thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-28--Federalist Society Board Chair Funded At-Risk GOP Senators Amid Barrett Hearings

At least two things : They ’ re all in tight reelection campaigns , and they all received a maxed-out donation from Federalist Society co-founder and board chairman Steven Calabresi during Amy Coney Barrett ’ s Supreme Court confirmation process .
Barrett is a longtime member of the Federalist Society , the conservative legal organization that has chosen and helped confirm all three of President Donald Trump ’ s Supreme Court nominees and nearly all of his 53 appeals court judges .
The group , part of a vast and secretive $ 250 million network of groups promoting conservative judges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ getting Barrett onto the high court .
A review of Federal Election Commission reports shows all six senators received $ 2,800 from Calabresi , the maximum amount an individual can contribute to a campaign in a general election , between Oct. 9 and Oct. 19 .
Barrett ’ s confirmation hearing took place between Oct. 12 and Oct. 15 , and she was voted out of committee on Oct. 22 .
In case any of these GOP senators were nervously looking at their tight races and considering joining another vulnerable GOP senator — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the confirmation process for a controversial Supreme Court nominee so close to the election , the timing of Calabresi ’ s donation certainly sent them the message that the Federalist Society had their backs and expected them to respond in kind by confirming Barrett .
Even if the dollar amount doesn ’ t seem hugely significant , it certainly is when a Federalist Society chairman maxes out a contribution to your campaign in the midst of a fight over a Federalist Society member up for a Supreme Court seat .
Sen. Steve Daines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for reelection in a race rated a toss-up by The Cook Political Report , was the only other senator who received an eleventh-hour , $ 2,800 donation from Calabresi .
That contribution came in on Oct. 23 , a day after Barrett was voted out of committee .
Calabresi did not respond to a request for comment on whether the timing of his donations was meant to pressure those GOP senators to follow through in confirming Barrett before the election .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
What do Republican Sens. Martha McSally (Ariz.), Cory Gardner (Colo.), David Perdue (Ga.), Kelly Loeffler (Ga.), Thom Tillis (N.C.) and Lindsey Graham (S.C.) have in common?
At least two things: They’re all in tight reelection campaigns, and they all received a maxed-out donation from Federalist Society co-founder and board chairman Steven Calabresi during Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court confirmation process.
Advertisement
Barrett is a longtime member of the Federalist Society, the conservative legal organization that has chosen and helped confirm all three of President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominees and nearly all of his 53 appeals court judges. The group, part of a vast and secretive $250 million network of groups promoting conservative judges and causes, was hugely invested in getting Barrett onto the high court.
A review of Federal Election Commission reports shows all six senators received $2,800 from Calabresi, the maximum amount an individual can contribute to a campaign in a general election, between Oct. 9 and Oct. 19. Barrett’s confirmation hearing took place between Oct. 12 and Oct. 15, and she was voted out of committee on Oct. 22.
In case any of these GOP senators were nervously looking at their tight races and considering joining another vulnerable GOP senator — Susan Collins of Maine — in opposing the confirmation process for a controversial Supreme Court nominee so close to the election, the timing of Calabresi’s donation certainly sent them the message that the Federalist Society had their backs and expected them to respond in kind by confirming Barrett.
Even if the dollar amount doesn’t seem hugely significant, it certainly is when a Federalist Society chairman maxes out a contribution to your campaign in the midst of a fight over a Federalist Society member up for a Supreme Court seat.
Advertisement
Here’s a link to each of the senators’ FEC reports showing Calabresi’s last-minute contributions to their campaigns.
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.), also up for reelection in a race rated a toss-up by The Cook Political Report, was the only other senator who received an eleventh-hour, $2,800 donation from Calabresi. That contribution came in on Oct. 23, a day after Barrett was voted out of committee.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-28--Trump Campaign Takes Biden's Pope Francis Quote Out Of Context In Deceptive Video

The Trump campaign took a speech in which Joe Biden quoted Pope Francis on Tuesday and deceptively edited the footage to make it seem as if the Democratic nominee was mentally unfit to be president .
“ I believe this election is about who we are as a nation , what we believe , and maybe most importantly , who we want to be .
It ’ s about our essence , ” Biden said .
“ It ’ s about what makes us Americans .
It ’ s that fundamental.
” “ Time and again , throughout our history @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the con men , the phony populist , who sought the play on our fears , appeal to our worst appetites , and pick at the oldest scabs we have for their own political gain , ” he added .
In what may have been a veiled jab at the president , Biden went on to argue that these “ charlatans ” increased division in the United States to benefit themselves , and then quoted Pope Francis .
“ In a recent encyclical , Pope Francis warns us against this phony populism , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most selfish instincts.
’ He goes on to say , ‘ Politics is something more noble than posturing , marketing , and media spin .
These sow nothing but division , conflict , and a bleak cynicism.
’ He said , ‘ For those who seek to lead , we do well to ask ourselves , why am I doing this ?
Why ?
What is my real aim ?
’ Pope Francis asked questions that anyone who seeks to lead this great nation should be able to answer .
And my answer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this nation and to heal this nation .
I ’ ve said that from the beginning .
It is badly necessary.
” Shortly after Biden ’ s rally , the Trump War Room Twitter account , which Trump ’ s campaign manages , zeroed in on the portion of the speech where Biden quoted the pope ’ s questions — “ Why am I doing this ?
Why ?
What is my real aim ?
” — eliminating all other context .
The edited footage is nothing new for the Trump campaign , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ misleading tweets to paint Biden as incompetent .
Mike Gwin , the deputy rapid response director for Joe Biden ’ s team , blasted the tweet and questioned why the Trump campaign was attacking Biden ’ s faith .
The Democratic nominee is open about his beliefs as a Catholic and previously stated that his faith helped him endure the losses of his first wife and daughter in a car crash in 1972 , and then the death of his son Beau from brain cancer in 2015 .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Trump campaign took a speech in which Joe Biden quoted Pope Francis on Tuesday and deceptively edited the footage to make it seem as if the Democratic nominee was mentally unfit to be president.
Biden had given the speech at a rally in Warm Springs, Georgia.
“I believe this election is about who we are as a nation, what we believe, and maybe most importantly, who we want to be. It’s about our essence,” Biden said. “It’s about what makes us Americans. It’s that fundamental.”
Advertisement
“Time and again, throughout our history, we’ve seen charlatans, the con men, the phony populist, who sought the play on our fears, appeal to our worst appetites, and pick at the oldest scabs we have for their own political gain,” he added.
In what may have been a veiled jab at the president, Biden went on to argue that these “charlatans” increased division in the United States to benefit themselves, and then quoted Pope Francis.
“In a recent encyclical, Pope Francis warns us against this phony populism, that appeals to ‘the basest and most selfish instincts.’ He goes on to say, ‘Politics is something more noble than posturing, marketing, and media spin. These sow nothing but division, conflict, and a bleak cynicism.’ He said, ‘For those who seek to lead, we do well to ask ourselves, why am I doing this? Why? What is my real aim?’ Pope Francis asked questions that anyone who seeks to lead this great nation should be able to answer. And my answer is this: I run to unite this nation and to heal this nation. I’ve said that from the beginning. It is badly necessary.”
Advertisement
Shortly after Biden’s rally, the Trump War Room Twitter account, which Trump’s campaign manages, zeroed in on the portion of the speech where Biden quoted the pope’s questions — “Why am I doing this? Why? What is my real aim?” — eliminating all other context.
As of Wednesday, the misleading tweet had received over five thousand likes and more than a thousand retweets.
Joe Biden: “Why am I doing this? Why? What is my real aim?” pic.twitter.com/pNPfzirGjO — Trump War Room - Text TRUMP to 88022 (@TrumpWarRoom) October 27, 2020
The edited footage is nothing new for the Trump campaign, which has frequently used edited images and misleading tweets to paint Biden as incompetent.
Mike Gwin, the deputy rapid response director for Joe Biden’s team, blasted the tweet and questioned why the Trump campaign was attacking Biden’s faith. The Democratic nominee is open about his beliefs as a Catholic and previously stated that his faith helped him endure the losses of his first wife and daughter in a car crash in 1972, and then the death of his son Beau from brain cancer in 2015.
Advertisement
If elected, Biden would only be the second Catholic president since John F. Kennedy.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-28--Kushner Bragged That Trump Wrested Control Of COVID-19 Response From Doctors: Report

“ There were three phases .
There ’ s the panic phase , the pain phase and then the comeback phase .
I do believe that last night symbolized kind of the beginning of the comeback phase , ” Kushner said in one clip .
He appeared to be referencing Trump ’ s remarks on reopening guidelines that the White House coronavirus task force created for the nation ’ s governors while the country was averaging 30,000 new cases per day .
Kushner continued to minimize the deepening crisis : “ That doesn ’ t mean there ’ s not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ won ’ t be pain for a while , but that basically was , we ’ ve now put out rules to get back to work .
Trump ’ s now back in charge .
It ’ s not the doctors .
They ’ ve kind of ― we have , like , a negotiated settlement.
” Trump has faced searing criticism for sidelining medical professionals throughout the pandemic , and experts fear COVID-19 cases will worsen further during the winter .
