates the income gains for the bottom half of the workforce, and the shrinking income inequality they’ve produced.

Hourly wages for production and nonsupervisory workers (who make up about 80 percent of the American workforce) rose 4.4 percent year-on-year in the third quarter of 2023, for instance, ahead of the pace of inflation. And this was not anomalous: Arindrajit Dube, an economist at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, crunched the numbers and found that real wages for that same sector of workers are not just higher than they were in 2019, but are now roughly where they would have been if we’d continued on the upward pre-pandemic trend.

The reason for this is simple: Low unemployment has translated into higher wages. As a recent working paper by Dube, David Autor, and Annie McGrew shows, the tight labor markets of the past few years have given lower-wage workers more bargaining power than in the past, leading to a compression in the wage gap between higher-paid and lower-paid workers. Of course, that gap is still immense, but the three scholars found that the wage gains for lower-paid workers have rolled back about a quarter of the rise in inequality that has occurred since the 1980s.

So what should we take away from the Survey of Consumer Finances data, and from Dube, Autor, and McGrew’s work? Not that everything is fine, but that public policy and macroeconomic management matter a lot. Enhanced unemployment benefits, the child-care tax credit, the stimulus payments—these things materially improved the lives of Americans and helped set the economy up for a strong recovery. If the policy response had been less aggressive, the U.S. economy would be in worse shape now. This is something you can see by looking at Europe, where economies are growing far more slowly and unemployment is higher, while inflation is no lower.

Key to this story is the fact that lower-wage workers in particular would be worse off, because they have been among the chief beneficiaries of the low unemployment created by the robust recovery. It’s a useful reminder that stagnant wages are not an inevitable result of American capitalism: When labor markets are tight, and employers have to compete with one another for employees, workers get paid more.

So, even allowing for the high inflation we saw in 2022, no one could really look at the U.S. economy today and say that the policy choices of the past three years made us poorer. Yet that, of course, is precisely how many Americans feel.

Although that pessimism does not bode well for Biden’s reelection prospects, the real problem with it is even more far-reaching: If voters think that policies that helped them actually hurt them, that makes it much less likely that politicians will embrace similar policies in the future. The U.S. got a lot right in its macroeconomic approach over the past three years. Too bad that voters think it got so much wrong.

#someone somewhere out there will find this infuriating #I'm not an economist and almost every time anyone says anything about economics I think 'sure that makes sense'#so I post in my ignorance #try to resist calling me a retard when you tear this apart #and it's always the worst with things like statistics because someone's gonna be like 'well if you reframe the numbers slightly #you'll find that in fact this article demonstrates that we have less wealth per capita than your average North Korean'

63 notes · View notes

justinspoliticalcorner · 14 days

Text

Dean Obeidallah at The Dean's Report:

Today’s GOP controlled Supreme Court is nothing more than an arm of the Republican Party focused on imposing their right-wing agenda upon us--from ending fundamental rights like abortion and marriage equality to undermining voting rights and more. That is why we must work to win control of the Supreme Court the same way we work to win control of the House, Senate and White House. That means going forward every Democratic presidential candidate must commit to “winning the court” (aka “reform of the Supreme Court”) or we should not support that person. The latest example of this grotesquely partisan court came Thursday in the oral argument of Donald Trump’s appeal that he has absolute immunity to commit all the crimes he wants as President. The six GOP Justices—who were all active in Republican politics or administrations before being picked by GOP presidents to serve—showed zero concern that Trump was charged with crimes for attempting to wage a coup to remain in power despite losing. Instead, it was clear that the Republican justices are focused on protecting Trump by delaying his Jan 6 trial beyond Election Day.

If these justices were truly concerned with protecting our Republic, they would have agreed to hear this case in December 2023 when Special Counsel Jack Smith asked the court to fast track Trump’s appeal of the trial judge’s decision denying him immunity in the Jan 6 case. But that was rejected by the GOP controlled court to help Trump delay his trial. And in the end, the Republican justices may render a decision that makes it all but impossible to prosecute Trump for his crimes in the Jan 6 case. In reality, no one should be surprised that the Republican justices would protect the presidential nominee of their party in an election year. That is especially true given that three of those justices were appointed by Trump. [...]

And the GOP Supreme Court is helping Republicans impose these women killing abortion bans. We saw this on Wednesday when the court considered a challenge from Idaho Republicans to a federal law that mandates doctors to provide an abortion to a woman who is faced with an medical emergency. It’s clear from the oral argument that GOP justices support the Idaho state law that makes it illegal for doctor to perform an abortion--even if a woman is suffering horribly or could suffer permanent injuries. Only if a woman is literally on the doorstep of death after suffering extensively and begging for help would these Republican justices allow an abortion. This is barbarism—and it’s also the mainstream GOP position. The GOP controlled court has also repeatedly chipped away at the wall between church and state to pave the way for a theocracy consistent with their right-wing religious views. For example, in 2023, the GOP justices rolled back anti-discrimination protections for the LGBTQ community in the name of “religious freedom.”

In addition, these same GOP justices weakened the Voting Rights Act and greatly restricted the ability of the EPA to address climate change. And in a case that will literally result in more Americans being killed by gun violence, these same six Justices struck down in 2022 a century old New York state law that limited who can carry a concealed weapon. Justice Thomas—in between lavish gifts from his billionaire benefactor—wrote in that case that modern gun control laws must be “consistent with the Second Amendment’s text and historical understanding.” This decision has resulted in courts striking down a wide range of modern gun laws—including prohibitions on guns in mass transit, guns in post offices, guns with obliterated serial numbers and gun possession by certain felons. Whatever the GOP wants, this court will deliver. That means—as Justice Thomas has vowed—the court will, when given a chance, limit access to forms of birth control that right wing theocrats oppose, roll back marriage equality and more. The reason the GOP Supreme Court is so acutely dangerous to our freedoms and rights is that there are no checks on their power. These justices don’t answer to the voters. There is no way to directly defeat them in an election. (We can’t even force Thomas to recuse himself from Jan 6 cases despite his obvious conflict of interest!)

