thewashingtonexaminer--2020-02-06--DNC chairman casts doubt on Iowa results

With Iowa caucus results still rolling in three days after voting , the leader of the Democratic National Committee said he has doubts about the figures released so far .
`` Enough is enough .
In light of the problems that have emerged in the implementation of the delegate selection plan and in order to assure public confidence in the results , '' tweeted DNC Chairman Tom Perez Thursday .
`` I am calling on the Iowa Democratic Party to immediately begin a recanvass . ''
A re-canvassing of results is a step just short of an official recount and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A re-canvassing of the Iowa results would likely involve having local party officials verify ballots with how they were officially recorded .
A recount , on the other hand , is a court-ordered process that is often much more time-consuming and involves a number of mandated steps .
Perez 's demands come as the Iowa Democratic Party has yet to release the full results of the caucus .
By Thursday afternoon , 97 % of the results had come in , although questions remained over their accuracy .
A number of outlets reported @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iowa precincts .
There remains no evidence that the errors in the data indicate a bias against any candidate in particular .
On Wednesday , Perez released a statement announcing that the DNC had staffers working with Iowa officials to `` ensure that all votes are counted . ''
“ Our immediate goal is to ensure that every vote is counted as quickly as possible .
Accuracy is our guidepost , '' he said .
It remains unclear whether the DNC has the power to enforce a re-canvassing , as the Iowa caucus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

With Iowa caucus results still rolling in three days after voting, the leader of the Democratic National Committee said he has doubts about the figures released so far.
"Enough is enough. In light of the problems that have emerged in the implementation of the delegate selection plan and in order to assure public confidence in the results," tweeted DNC Chairman Tom Perez Thursday. "I am calling on the Iowa Democratic Party to immediately begin a recanvass."
A re-canvassing of results is a step just short of an official recount and involves the double-checking of existing records. A re-canvassing of the Iowa results would likely involve having local party officials verify ballots with how they were officially recorded. A recount, on the other hand, is a court-ordered process that is often much more time-consuming and involves a number of mandated steps.
Perez's demands come as the Iowa Democratic Party has yet to release the full results of the caucus. By Thursday afternoon, 97% of the results had come in, although questions remained over their accuracy.
A number of outlets reported inconsistencies in the data provided by individual Iowa precincts. There remains no evidence that the errors in the data indicate a bias against any candidate in particular.
On Wednesday, Perez released a statement announcing that the DNC had staffers working with Iowa officials to "ensure that all votes are counted."
“Our immediate goal is to ensure that every vote is counted as quickly as possible. Accuracy is our guidepost," he said.
It remains unclear whether the DNC has the power to enforce a re-canvassing, as the Iowa caucus was operated solely by the state party.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-02-06--Andrew Yang says what Democrats are too afraid to admit about Iowa

Andrew Yang is the in the 2020 presidential race , and ( not that it matters ) he also has the .
The best thing about Yang , though , is that he ’ s willing to admit what every other Democrat has too large an ego to say .
After the that was the Iowa caucuses earlier this week , Democratic leaders scrambled to straighten out the results that they had botched so badly .
Bernie Sanders fans were with the handling of the situation , but it appears that no Democrat was willing to say what this failure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ town hall in New Hampshire on Wednesday , a CNN anchor pointed to Yang ’ s signature “ math ” pin and jokingly asked if he ’ d offered some math help to the Democrats in Iowa .
“ Oh my gosh , ” Yang responded .
“ One reason I am pumped to be here in New Hampshire is you all are gon na vote Feb. 11 , and you know when we ’ re gon na find out the results ?
Feb. 11 !
” After laughter and applause from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ debacle will mean for voters .
He continued : The plus side of Andrew Yang ’ s long-shot campaign is that he can go ahead and admit what other Democrats are too afraid to say .
If we can ’ t expect politicians to do something as simple as accurately count votes , how can we trust them with ?

Andrew Yang is the most likable candidate in the 2020 presidential race, and (not that it matters) he also has the best celebrity endorsements . The best thing about Yang, though, is that he’s willing to admit what every other Democrat has too large an ego to say.
After the disaster that was the Iowa caucuses earlier this week, Democratic leaders scrambled to straighten out the results that they had botched so badly. Bernie Sanders fans were furious with the handling of the situation, but it appears that no Democrat was willing to say what this failure of the Democratic Party actually meant .
Except for Yang.
At a town hall in New Hampshire on Wednesday, a CNN anchor pointed to Yang’s signature “math” pin and jokingly asked if he’d offered some math help to the Democrats in Iowa.
“Oh my gosh,” Yang responded. “One reason I am pumped to be here in New Hampshire is you all are gonna vote Feb. 11, and you know when we’re gonna find out the results? Feb. 11!”
After laughter and applause from the audience, Yang explained what the Iowa debacle will mean for voters. He continued:
“I feel for the Democrats and the people of Iowa, but the fact is this was really an avoidable error that shot the party in the foot, and it’s going to be harder to convince Americans that we can entrust massive systems with government if we can’t count votes on the same night in a way that’s clear, transparent, and reliable.”


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-02-06--Democrats accuse Trump supporters of flooding Iowa caucus results reporting hotline

Iowa Democrats are pointing fingers at President Trump supporters for exacerbating the state party 's delay in naming a winner of the opening 2020 primary contest .
After encountering glitches with a mobile app designed for Iowa precincts to report their results to party headquarters , caucus leaders resorted to phoning-in their alignment and delegate data .
But amid the chaos , the hotline number was posted online via photos of internal paperwork , contributing to some officials being placed on hold for hours .
Ken Sagar , a top Democrat on Iowa 's central committee who answered calls last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a teleconference Wednesday night that he spoke to people who instead wanted to convey their support for the president , according to Bloomberg News .
While the Iowa Democratic Party did n't immediately respond to the Washington Examiner 's request for comment , Trump campaign spokesman Tim Murtaugh said he did n't `` know anything about that . ''
`` Perhaps Iowa Democrats should consider using a phone app that actually works next time .
They are engulfed in the worst election embarrassment in modern history and they ’ re looking for someone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Murtaugh quipped .
NBC News reported Thursday internet trolls could have mobilized using 4chan message boards .
More than 48 hours after Iowa 's caucuses , the race appears to be a tie between former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg , 38 , and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders , 78 , based on figures provided by 97 % of precincts .
The past couple of days have been marked by turmoil , not only for Iowa Democrats but the Democratic Party as a whole , as questions swirl @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first-in-the-nation status and whether the nation can trust the final results it delivers .
The 2020 candidates vying for the right to challenge Trump in the fall have already moved onto New Hampshire ahead of that state 's primary on Feb. 11 .
But the eventual winner will be denied the traditional `` bump '' in positive press coverage , polling , and fundraising usually experienced after finishing first in Iowa .
The Iowa Democratic Party first attributed the delay to `` quality control '' after noting `` inconsistencies '' in the data @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it emerged the app had failed to send information to headquarters because of a `` coding error . ''
Since then , the state party has been slowly releasing batches of numbers , saying it was exercising an `` abundance of caution '' by verifying what they have against a paper trail of attendance records and preference cards .
On Wednesday , however , it put out results that included a strong showing for former Massachusetts Gov .
Patrick Deval , who did n't compete in the kick-off caucuses .

Iowa Democrats are pointing fingers at President Trump supporters for exacerbating the state party's delay in naming a winner of the opening 2020 primary contest.
After encountering glitches with a mobile app designed for Iowa precincts to report their results to party headquarters, caucus leaders resorted to phoning-in their alignment and delegate data.
But amid the chaos, the hotline number was posted online via photos of internal paperwork, contributing to some officials being placed on hold for hours.
Ken Sagar, a top Democrat on Iowa's central committee who answered calls last Monday night, told party leaders during a teleconference Wednesday night that he spoke to people who instead wanted to convey their support for the president, according to Bloomberg News.
While the Iowa Democratic Party didn't immediately respond to the Washington Examiner's request for comment, Trump campaign spokesman Tim Murtaugh said he didn't "know anything about that."
"Perhaps Iowa Democrats should consider using a phone app that actually works next time. They are engulfed in the worst election embarrassment in modern history and they’re looking for someone to blame. It’s pathetic,” Murtaugh quipped.
NBC News reported Thursday internet trolls could have mobilized using 4chan message boards.
More than 48 hours after Iowa's caucuses, the race appears to be a tie between former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, 38, and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, 78, based on figures provided by 97% of precincts.
The past couple of days have been marked by turmoil, not only for Iowa Democrats but the Democratic Party as a whole, as questions swirl over whether the state should retain its first-in-the-nation status and whether the nation can trust the final results it delivers.
The 2020 candidates vying for the right to challenge Trump in the fall have already moved onto New Hampshire ahead of that state's primary on Feb. 11. But the eventual winner will be denied the traditional "bump" in positive press coverage, polling, and fundraising usually experienced after finishing first in Iowa.
The Iowa Democratic Party first attributed the delay to "quality control" after noting "inconsistencies" in the data it had received from its precincts before it emerged the app had failed to send information to headquarters because of a "coding error."
Since then, the state party has been slowly releasing batches of numbers, saying it was exercising an "abundance of caution" by verifying what they have against a paper trail of attendance records and preference cards. On Wednesday, however, it put out results that included a strong showing for former Massachusetts Gov. Patrick Deval, who didn't compete in the kick-off caucuses.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-02-06--Iowa mess gets worse: Analysis finds inconsistencies in over 100 official caucus-site reports