According to Kushner , a turning point for the president came @ @ @ @ @ @ @

“There were three phases. There’s the panic phase, the pain phase and then the comeback phase. I do believe that last night symbolized kind of the beginning of the comeback phase,” Kushner said in one clip. He appeared to be referencing Trump’s remarks on reopening guidelines that the White House coronavirus task force created for the nation’s governors while the country was averaging 30,000 new cases per day.
Kushner continued to minimize the deepening crisis: “That doesn’t mean there’s not still a lot of pain and there won’t be pain for a while, but that basically was, we’ve now put out rules to get back to work. Trump’s now back in charge. It’s not the doctors. They’ve kind of ― we have, like, a negotiated settlement.”
Trump has faced searing criticism for sidelining medical professionals throughout the pandemic, and experts fear COVID-19 cases will worsen further during the winter.
According to Kushner, a turning point for the president came when he announced the reopening guidelines.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-28--8 Down-Ballot Races To Watch If Democrats Win Really Big

AP Photo/Charlie Riedel People wait to cast their ballot on the first day of early voting at an advance polling location Saturday , Oct. 17 , in Overland Park , Kansas .
When Sen. Pat Roberts announced his retirement , Republicans weren ’ t concerned about holding his seat .
Democrats , who haven ’ t won a Kansas Senate seat since the 1930s , figured they might have a shot if Kris Kobach ― known for his hardline anti-immigration views ― ran again , since the party managed to defeat him for the governor ’ s seat in 2018 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Senate seat , but he lost the primary to Rep. Roger Marshall , a party-line Republican with a relatively low profile .
But Democratic nominee state Sen. Barbara Bollier , a former doctor who was a Republican legislator in the state as recently as 2018 , is proving to be a competitive challenger .
Bollier changed parties two years ago , citing “ moral ” objections to the GOP , and because she wanted to help expand Medicaid and fund education .
She denounced the anti-transgender language added to the Kansas GOP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ critic of the Republican Party leadership ― particularly former Gov .
Sam Brownback ’ s aggressive tax-cutting agenda .
Cawthorn , a parapalegic who became paralyzed from the waist down in a car accident in 2014 , has been a controversial candidate .
He was accused of sexual misconduct , which he responded to by saying the encounter was in good humor and calling the accusation politically motivated .
In old now-deleted posts on Instagram , Cawthorn referred to Adolf Hitler with the honorific “ Fuhrer ” and called his visit to Hitler @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on his “ bucket list.
” More recently , his campaign created an attack website that went after a local reporter for working for “ non-white males , like Cory Booker , who aims to ruin white males running for office.
” Cawthorn said the line was a “ syntax error , ” meant to deride identity politics .
Democrat Brynne Kennedy , who launched a software business and has become an author , is running on the national debt , health care and the climate crisis .
The district has long been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a voter registration advantage over Democrats .
But in some counties , that ’ s shifting , and there are a fair number of independent voters as well .
It ’ s a race Democrats see as a possibility — especially in a big election year .
Alyse Galvin , who is also an independent , and an education activist , is running against Young a second time .
In 2018 , she fell just shy of 7 percentage points behind Young , and this time , she ’ s raising more money @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Washington for his bad behavior and abrasive style ( he literally pulled a knife on John Boehner once ) , has spent his 48 years in Congress bringing federal funding back for Alaska .
But Galvin says Young ’ s time has passed .
The 2019 race was an unusual one — the product of an absentee voting fraud scandal in 2018 , when a GOP operative tampered with ballots , resulting in a special election .
Since getting over that hurdle , Republicans in the state have been resting a little bit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has gone a little under the radar , it ’ s still competitive .
And in a year where there ’ s a competitive Senate and presidential race on the ballot , districts like the 9th could swing in a major wave .

People wait to cast their ballot on the first day of early voting at an advance polling location Saturday, Oct. 17, in Overland Park, Kansas. AP Photo/Charlie Riedel
Republicans are already anticipating some losses in next week’s elections, but there’s a lingering nightmare scenario they also have to brace for: What happens if Democrats win big — like, really big?
Democrats’ top priority is kicking President Donald Trump out of office, but to actually enact their agenda they have to win back the Senate, expand their majority in the House and put more Democratic governors in office.
Advertisement
Democrats are reluctant to be too excited publicly about polls showing Joe Biden leading Trump, remembering the heartbreak of 2016 and knowing that the pandemic significantly complicates forecasting this election. But they have their eyes on seats their party hasn’t won in more than 50 years, and in states that Trump won by more than 20 percentage points.
These races are urban, suburban and rural — they stretch from Alaska, to the California foothills, to suburban Texas. To win would mean bringing high turnout among African American and Latinx voters, getting record numbers of young people to actually go to the ballot box and persuading conservative-leaning voters to switch parties.
The results of the election would have to look more like 2008, when Democrats were able to bring record enthusiasm in liberal strongholds, as well as hold on to traditionally more conservative centers in Ohio and Indiana, than 2018, where Democrats ceded key Senate races to Republicans despite gaining significant ground in House races.
It’s a tall order. Generic ballot polls show Democrats currently have a roughly seven-point advantage over Republicans this election cycle. HuffPost has identified eight races to watch if 2020 turns out to not only be a successful year for Democrats, but a blowout. This is by no means an exhaustive list.
Advertisement
Kansas Senate: Barbara Bollier (D) vs. Roger Marshall (R)
Bollier, a state senator, wants to be the first Democrat to win a Kansas Senate seat since the 1930s.
Dr. Barbara Bollier, Democratic Senatorial candidate, campaigns for retiring Republican Senator Pat Roberts' seat, in Emporia, Kansas, on Oct. 16. Mark Reinstein/MediaPunch/MediaPunch/IPx
When Sen. Pat Roberts announced his retirement, Republicans weren’t concerned about holding his seat. Democrats, who haven’t won a Kansas Senate seat since the 1930s, figured they might have a shot if Kris Kobach ― known for his hardline anti-immigration views ― ran again, since the party managed to defeat him for the governor’s seat in 2018. Kobach did end up running for the Senate seat, but he lost the primary to Rep. Roger Marshall, a party-line Republican with a relatively low profile.
But Democratic nominee state Sen. Barbara Bollier, a former doctor who was a Republican legislator in the state as recently as 2018, is proving to be a competitive challenger. Bollier changed parties two years ago, citing “moral” objections to the GOP, and because she wanted to help expand Medicaid and fund education. She denounced the anti-transgender language added to the Kansas GOP’s platform and was a vocal critic of the Republican Party leadership ― particularly former Gov. Sam Brownback’s aggressive tax-cutting agenda.
She’s running on a public option for health care, funding public schools, protecting women’s health privacy and the pro-LGBTQ Equality Act. Her platform is carefully worded to avoid explicit mentions of abortion or gun access. Marshall, a staunchly pro-life OB-GYN, meanwhile, has been trying to appeal to Trump’s base, advocating to repeal and replace Obamacare and building a Southern border wall.
Advertisement
Bollier has raised five times more money than Marshall in October, and the polls show the two candidates either tied or with Marshall only a few points ahead. Kansas went for Trump by 21 points in 2016, but now Biden is less than 10 percentage points behind him in the polls.
Texas’ 2nd Congressional District: Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R) vs. Sima Ladjevardian (D)
The race gives Democrats a chance to take down a GOP rising star.
Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, is being challenged by former Beto O'Rourke adviser Sima Ladjevardian. Chip Somodevilla/Pool via AP
Democrats have long thought Texas would one day be in reach. If 2020 is the year Texas goes blue, or at least blue-ish, the wave will likely run through suburban districts like GOP Rep. Dan Crenshaw’s.
Democrat Sima Ladjevardian, a lawyer and former Beto O’Rourke adviser, says Texas’ second district, surrounding Houston, has completely changed since Crenshaw, the former United States Navy SEAL, was first elected to Congress two years ago. In 2016, Trump won 52% of the vote in this district. Then O’Rourke lost the area by just a percentage point in his 2018 Senate race.
Taking down Crenshaw will be a challenge; the freshman Republican’s profile has risen in his party, he’s a talented fundraiser and already has presidential buzz around him. But Ladjevardian, who immigrated to the United States as a kid from Iran, says the COVID-19 pandemic has changed people’s priorities. And the district’s increasingly young and diverse populations could make a difference.
Advertisement
North Carolina’s 11th Congressional District: Madison Cawthorn (R) vs. Moe Davis (D)
Mark Meadows’ old seat isn’t as conservative anymore.
Republican Madison Cawthorn wasn’t the GOP’s pick to replace White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows in Congress. The 24-year-old beat out the Republican Party’s — and Trump’s — pick for the seat in a surprising upset and has since he’s been named a rising star in the party. He is facing Democrat Moe Davis, a former military prosecutor, who is running on a public option and expanding broadband internet — dire issues in western North Carolina.