[...] That is why Democrats going forward must make reforming this court a priority. That could mean—by way of a federal law--expanding the court to say 13 justices to match the number of federal court of appeals. It could mean rotating judges from Supreme Court to lower federal courts after a set number of years. Reform can also mean “term limits” for justices—which polls show is supported by 67 percent of Americans. There is no greater threat to our freedoms, rights and democratic Republic than today’s corruptly partisan Supreme Court. That is why every Democratic presidential candidate and those seeking a House or Senate seat must make “reforming the court” a priority. It’s time to transform the US Supreme Court from an arm of the GOP back to a real a court!

Dean Obeidallah nails it: The Supreme Court must be expanded and reformed to counter the ill-gotten GOP edge on the court.

#SCOTUS #SCOTUS Is Compromised #SCOTUS Expansion #Expand The Court #Courts #Court Reform #Trump v. United States

23 notes · View notes

beardedmrbean · 5 days

Text

Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., is being hit with a censure resolution on Tuesday after she referred to some Jewish students as "pro-genocide" during a recent visit to Columbia University.

Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., is introducing the resolution against Omar on Tuesday, a source familiar with his plans told Fox News Digital.

The New York City Ivy League school has been the flashpoint for nationwide demonstrations on college campuses, where students have set up tent encampments to protest their universities' financial ties to pro-Israel companies.

COLUMBIA FACULTY ATTEMPT TO BLOCK CERTAIN STUDENTS, PRESS FROM ENTERING ENCAMPMENT UNTIL POLICE CALLED

Omar's daughter was one of more than 100 Columbia students and young adults attending its sister school, Barnard College, who were arrested over their encampment last month.

The progressive "Squad" Democrat visited the demonstration on April 26 in a show of solidarity for the pro-Palestinian protesters.

"I actually met a lot of Jewish students who are in the encampment, and I think it is really unfortunate that people don't care about the fact that all Jewish kids should be kept safe," Omar told Fox 5 New York while there. "We should not have to tolerate antisemitism or bigotry for all Jewish students, whether they are pro-genocide or anti-genocide."

Bacon's resolution text said Omar's "slanderous comments against Jewish students could inflame violence against the Jewish community."

In addition to censuring her for those comments, Bacon's resolution also accused her of having "a long and demonstrated history of hateful rhetoric that plays into the worst antisemitic tropes."

Omar has long been targeted by Republicans for her criticism of Israel. It even got her removed from the House Foreign Affairs Committee last February when the GOP won back the majority in the 2022 election.

Bacon told reporters last week, "To generalize, to say that the Jewish students are responsible for this and treat them that way, that is antisemitism, right? It's one thing to protest Israel, but to stretch it over and accost Jewish students is wrong."

"I'm working on a bill right now to call out Omar for what she said. She's talking about pro-genocide or anti-genocide Jewish students…all this talk is all wrong because Jewish Americans are Americans. Quit treating them that way," Bacon said.

Fox News Digital reached out to Omar's office for comment.

A spokesperson for Omar told Axios last week regarding Bacon's comments on preparing a censure resolution, "Attempts to misconstrue her words by drafting this baseless resolution are meant to distract from the ongoing violence and genocide occurring in Gaza and the large antiwar protests happening across our country and around the world."

Escalating tensions at the protests at Columbia and elsewhere have spurred bipartisan criticism amid multiple clashes between students and police, resulting in reports of people on both sides being injured. Jewish students at Columbia and other schools have also reported feeling unsafe on campus.

#nunyas news #at least diaper rash knows better than to open her mouth right now #about the best thing I could say about her #bunch of nazi wannabes in congress

14 notes · View notes

kp777 · 1 year

Text

By Thom Hartmann

Common Dreams

March 31, 2023

The Republican Party's most dangerous grift today has been their embrace of the lie that America is not a democracy but instead is a theocratic republic that should be ruled exclusively by armed Christian white men. It's leading us straight into the jaws of fascism.

Nobody ever accused Republicans of not knowing how to make a buck or BS-ing somebody into voting for them. Lying to people for economic or political gain is the very definition of a grift.

Whenever there’s another mass- or school-shooting, Republican politicians hustle out fundraising emails about how “Democrats are coming to take your guns!” The result is a measurable and profitable spike in gun sales after every new slaughter of our families and children, followed by a fresh burst of campaign cash to GOP lawmakers.

But the GOP’s ability to exploit any opportunity that comes along — regardless of its impact on America or American citizens — goes way beyond just fundraising hustles.

When Jared Kushner was underwater and nearly bankrupt because he overpaid for 666 Fifth Avenue and needed a billion-dollar bailout to cover his mortgage, his buddies in the Middle East (Saudi Arabia and the UAE) blockaded American ally (and host to the Fifth Fleet) Qatar until that country relented and laundered the money to Jared through a Canadian investment company.

Just this week, after Trump deregulated toxic trains leading to a horrible crash and the contamination of East Palestine, Ohio, Steve Bannon — already charged with multiple fraud-related crimes and then pardoned by Trump — showed up this week to hustle $300+ water filters to the people of that town.

The grift is at the core of the GOP’s existence, and has been since Nixon blew up LBJ’s peace talks with the Vietnamese in 1968 and then took cash bribes from the Milk Lobby and Jimmy Hoffa in the White House while having his mafia-connected “plumbers” wiretap the DNC’s offices at the Watergate.

— Republicans successfully fought the ability of Medicare to negotiate drug prices for decades; in turn, Big Pharma pours millions into their campaign coffers and personal pockets (legalized by 5 Republicans on the Supreme Court).

— Republicans beat back Democratic efforts to stop insurance giants from ripping off seniors and our government with George W. Bush’s Medicare Advantage privatization scam; in turn, the insurance companies rain cash on them like an Indian monsoon.

— Republicans oppose any effort to replace fossil fuels with green energy sources that don’t destroy our environment; in turn, the fossil fuel industry jacked up the price of gasoline into the stratosphere just in time for the 2022 election (and you can expect them to try it again in 2024).

— Republicans stopped enforcement of a century’s worth of anti-trust laws in 1983, wiping out America’s small businesses and turning rural city centers into ghost towns while pushing profits and prices through the ceiling; in turn massive corporate PACs fund ads supporting Republican candidates every election cycle.

— Republicans authored legislation letting billionaires own thousands of newspapers, radio stations, and TV outlets; in turn the vast majority of those papers (now half of all local papers are owned by a handful of rightwing New York hedge funds) and stations all run daily news and editorials attacking Democrats and supporting the GOP.