The Iowa Democratic Party 's woes in reporting results from its presidential nominating caucuses are multiplying , with an analysis of official results finding inconsistencies in more than 100 precincts .
The New York Times found instances where vote tallies did not add up , where state delegate equivalents ( the traditional measure used to determine the winner ) were awarded incorrectly , or where raw results should not be possible .
It 's the latest headache for Iowa Democrats , who ran Monday 's caucuses and still have not reported an official winner .
Changes to caucus rules this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first alignment for candidates who met a 15 % viability threshold , meaning that it should be impossible for candidates who met 15 % on the first alignment to have a smaller number of votes on the final alignment .
The analysis found at least 10 instances where a candidate viable on the first alignment lost support on the final alignment , which would not be possible under correctly-followed caucus procedures .
In at least 70 precincts , there are more votes recorded for the final alignment than on the first alignment , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no more caucusgoers are allowed to join a precinct after the start time at 7 p.m .
Candidates who won more votes received fewer state delegate equivalents in at least 15 precinct sites , and a few were awarded more state delegate equivalents than they were allotted .
Inconsistencies identified in the analysis are only the latest snafu in the Iowa results .
A coding glitch in an app meant to quickly transmit results from the precinct sites to party headquarters on Monday night delayed the first results for a day , derailing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to New Hampshire uncertain of the ultimate winner .
That caused the state party to verify results manually , but a backup phone line meant to be used to report results had long hold times and was flooded with calls from supporters of President Trump , causing further delays .
Some results are being sent by snail mail .
As official tallies slowly trickled in , one batch of results reported Wednesday incorrectly awarded support to long-shot candidates , businessman Tom Steyer and former Massachusetts Gov .
Deval Patrick , but was quickly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iowa Democratic Party Chairman Tom Price said Tuesday that the app problems `` did not impact the ability of precinct chairs to report data accurately . ''
But problems identified by the New York Times suggest that those running the more than 1,600 caucus sites had difficulty following the new rules or performing the `` caucus math '' to determine delegate allocation .
The problems would not have been recognized without a new transparency rule — pushed by supporters of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders , following his close loss to Hillary Clinton in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iowa Democratic Party is reporting raw vote totals in the precincts for first and final alignment .
In previous years , only the state delegate equivalent figure was reported .
Current official results with 96 % of precincts reporting , with the inconsistencies , reveal a razor-thin race with former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg with 26.2 % of state delegate equivalents and Sanders with 26.1 % .
Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former Vice President Joe Biden are in third and fourth place with 18.2 % and 15.8 % @ @ @

The Iowa Democratic Party's woes in reporting results from its presidential nominating caucuses are multiplying, with an analysis of official results finding inconsistencies in more than 100 precincts.
The New York Times found instances where vote tallies did not add up, where state delegate equivalents (the traditional measure used to determine the winner) were awarded incorrectly, or where raw results should not be possible.
It's the latest headache for Iowa Democrats, who ran Monday's caucuses and still have not reported an official winner.
Changes to caucus rules this year included locking in support on the first alignment for candidates who met a 15% viability threshold, meaning that it should be impossible for candidates who met 15% on the first alignment to have a smaller number of votes on the final alignment. The analysis found at least 10 instances where a candidate viable on the first alignment lost support on the final alignment, which would not be possible under correctly-followed caucus procedures.
In at least 70 precincts, there are more votes recorded for the final alignment than on the first alignment, which should also not be possible since no more caucusgoers are allowed to join a precinct after the start time at 7 p.m.
Candidates who won more votes received fewer state delegate equivalents in at least 15 precinct sites, and a few were awarded more state delegate equivalents than they were allotted.
Inconsistencies identified in the analysis are only the latest snafu in the Iowa results.
A coding glitch in an app meant to quickly transmit results from the precinct sites to party headquarters on Monday night delayed the first results for a day, derailing candidate victory parties and sending them all to New Hampshire uncertain of the ultimate winner. That caused the state party to verify results manually, but a backup phone line meant to be used to report results had long hold times and was flooded with calls from supporters of President Trump, causing further delays. Some results are being sent by snail mail.
As official tallies slowly trickled in, one batch of results reported Wednesday incorrectly awarded support to long-shot candidates, businessman Tom Steyer and former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, but was quickly corrected. The other inconsistencies remain.
Iowa Democratic Party Chairman Tom Price said Tuesday that the app problems "did not impact the ability of precinct chairs to report data accurately." But problems identified by the New York Times suggest that those running the more than 1,600 caucus sites had difficulty following the new rules or performing the "caucus math" to determine delegate allocation.
The problems would not have been recognized without a new transparency rule — pushed by supporters of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, following his close loss to Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Iowa caucuses — where the Iowa Democratic Party is reporting raw vote totals in the precincts for first and final alignment. In previous years, only the state delegate equivalent figure was reported.
Current official results with 96% of precincts reporting, with the inconsistencies, reveal a razor-thin race with former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg with 26.2% of state delegate equivalents and Sanders with 26.1%. Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former Vice President Joe Biden are in third and fourth place with 18.2% and 15.8%, respectively.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-02-06--Bernie Sanders campaign sees best fundraising month to date with $25M January haul

Sen. Bernie Sanders set a record for himself by raising $ 25 million in January , giving his 2020 presidential campaign a financial lead over almost the entire Democratic field .
The independent Vermont senator experienced his best fundraising month to date , according to a Thursday statement released by his team .
Over 1.3 million donations were given to aid Sanders in his bid for the presidency , coming from 648,000 small donors .
Among those who donated include 219,000 new donors .
The average donation was $ 18.72 , with the most common occupation among donors being `` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it plans to use the funds toward boosting its performance in Super Tuesday states .
Since the announcement of his White House bid , Sanders , 78 , has amassed approximately $ 121 million , collecting $ 96 million in 2019 .
During the last financial quarter of 2019 , Sanders raised $ 34.5 million , leading the pack of Democrats running for president .
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is the only Democrat with a campaign treasury that is larger than Sanders , spending over $ 200 million in five @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the only Democratic presidential candidates who came close to Sanders 's fundraising levels were former Mayor of South Bend , Indiana , Pete Buttigieg , former Vice President Joe Biden , and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren , raising $ 24.5 million , $ 22.7 million , and $ 21.2 million respectively in the fourth financial quarter of 2019 .
On the Republican side , President Trump has collected an immense campaign war chest , raising a total of $ 463 million toward the reelection campaign in 2019 alone .
By October 2019 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ approximately twice that of President Barack Obama 's reelection campaign at that point in the race .

Sen. Bernie Sanders set a record for himself by raising $25 million in January, giving his 2020 presidential campaign a financial lead over almost the entire Democratic field.
The independent Vermont senator experienced his best fundraising month to date, according to a Thursday statement released by his team. Over 1.3 million donations were given to aid Sanders in his bid for the presidency, coming from 648,000 small donors.
Among those who donated include 219,000 new donors. The average donation was $18.72, with the most common occupation among donors being "teacher." The Sanders campaign said it plans to use the funds toward boosting its performance in Super Tuesday states.
Since the announcement of his White House bid, Sanders, 78, has amassed approximately $121 million, collecting $96 million in 2019. During the last financial quarter of 2019, Sanders raised $34.5 million, leading the pack of Democrats running for president. Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is the only Democrat with a campaign treasury that is larger than Sanders, spending over $200 million in five weeks.
By the end of 2019, the only Democratic presidential candidates who came close to Sanders's fundraising levels were former Mayor of South Bend, Indiana, Pete Buttigieg, former Vice President Joe Biden, and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, raising $24.5 million, $22.7 million, and $21.2 million respectively in the fourth financial quarter of 2019.
On the Republican side, President Trump has collected an immense campaign war chest, raising a total of $463 million toward the reelection campaign in 2019 alone. By October 2019, Trump's reelection campaign had raised approximately twice that of President Barack Obama's reelection campaign at that point in the race.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-02-07--Cory Gardner is in the middle, facing crossfire