Cawthorn, a parapalegic who became paralyzed from the waist down in a car accident in 2014, has been a controversial candidate. He was accused of sexual misconduct, which he responded to by saying the encounter was in good humor and calling the accusation politically motivated. In old now-deleted posts on Instagram, Cawthorn referred to Adolf Hitler with the honorific “Fuhrer” and called his visit to Hitler’s vacation home as a trip on his “bucket list.” More recently, his campaign created an attack website that went after a local reporter for working for “non-white males, like Cory Booker, who aims to ruin white males running for office.” Cawthorn said the line was a “syntax error,” meant to deride identity politics.
Tucked in the Appalachian mountains in the westernmost part of North Carolina, the 11th district has been dependable conservative stronghold; after all, Meadows, who shot up through the Tea Party movement and came to chair the ultra-conservative Trump-aligned Freedom Caucus, represented it.
But last year, North Carolina underwent a court-ordered redistricting that pushed Buncombe County, home to the liberal city of Asheville, within the 11th district’s boundaries — an attempt to course-correct for Republican gerrymandering.
Cawthorn is still favored, but Davis has released internal polling showing him beating the young Republican. If that’s true, it will likely signal a statewide swing in North Carolina, where Biden is proving to be competitive and there’s a high-profile Senate race.
Advertisement
California’s 4th Congressional District: Rep. Tom McClintock (R) vs. Brynne Kennedy (D)
Will the wildfires be a climate science denier’s undoing?
Rep. Tom McClintock, the most conservative member in California’s congressional delegation who is serving his 12th year in Congress, has long been on Democrats’ radar for unseating. His district spans most of northern California’s Sierra Nevada mountain range, including Lake Tahoe and down to Yosemite National Park.
McClintock is probably best known for being one of environmental groups’ biggest targets. As wildfires ravage the district year after year, McClintock still questions whether humans are an accelerating force in climate change. Instead, he uses the Trump line on the forest fires, pushing for more aggressive forest management.
Democrat Brynne Kennedy, who launched a software business and has become an author, is running on the national debt, health care and the climate crisis. The district has long been a conservative stronghold; Republicans still have a voter registration advantage over Democrats. But in some counties, that’s shifting, and there are a fair number of independent voters as well. It’s a race Democrats see as a possibility — especially in a big election year.
Kentucky’s Sixth Congressional District: Rep. Andy Barr (R) vs. Josh Hicks (D)
Another Democrat takes up Amy McGrath’s mission.
Democrat Josh Hicks is hoping to make Kentucky's 6th District a political battleground again running against Republican Rep. Andy Barr. AP Photo/Bruce Schreiner
Josh Hicks is taking over Amy McGrath’s mission to kick Republican Rep. Andy Barr out of Congress. In 2018, McGrath proved that the district, which encompasses Lexington and the surrounding suburbs, wasn’t as solidly conservative as Republicans thought, with the former Marine fighter pilot coming within three points of the four-term congressman.
Advertisement
McGrath is now running a high-profile — albeit extremely long shot — bid against Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R), and Hicks ― a Marine veteran, former police officer and lawyer ― may benefit from an extremely energized Democratic base in Kentucky.
High voter turnout in Lexington played a big role in Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear’s victory in the 2019 race against the extremely unpopular Matt Bevin, and McGrath seems to be polling well in the district. Of course, a presidential election cycle is going to come with a different turnout altogether, but Hicks’ race is worth watching.
Alaska’s At-Large Congressional Seat: Rep. Don Young (R) vs. Alyse Galvin (D)
The race will test Alaska’s independent streak.
U.S. Rep. Don Young, left, and Alyse Galvin square off in a debate for the sole Alaska house seat Thursday, Oct. 22, in Anchorage, Alaska. (Jeff Chen/Pool Photo via AP) ASSOCIATED PRESS
Alaska has an entirely Republican delegation in Congress. But the state has a strong independent streak that Democrats are hoping will come out in their favor if there is a major wave election.
There’s been a lot of attention on the state’s Senate race, which is between Sen. Dan Sullivan (R) and Al Gross, an independent candidate aligned with Democrats. If energy around that race holds, it might trickle down to the state’s only House member, Rep. Don Young, the 87-year-old Republican who is seeking his 25th term representing Alaska’s at-large district.
Advertisement
Alyse Galvin, who is also an independent, and an education activist, is running against Young a second time. In 2018, she fell just shy of 7 percentage points behind Young, and this time, she’s raising more money than him. Young, known in Washington for his bad behavior and abrasive style (he literally pulled a knife on John Boehner once), has spent his 48 years in Congress bringing federal funding back for Alaska. But Galvin says Young’s time has passed.
North Carolina’s 9th Congressional District: Rep. Dan Bishop (R) vs. Cynthia Wallace (D)
Republicans made it through a voter fraud scandal. Now they’re up against a blue wave.
Eric Trump, left, the son of President Donald Trump, stands with Rep. Dan Bishop, R-N.C., at a campaign rally for Trump in Monroe, North Carolina, Oct. 8. AP Photo/Nell Redmond
North Carolina is a swing state — and much of that swing will be decided in suburban-rural areas like the 9th congressional district.
Last year, Republican Rep. Dan Bishop spent $6 million to win a narrow 51 percent to 49 percent win over Democrat Dan McCready in a district that Trump won by 12 percentage points. Bishop, known most for being the author of the famed anti-transgender “bathroom bill” in North Carolina, lost the Charlotte suburbs that Trump had won.
McCready isn’t running again. Democrat Cynthia Wallace, a black woman with a 25-year history in the financial services industry, is. Wallace, like most Democrats running in moderate suburban districts, has been focusing on health care, saying she will focus on lowering prescription costs and expanding COVID-19 testing if elected.
Advertisement
The 2019 race was an unusual one — the product of an absentee voting fraud scandal in 2018, when a GOP operative tampered with ballots, resulting in a special election. Since getting over that hurdle, Republicans in the state have been resting a little bit easier. But, while the race has gone a little under the radar, it’s still competitive. And in a year where there’s a competitive Senate and presidential race on the ballot, districts like the 9th could swing in a major wave.
Montana’s At-Large Congressional Seat: Matt Rosendale (R) vs. Kathleen Williams (D)
Democrats are in right races in Montana up and down the ballot.
Democratic U.S. House candidate Kathleen Williams is running for Montana's at-large seat for the second time. (AP Photo/Matt Volz) ASSOCIATED PRESS
Democrats had an early victory in Montana when the party convinced the state’s popular term-limited governor Steve Bullock to run for Senate. If Democrats prevail in Montana, the state’s open at-large House seat is also worth watching closely.
Rep. Greg Gianforte (R) ― famous for losing his temper and “body-slamming” a journalist ― is running for governor. Democrat Kathleen Williams, a former state legislator, is running for his vacant congressional seat a second time against Republican State Auditor Matt Rosendale. Polls are showing a close race, as Rosendale ties himself to Trump and Williams tries to cast herself as an independent. A New York Times Siena College poll showed Williams trailing Rosendale 50% to 46%.
Democrats are already hoping Montanans will split ballots in November for Bullock. Williams could get the benefit as well if there’s truly a big Democratic groundswell.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-28--School Bank Accounts Are Dwindling, As The Third Wave Of COVID-19 Takes Hold

“ Thank goodness we budgeted so conservatively , because what we thought might happen actually did happen , ” said Russell , whose district is using a hybrid learning model .
As the months continue , though , he is pessimistic that they will continue to be so lucky .
“ If we got through the whole year and we didn ’ t have to lay anyone off , I would consider that a huge win.
” As the third wave of COVID-19 ravages the country and Congress continues to spar over its next stimulus package , school districts like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the lurch , resulting in cuts , budgetary uncertainty and , in some cases , job losses .
Last spring , dozens of urban district superintendents with the Council of Great City Schools wrote to congressional leaders warning that without hundreds of billions more dollars in funding , they would be forced to lay off hundreds of thousands of teachers .
Months later , it ’ s still too early to tell how many teacher jobs have and could be lost , in part “ because districts are waiting to see if relief @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Tonya Harris , a spokesperson for the Council of Great City Schools , wrote in an email to HuffPost .
About half of districts started the school year fully remote , although that number has likely decreased since then as large districts have moved to reopen in person .
Research on the safety of these reopenings remains limited and inconclusive , though the preliminary data looks hopeful .
But districts have been forced to prepare for all options , often serving students both remotely and in person while gearing up for potential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Boston Public Schools , for example , delayed reopening plans last week as cases in the city climbed .
And on Wednesday , a school district in Georgia sent all students home to learn remotely for 10 days amid an outbreak .
This year , Russell spent heavily on technology expenses and personal protective equipment .
Many families have chosen to homeschool or enroll their children in a virtual school , and the loss in enrollment means the district is making less money from providing school meals than usual .
It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for transportation services ― funding reimbursement is provided per number of riders ― though the district ’ s overhead costs remain the same .
In Washington state , districts receive about $ 10,000 per student , Russell said .
In total , his district stands to lose about $ 300,000 in funding this year .
Budgetary constraints won ’ t prevent Russell ’ s district from going back to in-person classes full time , if safety allows .
But it will affect the quality of services provided and the curriculum , including a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was considering adopting but has since been put on the back burner .
No extracurricular activities are being offered — no band , no sports .
To save money , the district has cut back on custodial services and left vacant teaching positions open .