— Republicans Trump and Pai killed net neutrality so giant tech companies can legally spy on you and me, recording every website we visit and selling that information for billions; in turn, major social media sites amplify rightwing voices while giant search engines stopped spidering progressive news sites.

Newspeak — George Orwell’s term for the grift where politicians use fancy phrases that mean the opposite of what people think they mean — has been the GOP’s go-to strategy for a half-century.

Richard Nixon, for example, promised to crack down on drugs, but instead used that as an excuse to crack down on anti-war liberals and Black people. Instead of an economic grift, it was a political grift.

As Nixon‘s right hand man, John Ehrlichman, told reporter Dan Baum:

“You want to know what this was really all about? The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and Black people. Do you understand what I’m saying? “We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or Black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and Blacks with heroin and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. “We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. “Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.“

The grift is a recurrent theme through Republican presidencies in the modern era.

Ronald Reagan told us if we just destroyed America’s unions and moved our manufacturing to China and Mexico, great job opportunities would fill the nation.

He followed that up by promising if we just cut taxes on the morbidly rich, prosperity would trickle-down to the rest of us.

Reagan even assured us that raising the Social Security retirement age to 67 and taxing Social Security benefits would mean seniors could retire with greater ease.

All, of course, were grifter’s lies. Republican presidents since Reagan have continued the tradition.

George W. Bush called his program to make it easier to clear-cut America’s forests and rip roads through wilderness areas the “Healthy Forests Initiative.”

His program to legalize more pollution from coal-fired power plants and immunize them from community lawsuits (leading to tens of thousands of additional lung- and heart-disease deaths in the years since) was named the “Clean Air Act.”

Bush’s scam to “strengthen” Medicare — “Medicare Advantage” — was a thinly disguised plan to privatize that program that is today draining Medicare’s coffers while making insurance executives richer than Midas.

Donald Trump told Americans he had the coronavirus pandemic under control while he was actually making the situation far worse: America had more deaths per capita from the disease than any other developed country in the world, with The Lancet estimating a half-million Americans died needlessly because of Trump’s grift.

Jared and Ivanka cashed in on their time in the White House to the tune of billions, while Trump squeezed hundreds of millions out of foreign governments, encouraging them to illegally pay him through rentals in his properties around the world.

Other Trump grifts — most leading to grateful industries or billionaires helping him and the GOP out — included:

— Making workplaces less safe — Boosting religious schools at the expense of public schools — Cutting relief for students defrauded by student loan sharks — Shrinking the safety net by cutting $60 billion out of food stamps — Forcing workers to put in overtime without getting paid extra for it — Pouring more pollution from fossil fuels into our fragile atmosphere — Gutting the EPA’s science operation — Rescinding rules that protected workers at federal contract sites — Dialing back car air pollution emissions standards — Reducing legal immigration of skilled workers into the US from “shithole countries” — Blocking regulation of toxic chemicals — Rolling back rules on banks, setting up the crisis of 2023 — Defenestrating rules against racially segregated housing

While Nixon was simply corrupt — a crook, to use his own term — in 1978 when five Republicans on the Supreme Court signed off on the Bellotti decision authored by Lewis Powell himself, giving corporations the legal right to bribe American politicians, the GOP went all in.

Ever since then, the GOP has purely been the party of billionaires and giant corporations, although their most successful political grift has been to throw an occasional bone to racists, gun-nuts, fascists, homophobes, and woman-haters to get votes.

Democrats at that time were largely funded by the unions, so it wasn’t until the 1990s, after Reagan had destroyed about half of America’s union jobs and gutted the unions’ ability to fund campaigns, that the Democratic Party under Bill Clinton was forced to make a big turn toward taking corporate cash.

Since Barack Obama showed how online fundraising could replace corporate cash, however, about half of the nation’s Democratic politicians have aligned with the Progressive Caucus and eschewed corporate money, returning much of the Party to its FDR and Great Society base.

The GOP, in contrast, has never wavered from lapping up corporate money in exchange for tax cuts, deregulation, and corporate socialism.

Their most dangerous grift today, though, has been their embrace of the lie that America is not a democracy but instead is a theocratic republic that should be ruled exclusively by armed Christian white men. It’s leading us straight into the jaws of fascism.

Bannon’s grift in East Palestine is the smallest of the small, after his being busted for a multi-million-dollar fraud in the “Build the Wall” scheme and others, but is still emblematic of the Republican strategy at governance.

When all you have to offer the people is a hustle, then at the very least, Republicans figure, you should be able to make a buck or gain/keep political power while doing it.

#republicans #gop #grift #common dreams

91 notes · View notes

mapsontheweb · 1 year

Photo

2022 New York Gubernatorial Election Results

#maps #elections #2022 #new york

165 notes · View notes

ridenwithbiden · 2 months

Text

("It's Your Money" Not His) "Since leaving office in 2021, former President Donald J. Trump has spent more than $100 million on lawyers and other costs related to fending off various investigations, indictments and his coming criminal trials, according to a New York Times review of federal records.

The remarkable sum means that Mr. Trump has averaged more than $90,000 a day in legal-related costs for more than three years — none of it paid for with his own money.

Instead, the former president has relied almost entirely on donations made in an attempt to fight the results of the 2020 election.

Now, those accounts are nearly drained, and Mr. Trump faces a choice: begin to pay his own substantial legal fees or find another way to finance them.

November 2020 to Early 2021

Mr. Trump raised a staggering $254 million online from Nov. 4, 2020, the day after the election, to President Biden’s inauguration on Jan. 20, 2021, as he urged supporters to fuel an “election defense fund.”

The contributions came so quickly that on Nov. 9, Mr. Trump formed a new political action committee, Save America, to store all the cash.

Only a fraction of the money, however, went toward recounts and other legal challenges to the election. Some went to Mr. Trump’s lawyers during his second impeachment, related to the Jan. 6 riot.

But Mr. Trump banked much of the cash.

Rest of 2021

Mr. Trump started to use the money to fund his post-presidential political operation and what would eventually become his sprawling legal teams. In February, Trump renamed his 2020 committee to “MAGA PAC.”

By the end of 2021, Save America, which continued to bring in new donations, held a substantial portion of Mr. Trump’s fund-raising: $105 million.

2022

Both Save America and MAGA PAC spent significantly in 2022 on legal bills and other related expenses. The House held its impeachment hearings. The F.B.I. searched Mar-a-Lago for missing classified documents in August. Mr. Trump’s legal fees rose.