As the 2020 elections approach , Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner is under fire .
Democrats , of course , want him out .
As one of only two sitting Republican senators representing a state Hillary Clinton won in 2016 , Gardner is pegged by the Democratic National Committee as one of its top 2020 targets .
And since 2017 , left-wing Colorado activists have been beating their war drums against him .
Armed with satirical , life-sized cardboard cutouts of the senator , and a ream of grievances , groups such as Progress Now Colorado and Indivisible Front Range Resistance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state , demanding Gardner ’ s head .
The cries of dissent reached fever pitch when Gardner voted ( with 50 other Republicans ) not to allow more witnesses in the impeachment trial of President Trump .
Days later , Gardner joined the majority of his Republican colleagues to acquit the president of the charges leveled against him by Democrats in the House of Representatives .
“ It ’ s time to unite and fight , ” state Rep. Joe Salazar shouted Saturday during an anti-Gardner rally in Denver .
“ We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We are going to come out.
” But uniting has proved difficult .
Nine Democratic candidates are locked in a bitter primary battle for the Senate nomination , in large part because of former Gov .
and erstwhile presidential candidate John Hickenlooper ’ s late entry into the race .
Hickenlooper is still embroiled in a corporate ethics scandal from his time as governor .
Many state Democrats resent his presumptuous late candidacy .
Hickenlooper ’ s primary foe , former Speaker of the Colorado House of Representatives Andrew Romanoff , has repeatedly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into the race by the national party , which is true .
Romanoff has taunted Hickenlooper , saying he knows he “ wouldn ’ t be good ” at the job , which Hickenlooper admitted during his presidential run last year .
At a January forum featuring all of the Democratic candidates , Romanoff tore into national party leaders for attempting to turn the “ contest into a coronation.
” The Gardner campaign has piled on as well , stoking the fires of division on the Left amid Hickenlooper ’ s calls for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ universal healthcare and the elimination of fossil fuels ) .
Romanoff ’ s activist base has swung sharply to the left .
“ There is no such thing as a ‘ moderate ’ Democrat anymore , ” Jerrod Dobkin , Gardner ’ s campaign communications director , told the Washington Examiner .
“ All of the Democrat candidates want to impose their radical agenda on hardworking Coloradans that will destroy the economy and kill jobs.
” In any other race , division among Democrats might give Gardner a clear edge .
But here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is also getting hammered by anti-Trump Republicans for voting along party lines in Trump ’ s impeachment trial .
In the most flagrant example , a January advertisement released by the Lincoln Project slammed Gardner for “ putting Trump over Colorado every time.
” The Lincoln Project is a group fronted by disgruntled Never Trump Republicans including George Conway , husband of Trump ’ s counselor Kellyanne Conway , plus Steve Schmidt , John Weaver , and Rick Wilson .
“ Why do the polls show you headed for humiliating defeat in November @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for us , not Donald Trump , ” the ad says .
“ Tough people built our great state , and they ’ ve always fought for what ’ s right .
The only thing you ’ ll fight for is Trump .
You ’ re just another Trump servant : weak , frightened , impotent , a small man terrified of a political bully.
” These charges are demonstrably false .
Polls do not show Gardner headed for a humiliating defeat in November .
And he is far from written off .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said , `` I still have a lot of belief in Cory . ''
The Cook Political Report lists Gardner ’ s seat as a toss-up , as it does those of fellow Republican Sens .
Susan Collins of Maine and Martha McSally of Arizona .
Gardner ’ s record proves he ’ s not just another Trump servant , beginning with the fact that he did not vote for Trump in 2016 .
Gardner wrote in now-Vice President Mike Pence instead after calling for Trump to step @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his Access Hollywood tape in October 2016 .
When Trump first took office , Gardner continued to be critical .
After the deadly 2017 “ Unite the Right ” rally in Charlottesville , he was the first Republican to condemn Trump ’ s “ very fine people on both sides ” response .
Gardner tweeted , “ Mr .
President — we must call evil by its name .
These were white supremacists and this was domestic terrorism.
” Similarly , when Trump endorsed the doomed Alabama Senate candidate , Roy Moore , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , following accusations that Moore had engaged in inappropriate sexual contact with teenage girls while in his 30s , Gardner spoke out .
He said Moore ’ s accusers “ spoke with courage and truth , ” and he called for Moore to withdraw from the race .
These were strong words from the then-chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee .
Gardner threatened that if Moore refused and went on to win , there would be a Senate “ vote to expel him.
” Despite this , however , Gardner is no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solid relationship with the president and his administration , using it to swing federal dollars to Colorado .
His most significant achievements have been his pushes for the relocation of the Bureau of Land Management in western Colorado and the establishment of the new Space Command in Colorado Springs .
He ’ s also been a fervent supporter of Trump ’ s United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement and a reliable vote in the confirmation of Trump ’ s judicial nominees , including the contentious Supreme Court pick of Brett Kavanaugh .
For his support in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NRSC through the first half of Trump ’ s term , Gardner earned a personal commendation from the president in 2018 .
While speaking at a rally in West Virginia , Trump called Gardner ’ s work to maintain Republican control of the Senate “ tremendous.
” Two years later , it ’ s going to take a tremendous amount of work to keep Gardner in office , and , by extension , keep Republicans running the Senate .
His shot at reelection depends on his ability to repudiate the charges brought against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , from Democrats and Never Trump Republicans .
Gardner must prove to voters what his record already shows : that he truly is a centrist , undeterred by multifronted partisan attacks .
But Gardner is no stranger to the centrist ’ s high-wire walk .
In fact , it ’ s how he broke into the Senate in 2014 .
A look back on this election provides some insight into how Gardner will face similar challenges in 2020 .
He announced his Senate run after serving two terms in the House .
There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rising star after ousting freshman Democrat Betsy Markey in 2010 .
Like many Republicans who cut their teeth in the Tea Party wave , Gardner went to Washington promising to reduce “ wasteful and duplicative ” federal programs , as well as to repeal and replace President Barack Obama ’ s signature healthcare law .
Gardner ’ s 2014 Senate run was essentially an expansion of his 2010 platform , but this time aimed at the vulnerable first-term Democrat Mark Udall .
Upon announcing his campaign , Gardner expressed frustration that Udall seemingly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ telling the Washington Examiner , “ So , my wife said , ‘ You can stay in the House and get reelected , or you can make a difference by running for the Senate.
’ ” Gardner ’ s campaign focused on fundamental issues : healthcare , the economy , and energy .
He vowed to be a “ new kind of Republican ” who focused on bipartisanship and delivering results for Colorado .
The Udall campaign launched a spectacularly expensive broadside developed from the so-called “ Colorado Model , ” which had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2004 .
The model , which is now the Democratic playbook for every high-profile race , was once explained by former member of the Colorado House of Representatives Rob Witwer as , “ First , establish the narrative that the Republican candidate is extreme , narrow-minded , and obsessed with social issues .
Second , wait for him to confirm that narrative , either through a gaffe or a loose remark .
Third , having reduced the candidate to a caricature , use state-of-the-art data and voter mobilization to bring the election home.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the social issue was his past support for “ personhood , ” a pro-life cause that sought to protect unborn babies as “ persons.
” It ’ s a deeply held belief among many pro-lifers but not considered politically viable rhetoric among movement leaders .
The Udall campaign alleged that Gardner , a Missouri Synod Lutheran , was a fundamentalist , woman-hating bigot bent on imposing the strictest restrictions on abortion and outright bans on birth control .
Aided by the abortion industry ’ s political arms , $ 5 million in cash @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ecosystem of left-wing statewide organizations , the Udall campaign saturated Colorado ’ s airwaves with nonstop sex talk .
Gardner refused to be defined by this narrative .
Not only did he rescind his past support of state-level personhood measures , but he also wrote an op-ed in the Denver Post advocating over-the-counter birth control for all women .
“ Too many people in Washington would rather play politics with contraception instead of actually making life easier for women , ” Gardner wrote .
“ Too many Democrats prefer to attack Republicans on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make contraception more available and affordable , and too many Republicans are afraid to break the mold.
” When the issue continued to come up — it did with great regularity — Gardner brushed it off with jokes .
“ It ’ s simply outrageous to believe that somebody would try to ban birth control , ” Gardner said during a debate with Udall .
“ That ’ s simply outrageous .
In fact , the first time my wife and I saw a television ad by Sen. Udall that said we wanted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ looked at me , smiled , and said , ‘ Didn ’ t you used to pick up my prescription ?
’ ” Gardner ’ s good humor and commitment to issues outside of the bedroom bested Udall .
A month before the election , the usually liberal Denver Post endorsed Gardner , citing his “ energy and ideas ” while decrying Udall ’ s “ obnoxious one-issue campaign.
” Yet , in the race ’ s final week , Udall continued to hammer Gardner on the issue .
“ If Cory Gardner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up on condoms , ” warned an ad from NARAL Pro-Choice America , echoing a sentiment Udall had voiced in his own admonitions to voters .
The senator had become so hyperfocused that the candidate ’ s critics dubbed him “ Mark Uterus.
” In the end , the Colorado Model backfired , and Gardner won a narrow victory .
He succeeded by deflecting Udall ’ s assaults and branding the Democrat as the real narrow-minded and social issue-obsessed candidate .
Gardner faces a similar predicament in 2020 , as critics from both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Trump servant.
” But as in 2014 , the Gardner campaign is confident .
He has sought to embrace both Trump and his responsibilities to the state , explaining how a working relationship with the president has delivered results for Colorado .
“ Sen .
Gardner has repeatedly said he welcomes the president to come to Colorado and would invite the entire delegation to join them to celebrate relocating the Bureau of Land Management headquarters to Grand Junction , establishing Space Force in Colorado Springs , and many other things they have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told the Washington Examiner .
“ If Colorado Democrats insist on campaigning against this state ’ s success stories , then they simply do n't believe in Colorado the way Sen. Gardner does.
” As for Gardner ’ s Republican critics , a source close to the campaign pointed out that ads such as the one from the Lincoln Project don ’ t have enough money behind them to get significant airplay on Colorado TV .
In short , there ’ s punditry but no infrastructure .
Without “ enough eyeballs to make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they remain just that .
The Gardner campaign is betting on Trump not being nearly as contentious in Colorado at large as he is in Denver and its suburbs .
After all , Trump is not as hated in the state as past Republicans have been .
He lost the state by only 5 points in 2016 , while Mitt Romney lost it by nearly 6 points in 2012 and John McCain by about 9 points in 2008 .
Coloradans are known to split their ballots .
The year Gardner won his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ No matter which candidate ends up facing him in 2020 , Gardner ’ s campaign is not convinced that centrist Colorado voters will sign on for increasingly left-leaning proposals such as the Green New Deal and Medicare for All that will require massive increases in government spending .
“ While most folks looking at Colorado ’ s recent elections focus on the performance of Democratic candidates , equally important is the overwhelming evidence that conservative economic principles can win at the ballot as well , ” NRSC spokeswoman Joanna Rodriguez said , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ballot measure that would have removed revenue caps on Colorado ’ s state budget .
Still , the race will be tight .
Gardner may have a bipartisan record , but any record can be weaponized .
This is bound to be one of the most expensive races of 2020 for both Republicans and Democrats .
Gardner ’ s success depends on whether he can convince voters he is still that “ new kind of Republican ” from 2014 and that it is his opponents who are narrow-minded and obsessive .