Russell said the past few months have been the second most difficult time he ’ s had during his 33-year career working in education , only topped by a school shooting in the district in 2017 , when four students were shot and one died .
“ We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because you just don ’ t know , ” said Russell , who has served as superintendent since 2011 .
“ We ’ re sure trying not to lay people off … but if there ’ s not some changes to some of the funding systems in Washington , then I believe that ’ s going to be a reality midyear.
” In rural Umatilla , Oregon , all students in the school district qualify for free or reduced price lunch , while many of them are learning English and don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pandemic , the district has purchased 500 hot spots for $ 100 each , $ 10 a month ― a new expense it had never anticipated .
In the first week of school , only four out of the district ’ s 1,044 children failed to log on .
The district ’ s superintendent , Heidi Sipe , is relying on community grants to help pay for internet hot spots for families through December .
When those grants run out , though , the district is on its own .
It began a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in anticipation of new costs , with 14 teachers ultimately deciding to leave .
Over the summer , the district had planned on starting the year with a hybrid learning model .
By the end of July , however , with COVID-19 cases on the rise , educators had to do an about-face .
The whiplash was both draining and expensive , forcing more planning in figuring out every student ’ s home device and internet situation , making sure teachers had the necessary equipment and setting up buses to deliver meals and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ glue sticks , every day .
It ’ s not that districts aren ’ t used to the ebbs and flows of school budgets and community needs .
It ’ s that they usually have months to put a plan in place to patch up these holes and figure out the most logical places to make cuts .
But time isn ’ t a luxury that districts have anymore .
Without financial support , Sipe anticipates that the district will have to dip into its reserve funds and make “ drastic ” changes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Highline Public Schools Superintendent Susan Enfield can list a ticker tape of items the district has had to shell out cash for : more expensive lunches as schools have been serving shelf-stable food , which is higher-priced ; hot spots and learning devices for students ; and hundreds of thousands of dollars ’ worth of PPE , since students require more custodial service once they return to school .
Like Russell , Enfield is predicting drastic cuts in her transportation budget based on decreased ridership .
The district has started looking for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in anticipation .
“ [ Schools are ] really struggling in terms of how do they maintain a sense of optimism in making those decisions right for kids , when they don ’ t know if they ’ ll have the money to support additional social workers , ” Delisle said .
“ How do you balance your budget , make the right reductions , but still provide the service kids need , especially kids who have been impacted by the trauma in the pandemic ?
”

aging teachers in classroom Illustration: Rebecca Zisser/HuffPost; Photo: Getty
At the end of last school year, Freeman School District Superintendent Randy Russell of eastern Washington state drew up three potential budgets for September: a best-case scenario, a doomsday scenario and one in between.
The district cut back on staff training, stopped buying new materials and school supplies, and declined to hire the additional support staff they normally hire. This fall, with a nearly 10% drop in student enrollment, the district almost had to deploy its doomsday budget ― which would have required staff layoffs.
Advertisement
“Thank goodness we budgeted so conservatively, because what we thought might happen actually did happen,” said Russell, whose district is using a hybrid learning model. As the months continue, though, he is pessimistic that they will continue to be so lucky. “If we got through the whole year and we didn’t have to lay anyone off, I would consider that a huge win.”
As the third wave of COVID-19 ravages the country and Congress continues to spar over its next stimulus package, school districts like Russell’s have been left in the lurch, resulting in cuts, budgetary uncertainty and, in some cases, job losses. Last spring, dozens of urban district superintendents with the Council of Great City Schools wrote to congressional leaders warning that without hundreds of billions more dollars in funding, they would be forced to lay off hundreds of thousands of teachers. Months later, it’s still too early to tell how many teacher jobs have and could be lost, in part “because districts are waiting to see if relief was coming from the federal government,” Tonya Harris, a spokesperson for the Council of Great City Schools, wrote in an email to HuffPost.
Indeed, the September jobs report showed that about 570,000 elementary and secondary school education jobs, primarily support staff, had been lost since the same time in 2019. Without aid in sight, school districts are looking into the financial abyss.
“I’m so disappointed. To have adults not make the best decisions for kids — that’s all kids want. They don’t care if you’re Democrat or Republican,” Deborah Delisle, CEO and president of the Alliance for Excellent Education, a national policy and advocacy group, said about the lack of a stimulus package.
Advertisement
About half of districts started the school year fully remote, although that number has likely decreased since then as large districts have moved to reopen in person. Research on the safety of these reopenings remains limited and inconclusive, though the preliminary data looks hopeful. But districts have been forced to prepare for all options, often serving students both remotely and in person while gearing up for potential COVID-19 outbreaks and various shutdown scenarios. Boston Public Schools, for example, delayed reopening plans last week as cases in the city climbed. And on Wednesday, a school district in Georgia sent all students home to learn remotely for 10 days amid an outbreak.
This year, Russell spent heavily on technology expenses and personal protective equipment. Many families have chosen to homeschool or enroll their children in a virtual school, and the loss in enrollment means the district is making less money from providing school meals than usual. It’s also likely to receive less state funding for transportation services ― funding reimbursement is provided per number of riders ― though the district’s overhead costs remain the same. In Washington state, districts receive about $10,000 per student, Russell said. In total, his district stands to lose about $300,000 in funding this year.
Budgetary constraints won’t prevent Russell’s district from going back to in-person classes full time, if safety allows. But it will affect the quality of services provided and the curriculum, including a new K-8 reading program that the district was considering adopting but has since been put on the back burner. No extracurricular activities are being offered — no band, no sports.
To save money, the district has cut back on custodial services and left vacant teaching positions open. Russell said the past few months have been the second most difficult time he’s had during his 33-year career working in education, only topped by a school shooting in the district in 2017, when four students were shot and one died.
“We weren’t counting on federal help because you just don’t know,” said Russell, who has served as superintendent since 2011. “We’re sure trying not to lay people off … but if there’s not some changes to some of the funding systems in Washington, then I believe that’s going to be a reality midyear.”
Advertisement
In lieu of help from the federal government, some superintendents have relied on assistance from elsewhere, such as grant money. They can’t wait for help when the need is immediate.
In rural Umatilla, Oregon, all students in the school district qualify for free or reduced price lunch, while many of them are learning English and don’t have adequate internet access. During the pandemic, the district has purchased 500 hot spots for $100 each, $10 a month ― a new expense it had never anticipated. In the first week of school, only four out of the district’s 1,044 children failed to log on. The district’s superintendent, Heidi Sipe, is relying on community grants to help pay for internet hot spots for families through December. When those grants run out, though, the district is on its own. It began a voluntary layoff process for educators last spring in anticipation of new costs, with 14 teachers ultimately deciding to leave.
Over the summer, the district had planned on starting the year with a hybrid learning model. By the end of July, however, with COVID-19 cases on the rise, educators had to do an about-face. The whiplash was both draining and expensive, forcing more planning in figuring out every student’s home device and internet situation, making sure teachers had the necessary equipment and setting up buses to deliver meals and school supplies, such as pencils and glue sticks, every day.
“I cannot wait for federal funding to serve kids. The needs are immediate right now,” Sipe said. “I have to adjust and make it work at this time.”
It’s not that districts aren’t used to the ebbs and flows of school budgets and community needs. It’s that they usually have months to put a plan in place to patch up these holes and figure out the most logical places to make cuts. But time isn’t a luxury that districts have anymore. Without financial support, Sipe anticipates that the district will have to dip into its reserve funds and make “drastic” changes in the future.
Advertisement
These financial challenges exacerbate an already difficult year. Over the course of the pandemic, the rural Oregon district has already faced two floods, a wildfire and a drive-thru graduation that was taken out by a windstorm.
“We cannot catch a break,” Sipe said.
So far, the state’s budget has not been as negatively affected as anticipated. Sipe said she hopes that will leave room to potentially hire back some teaching positions.
In Washington state, Highline Public Schools Superintendent Susan Enfield can list a ticker tape of items the district has had to shell out cash for: more expensive lunches as schools have been serving shelf-stable food, which is higher-priced; hot spots and learning devices for students; and hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of PPE, since students require more custodial service once they return to school. Like Russell, Enfield is predicting drastic cuts in her transportation budget based on decreased ridership. The district has started looking for areas where it can make deep cuts in anticipation.
Enfield said she is struggling to predict what budget cuts will look like at the state level, without any idea of whether federal relief will come.
“It’s hard to tell what decisions they’re going to make,” she said. “We are bracing for some significant budget reductions in the coming months and going into the next school year.”
Advertisement
Delisle, president of the Alliance for Excellent Education, worries that these cuts could come at the expense of students’ mental health.
“[Schools are] really struggling in terms of how do they maintain a sense of optimism in making those decisions right for kids, when they don’t know if they’ll have the money to support additional social workers,” Delisle said. “How do you balance your budget, make the right reductions, but still provide the service kids need, especially kids who have been impacted by the trauma in the pandemic?”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-28--Poll: Voters Give Trump A Poor Preelection Verdict On Handling Of COVID-19 Pandemic

Chris Szagola/ASSOCIATED PRESS Supporters walk by a sign reminding them to wear a face mask as they arrive to hear President Donald Trump speak Monday at a campaign rally in Allentown , Pennsylvania .