Mr. Trump spent about $27.2 million on legal-related costs for the year.

As Mr. Trump prepared to announce his 2024 run late in 2022, he faced a quandary: His PAC could not directly spend money to elect him as president. So Save America transferred $60 million to a pro-Trump super PAC called MAGA Inc.

2023

Save America began 2023 with $18.3 million. But Mr. Trump’s legal expenses were about to soar. He was first indicted in March 2023 in New York. Three other indictments followed.

Mr. Trump spent close to $60 million on legal and investigation-related costs — which included his lawyers, a document-production company and an expert witness in Trump’s New York civil fraud case.

Early last year, Mr. Trump made a change to bring more money into Save America, the PAC that was paying his legal expenses. At first, one cent of every dollar he raised online went to Save America; the rest went to his 2024 campaign. But with Save America short of cash to pay lawyers, he increased that to 10 percent.

It was still not enough. By June 2023, Save America had less than $4 million on hand. In an unusual move, Mr. Trump asked his super PAC for a refund of the $60 million he had given just months earlier, so that Save America could continue paying for his legal expenses.

By the end of 2023, more than $42 million had been returned from his super PAC to Save America.

2024

With his first trial looming — in the New York case related to hush-money payments to a porn star in 2016 — Mr. Trump’s legal costs continued to rise. He spent at least $9.7 million in January and February.

The more than $100 million in legal spending since leaving office does not include spending from Mr. Trump's 2024 campaign, which has not paid for his personal legal bills.

To cover the ongoing legal costs, his super PAC refunded an additional $10 million in January and February. But there is now only $7.75 million left to refund. Save America had less than $4 million at the end of February, when accounting for unpaid debts.

The Trump team has said the Republican National Committee won’t pay his legal bills. But his new shared fund-raising agreement with the party directs a portion of donations to his Save America PAC before the party itself.

Still, the account paying Mr. Trump’s legal bills will most likely be out of money by summer at the current spending pace.

Then, Mr. Trump will have to decide: Whose money will he use to pay his lawyers?"

7 notes · View notes

globalcourant · 2 years

Text

Rep. Jerry Nadler will win the Democratic nomination for New York's 12th District

Rep. Jerry Nadler will win the Democratic nomination for New York’s 12th District

Democrats in Florida on Tuesday picked Rep. Charlie Crist, left, to take on Gov. Ron DeSantis in the fall, CNN projected. (Getty Images) The final pieces of the midterm puzzle are coming into focus as Tuesday primaries in New York, Florida and Oklahoma lock in key parts of the November election slate. Democrats in Florida on Tuesday picked Rep. Charlie Crist to take on Gov. Ron DeSantis in the…

View On WordPress

#12th #Democratic #district #Jerry #Live updates: Florida #Nadler #New York election results 2022 #nomination #Politics #Rep #win #Yorks

0 notes

dontmeantobepoliticalbut · 9 months

Text

By Jess Coleman

When, in December 2021, West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin announced he would vote “no” on President Biden’s signature legislative proposal, the Build Back Better Act, the reaction boiled down to: “Well, what did you expect?” After all, Manchin, despite being a Democrat, is from deep-red West Virginia, and politicians from deep-red states simply cannot vote in favor of major progressive policies championed by the leader of the Democratic Party. That’s just politics, dummy. That Biden and his fellow Democrats even tried was treated in some circles as painfully naïve: Unless Democrats learn that basic lesson and bring centrists into the fold, they’ll never achieve a vibrant, sustainable majority. Or so sayeth the conventional wisdom.

So when Manchin announced last week that he is considering leaving the Democratic Party to become an independent, his rationale was hardly difficult to predict. “The brand has become so bad,” he said, drawing on the oft-repeated talking point that the Democrats have lept too far left. In other words—and in contravention of all logic, given the results of the 2022 midterms—Manchin simply cannot in good conscience remain with a party that, in substance and style, provides no room for leaders seeking to appeal to a moderate, bipartisan electorate.

Don’t be fooled. Manchin’s charade is hardly one of principle. It’s one of total desperation.

There are no secrets about Manchin’s political situation at home. After being reelected in 2018 by just 3%, in a year in which Democrats vastly outperformed expectations nationally, Manchin has an enormous hill to climb with his reelection looming in 2024. But the West Virginia Senator doesn’t seem to have much interest in taking responsibility for the electoral crisis in which he has enmeshed himself. Instead, he’d like us to believe the political forces around him have simply left him no choice: Both sides have drawn too far to the extremes, leaving no political home for the critical mass of centrist West Virginians who sent him to Washington. Hence the need to chart a new path on his own.

The framing echoes a convenient perspective that is adored by the media and political establishment: Elections are not won with base voters, but through a small slice of persuadable, moderate swing voters, perpetually lurking just outside of frame. Democrats, in turn, need to have some Joe Manchins—those politicians who embody the voters who are key to electoral success—lying around to be taken seriously. The failure to keep these soi-disant moderate saviors on hand reveals a fundamental structural deficiency for the party writ large.

But if it’s true that Manchin is such a political genius—uniquely capable of surviving as a Democrat in a deep red state—you would expect that his victory is owed to a broad cross section of voters from a variety of political camps. Alas, that’s the complete opposite of what happened in 2018. According to CNN exit polls, Manchin garnered the votes of 64% of those who identify as moderates, and just 23% of conservatives. Those numbers are roughly in line with what New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand achieved that same year: 70% and 18%, respectively. The reality is Manchin barely made it over the finish line in roughly the same way Democrats all around the country win their seats: by running up the numbers with voters on the political left—Manchin won 80% of self-identified liberals in 2018.

Indeed, as The New Republic’s Alex Pareene observed in 2021, Manchin is actually far more reliant on Democratic voters than many of his blue state counterparts. While someone like Gillibrand can afford to lose large swaths of Democrats in a state where they are in ample supply, Manchin needs to pull virtually every registered Democrat in his state to win. Against all logic, Manchin approached Biden’s first term as if the rules that governed his electoral hopes were precisely opposite to reality. Instead of rewarding his most loyal voters—dyed-in-the-wool liberal Democrats—by delivering for them in Washington, Manchin has spent his latest term going out of his way to alienate his base and position himself in a political no man’s land: personally steamrolling key Democratic priorities while siding with his party on most routine issues and appointments.