As the 2020 elections approach, Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner is under fire.
Democrats, of course, want him out. As one of only two sitting Republican senators representing a state Hillary Clinton won in 2016, Gardner is pegged by the Democratic National Committee as one of its top 2020 targets.
And since 2017, left-wing Colorado activists have been beating their war drums against him. Armed with satirical, life-sized cardboard cutouts of the senator, and a ream of grievances, groups such as Progress Now Colorado and Indivisible Front Range Resistance, have held town hall meetings across the state, demanding Gardner’s head.
The cries of dissent reached fever pitch when Gardner voted (with 50 other Republicans) not to allow more witnesses in the impeachment trial of President Trump. Days later, Gardner joined the majority of his Republican colleagues to acquit the president of the charges leveled against him by Democrats in the House of Representatives.
“It’s time to unite and fight,” state Rep. Joe Salazar shouted Saturday during an anti-Gardner rally in Denver. “We vote, and we vote big. We are going to come out.”
But uniting has proved difficult. Nine Democratic candidates are locked in a bitter primary battle for the Senate nomination, in large part because of former Gov. and erstwhile presidential candidate John Hickenlooper’s late entry into the race. Hickenlooper is still embroiled in a corporate ethics scandal from his time as governor. Many state Democrats resent his presumptuous late candidacy.
Hickenlooper’s primary foe, former Speaker of the Colorado House of Representatives Andrew Romanoff, has repeatedly accused Hickenlooper of being “recruited” into the race by the national party, which is true. Romanoff has taunted Hickenlooper, saying he knows he “wouldn’t be good” at the job, which Hickenlooper admitted during his presidential run last year. At a January forum featuring all of the Democratic candidates, Romanoff tore into national party leaders for attempting to turn the “contest into a coronation.”
The Gardner campaign has piled on as well, stoking the fires of division on the Left amid Hickenlooper’s calls for moderation (such as slowing progress toward universal healthcare and the elimination of fossil fuels). Romanoff’s activist base has swung sharply to the left.
“There is no such thing as a ‘moderate’ Democrat anymore,” Jerrod Dobkin, Gardner’s campaign communications director, told the Washington Examiner. “All of the Democrat candidates want to impose their radical agenda on hardworking Coloradans that will destroy the economy and kill jobs.”
In any other race, division among Democrats might give Gardner a clear edge. But here, division cuts both ways. Gardner is also getting hammered by anti-Trump Republicans for voting along party lines in Trump’s impeachment trial. In the most flagrant example, a January advertisement released by the Lincoln Project slammed Gardner for “putting Trump over Colorado every time.” The Lincoln Project is a group fronted by disgruntled Never Trump Republicans including George Conway, husband of Trump’s counselor Kellyanne Conway, plus Steve Schmidt, John Weaver, and Rick Wilson.
“Why do the polls show you headed for humiliating defeat in November? Because Colorado trusted you to work for us, not Donald Trump,” the ad says. “Tough people built our great state, and they’ve always fought for what’s right. The only thing you’ll fight for is Trump. You’re just another Trump servant: weak, frightened, impotent, a small man terrified of a political bully.”
These charges are demonstrably false. Polls do not show Gardner headed for a humiliating defeat in November. And he is far from written off. Talking to the Washington Examiner, GOP House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said, "I still have a lot of belief in Cory."
The Cook Political Report lists Gardner’s seat as a toss-up, as it does those of fellow Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Martha McSally of Arizona. Gardner’s record proves he’s not just another Trump servant, beginning with the fact that he did not vote for Trump in 2016. Gardner wrote in now-Vice President Mike Pence instead after calling for Trump to step off the ticket following the leak of his Access Hollywood tape in October 2016.
When Trump first took office, Gardner continued to be critical. After the deadly 2017 “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, he was the first Republican to condemn Trump’s “very fine people on both sides” response. Gardner tweeted, “Mr. President — we must call evil by its name. These were white supremacists and this was domestic terrorism.”
Similarly, when Trump endorsed the doomed Alabama Senate candidate, Roy Moore, in a special election later that year, following accusations that Moore had engaged in inappropriate sexual contact with teenage girls while in his 30s, Gardner spoke out. He said Moore’s accusers “spoke with courage and truth,” and he called for Moore to withdraw from the race. These were strong words from the then-chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. Gardner threatened that if Moore refused and went on to win, there would be a Senate “vote to expel him.”
Despite this, however, Gardner is no Never Trumper. He has built a solid relationship with the president and his administration, using it to swing federal dollars to Colorado. His most significant achievements have been his pushes for the relocation of the Bureau of Land Management in western Colorado and the establishment of the new Space Command in Colorado Springs. He’s also been a fervent supporter of Trump’s United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement and a reliable vote in the confirmation of Trump’s judicial nominees, including the contentious Supreme Court pick of Brett Kavanaugh.
For his support in the Senate and his leadership of the NRSC through the first half of Trump’s term, Gardner earned a personal commendation from the president in 2018. While speaking at a rally in West Virginia, Trump called Gardner’s work to maintain Republican control of the Senate “tremendous.”
Two years later, it’s going to take a tremendous amount of work to keep Gardner in office, and, by extension, keep Republicans running the Senate. His shot at reelection depends on his ability to repudiate the charges brought against him from the Left and the Right, from Democrats and Never Trump Republicans. Gardner must prove to voters what his record already shows: that he truly is a centrist, undeterred by multifronted partisan attacks.
But Gardner is no stranger to the centrist’s high-wire walk. In fact, it’s how he broke into the Senate in 2014. A look back on this election provides some insight into how Gardner will face similar challenges in 2020.
He announced his Senate run after serving two terms in the House. There, he had been seen as a rising star after ousting freshman Democrat Betsy Markey in 2010. Like many Republicans who cut their teeth in the Tea Party wave, Gardner went to Washington promising to reduce “wasteful and duplicative” federal programs, as well as to repeal and replace President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare law.
Gardner’s 2014 Senate run was essentially an expansion of his 2010 platform, but this time aimed at the vulnerable first-term Democrat Mark Udall. Upon announcing his campaign, Gardner expressed frustration that Udall seemingly placed loyalty to Obama over Colorado, telling the Washington Examiner, “So, my wife said, ‘You can stay in the House and get reelected, or you can make a difference by running for the Senate.’”
Gardner’s campaign focused on fundamental issues: healthcare, the economy, and energy. He vowed to be a “new kind of Republican” who focused on bipartisanship and delivering results for Colorado.
The Udall campaign launched a spectacularly expensive broadside developed from the so-called “Colorado Model,” which had secured Democratic wins in the state since 2004. The model, which is now the Democratic playbook for every high-profile race, was once explained by former member of the Colorado House of Representatives Rob Witwer as, “First, establish the narrative that the Republican candidate is extreme, narrow-minded, and obsessed with social issues. Second, wait for him to confirm that narrative, either through a gaffe or a loose remark. Third, having reduced the candidate to a caricature, use state-of-the-art data and voter mobilization to bring the election home.”
In Gardner’s case, the social issue was his past support for “personhood,” a pro-life cause that sought to protect unborn babies as “persons.” It’s a deeply held belief among many pro-lifers but not considered politically viable rhetoric among movement leaders.
The Udall campaign alleged that Gardner, a Missouri Synod Lutheran, was a fundamentalist, woman-hating bigot bent on imposing the strictest restrictions on abortion and outright bans on birth control. Aided by the abortion industry’s political arms, $5 million in cash from Tom Steyer, and a healthy ecosystem of left-wing statewide organizations, the Udall campaign saturated Colorado’s airwaves with nonstop sex talk.
Gardner refused to be defined by this narrative. Not only did he rescind his past support of state-level personhood measures, but he also wrote an op-ed in the Denver Post advocating over-the-counter birth control for all women.
“Too many people in Washington would rather play politics with contraception instead of actually making life easier for women,” Gardner wrote. “Too many Democrats prefer to attack Republicans on the issue of contraception rather than actually make contraception more available and affordable, and too many Republicans are afraid to break the mold.”
When the issue continued to come up — it did with great regularity — Gardner brushed it off with jokes.
“It’s simply outrageous to believe that somebody would try to ban birth control,” Gardner said during a debate with Udall. “That’s simply outrageous. In fact, the first time my wife and I saw a television ad by Sen. Udall that said we wanted to ban birth control, my wife looked at me, smiled, and said, ‘Didn’t you used to pick up my prescription?’”
Gardner’s good humor and commitment to issues outside of the bedroom bested Udall. A month before the election, the usually liberal Denver Post endorsed Gardner, citing his “energy and ideas” while decrying Udall’s “obnoxious one-issue campaign.”
Yet, in the race’s final week, Udall continued to hammer Gardner on the issue.
“If Cory Gardner gets his way, you better stock up on condoms,” warned an ad from NARAL Pro-Choice America, echoing a sentiment Udall had voiced in his own admonitions to voters. The senator had become so hyperfocused that the candidate’s critics dubbed him “Mark Uterus.”
In the end, the Colorado Model backfired, and Gardner won a narrow victory. He succeeded by deflecting Udall’s assaults and branding the Democrat as the real narrow-minded and social issue-obsessed candidate.
Gardner faces a similar predicament in 2020, as critics from both sides attempt to cast him as a “Trump servant.” But as in 2014, the Gardner campaign is confident. He has sought to embrace both Trump and his responsibilities to the state, explaining how a working relationship with the president has delivered results for Colorado.
“Sen. Gardner has repeatedly said he welcomes the president to come to Colorado and would invite the entire delegation to join them to celebrate relocating the Bureau of Land Management headquarters to Grand Junction, establishing Space Force in Colorado Springs, and many other things they have delivered for this state,” Dobkin told the Washington Examiner. “If Colorado Democrats insist on campaigning against this state’s success stories, then they simply don't believe in Colorado the way Sen. Gardner does.”
As for Gardner’s Republican critics, a source close to the campaign pointed out that ads such as the one from the Lincoln Project don’t have enough money behind them to get significant airplay on Colorado TV. In short, there’s punditry but no infrastructure. Without “enough eyeballs to make a difference” on Never Trump jeremiads, they remain just that.
The Gardner campaign is betting on Trump not being nearly as contentious in Colorado at large as he is in Denver and its suburbs. After all, Trump is not as hated in the state as past Republicans have been. He lost the state by only 5 points in 2016, while Mitt Romney lost it by nearly 6 points in 2012 and John McCain by about 9 points in 2008. Coloradans are known to split their ballots. The year Gardner won his seat, Hickenlooper was reelected governor.
No matter which candidate ends up facing him in 2020, Gardner’s campaign is not convinced that centrist Colorado voters will sign on for increasingly left-leaning proposals such as the Green New Deal and Medicare for All that will require massive increases in government spending.
“While most folks looking at Colorado’s recent elections focus on the performance of Democratic candidates, equally important is the overwhelming evidence that conservative economic principles can win at the ballot as well,” NRSC spokeswoman Joanna Rodriguez said, in reference to the defeat of a 2019 ballot measure that would have removed revenue caps on Colorado’s state budget.
Still, the race will be tight. Gardner may have a bipartisan record, but any record can be weaponized. This is bound to be one of the most expensive races of 2020 for both Republicans and Democrats. Gardner’s success depends on whether he can convince voters he is still that “new kind of Republican” from 2014 and that it is his opponents who are narrow-minded and obsessive.
Nic Rowan is a writer living in Washington.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-02-07--How Elizabeth Warren killed her chances