Voters disapprove , 55 % to 40 % , of the U.S. government ’ s handling of issues relating to the coronavirus .
By an even broader margin , 59 % to 38 % , voters disapprove of Trump ’ s own handling of the pandemic .
Just 13 % of voters say Trump ’ s handling of the coronavirus has been better than his handling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % saying it ’ s been about the same and 37 % that he ’ s handled it worse than most other issues .
Views remain deeply polarized but are more cohesively so among Trump ’ s opponents .
An 84 % majority of Democratic voters say they strongly disapprove of Trump ’ s handling of the issue , compared with the 55 % of Republican voters who strongly approve .
Democratic voters mostly say Trump ’ s work on coronavirus has stood out as worse than his work on other issues .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s handled it about as well as other issues , with fewer than 3 in 10 saying he handled it better than most .
Last spring , as the pandemic first descended on the U.S. , the government ’ s response looked like a relatively bright spot for the Trump administration .
Americans ’ approval of the federal response to the coronavirus reached as high as 57 % in late March .
Trump ’ s approval rating on the issue reached the 50 % mark around that time , higher than his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ both Trump and the federal government sank by May and have not recovered .
Voters are increasingly dissatisfied with the way the U.S. has responded in comparison with other countries .
Half say the U.S. has done a worse job of handling the outbreak than most other countries , up from 29 % of voters who said the same in March and 42 % who said so in May .
Throughout the year , Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has been convincing voters that he ’ d be the better alternative .
By @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 35 % , voters now say they think Biden would do a better job than Trump of handling the country ’ s coronavirus outbreak , with the remainder unsure or believing both men would do about the same .
That marks a significant shift since late March , when voters were about evenly split over which candidate would do a better job , with 40 % saying Biden and 39 % that Trump would .
A 59 % majority say that the Biden campaign ’ s attitude toward taking coronavirus precautions has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters say that the Trump campaign has taken too many risks .
It ’ s clear that the Trump administration ’ s handling of the pandemic is deeply unpopular .
What ’ s less clear is exactly how much of an effect that ’ s had on the dynamics of this election .
The pandemic likely hasn ’ t been far from most voters ’ minds this year , especially with unprecedented numbers voting early or by mail-in ballot at least in part because of health concerns .
A 64 % majority say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lasting effect on the country , with only about a quarter believing things will soon get back to normal .
Roughly three-quarters of voters say they ’ re at least somewhat concerned about the spread of the coronavirus in the United States .
Two-thirds say that the issue of the coronavirus outbreak will be at least somewhat important to their vote , with 42 % calling it very important .
On surveys of voters ’ top issues , the coronavirus itself regularly polls near or behind perennial top issues like the economy and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of course , have been severely affected by the pandemic .
At the same time , measurements of the campaign have remained almost aggressively stable .
Trump entered 2020 behind in the polls and facing underwater ratings .
In FiveThirtyEight ’ s polling aggregate , Trump started this year with an average 42.6 % approval rating .
After a modest summertime dip and recovery , it currently stands at 43.2 % .
CNN ’ s national polling , which found Biden leading Trump by 10 points among registered voters in October 2019 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ similar 12 points .
The intervening year , and the pandemic it brought , may not have changed many minds about Trump ’ s performance in office .
But the ongoing centrality of the coronavirus in the campaign ― despite the Trump camp ’ s attempts to push the campaign onto other issues ― has given the president little leeway to turn things around .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
With less than a week of campaigning to go, voters give President Donald Trump a poor verdict on his handling of the coronavirus outbreak, a new HuffPost/YouGov survey finds.
Voters disapprove, 55% to 40%, of the U.S. government’s handling of issues relating to the coronavirus. By an even broader margin, 59% to 38%, voters disapprove of Trump’s own handling of the pandemic.
Advertisement
Supporters walk by a sign reminding them to wear a face mask as they arrive to hear President Donald Trump speak Monday at a campaign rally in Allentown, Pennsylvania. Chris Szagola/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Just 13% of voters say Trump’s handling of the coronavirus has been better than his handling of most other issues, with 45% saying it’s been about the same and 37% that he’s handled it worse than most other issues.
Views remain deeply polarized but are more cohesively so among Trump’s opponents. An 84% majority of Democratic voters say they strongly disapprove of Trump’s handling of the issue, compared with the 55% of Republican voters who strongly approve. Democratic voters mostly say Trump’s work on coronavirus has stood out as worse than his work on other issues. A majority of Republican voters say he’s handled it about as well as other issues, with fewer than 3 in 10 saying he handled it better than most.
Advertisement
Last spring, as the pandemic first descended on the U.S., the government’s response looked like a relatively bright spot for the Trump administration. Americans’ approval of the federal response to the coronavirus reached as high as 57% in late March. Trump’s approval rating on the issue reached the 50% mark around that time, higher than his overall approval ratings. But ratings for both Trump and the federal government sank by May and have not recovered.
Voters are increasingly dissatisfied with the way the U.S. has responded in comparison with other countries. Half say the U.S. has done a worse job of handling the outbreak than most other countries, up from 29% of voters who said the same in March and 42% who said so in May.
Throughout the year, Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has been convincing voters that he’d be the better alternative. By a 15-percentage-point margin, 50% to 35%, voters now say they think Biden would do a better job than Trump of handling the country’s coronavirus outbreak, with the remainder unsure or believing both men would do about the same. That marks a significant shift since late March, when voters were about evenly split over which candidate would do a better job, with 40% saying Biden and 39% that Trump would.
A 59% majority say that the Biden campaign’s attitude toward taking coronavirus precautions has been about right, while 58% of voters say that the Trump campaign has taken too many risks.
Advertisement
It’s clear that the Trump administration’s handling of the pandemic is deeply unpopular. What’s less clear is exactly how much of an effect that’s had on the dynamics of this election.
The pandemic likely hasn’t been far from most voters’ minds this year, especially with unprecedented numbers voting early or by mail-in ballot at least in part because of health concerns. A 64% majority say they expect the outbreak to have a lasting effect on the country, with only about a quarter believing things will soon get back to normal.
Roughly three-quarters of voters say they’re at least somewhat concerned about the spread of the coronavirus in the United States. Two-thirds say that the issue of the coronavirus outbreak will be at least somewhat important to their vote, with 42% calling it very important.
On surveys of voters’ top issues, the coronavirus itself regularly polls near or behind perennial top issues like the economy and health care ― both of which, of course, have been severely affected by the pandemic.
At the same time, measurements of the campaign have remained almost aggressively stable. Trump entered 2020 behind in the polls and facing underwater ratings. In FiveThirtyEight’s polling aggregate, Trump started this year with an average 42.6% approval rating. After a modest summertime dip and recovery, it currently stands at 43.2%. CNN’s national polling, which found Biden leading Trump by 10 points among registered voters in October 2019, now has Biden up by a very similar 12 points.
Advertisement
The intervening year, and the pandemic it brought, may not have changed many minds about Trump’s performance in office. But the ongoing centrality of the coronavirus in the campaign ― despite the Trump camp’s attempts to push the campaign onto other issues ― has given the president little leeway to turn things around.
The HuffPost/YouGov poll consisted of 1,000 completed interviews conducted Oct. 23-27 among U.S. registered voters, using a sample selected from YouGov’s opt-in online panel to match the demographics and other characteristics of the population.
HuffPost has teamed up with YouGov to conduct daily opinion polls. You can learn more about this project and take part in YouGov’s nationally representative opinion polling. More details on the polls’ methodology are available here.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-28--Democrats Are Reclaiming Populism, And Obama-Trump Territory

CrawDaddy Outdoors was surviving ― people can kayak even during a pandemic ― but many of its neighbors on the main commercial drag in Waverly were struggling .
The owner of Scott Pharmacy in nearby Fayette talked about how consolidation in the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries was making it harder for independent drugstores like his own to survive .
Trump ’ s trade war had hit the timber business in Elkader , to the east , blocking it from selling to Chinese customers .
In Decorah , the owner of an organic farm had taken a part-time job at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make ends meet .
“ When I was just a sport , my parents added on to the house .
They added a big entry , ” she said in an interview .
“ You know what was in it ?
A shower , a washing machine and a dryer .
Because we didn ’ t take showers when we left in the morning , we took them when we got home at night because we worked .
And that ’ s just very Iowan .
And Democrats haven ’ t been talking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ having an effect : A CBS News/YouGov poll of Wisconsin released earlier this month found 60 % of likely voters there believe Trump was most concerned about the “ wealthy and elite.
” Just 35 % of likely voters said the same of Biden .
The poll has found similar results in Pennsylvania ― 56 % of likely voters said the Trump administration has mostly favored the wealthy ― and in Michigan , where 55 % of likely voters said Trump ’ s campaign was paying too much attention to the wealthy and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ little attention to the middle class .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WAVERLY, Iowa ― Democrats throughout the country are winning back a small but potentially critical number of voters in counties and cities that flipped to support President Donald Trump four years ago, thanks to a renewed outreach from Democrats and the loss of the populist edge the Republican Party developed in 2016.