In short, Manchin made a bet. He believed he could rely on the support of Democrats and spent nearly all his time trying to appeal to a tiny, if not nonexistent, group of voters who are up for grabs and have no real allegiance to either of the two dominant political parties. It hasn’t worked out the way Manchin anticipated, and this is where he now finds himself—orchestrating a last-ditch, hopeless effort to create a new political reality from thin air.

It is possible Manchin never had a shot at reelection, had fortune and circumstance not permitted him to avail himself of 2018’s political trends, we’d already have a Republican holding that West Virginia Senate seat. But the broader lesson is crucial for those in the media and elected leadership who constantly insist that disregarding the Democratic base in service of pursuing the allegedly vast rewards that come from focusing solely on the views of the so-called centrist, swing voters is the only viable path to victory in American politics. Those who subscribe to this view should explain why the two most notable Democrats who aggressively pursued this approach—Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin—are currently fighting for their political lives, while other red-state Democratic senators such as Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Jon Tester of Montana have consistently survived—and remain loyal to the party’s big priorities even when their electoral hopes face massive headwinds.

Mostly, we have to understand something simple about Manchin: We are not watching a political genius at work. He’s not on the verge of revealing a masterful plan to pull off another miracle in West Virginia. This is a desperate politician squirming for his political life after making a series of catastrophic political decisions. Manchin has hardly proven that the Democratic Party is mortally wounded due to its failure to leave room for the center left. All he’s done is reinforce a very basic rule in politics: Doing the opposite of what your voters want is an idiotic election strategy.

#us politics #news #the new republic #2023 #west virginia #sen. joe manchin #biden administration #president joe biden #Democratic Party #Democrats #centrists #independents #2024 elections #sen. Kirsten Gillibrand #Alex Pareene #Sen. sherrod Brown #sen. Jon Tester #Jess Coleman #op eds

19 notes · View notes

justinspoliticalcorner · 24 days

Text

Helena Hind at MMFA:

Once again, a national broadcast outlet has failed to adequately identify a conservative man-on-the-street source in its television coverage. This time, CBS News omitted any mention of an Arizona activist’s well-documented working relationship with Arizona Senate candidate and election denier Kari Lake.

During a report on Arizona Republicans blocking another effort to repeal Arizona’s near-total abortion ban, CBS News featured a soundbite from Merissa Hamilton, identifying her only as an abortion rights opponent. “We need to save freedom in our state,” said Hamilton. “We need to save our constitution. Our rights are under threat every single day.” Beyond being an “abortion rights opponent,” Hamilton has an illustrious career as both a right-wing operative and a political candidate. Last May, prior to Lake’s October announcement about her Senate run, the Trump ally named Hamilton to lead a ballot-chasing operation, because, in Lake’s words, “we cannot allow them to steal another election from we the people.” [...]

The New York Times similarly quoted Hamilton without making the connection to Lake, but the paper at least noted her position as president of an activist group in Arizona, EZAZ.

In 2020, Hamilton ran for mayor of Phoenix and ultimately lost to the incumbent candidate by a large margin. During the campaign, an investigative report from The Arizona Republic revealed Hamilton’s membership in a private Facebook group filled with far-right conspiracy theories and hateful rhetoric against Muslims and LGBTQ people, which drew condemnation from the Human Rights Campaign. [...] In addition to Lake's well-documented election denial — which includes denying the results of her ill-fated Arizona gubernatorial bid in 2022 — the candidate has a history of flip-flopping. Most recently, she was called out for backtracking in her previous endorsement of Arizona’s 19th-century abortion ban.

CBS interviewed Merissa Hamilton, an anti-abortion activist with ties to the Karl Lake campaign and didn't disclose it to the viewers of CBS Evening News.

#CBS #CBS News #CBS Evening News #Kari Lake #Merissa Hamilton #Arizona #Media Ethics #Abortion #Abortion Bans

6 notes · View notes

dreaminginthedeepsouth · 2 months

Text

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

March 27, 2024

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

MAR 28, 2024

The news that NBC News reconsidered its invitation to former Republican National Committee chair Ronna McDaniel to become a paid contributor has buried the recent news about some of the other participants in Trump’s attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

Yesterday a judge in Minnesota ruled in favor of a warehouse owner who sought to evict MyPillow after it failed to pay more than $200,000 in rent. MyPillow chief executive officer Mike Lindell has complained that his company has been “decimated” by his support for Trump. His insistence—without evidence—that the 2020 presidential election was stolen has entangled him in expensive defamation lawsuits filed by voting machine companies Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic.

Lindell cannot pay his lawyers and claims to have “lost hundreds of millions of dollars,” but insists he is being persecuted “because you want me to shut up about [the] security of our elections.”

Also yesterday, Trump loyalist Kari Lake, who has pushed the idea that the 2020 presidential election was stolen, ran for Arizona governor in 2022, and is now running for the U.S. Senate, admitted she defamed Maricopa County recorder Stephen Richer and that she acted with actual malice when she claimed he “sabotaged” the 2022 election. The request to admit to defamation came on the day that discovery, the process of sharing information about a case with each side, was to begin, suggesting that she preferred to admit wrongdoing rather than let anyone see what might be in her emails, texts, and recordings.

Arizona journalist Howard Fischer reported in the Arizona Daily Star that in a video statement, Lake said her admission did not mean she agreed she did anything wrong, although that is expressly stipulated in the court papers. She said she conceded because Richer’s lawsuit was keeping her off the campaign trail. “It’s called lawfare: weaponizing the legal system to punish, impoverish and destroy political opponents,’’ Lake said. “We’ve all seen how they’re doing it to President Trump. And here in Arizona, they’re doing the exact same thing to me.’’

One of Lake’s senior advisors said: “Kari Lake maintains she has always been truthful.”

Also yesterday, a three-member panel of the D.C. Bar’s Board of Professional Responsibility began a disciplinary hearing for former Department of Justice environmental lawyer Jeffrey Clark, who was so key to Trump’s plan to get state legislatures to overturn the results of the 2020 election that Trump tried to make him attorney general.

Clark joins Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, who led the media blitz to argue—falsely—that the election had been stolen. Giuliani’s New York and Washington, D.C., law licenses were suspended in June 2021 after a court found that he made “demonstrably false and misleading statements to courts, lawmakers, and the public at large.” He is now facing disbarment.