How Elizabeth Warren killed her chances

In the fall , it looked like Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren might just run away with her party ’ s presidential nomination , as she topped former Vice President Joe Biden in many early state polls .
But following a series of events , including a slew of New York Times/Siena College polls showing that Warren performed the worst of any front-runner against President Trump in swing states , as well as a number of contentious debates with former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg over `` Medicare for all '' and money in politics , her lead vanished .
Warren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unlikely the Massachusetts senator will retain her status as a top-tier candidate unless she pulls off an upset in New Hampshire .
If her campaign does collapse soon , political observers will gather to write obituaries of her failed bid for the White House , seeking to explain her rise and fall .
I ’ m sure many will ask , `` What happened to Elizabeth Warren ’ s campaign ? ''
But my question is , what happened to Elizabeth Warren ?
In the fall of 2012 , I helped Warren get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ group to raise thousands of dollars and corral dozens of volunteers for her .
Warren ’ s appeal that year was simple .
She was a Republican-turned-bankruptcy law professor who left the party after growing incensed about the financial sector ’ s abuses .
While she was reliably liberal in her political orientation , her message was anything but sectarian .
She wanted to build a broad and deep coalition to tackle economic unfairness and to rally the middle class around an agenda that promoted broad prosperity .
It was a winning message @ @ @ @ @ @ @ senator , she found her niche taking on economic elites on Wall Street and within the Obama administration .
Just ask Larry Summers , who isn ’ t in charge of the Federal Reserve today , partly thanks to Warren ’ s forceful advocacy against him .
That Elizabeth Warren was present at times in the finer moments of her presidential campaign — when she would talk about the hollowing out of the middle class , for instance .
But over the course of her bid , Warren grew increasingly chauvinistic , personally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ corrupt or a heretic .
When Biden raised questions about `` Medicare for all , '' Warren accused him of “ repeating Republican talking points ” and even went so far as to say that he was “ running in the wrong presidential primary.
” After years of doing private fundraisers with very rich people , she went out of her way to assail Buttigieg , one of the least wealthy candidates in the race , for doing a fundraising event in a California “ wine cave.
” It would be one thing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to political opponents .
But she even started lashing out at everyday people who didn ’ t share her politics .
When a questioner at a televised town hall asked her what she would say to someone who disagrees with gay marriage , Warren showed little empathy for the position even Barack Obama took during his first race for the presidency .
“ Well , I ’ m going to assume it ’ s a guy who said that , ” Warren replied .
“ And I ’ m gon na say , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ' I ’ m cool with that.
” As the crowd laughed , she added , “ Assuming you can find one.
” The antagonistic answer , implying that only men opposed gay marriage ( and that they were probably losers who couldn ’ t find a woman , to boot ) , was surely a crowd-pleaser among the upper-crust social liberals who flocked to Warren ’ s campaign in droves .
But according to the latest Pew data , around 51 % of black people support gay marriage .
That means about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t on the same page as Warren is on this issue .
As those of us who have worked in and study politics know , minority voters are often much more socially conservative than white voters , particularly within the Democratic coalition .
And rather than approach those people with humility and charity , Warren chose instead to insult them .
It ’ s hardly a surprise , then , that Warren never took off with minority voters .
According to the latest Morning Consult polling , Warren ’ s support among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 10 % .
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg , who has done little else except spend hundreds of millions of dollars on television ads , has already overtaken Warren among these key constituencies .
This failing has not been helped by the fact that Warren ’ s outreach strategy toward America ’ s Hispanic population has been to refer to this populous minority group as “ Latinx , '' a gender-neutral neologism favored by leftist ideologues that only around 2 % of Latinos themselves use , according to one survey .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Iowa ’ s small Latino population appear to have favored Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders .
At least his campaign uses the same language they do .
In her campaign ’ s pre-Iowa closing pitch , Warren preached unity , making the case that she can bring together warring Democratic Party factions .
But by attaching herself to woke chauvinism and attacking her rivals so harshly , she appeared anything but unifying .
After all , it was Sanders and Buttigieg who agreed to go on Fox News and talk to the other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to deride the network as a “ for-profit hate racket , ” perhaps deciding to court the all-powerful Media Matters vote rather than the votes of those who watch America ’ s most popular network .
In perhaps her most bizarre bit of pandering , she told supporters in Iowa that she will ask a transgender child to vet her education secretary pick .
“ I 'm going to have a secretary of education that this young trans person interviews on my behalf , ” she said , “ and only if this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of education nominee is absolutely committed to creating a welcoming environment , a safe environment , and a full educational curriculum for everyone will that person actually be advanced to be secretary of education.
” As someone who has worked around the professional progressive movement for the past decade , I don ’ t think most of the progressive agenda itself is the problem .
From a wealth tax to some form of universal healthcare , many of these ideas are popular .
The problem with modern progressivism is how much it looks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a kind of elitism that makes populism impossible , because you can ’ t have populism without the population .
The old Elizabeth Warren understood that .
It appears that the new Elizabeth Warren has forgotten it .
Zaid Jilani is a Bridging Differences writing fellow at UC Berkeley ’ s Greater Good Science Center and a freelance journalist .