These areas, where voters are disproportionately white, rural and older, and without college degrees, are mostly in the northern half of the country, especially in the Midwest. They have disproportionate power in the nation’s political system because of the overrepresentation of rural states in the Senate and the Electoral College.
Advertisement
“The blue wall has to be reestablished,” Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden told reporters in Pennsylvania on Monday, expressing optimism about winning the three traditionally Democratic-leaning states ― Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan ― that Trump narrowly won over Democrat Hillary Clinton in 2016.
Few operatives in either party expect Democrats to win back these voters or the small counties and cities they live in entirely, but the party’s gains with them are playing a crucial role in creating a path to 270 electoral votes that looks increasingly solid for former Vice President Biden.
“People are pissed. They’re angry. They think the entire system is corrupt. And they’re voting for Joe Biden.” - Matt Morrison, executive director of Working America
For many of these voters, the issues match the top reasons anyone in the electorate is backing Biden: They believe Trump has grossly mishandled the coronavirus pandemic that has killed more than 250,000 Americans and think Republicans are threatening key health care protections. But operatives in both parties also said they’ve been surprised at the ability of Biden, a career politician, to steal the mantle of populism from Trump.
Advertisement
“People are pissed,” said Matt Morrison, the executive director of Working America, the political organizing arm of the AFL-CIO, describing what his group hears from voters in text messages and phone calls. “They’re angry. They think the entire system is corrupt. And they’re voting for Joe Biden.”
While Biden and his campaign are leading the charge, the shift is also occurring further down the ballot, providing key boosts to Democrats running for Senate and governor in rural states and for House candidates battling for control of the exurban districts.
On a Monday earlier this month, Theresa Greenfield, the Democratic U.S. Senate candidate in Iowa, was trying to win over more of these voters with a swing through four counties in the state’s northeast corner that had backed Democrat Barack Obama in 2012 and Trump in 2016. Each socially distanced, mask-wearing stop was designed to highlight a different reason why voters in these sparsely populated rural counties might be tempted to abandon the GOP Sen. Joni Ernst and the Republican Party.
CrawDaddy Outdoors was surviving ― people can kayak even during a pandemic ― but many of its neighbors on the main commercial drag in Waverly were struggling. The owner of Scott Pharmacy in nearby Fayette talked about how consolidation in the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries was making it harder for independent drugstores like his own to survive. Trump’s trade war had hit the timber business in Elkader, to the east, blocking it from selling to Chinese customers. In Decorah, the owner of an organic farm had taken a part-time job at the U.S. Postal Service to help make ends meet.
At each stop, Greenfield, whose accent and relentless cheeriness peg her as a native daughter of the Midwest, pointed to solutions: A focus on vocational schools and community colleges, along with new infrastructure funding, could boost the economy. A public option and granting Medicare the ability to negotiate drug prices would help seniors afford prescriptions. Ditching Trump’s preference for bilateral trade deals could open up foreign markets. She would work to increase access to capital for small farmers.
Advertisement
Public polling shows Iowa Democratic Senate candidate Theresa Greenfield winning over a small but critical number of voters who backed President Donald Trump in 2016. Caroline Brehman via Getty Images
Greenfield was always sure to mention her own roots in rural America ― she grew up on a farm just over the border in Minnesota, in a town with a population of less than 500 ― as a way of connecting to a lifestyle she admitted many Democrats now felt was foreign. (Ernst’s campaign is fond of pointing out that Greenfield, a real estate executive, now lives in one of Iowa’s wealthiest ZIP codes.)
“When I was just a sport, my parents added on to the house. They added a big entry,” she said in an interview. “You know what was in it? A shower, a washing machine and a dryer. Because we didn’t take showers when we left in the morning, we took them when we got home at night because we worked. And that’s just very Iowan. And Democrats haven’t been talking about that.”
Public polling shows crucial gains: The last iteration of the Des Moines Register’s Iowa Poll showed Greenfield with a small lead over Ernst. In the survey, Greenfield was winning 10% of voters who had backed Trump in 2016. The same poll showed Biden in a tight race with Trump.
Surveys in other states show similar small but important shifts. In a Monmouth University poll of Pennsylvania, Trump was leading in a set of counties where he dominated in 2016 by 22 percentage point margin, but that was down from 36 points four years ago. A New York Times/Siena College poll of Michigan found Biden barely trailing Trump among rural voters there.
Advertisement
Stanley Greenberg, a Democratic pollster who has studied working-class voters for decades, praised Biden for “articulating a vision that was grounded in his working-class values and talks about working-class life,” in contrast to the Clinton campaign four years earlier.
“They thought Trump was different. They believed his promises because he was a business guy, because he was bellicose. But they see now that he’s worse.” - Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
“It was a campaign that, after [Clinton] lost to Bernie Sanders in Michigan, thought she couldn’t win white working-class and rural voters,” Greenberg said. “There was a Trump pull to the white working-class revolt, but there was also a push from Hillary Clinton and some Democrats.”
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), who has long been bullish on winning back industrial areas in the Midwest, said voters in his home state ― which polling indicates is tied after Trump won it by double digits in 2016 ― no longer believe Trump is different from typical politicians. He noted Trump has failed to stop the offshoring of manufacturing jobs and has undermined rules designed to boost overtime pay and protect contract workers.
“They thought Trump was different. They believed his promises because he was a business guy, because he was bellicose,” Brown said. “But they see now that he’s worse.”
Advertisement
Biden’s campaign has always contained elements of populism ― he launched his campaign at a union hall in Pittsburgh, attacking Trump over cuts to health care ― but he’s stepped up his critiques of the Trump administration’s bias toward the wealthy over the course of the past month, relentlessly framing the race as a battle between “Scranton and Park Avenue.”
“More than 215,000 dead because of COVID-19. Experts say we’ll lose nearly 200,000 more lives in the next few months,” Biden said during a trip to Detroit earlier this month. “All because all this president cares about from his Park Avenue perspective is the stock market.”
Earlier this month, the Biden campaign began airing a series of localized ads around the country contrasting Trump’s plans to push for a cut in the capital gains tax ― which would disproportionately benefit the wealthiest Americans ― with his own plans to implement “Buy American” rules for federal purchases.
“Donald Trump’s answer? A new $30 billion tax break for the 100 richest people in America,” a narrator says. “Joe Biden has a plan for economic recovery that actually helps you.”
The populist positioning is having an effect: A CBS News/YouGov poll of Wisconsin released earlier this month found 60% of likely voters there believe Trump was most concerned about the “wealthy and elite.” Just 35% of likely voters said the same of Biden. The poll has found similar results in Pennsylvania ― 56% of likely voters said the Trump administration has mostly favored the wealthy ― and in Michigan, where 55% of likely voters said Trump’s campaign was paying too much attention to the wealthy and 51% said it was paying too little attention to the middle class.
Advertisement
Trump has tried, over the course of the campaign, to reemphasize the issues that brought white working-class voters into his coalition into 2016. A full 30% of the Trump campaign’s television spending since Labor Day has gone toward ads on immigration, according to data from Kantar/CMAG.
“What does Biden now propose while the pandemic smolders around the globe?” a narrator asks in one such ad. “Increasing refugees by 700%, from the most unstable, vulnerable and dangerous parts of the world.” (As the narrator speaks the second sentence, the words “Syria Somalia Yemen” appear on the screen.)
But a University of Wisconsin poll of Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania found fewer than 5% of voters think immigration is the most important issue facing the country.
Democratic performance in these counties is improving not only because they are winning over voters who backed him four years ago but also from winning over voters who backed third-party candidates or stayed home in 2016.
Maria Laviena, a Reading, Pennsylvania, resident who is now active in the progressive group Make the Road Action, voted for Trump four years ago because of his business background. “He was a businessman, a man with money, a capable man,” she said.
Advertisement
Her opinion has changed. After seeing Trump’s treatment of her native Puerto Rico, she’s concluded Trump “doesn’t have the capacity to govern.”
Vice President Mike Pence arrives at a campaign rally at the Reading Regional Airport on Oct. 17. A rising Latino population in the area has cut into Trump's 2016 leads. Michael Perez/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Mary Brennan, a barista in Scranton, Pennsylvania, has a mix of liberal and conservative views but identifies as a Republican. Her 2016 vote for Trump was the first time she had voted in years. She doesn’t like Biden, but Trump’s mishandling of the pandemic and recent behavior has alienated her enough to consider voting for the Democrat on Election Day.
“He knew he had COVID and then he went and did a big rally,” Brennan said. “He’s doing all these things to, like, screw up. And it’s almost like he’s doing it on purpose.”
Voters like Brennan would probably be firmly in Trump’s corner if Trump had kept more of the populist promises he ran on, according to Pennsylvania state Sen. John Yudichak, who represents Luzerne County ― a heavily white, working-class county in northeast Pennsylvania that flipped from Obama in 2012 to Trump in 2016.
Advertisement
“If President Trump came out of the gate, instead of attacking health care, put together a bipartisan deal for the largest infrastructure funding bill in the history of the country, I don’t think we would have a competitive election today,” he said.
Yudichak formally left the Democratic Party last November, becoming an independent who caucuses with Republicans. Yudichak, a pro-labor moderate, is particularly frustrated by some Democrats’ opposition to fracking, which has been a major source of union jobs in his part of the state.