Earlier this month, he said on his podcast that he expected to be disbarred because “[t]he Bar Association is going to crucify me no matter what. I will be disbarred in New York. I will be disbarred in Washington. It will have nothing to do with anything I did wrong.”

Today, after a long trial, attorney discipline judge Yvette Roland recommended that John Eastman, the lawyer who came up with the justification for using fake electors to overturn the 2020 presidential election, be disbarred. Eastman will immediately lose his license to practice law. The California Supreme Court will decide whether to disbar Eastman.

Eastman’s lawyer said it was unfair to take Eastman’s law license because he needs to make money to fight the criminal charges against him in Georgia, where he has been indicted for his part in the effort to overthrow the results of the 2020 presidential election there. For his part, Eastman maintains he did nothing wrong.

In her recommendation, Judge Roland compared Eastman’s case to that of Donald Segretti, the lawyer whose efforts to guarantee President Richard Nixon’s 1972 reelection included, as Roland’s recommendation noted, distributing letters that made false accusations against Nixon’s rivals (including a forged letter attributing a slur against French-Canadians to Maine senator and candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination Edmund Muskie). At the time, the court noted that Segretti was only 30, thought he was acting for Nixon, and did not act in his capacity as a lawyer. The court also emphasized that Segretti “recognized the wrongfulness of his acts, expressed regret, and cooperated with the investigating agencies.”

In contrast, Roland wrote, “[t]he scale and egregiousness of Eastman’s unethical actions far surpasses” Segretti’s misconduct. Segretti acted outside his role as an attorney, while “Eastman’s wrongdoing was committed directly in the course and scope of his representation of President Trump and the Trump campaign.” Roland also noted that while Segretti expressed remorse and recognized his wrongdoing, Eastman has shown “an apparent inability to accept responsibility. This lack of remorse and accountability presents a significant risk that Eastman may engage in further unethical conduct, compounding the threat to the public.”

One by one, those who worked with Trump to overturn the election are being held to account by our legal system. But still, they refuse to admit any wrongdoing.

In that, they are following Trump.

Despite Judge Juan Merchan’s gag order, Trump continued today to attack both Merchan and his daughter. On his social media site, Trump posted that Merchan was trying to deprive him of his “First Amendment right to speak out against the Weaponization of Law Enforcement, including the fact that Crooked Joe Biden, Merrick Garland, and their Hacks and Thugs are tracking and following me all across the Country, obsessively trying to persecute me, while everyone knows I have done nothing wrong!” Trump posted in great detail about the judge’s daughter, accusing her of making money by “working to ‘Get Trump,’” based on images shared by an old social media account of hers that had been hacked.

It was President Nixon who perfected the refusal to admit wrongdoing in the face of overwhelming evidence. Even after tapes recorded in the Oval Office revealed that he had plotted with an aide to block investigations of the break-in at the Washington, D.C., headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in the Watergate Hotel by invoking national security and Republican Party leaders told him he needed to resign, he refused to admit wrongdoing. Instead, he told the American people he was stepping down because he no longer had enough support in Congress to advance the national interest. He blamed his fall on the press, saying its “leaks and accusations and innuendo” were designed to destroy him.

Gerald R. Ford, the president who replaced Nixon, inadvertently put a rubber stamp on Nixon’s refusal to accept responsibility. Believing it was better for the country to move past the divisions of the Watergate era, Ford issued a preemptive pardon for any crimes the former president might have committed against the United States while in office. Ford maintained that the acceptance of a pardon was an admission of guilt.

But Ford’s pardon meant Nixon never faced legal accountability for his actions. That escape allowed him to argue that a president is above the law. In a 1977 interview with British journalist David Frost, Nixon told Frost that “when the president does it…that means that it is not illegal,” by definition.

As Nixon did, Trump has watched those who participated in his schemes pay dearly for their support, but he appears angry and confused at the idea that he himself could be held legally accountable for his behavior.

But without accountability, as Judge Roland noted, there is no incentive to stop dangerous behavior. Josh Dawsey reported last night in the Washington Post that since Trump has taken over the Republican National Committee and purged it of former employees, those interviewing for jobs are being asked if they believe the 2020 presidential election was stolen. Other questions, Dawsey reported, include “what applicants believe should be done on ‘election integrity’ in 2024.”

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

#Letters From An American #Heather Cox Richardson #Jan 6 2021 #MAGA #lawyers #accountability #election fraud #election tampering #unethical conduct

5 notes · View notes

beardedmrbean · 5 months

Text

Sen. John Fetterman could land himself in trouble with voters after he doubled down on his claims that he is not a progressive Democrat, despite comments he made during his election campaign.

"I'm not a progressive, I'm just a regular Democrat," Fetterman said on X, formerly Twitter.

The statement was contradicted by the website's community notes feature, referencing tweets from Fetterman in 2016 and 2020 in which he clearly said he was a progressive.

Despite the contradiction, Fetterman has noticeably shifted away from the position upon which he narrowly defeated Donald Trump-endorsed Dr. Mehmet Oz in the 2022 midterms.

Politicians such as Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent closely aligned with the left of the Democratic Party, have called for a ceasefire in Gaza, whereas Fetterman has said he supports the Israeli response to the attack by the Palestinian militant group Hamas on October 7 "unequivocally," despite criticism that it has been too strong.

"I just think I'm a Democrat that is very committed to choice and other things. But with Israel, I'm going to be on the right side of that," Fetterman said.

The Pennsylvania senator's stance on Israel is a particular source of ire for many who consider themselves part of the progressive movement, largely younger voters.

A November 2021 poll by Pew Research recorded that 71 percent of the progressive left movement is made up of people aged 18 to 49.

It is young voters that favored Fetterman in his 2022 Senate race against Oz. According to an exit poll taken by Statista, 72 percent of voters aged 18-24 who answered said they voted for the Democrat. The figure was similar for voters aged 25 to 29, at 68 percent.

His position on Israel-Gaza could spell trouble among this voter demographic. According to a New York Times/Siena poll published on Tuesday, 45 percent of people aged 18 to 29 think President Joe Biden is "too supportive" of Israel. In the same age group, 46 percent of people who responded said they were supportive of Palestine, compared to 27 percent favoring Israel.