In the fall, it looked like Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren might just run away with her party’s presidential nomination, as she topped former Vice President Joe Biden in many early state polls.
But following a series of events, including a slew of New York Times/Siena College polls showing that Warren performed the worst of any front-runner against President Trump in swing states, as well as a number of contentious debates with former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg over "Medicare for all" and money in politics, her lead vanished. Warren's third-place finish in Iowa makes it unlikely the Massachusetts senator will retain her status as a top-tier candidate unless she pulls off an upset in New Hampshire.
If her campaign does collapse soon, political observers will gather to write obituaries of her failed bid for the White House, seeking to explain her rise and fall. I’m sure many will ask, "What happened to Elizabeth Warren’s campaign?" But my question is, what happened to Elizabeth Warren?
In the fall of 2012, I helped Warren get elected by working with an outside progressive group to raise thousands of dollars and corral dozens of volunteers for her. Warren’s appeal that year was simple. She was a Republican-turned-bankruptcy law professor who left the party after growing incensed about the financial sector’s abuses. While she was reliably liberal in her political orientation, her message was anything but sectarian. She wanted to build a broad and deep coalition to tackle economic unfairness and to rally the middle class around an agenda that promoted broad prosperity.
It was a winning message in Massachusetts, and as a U.S. senator, she found her niche taking on economic elites on Wall Street and within the Obama administration. Just ask Larry Summers, who isn’t in charge of the Federal Reserve today, partly thanks to Warren’s forceful advocacy against him.
That Elizabeth Warren was present at times in the finer moments of her presidential campaign — when she would talk about the hollowing out of the middle class, for instance.
But over the course of her bid, Warren grew increasingly chauvinistic, personally attacking anyone who disagreed with her as corrupt or a heretic. When Biden raised questions about "Medicare for all," Warren accused him of “repeating Republican talking points” and even went so far as to say that he was “running in the wrong presidential primary.” After years of doing private fundraisers with very rich people, she went out of her way to assail Buttigieg, one of the least wealthy candidates in the race, for doing a fundraising event in a California “wine cave.”
It would be one thing if Warren’s insults were limited to political opponents. But she even started lashing out at everyday people who didn’t share her politics. When a questioner at a televised town hall asked her what she would say to someone who disagrees with gay marriage, Warren showed little empathy for the position even Barack Obama took during his first race for the presidency.
“Well, I’m going to assume it’s a guy who said that,” Warren replied. “And I’m gonna say, ‘Then just marry one woman.' I’m cool with that.” As the crowd laughed, she added, “Assuming you can find one.”
The antagonistic answer, implying that only men opposed gay marriage (and that they were probably losers who couldn’t find a woman, to boot), was surely a crowd-pleaser among the upper-crust social liberals who flocked to Warren’s campaign in droves. But according to the latest Pew data, around 51% of black people support gay marriage. That means about half of this important Democratic constituency isn’t on the same page as Warren is on this issue. As those of us who have worked in and study politics know, minority voters are often much more socially conservative than white voters, particularly within the Democratic coalition. And rather than approach those people with humility and charity, Warren chose instead to insult them.
It’s hardly a surprise, then, that Warren never took off with minority voters. According to the latest Morning Consult polling, Warren’s support among black and Hispanic voters is around just 10%. Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has done little else except spend hundreds of millions of dollars on television ads, has already overtaken Warren among these key constituencies.
This failing has not been helped by the fact that Warren’s outreach strategy toward America’s Hispanic population has been to refer to this populous minority group as “Latinx," a gender-neutral neologism favored by leftist ideologues that only around 2% of Latinos themselves use, according to one survey. It is hardly a surprise that most of Iowa’s small Latino population appear to have favored Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. At least his campaign uses the same language they do.
In her campaign’s pre-Iowa closing pitch, Warren preached unity, making the case that she can bring together warring Democratic Party factions. But by attaching herself to woke chauvinism and attacking her rivals so harshly, she appeared anything but unifying. After all, it was Sanders and Buttigieg who agreed to go on Fox News and talk to the other half of America. Warren instead chose to deride the network as a “for-profit hate racket,” perhaps deciding to court the all-powerful Media Matters vote rather than the votes of those who watch America’s most popular network.
In perhaps her most bizarre bit of pandering, she told supporters in Iowa that she will ask a transgender child to vet her education secretary pick. “I'm going to have a secretary of education that this young trans person interviews on my behalf,” she said, “and only if this person believes that our secretary or secretary of education nominee is absolutely committed to creating a welcoming environment, a safe environment, and a full educational curriculum for everyone will that person actually be advanced to be secretary of education.”
As someone who has worked around the professional progressive movement for the past decade, I don’t think most of the progressive agenda itself is the problem. From a wealth tax to some form of universal healthcare, many of these ideas are popular. The problem with modern progressivism is how much it looks down on people who disagree. It’s a kind of elitism that makes populism impossible, because you can’t have populism without the population. The old Elizabeth Warren understood that. It appears that the new Elizabeth Warren has forgotten it.
Zaid Jilani is a Bridging Differences writing fellow at UC Berkeley’s Greater Good Science Center and a freelance journalist.


Bernie strikes back

Bernie Sanders did n't declare victory in Iowa until days after the caucus ended , but something much more important happened : His movement was vindicated .
Much has been written about how the Republican Party didn ’ t take Donald Trump seriously enough during the 2016 primary until it was too late .
By the time he had demonstrated that his candidacy was a serious threat to the party apparatus , most members of the GOP establishment either gave in or rushed to the press and gave background quotes about how unacceptable the prospect of his nomination seemed .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The dynamic that exists with Sanders is similar in the fact that the Democratic establishment , a polite way to describe wealthy donors and senior party officials with cushy jobs , finds itself horrified with the prospect of his presidency .
It is , however , also enveloped in a deep psychiatric recovery from the 2016 election .
Sanders , now the 2020 front-runner , is perfectly happy to make everyone relive much of that trauma .
As the opening week of the Democratic contests has shown , Sanders has good reason @ @ @ @ @ @ @ movement seemingly won ’ t be satisfied until the Democratic Party is destroyed .
You can hear it in his speeches , which feature diatribes against party officials .
You can hear it in the language of his aides , who , in private staff meetings , speak of a conspiracy to stop the transformation of the American economy and political system .
You can hear it in the cries of his supporters , who blame the Democratic establishment for stopping Sanders in 2016 and handing a win to Trump .
As the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at Sanders 's headquarters was noticeably different than the palpable hysteria at the conference rooms rented out by Elizabeth Warren or Pete Buttigieg .
Rather than express concern , Sanders 's campaign and supporters felt deja vu .
You could hear being whispered in the Des Moines Holiday Inn lobby that `` they '' were trying to take it from Bernie once again .
But this time , the Sanders campaign came prepared .
After complaints in 2016 that the Iowa Democratic Party would n't release raw vote totals from the caucus , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from each caucus precinct .
The campaign also proved to have the most sophisticated Iowa operation .
Beyond ginning up youth turnout through concerts performed by Bon Iver and Vampire Weekend , the Sanders team was the only one that focused on winning satellite caucuses held in mosques and others for Spanish speakers .
Despite the party rhetoric about the constant threat faced by minorities in the Trump era , only Sanders bothered to go out and actually win their vote .
By midnight , the press had begun receiving emails from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lead .
Aides for Warren began complaining about potential misinformation pushed from their rivals .
The message from Team Sanders , however , was clear : We 're the only adults in the room .
After all , are you really going to trust that guy from South Bend , Indiana , who just flimsily declared himself the winner ?
For reporters in Iowa who were being jerked around with vague statements about `` irregularities '' and `` more information soon '' from the Iowa Democratic Party , it certainly felt that Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chaos , but taking control of the situation while the rest of the party floundered .
Behind the scenes , the Sanders campaign blasted party officials .
Senior Sanders adviser Jeff Weaver declared the entire system a `` fraud '' on a secret late-night conference call with Iowa Democrats and other campaigns .
The Democratic Party was revealed , once again , to be a defunct apparatus operated by incompetents .
It proved itself incapable of overseeing the most important nominating contest .
Why , Sanders 's team asked itself , echoing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it be destroyed ?
On his flight to New Hampshire the next day , Sanders subtly reminded voters what his campaign was really about .
The surreal , anti-climactic feeling shared by the electorate on the night of the caucuses was indicative of the same hopelessness that Sanders was running a campaign to reverse .
“ If I ’ m a first-time voter and I came out and voted — and the results are not coming in for 16 hours ?
You know , that ’ s a little disconcerting , '' Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ universal healthcare and free college attracted thousands to his rallies , the message that resonated the most was something bigger .
Sanders promised millions that they could trust the system again .
That feeling of unease on caucus day symbolized something much more .
A party that decried threats to election integrity for four years could n't see the biggest danger was coming from inside the house .
Somehow , these same people were expected to build an organization to defeat Trump in November .
Somehow , voters were supposed to trust establishment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden and Buttigieg that they had the more realistic vision of America and could navigate the country 's institutions in a way that Sanders could n't .
Suddenly , the `` Bernie beats Trump '' bumper stickers and pins handed out at Sanders rallies took on a new meaning .
It 's not just that Sanders 's pro-union bonafides and socialist sincerity could win back the white working class , but that only an outside campaign such as his was capable of ripping out the rot that had infiltrated not just the mainstream @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as running a primary .
All of that meant a lot more than a handful of delegates .
Joseph Simonson is a political reporter for the Washington Examiner .