But Yudichak plans to vote for Biden because he believes he stood up to the left by rejecting calls to oppose fracking and by condemning rioting that spilled out from anti-racism protests in late May and June. Trump, by contrast, has not been willing enough to confront the extreme elements in his own base, Yudichak said.
Officials with the Democratic Governors’ Association say Biden’s strengths are helping their underdog candidates in Republican-leaning Missouri and Montana. House incumbents such as Maine Rep. Jared Golden, whose Trump-won rural district is the largest east of the Mississippi, are cruising to reelection.
Still, the race in Iowa may be the most vivid down-ballot demonstration of these gains and how Republicans are trying to limit them. After victories in the presidential race in 2016 and the governor’s race in 2018, the GOP was confident a then-popular Ernst could hold her Senate seat as Republicans worked to protect their endangered 53-47 majority.
Advertisement
Instead, the race has become a $140 million slugfest and one of the nation’s closest Senate contests. Democrats and Greenfield have relentlessly slammed Ernst for suggesting cuts to Social Security, for downplaying the pandemic and for purchasing a “luxury condo” in Washington.
“If President Trump came out of the gate, instead of attacking health care, put together a bipartisan deal for the largest infrastructure funding bill in the history of the country, I don’t think we would have a competitive election today.” - Pennsylvania state Sen. John Yudichak
Republicans have largely responded with the same attacks they’ve deployed against every Democratic Senate candidate: Their television ads falsely say Greenfield supports the Green New Deal and a “government takeover of health care.”
But there is one attack that stands out, highlighting Greenfield’s role as a “big shot executive” who “personally signed the notices to kick small businesses to the curb to allow a foreign-owned corporation to move in,” in the words of a narrator for a super PAC controlled and funded by allies of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).
Asked by a local reporter about the ads, Greenfield dismissed them as meaningless partisan attacks attempting to turn an everyday business deal into a scandal. “I’m quite proud of my small business record,” she said.
Advertisement
Still, the goal of the ads is clear: They seek to portray Greenfield as a smaller-time version of the distinctly un-populist villain Democrats turned Mitt Romney into during the 2012 election, betraying the little guy for cash and foreign companies.
American Bridge, a Democratic super PAC, has spent millions on television ads targeting white voters in rural areas of Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, believing that limiting Trump’s margins was key to providing a path back for Democrats.
Sacha Haworth, the group’s political director, said Trump’s initial weaknesses with these voters were on health care and the economy, but his behavior became more concerning as they realized he had broken key promises.
“They liked he was an asshole because they thought he was their asshole,” Haworth said. “But he turned out to just be an asshole.”
Daniel Marans contributed reporting from Pennsylvania.
We want to know what you’re hearing on the ground from the candidates. If you get any interesting ― or suspicious! ― campaign mailers, robocalls or hear anything else you think we should know about, email us at scoops@huffpost.com.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-28--Supreme Court Allows North Carolina To Receive Absentee Ballots After Election Day

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — The Supreme Court will allow absentee ballots in North Carolina to be received and counted up to nine days after Election Day , in a win for Democrats .
The justices , by a 5-3 vote Wednesday , refused to disturb a decision by the State Board of Elections to lengthen the period from three to nine days because of the coronavirus pandemic , pushing back the deadline to Nov. 12 .
The board ’ s decision was part of a legal settlement with a union-affiliated group .
Under the Supreme Court ’ s order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Election Day must be received by 5 p.m. on Nov. 12 in order to be counted .
New Justice Amy Coney Barrett took no part in the case “ because of the need for a prompt resolution and because she has not had time to fully review the parties ’ filings , ” court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg said .
State and national Republican groups , including President Donald Trump ’ s campaign , had filed separate but similar appeals asking the high court to make the state revert to a Nov. 6 deadline @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Election Day .
That three-day timeframe was specified in state law .
The appeals , including one led by the state ’ s Republican legislative leaders , argued that the deadline change put in place by the State Board of Elections usurped legislators ’ constitutional authority to set rules for elections .
They also said the change made after early voting started would create unequal treatment of voters who had cast ballots under previous , stricter rules .
The State Board of Elections had lengthened the period as part of a late @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Alliance for Retired Americans , a union-affiliated group represented by Marc Elias , a lawyer prominent in Democratic circles .
The legal settlement , which also loosened requirements for fixing absentee ballots that lacked a witness signature , was approved by a state judge .
The settlement said counties should have longer to accept ballots because of possible mail delays .
Gorsuch said the state legislature already had responded to voting challenges related to the pandemic by allowing absentee ballots to arrive three days after the election and still be counted .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worked together to override a carefully tailored legislative response to COVID , ” Gorsuch wrote .
The changes developed by the Democratic-majority state elections board and defended in court by the state ’ s Democratic attorney general prompted accusations from Republican legislative leaders that state elections officials had cut a backroom deal to favor left-leaning candidates and causes .
State House Speaker Tim Moore and state Senate leader Phil Berger quickly moved to challenge the rule changes in state and federal court , as did the Trump campaign , the Republican National Committee @ @ @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court will allow absentee ballots in North Carolina to be received and counted up to nine days after Election Day, in a win for Democrats.
The justices, by a 5-3 vote Wednesday, refused to disturb a decision by the State Board of Elections to lengthen the period from three to nine days because of the coronavirus pandemic, pushing back the deadline to Nov. 12. The board’s decision was part of a legal settlement with a union-affiliated group.
Advertisement
Republicans had asked the high court to step in.
Under the Supreme Court’s order, mailed ballots postmarked on or before Election Day must be received by 5 p.m. on Nov. 12 in order to be counted.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the three liberal justices in the majority. Three conservative justices, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas, dissented.
New Justice Amy Coney Barrett took no part in the case “because of the need for a prompt resolution and because she has not had time to fully review the parties’ filings,” court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg said.
State and national Republican groups, including President Donald Trump’s campaign, had filed separate but similar appeals asking the high court to make the state revert to a Nov. 6 deadline for accepting late-arriving ballots that were postmarked by Election Day. That three-day timeframe was specified in state law.
Advertisement
The appeals, including one led by the state’s Republican legislative leaders, argued that the deadline change put in place by the State Board of Elections usurped legislators’ constitutional authority to set rules for elections. They also said the change made after early voting started would create unequal treatment of voters who had cast ballots under previous, stricter rules.
The State Board of Elections had lengthened the period as part of a late September legal settlement with the North Carolina Alliance for Retired Americans, a union-affiliated group represented by Marc Elias, a lawyer prominent in Democratic circles. The legal settlement, which also loosened requirements for fixing absentee ballots that lacked a witness signature, was approved by a state judge. The settlement said counties should have longer to accept ballots because of possible mail delays.
Gorsuch said the state legislature already had responded to voting challenges related to the pandemic by allowing absentee ballots to arrive three days after the election and still be counted. The election board and the state judge “worked together to override a carefully tailored legislative response to COVID,” Gorsuch wrote.
The changes developed by the Democratic-majority state elections board and defended in court by the state’s Democratic attorney general prompted accusations from Republican legislative leaders that state elections officials had cut a backroom deal to favor left-leaning candidates and causes. State House Speaker Tim Moore and state Senate leader Phil Berger quickly moved to challenge the rule changes in state and federal court, as did the Trump campaign, the Republican National Committee and other national groups.
___
Drew reported from Raleigh, North Carolina.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-28--Abortion Is Under Threat After Amy Coney Barrett Confirmation. Donors Are Stepping Up.

NARAL Pro-Choice America saw a 200 % increase in funding after Monday night ’ s Senate vote , according to a spokesperson .
The National Network of Abortion Funds raised over $ 25,000 in the first 24 hours of Barrett ’ s confirmation , which a NNAF spokesperson said is a big uptick in donations for their organization .
And the Yellowhammer Fund , a group advocating for reproductive justice in the South , saw an influx in fundraising logging around $ 17,000 before the organization even sent out a statement on Barrett ’ s confirmation .
“ Amy Barrett @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rights is disqualifying .
We know that they can not be shamed , so we will see every single Republican who has played a role in this charade at the ballot box , ” NARAL President Ilyse Hogue said in a statement following Monday ’ s vote .
The night Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died back in September , abortion rights advocates knew they would need to fight tooth and nail for a justice who supported reproductive and sexual health .
That hope died , however , with Barrett ’ s nomination and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know these donation dollars will have a big impact on the fight for continued safe and legal access to abortion .
Still , Marty cautioned how little impact this donation would have if Roe is repealed .
“ This is while abortion is still legally accessible in Alabama and the surrounding states , ” she said .
“ When Roe is overturned , when each of those patients will instead have to travel to Florida , Virginia or even Illinois , well , $ 17,000 won ’ t even last a week .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ preparing for now.
” Barrett ’ s confirmation to the court cements a 6-3 conservative majority , leaving many reproductive rights advocates worried about the fate of Roe v. Wade , the landmark 1973 ruling that protects the right to abortion .
Currently there are 17 abortion cases one step away from heading to the Supreme Court , according to Planned Parenthood .