The same poll said that just 20 percent of all voters aged 18 to 29 believe Biden is handling the conflict well. Asked about the result on CNN on Tuesday, Fetterman said: "If you're getting your perspective on the world on TikTok, it's going to tend to be kinda warped."

He added: "Sometimes you may alienate some voters, but it is really most important to be on the right side on that. That's where I am at."

A total of 16 of his former campaign staffers wrote him an open letter, asking him to change his stance.

"It is not too late to change your stance and stand on the righteous side of history," it said.

An op-ed in news outlet PennLive was published in November by Mireille Rebeiz, Ph.D., chair of Middle East Studies and associate professor at Dickinson College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, in which his position on the issue was labeled "disturbing" and saying he was "unworthy of my trust."

Fetterman has called for humanitarian aid to be sent to Gaza, but criticized pro-Palestinian protesters when they staged a demonstration outside a Jewish-owned store in Philadelphia in December, calling the gathering antisemitic.

Immigration is also a divisive issue in Congress, and Fetterman has made it clear he wants to work with Senate Republicans and says it is a "reasonable conversation" to have. The GOP has pushed for stricter measures along the southern border with Mexico.

"It's a reasonable conversation—until somebody can say there's an explanation on what we can do when 270,000 people are being encountered on the border, not including the ones, of course, that we don't know about," Fetterman said to NBC. "To put that in reference, that is essentially the size of Pittsburgh, the second-largest city in Pennsylvania."

His wife, Gisele Fetterman, arrived undocumented from Brazil as a 7-year-old and was an important part of his Senate campaign. Some accused him of throwing his wife under the bus because of his stance.

Newsweek has reached out to Fetterman via email through his Senate office for comment.

"Fetterman has never been progressive, but endorsing talks for tougher immigration laws when he's married to an incredible woman who was once an illegal immigrant and who kept his campaign alive while he was recovering from a stroke is actually sickening," said Alexandra Hunt, a former Democrat candidate for Pennsylvania's 3rd Congressional District.

The conversation around Fetterman has some such as left-leaning commentator Mehdi Hasan questioning if he is the "new Kyrsten Sinema," the Arizona senator who became an independent in 2022.

"Fetterman has been a pleasant surprise for his Republican colleagues and a thorn in the side of progressive Democrat," Hasan wrote in British news magazine The Spectator in December. He added: "One still has to wonder if he might follow in Sinema's footsteps and officially extricate himself from the two-party system."

Sinema cited a "deeply broken two-party system" as the reason she left the Democratic Party in 2022.

However, Heath Mayo, a conservative who founded the anti-Trump nonprofit Principles First, praised Fetterman.

"John Fetterman is testing a lot of new boundaries for the Democratic Party right now. Aggressively pro-Israel, pro-border security, anti-corruption in his own party[...]That's principled leadership and Dems should embrace it. He is speaking to a lot of us," Mayo said.

On X, Hasan said Fetterman's comments on him not being aligned with the progressive movement was "a total attack on the people who worked hard to elect him."

#nunyas news

23 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 2 months

Text

For years, China’s state-backed hackers have stolen huge troves of company secrets, political intelligence, and the personal information of millions of people. On Monday, officials in the United States and United Kingdom expanded the long list of hacking allegations, claiming China is responsible for breaching the UK’s elections watchdog and accessing 40 million people’s data. The countries also issued a raft of criminal charges and sanctions against a separate Chinese group following a multiyear hacking rampage.

In August last year, the UK’s Electoral Commission revealed “hostile actors” had infiltrated its systems in August 2021 and could potentially access sensitive data for 14 months until they were booted out in October 2022. The deputy prime minister, Oliver Dowden, told lawmakers on Monday that a China state-backed actor was responsible for the attack. In addition, Dowden said, the UK’s intelligence services have determined that Chinese hacking group APT31 targeted the email accounts of politicians in 2021.

“This is the latest in a clear pattern of malicious cyber activity by Chinese state-affiliated organizations and individuals targeting democratic institutions and parliamentarians in the UK and beyond,” Dowden said in the UK’s House of Commons. The revelations were accompanied by the UK sanctioning two individuals and one company linked to APT31.

Alongside the UK’s announcement on Monday, the US Department of Justice and Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control unveiled further action against APT31, also known as Violet Typhoon, Bronze Vinewood, and Judgement Panda, including charging seven Chinese nationals with the conspiracy to commit computer intrusions and wire fraud.

The DOJ claims the hacking group, which has been linked back to China’s Ministry of State Security (MSS) spy agency, has spent 14 years targeting thousands of critics, businesses, and political entities around the world in widespread espionage campaigns. This includes posing as journalists to send more than 10,000 malicious emails that tracked recipients, compromising email accounts, cloud storage accounts, telephone call records, home routers, and more. The spouses of one high-ranking White House official and those of multiple US senators were also targeted, the DOJ says.

“These allegations pull back the curtain on China’s vast illegal hacking operation that targeted sensitive data from US elected and government officials, journalists and academics; valuable information from American companies; and political dissidents in America and abroad,” Breon Peace, a US attorney for the Eastern District of New York, said in a statement. “Their sinister scheme victimized thousands of people and entities across the world, and lasted for well over a decade.”

The moves come as countries increasingly warn of an increase in China-linked espionage, during a year when more than 100 countries will host major elections. Statements from officials focus on the impact of the hacking activity on democratic processes, including the targeting of elected officials around the world and the compromising of pro-democracy activists and lawmakers in Hong Kong. However, the disclosures also coincide with continued jostling from Western politicians over pro- or anti-China stances, including the proposed sale of TikTok to a US company, which could result in a ban on the popular app if the sale fails to go through.

As officials in the UK disclosed the details of the hacking activity, Lin Jian, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson, claimed it was “disinformation” and told reporters the country “opposes illegal and unilateral” sanctions. “When investigating and determining the nature of cyber cases, one needs to have adequate and objective evidence, instead of smearing other countries when facts do not exist, still less politicize cybersecurity issues,” Jian said in a daily press conference on Monday.

“China is embarking on a huge global campaign of interference and espionage, and the UK and the like-minded nations are pretty sick of it,” says Tim Stevens, a global security lecturer and head of the cybersecurity research group at King’s College London. Stevens says the public shaming and sanctions are unlikely to significantly change China’s actions but may signal a warning to other countries about what is and isn’t deemed acceptable when it comes to international affairs.