Bernie Sanders didn't declare victory in Iowa until days after the caucus ended, but something much more important happened: His movement was vindicated.
Much has been written about how the Republican Party didn’t take Donald Trump seriously enough during the 2016 primary until it was too late. By the time he had demonstrated that his candidacy was a serious threat to the party apparatus, most members of the GOP establishment either gave in or rushed to the press and gave background quotes about how unacceptable the prospect of his nomination seemed. You know the rest of the story.
The dynamic that exists with Sanders is similar in the fact that the Democratic establishment, a polite way to describe wealthy donors and senior party officials with cushy jobs, finds itself horrified with the prospect of his presidency. It is, however, also enveloped in a deep psychiatric recovery from the 2016 election. Sanders, now the 2020 front-runner, is perfectly happy to make everyone relive much of that trauma. As the opening week of the Democratic contests has shown, Sanders has good reason for doing that.
Sanders and his movement seemingly won’t be satisfied until the Democratic Party is destroyed. You can hear it in his speeches, which feature diatribes against party officials. You can hear it in the language of his aides, who, in private staff meetings, speak of a conspiracy to stop the transformation of the American economy and political system. You can hear it in the cries of his supporters, who blame the Democratic establishment for stopping Sanders in 2016 and handing a win to Trump.
As the Iowa disaster was underway, the feeling at Sanders's headquarters was noticeably different than the palpable hysteria at the conference rooms rented out by Elizabeth Warren or Pete Buttigieg. Rather than express concern, Sanders's campaign and supporters felt deja vu. You could hear being whispered in the Des Moines Holiday Inn lobby that "they" were trying to take it from Bernie once again.
But this time, the Sanders campaign came prepared. After complaints in 2016 that the Iowa Democratic Party wouldn't release raw vote totals from the caucus, the Sanders campaign accumulated its own data from each caucus precinct. The campaign also proved to have the most sophisticated Iowa operation. Beyond ginning up youth turnout through concerts performed by Bon Iver and Vampire Weekend, the Sanders team was the only one that focused on winning satellite caucuses held in mosques and others for Spanish speakers. Despite the party rhetoric about the constant threat faced by minorities in the Trump era, only Sanders bothered to go out and actually win their vote.
By midnight, the press had begun receiving emails from the Sanders campaign showing it with a decisive lead. Aides for Warren began complaining about potential misinformation pushed from their rivals. The message from Team Sanders, however, was clear: We're the only adults in the room. After all, are you really going to trust that guy from South Bend, Indiana, who just flimsily declared himself the winner?
For reporters in Iowa who were being jerked around with vague statements about "irregularities" and "more information soon" from the Iowa Democratic Party, it certainly felt that Sanders wasn't simply taking advantage of the chaos, but taking control of the situation while the rest of the party floundered. Behind the scenes, the Sanders campaign blasted party officials. Senior Sanders adviser Jeff Weaver declared the entire system a "fraud" on a secret late-night conference call with Iowa Democrats and other campaigns.
The Democratic Party was revealed, once again, to be a defunct apparatus operated by incompetents. It proved itself incapable of overseeing the most important nominating contest. Why, Sanders's team asked itself, echoing the demands of its supporters, shouldn't it be destroyed?
On his flight to New Hampshire the next day, Sanders subtly reminded voters what his campaign was really about. The surreal, anti-climactic feeling shared by the electorate on the night of the caucuses was indicative of the same hopelessness that Sanders was running a campaign to reverse. “If I’m a first-time voter and I came out and voted — and the results are not coming in for 16 hours? You know, that’s a little disconcerting," Sanders said.
As much as promises of universal healthcare and free college attracted thousands to his rallies, the message that resonated the most was something bigger. Sanders promised millions that they could trust the system again. That feeling of unease on caucus day symbolized something much more.
A party that decried threats to election integrity for four years couldn't see the biggest danger was coming from inside the house. Somehow, these same people were expected to build an organization to defeat Trump in November. Somehow, voters were supposed to trust establishment favorites such as former Vice President Joe Biden and Buttigieg that they had the more realistic vision of America and could navigate the country's institutions in a way that Sanders couldn't.
Suddenly, the "Bernie beats Trump" bumper stickers and pins handed out at Sanders rallies took on a new meaning. It's not just that Sanders's pro-union bonafides and socialist sincerity could win back the white working class, but that only an outside campaign such as his was capable of ripping out the rot that had infiltrated not just the mainstream Democratic policy platform, but simple things such as running a primary.
All of that meant a lot more than a handful of delegates.
Joseph Simonson is a political reporter for the Washington Examiner.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-02-07--Trump is at the top of the political ladder

The ladder of American politics has a top and a bottom .
It took President Trump two weeks , maybe three , to climb to the top .
During that time , Democrats tripped and fell to the bottom .
The causes of change can pile up quickly in politics , and indeed they have .
But their consequences have yet to be understood by the media , Democrats , and even many Republicans .
One thing , though , is clear : Trump is now in the strongest position of his presidency , and while he ’ s hardly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , his reelection prospects are better than ever .
Think about what ’ s driven Trump ’ s rise , starting with impeachment .
That the president has gained from the ordeal unleashed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is more than a lucky break .
It ’ s an amazing development that was foreseen by very few .
It not only hurt Democrats ; it has prompted an increase in approval of Republicans .
Pelosi turns out to be the most agonized victim of her decision to impeach Trump .
She seemed agitated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Union address .
And Democratic members of Congress looked like a ragtag army stranded on the House floor , unsure when to sit , stand , or chant “ H.R .
3 , ” a bill to cut prescription drug prices .
While the economy continues to boost Trump , there are special reasons why it makes Democrats miserable .
Liberal economists , notably New York Times columnist Paul Krugman , assured them Trump and recessions were synonymous .
With Trump in charge , the well-being of the public would become a thing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrong .
Trump has leapfrogged mere boasting about economic growth .
He loves to talk about how minorities , whom Democrats see as their loyalists , have fared in the three years of his presidency .
Here ’ s the White House transcript of his State of the Union speech : “ The unemployment rate for African Americans , Hispanic Americans , and Asian Americans has reached the lowest levels in history .
( Applause . )
African American youth unemployment has reached an all-time low .
( Applause . )
African American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ever recorded .
( Applause . )
” In foreign policy , Trump ’ s greatest success is the humbling of Iran ’ s ruling mullahs .
His decision to kill Qassem Soleimani , the Iranian terrorist chief , and the slapping of sanctions on Iran have crippled its economy and weakened its role in the world .
Another result : The president ’ s stature , or at least his prowess , has increased .
This has led Trump to a new tack in dealing with the mullahs .
If Iran abandons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and stops “ spreading terror , ” he promises to help revive its economy .
“ Perhaps they are too proud or too foolish to ask for that help , ” he said in the State of the Union .
“ We are here .
Let ’ s see which road they choose .
It is totally up to them.
” Roger Kimball , the editor of the New Criterion , assessed Trump ’ s standing after the address to Congress .
“ The irony … is that despite the endless carping of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media , and the corridors of elite power , Donald Trump has emerged from the unremitting ad hominem attacks stronger and more persuasive.
” His reelection effort is far ahead of the campaign of any Democratic presidential rival , including billionaire Michael Bloomberg .
And if the nominee is not decided until the Democratic convention in July , all the better for Trump .
But if he believes he can cruise to reelection , he is mistaken .
He will be opposed by most of the media .
Democrats are likely to vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will finance a national dragnet to uncover unsavory tales , offensive comments , or questionable actions to use against him .
Scott Reed , manager of Republican Bob Dole ’ s bid for president in 1996 , says the Trump campaign must deal with two priorities : message control and the suburban vote .
And both involve Trump ’ s personality and tendency to cause trouble with off-the-cuff remarks and tweets .
He can ’ t afford to alienate college-educated voters , women especially , as he did in 2016 .
In the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ behavior was a cause of sweeping defeats in suburbs and the loss of the House .
Reed believes Trump “ touched all the right political buttons ” in the State of the Union address .
Of those he introduced in the balcony , there was an emphasis on African Americans and Hispanics .
It was a disciplined performance by the president .
He read the speech from the teleprompters .
He didn ’ t ad-lib .
He rarely smiled .
He was disciplined .
“ It was a tour de force , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keep Trump at the top of the political ladder .