The last two decisions on the issue were decided by one vote while Ginsburg , whom Barrett replaced , was still alive .
Even though Barrett did not reveal during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on a case involving Roe , her past judicial rulings , ties to conservative Christian communities and identifying as an originalist ( a judge who interprets the Constitution as it was written at the time ) make it clear how she feels about abortion .
President Donald Trump ’ s rushed nomination of Barrett after his repeated promises to gut the Affordable Care Act , which covers reproductive health services for millions , has many Democrats worried about how the judge will vote on cases about the ACA .
The senators who supported @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is expected to vote to eliminate access to health care for tens of millions and further restrict reproductive rights , days before an election , should prepare to lose their jobs .
In just eight days , voters will hold them accountable .
Groups that support abortion rights plan to use the rushed process and confirmation of Barrett to motivate voters .
Planned Parenthood Votes , the organization ’ s political arm , did not release its fundraising numbers , but executive director Jenny Lawson said the group is focused on getting the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nomination through out of office .
“ The senators who supported Trump and rushed through a nominee who is expected to vote to eliminate access to health care for tens of millions and further restrict reproductive rights , days before an election , should prepare to lose their jobs , ” Lawson told HuffPost .
“ In just eight days , voters will hold them accountable .
Planned Parenthood Votes will help ensure this is the last Supreme Court confirmation vote they take.
” The majority of Americans support reproductive freedom , with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keeping Roe in place according to an NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist Poll ( although a majority would like to see more restrictions on the medical procedure ) .
Support for Barrett ’ s confirmation slipped eight points during her hearing because some registered voters believed that if confirmed she would overturn Roe , a Yahoo News/YouGov poll found .
“ We have had a positive response in fundraising with our PAC and Action campaigns regarding the SCOTUS nomination and appointment , ” Nunes said .
“ Members are fired up and ready to see change @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years from reoccurring , or worse.
” Sen. Lindsey Graham ( R-S.C. ) , chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee , even applauded Barrett for being “ unashamedly pro-life ” during the confirmation hearing .
“ This is the first time in American history that we ’ ve nominated a woman who is unashamedly pro-life and embraces her faith without apology , and she is going to the court , ” he said .
Two documents surfaced before Barrett ’ s hearings which confirmed her personal opinion on reproductive rights .
In 2006 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ newspaper ad created by an anti-abortion group which argued that “ it ’ s time to put an end to the barbaric legacy of Roe v. Wade and restore laws that protect the lives of unborn children.
” In 2013 , while she was a part of Notre Dame University ’ s Faculty for Life group , she signed her name in support of another anti-abortion ad to “ renew our call for the unborn to be protected in law and welcomed in life.
” Barrett was also formerly a part of The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conservative lawyers .
The organization maintains that it takes no official policy positions but has a long track record of supporting judges with anti-abortion , anti-LGBTQ rights and anti-voting rights records .
The Federalist Society also vetted Barrett and supported her nomination to the Supreme Court .
“ Catholics in the United States represent a vast range of experiences , backgrounds and upbringings .
But across our differences , the majority of Catholics are united in their support for access to safe , legal abortion , as well as the right to make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our own conscience , ” Manson said .
“ We also believe that there should be true religious freedom , predicated on the separation of church and state , something the bishops and jurists like Judge Coney Barrett have sought to eliminate .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
While the Senate wrapped up the final vote to confirm Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court on Monday evening, pro-choice groups started seeing an influx in donations ― a welcomed gesture as abortion rights advocates ready themselves for the fight of a lifetime.
NARAL Pro-Choice America saw a 200% increase in funding after Monday night’s Senate vote, according to a spokesperson. The National Network of Abortion Funds raised over $25,000 in the first 24 hours of Barrett’s confirmation, which a NNAF spokesperson said is a big uptick in donations for their organization. And the Yellowhammer Fund, a group advocating for reproductive justice in the South, saw an influx in fundraising logging around $17,000 before the organization even sent out a statement on Barrett’s confirmation.
Advertisement
“Amy Barrett’s extreme position on our fundamental rights is disqualifying. We know that they cannot be shamed, so we will see every single Republican who has played a role in this charade at the ballot box,” NARAL President Ilyse Hogue said in a statement following Monday’s vote.
The night Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died back in September, abortion rights advocates knew they would need to fight tooth and nail for a justice who supported reproductive and sexual health. That hope died, however, with Barrett’s nomination and subsequent confirmation. And reproductive justice organizations know these donation dollars will have a big impact on the fight for continued safe and legal access to abortion.
Yellowhammer Fund’s communications director Robin Marty said donations received will go directly to financially supporting abortion access in the Deep South. The $17,000 Yellowhammer Fund received after Barrett’s confirmation will help 40 to 60 patients seeking abortion care pay for costs such as gas, hotels and child care.
Still, Marty cautioned how little impact this donation would have if Roe is repealed. “This is while abortion is still legally accessible in Alabama and the surrounding states,” she said. “When Roe is overturned, when each of those patients will instead have to travel to Florida, Virginia or even Illinois, well, $17,000 won’t even last a week. That’s the reality we are preparing for now.”
Advertisement
The National Network of Abortion Funds’ fundraising will help pay for financial barriers to abortion access for the 70 organizations included under the national organization’s umbrella. Donations will help pay for abortions as well as transportation, child care, hotel and translation services.
Barrett’s confirmation to the court cements a 6-3 conservative majority, leaving many reproductive rights advocates worried about the fate of Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 ruling that protects the right to abortion. Currently there are 17 abortion cases one step away from heading to the Supreme Court, according to Planned Parenthood. The last two decisions on the issue were decided by one vote while Ginsburg, whom Barrett replaced, was still alive.
Even though Barrett did not reveal during her confirmation hearings how she would rule on a case involving Roe, her past judicial rulings, ties to conservative Christian communities and identifying as an originalist (a judge who interprets the Constitution as it was written at the time) make it clear how she feels about abortion. President Donald Trump’s rushed nomination of Barrett after his repeated promises to gut the Affordable Care Act, which covers reproductive health services for millions, has many Democrats worried about how the judge will vote on cases about the ACA.
“The senators who supported Trump and rushed through a nominee who is expected to vote to eliminate access to health care for tens of millions and further restrict reproductive rights, days before an election, should prepare to lose their jobs. In just eight days, voters will hold them accountable.” - Jenny Lawson, Planned Parenthood Votes executive director
Groups that support abortion rights plan to use the rushed process and confirmation of Barrett to motivate voters. Planned Parenthood Votes, the organization’s political arm, did not release its fundraising numbers, but executive director Jenny Lawson said the group is focused on getting the Republican senators who pushed Barrett’s nomination through out of office.
Advertisement
“The senators who supported Trump and rushed through a nominee who is expected to vote to eliminate access to health care for tens of millions and further restrict reproductive rights, days before an election, should prepare to lose their jobs,” Lawson told HuffPost. “In just eight days, voters will hold them accountable. Planned Parenthood Votes will help ensure this is the last Supreme Court confirmation vote they take.”
The majority of Americans support reproductive freedom, with 75% of people saying they support keeping Roe in place according to an NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist Poll (although a majority would like to see more restrictions on the medical procedure). Support for Barrett’s confirmation slipped eight points during her hearing because some registered voters believed that if confirmed she would overturn Roe, a Yahoo News/YouGov poll found.
National Organization for Women was unable to share their fundraising numbers with HuffPost, but president Christian F. Nunes said the women’s group is ready to respond to Barrett’s confirmation at the polls.
“We have had a positive response in fundraising with our PAC and Action campaigns regarding the SCOTUS nomination and appointment,” Nunes said. “Members are fired up and ready to see change take place to prevent the past four years from reoccurring, or worse.”
Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Oct. 14. The Washington Post via Getty Images
Advertisement
Breaking from tradition, Senate Republicans openly discussed Barrett’s anti-abortion views. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) declared he would only vote in support of a nominee who has a written record proving they believe Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided, later adding that Barrett met this litmus test.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, even applauded Barrett for being “unashamedly pro-life” during the confirmation hearing. “This is the first time in American history that we’ve nominated a woman who is unashamedly pro-life and embraces her faith without apology, and she is going to the court,” he said.
Two documents surfaced before Barrett’s hearings which confirmed her personal opinion on reproductive rights. In 2006, Barrett signed her name to a newspaper ad created by an anti-abortion group which argued that “it’s time to put an end to the barbaric legacy of Roe v. Wade and restore laws that protect the lives of unborn children.” In 2013, while she was a part of Notre Dame University’s Faculty for Life group, she signed her name in support of another anti-abortion ad to “renew our call for the unborn to be protected in law and welcomed in life.”
Barrett was also formerly a part of The Federalist Society, a national organization of conservative lawyers. The organization maintains that it takes no official policy positions but has a long track record of supporting judges with anti-abortion, anti-LGBTQ rights and anti-voting rights records. The Federalist Society also vetted Barrett and supported her nomination to the Supreme Court.
Jamie Manson, president of Catholics for Choice, a national group of Catholics who support safe and legal abortion, said with Barrett’s confirmation the court’s conservative majority no longer represents all Americans, including Catholic Americans.
Advertisement