China has a broad range of hacking groups linked to its intelligence services and military, as well as companies that it contracts to launch some cyber operations. Many of these groups have been active for more than a decade. Dakota Cary, a China-focused consultant at security firm SentinelOne, says that groups associated with China’s civilian intelligence service are largely conducting diplomatic or government intelligence collection and espionage, while China’s military hackers are behind attacks on power grids and US critical infrastructure such as water supplies. “We do see China engaging in all of those activities simultaneously,” Cary says.

In announcing criminal charges and sanctions against members of APT31, officials in the US laid out a series of hacking allegations that include the targeting of businesses, political entities, and dissidents around the world. These included a “leading provider” of 5G telecoms equipment in the US, Norwegian government officials, and people working in the aerospace and defense industries. APT31 was run by the MSS’s Hubei State Security Department in the city of Wuhan, US officials say.

The seven Chinese nationals hit with charges are Ni Gaobin, Weng Ming, Cheng Feng, Peng Yaowen, Sun Xiaohui, Xiong Wang, and Zhao Guangzong. Both Zhao Guangzong and Ni Gaobin were also sanctioned. The two are alleged to be affiliated with Wuhan XRZ, a company that has also been sanctioned by the US and UK and is believed to be a cover for MSS-linked hacking operations. Employees of the company hacked into a Texas-based energy company in 2018, the US Treasury Department said.

The group used sophisticated malware—including Rawdoor, Trochilus, and EvilOSX—to compromise systems, according to a 27-page indictment unsealed by the DOJ. They also used a “cracked/pirated” version of penetration testing tool Cobalt Strike Beacon to compromise victims, the indictment says. It adds that, between 2010 and November 2023, the group “gained access” to a defense contractor that designed flight simulators for the US Army, Air Force, and Navy; a multi-factor authentication company; an American trade association; a steel company; a machine learning laboratory based in Virginia; and multiple research hospitals.

In its announcement, the UK outlined two separate China-linked incidents: first, the targeting of the email inboxes of 43 members of parliament (MPs) by APT31 in 2021; and second, the hack of the Electoral Commission by further unnamed China-linked hackers. Elections in the UK are decentralized and organized locally, with the commission overseeing the entire process. This setup means the integrity of the electoral process was not impacted, the commission says; however, a huge amount of data may have been taken by the hackers.

When the Electoral Commission revealed it had been compromised last year, it said the details of around 40 million people may have been accessed. The commission said names and addresses of people in Great Britain who were registered to vote between 2014 and 2022 could have been compromised, and that file-sharing and email systems could have been made accessible. “It’s really remarkable that China would go after election oversight systems, particularly given the diplomacy that the PRC [People’s Republic of China] is trying to pull off with the EU,” Cary says. “It’s a very significant act for the PRC to go after these types of systems,” Cary says. “It’s something that democracies are really sensitive to.”

While nations have called out China’s hacking activities for years, the country has evolved its tactics and techniques to become harder to detect. “Over the past couple of years, tired of having their operations rumbled and publicly outed, the Chinese have placed a growing emphasis on stealthy tradecraft in cyber espionage attacks,” Don Smith, vice president of threat intelligence at security firm Secureworks’ counter-threat unit, said in a statement. “This is a change in MO from its previous ‘smash and grab’ reputation but it is viewed by the Chinese as a necessary evolution to one, make it harder to get caught and two, make it nearly impossible to attribute an attack to them.”

3 notes · View notes

tomorrowusa · 1 month

Text

Bad news and good news out of Ron DeSantis's Florida.

The Florida Supreme Court will allow a new 6-week abortion ban to take effect in May. BUT the court also approved a ballot initiative for November which would restore reproductive freedom in the state.

Floridians will be able to vote on abortion protections this fall, the state’s Supreme Court ruled Monday—a win celebrated by the state’s Democrats despite the court, in a separate case, also paving the way for a law to take effect that will ban all abortions after six weeks. That six-week abortion ban, passed by Florida’s Republican-majority legislature and signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis last year, will go into effect on May 1. That measure can be undone by voters come November, however. The court’s decision is expected to reverberate across Florida and the southeast. A privacy protection clause in the Florida constitution had allowed the Sunshine State to enjoy abortion access up to 15 weeks despite DeSantis being at the helm—access that women relied upon in nearby states like Alabama and Mississippi, where abortion is outright banned, and in Georgia and South Carolina, which have laws similar to Florida’s soon-to-be-active six-week ban.

DeSantis appointed most of the Florida Supreme Court justices. Another reason why we should pay more attention to state government – regardless of state.

Florida’s Supreme Court, which had five of its seven justices appointed by DeSantis, ruled in favor of the state on Monday, 6-1. Now, Florida women will often be barred from having an abortion before many realize they’re even pregnant.

The court approval of the upcoming referendum, actually a Florida constitution amendment called Amendment 4 on the 2024 ballot, was narrow.

That amendment, if it received at least 60 percent of votes in favor of it, would significantly protect abortion access in Florida. Its text reads, in part, that “no law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before fetal viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider.” Viability is estimated to be around six months of pregnancy. The Florida Supreme Court voted 4-3 in favor of approving the amendment to reach the ballot—a tight victory for abortion advocates like Planned Parenthood, which has championed the proposed amendment.

60% is a relatively high bar. But Kansas, arguably more conservative than Florida, had an abortion referendum in 2022 in which the reproductive freedom side got 59.16% of the vote; the Kansas election required just a simple majority but the final result exceeded that by almost 10%.

The necessary 60% for the Florida reproductive freedom amendment required in Florida won't be a cake walk but it is quite doable.

As many as 11 states could have reproductive freedom on the ballot as referendums this year.

Where abortion rights could be on the ballot this fall

^^^ Just to clarify: New York already offers strong reproductive legal protections. The upcoming referendum, if passed, would place freedom of choice into the NY constitution. It doesn't get more secure than that in state law.

#florida #6 week abortion ban #abortion #reproductive freedom #a woman's right to choose #ron desantis #florida supreme court #florida abortion referendum #amendment 4 #state government #roe v. wade #restore roe #keep republicans out of your bedroom and doctor's office #republicans hate freedom #election 2024 #vote blue no matter who

10 notes · View notes