The ladder of American politics has a top and a bottom. It took President Trump two weeks, maybe three, to climb to the top. During that time, Democrats tripped and fell to the bottom.
The causes of change can pile up quickly in politics, and indeed they have. But their consequences have yet to be understood by the media, Democrats, and even many Republicans. One thing, though, is clear: Trump is now in the strongest position of his presidency, and while he’s hardly a shoo-in to win a second term, his reelection prospects are better than ever.
Think about what’s driven Trump’s rise, starting with impeachment. That the president has gained from the ordeal unleashed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is more than a lucky break. It’s an amazing development that was foreseen by very few. It not only hurt Democrats; it has prompted an increase in approval of Republicans.
Pelosi turns out to be the most agonized victim of her decision to impeach Trump. She seemed agitated and unhappy during his State of the Union address. And Democratic members of Congress looked like a ragtag army stranded on the House floor, unsure when to sit, stand, or chant “H.R. 3,” a bill to cut prescription drug prices.
While the economy continues to boost Trump, there are special reasons why it makes Democrats miserable. Liberal economists, notably New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, assured them Trump and recessions were synonymous. With Trump in charge, the well-being of the public would become a thing of the past. The economists were wrong.
Trump has leapfrogged mere boasting about economic growth. He loves to talk about how minorities, whom Democrats see as their loyalists, have fared in the three years of his presidency. Here’s the White House transcript of his State of the Union speech:
“The unemployment rate for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Asian Americans has reached the lowest levels in history. (Applause.) African American youth unemployment has reached an all-time low. (Applause.) African American poverty has declined to the lowest rate ever recorded. (Applause.)”
In foreign policy, Trump’s greatest success is the humbling of Iran’s ruling mullahs. His decision to kill Qassem Soleimani, the Iranian terrorist chief, and the slapping of sanctions on Iran have crippled its economy and weakened its role in the world. Another result: The president’s stature, or at least his prowess, has increased.
This has led Trump to a new tack in dealing with the mullahs. If Iran abandons “its pursuit of nuclear weapons” and stops “spreading terror,” he promises to help revive its economy. “Perhaps they are too proud or too foolish to ask for that help,” he said in the State of the Union. “We are here. Let’s see which road they choose. It is totally up to them.”
Roger Kimball, the editor of the New Criterion, assessed Trump’s standing after the address to Congress. “The irony … is that despite the endless carping of his opponents in the government, the media, and the corridors of elite power, Donald Trump has emerged from the unremitting ad hominem attacks stronger and more persuasive.”
His reelection effort is far ahead of the campaign of any Democratic presidential rival, including billionaire Michael Bloomberg. And if the nominee is not decided until the Democratic convention in July, all the better for Trump.
But if he believes he can cruise to reelection, he is mistaken. He will be opposed by most of the media. Democrats are likely to vote in record numbers. And his enemies will finance a national dragnet to uncover unsavory tales, offensive comments, or questionable actions to use against him.
Scott Reed, manager of Republican Bob Dole’s bid for president in 1996, says the Trump campaign must deal with two priorities: message control and the suburban vote. And both involve Trump’s personality and tendency to cause trouble with off-the-cuff remarks and tweets. He can’t afford to alienate college-educated voters, women especially, as he did in 2016. In the 2018 midterm elections, Trump’s behavior was a cause of sweeping defeats in suburbs and the loss of the House.
Reed believes Trump “touched all the right political buttons” in the State of the Union address. Of those he introduced in the balcony, there was an emphasis on African Americans and Hispanics. It was a disciplined performance by the president. He read the speech from the teleprompters. He didn’t ad-lib. He rarely smiled. He was disciplined. “It was a tour de force,” Reed said, the kind that will keep Trump at the top of the political ladder.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-02-07--'Domestic terrorism': El Paso mass shooting suspect indicted on 90 hate crime charges

The suspect of a mass shooting that resulted in 22 dead at an El Paso Walmart last August was charged in a 90-count hate crime indictment on Thursday , opening the suspect up to the death penalty if convicted .
The Justice Department said on Thursday that Patrick Crusius , 21 , posted a four-page racist manifesto , “ The Inconvenient Truth , ” on 8chan just prior to the shooting , claiming that “ this attack is a response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas.
” The document also said he drew inspiration from mass shootings at two mosques @ @ @ @ @ @ @ March , which resulted in 51 dead and 49 injured .
“ Now , in the 2020s , we face a resurgent threat of violence motivated by race , ” John Bash , the U.S. attorney for West Texas , said in a press conference announcing the charges , later tweeting , “ Our team is committed to obtaining justice for the victims of this horrific hate crime and act of domestic terrorism.
” The nine-page indictment made public Thursday evening charges Crusius with 22 counts of hate crimes resulting in death , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and 45 counts of discharging a firearm in connection to the hate crimes .
Following a trial , the suspect could face life in prison or capital punishment if Attorney General William Barr pursues it .
Barr directed the federal government to resume executions last year .
`` We are vindicating the important federal interest in stopping crimes that are motivated by hatred of a particular group of people , ” Bash said .
“ Today , we and the grand jury allege that the defendant committed federal hate crimes and that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intimidate the Hispanic community , ” Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division Eric Dreiband said .
“ This hate crime may be considered an act of domestic terrorism , as have other hate crimes throughout our history , like the violence wrought by white supremacists and the Ku Klux Klan.
” The indictment said that Crusius purchased a Romanian-made semi-automatic rifle online on June 19 , 2019 , along with 1,000 rounds of hollow point ammunition .
Weeks later , the indictment alleges , Crusius drove overnight over 650 miles from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Supercenter in El Paso on Aug. 3 , 2019 , where he opened fire and gunned down nearly two dozen people .
The shooter surrendered to police and admitted he ’ d been targeting Hispanics .
“ We will not tolerate hate-fueled violence in our communities , ” FBI Director Christopher Wray testified to the House Judiciary Committee earlier this week .
“ I ’ ve elevated the racially motivated violent extremists threat to the same national threat priority , along with ISIS and homegrown violent extremists.
” Jaime Esparza , El Paso @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in August that Crusius would be charged on the state level with capital murder and that he would also be seeking the death penalty .
Crusius pleaded not guilty to those state charges and will face the new DOJ charges in federal court next Wednesday .

The suspect of a mass shooting that resulted in 22 dead at an El Paso Walmart last August was charged in a 90-count hate crime indictment on Thursday, opening the suspect up to the death penalty if convicted.
The Justice Department said on Thursday that Patrick Crusius, 21, posted a four-page racist manifesto, “The Inconvenient Truth,” on 8chan just prior to the shooting, claiming that “this attack is a response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas.” The document also said he drew inspiration from mass shootings at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, last March, which resulted in 51 dead and 49 injured.
“Now, in the 2020s, we face a resurgent threat of violence motivated by race,” John Bash, the U.S. attorney for West Texas, said in a press conference announcing the charges, later tweeting, “Our team is committed to obtaining justice for the victims of this horrific hate crime and act of domestic terrorism.”
The nine-page indictment made public Thursday evening charges Crusius with 22 counts of hate crimes resulting in death, 23 hate crimes involving attempted murder, and 45 counts of discharging a firearm in connection to the hate crimes. Following a trial, the suspect could face life in prison or capital punishment if Attorney General William Barr pursues it. Barr directed the federal government to resume executions last year.
"We are vindicating the important federal interest in stopping crimes that are motivated by hatred of a particular group of people,” Bash said.
“Today, we and the grand jury allege that the defendant committed federal hate crimes and that he committed these violent crimes to frighten and intimidate the Hispanic community,” Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division Eric Dreiband said. “This hate crime may be considered an act of domestic terrorism, as have other hate crimes throughout our history, like the violence wrought by white supremacists and the Ku Klux Klan.”
The indictment said that Crusius purchased a Romanian-made semi-automatic rifle online on June 19, 2019, along with 1,000 rounds of hollow point ammunition. Weeks later, the indictment alleges, Crusius drove overnight over 650 miles from Allen, Texas, to a Walmart Supercenter in El Paso on Aug. 3, 2019, where he opened fire and gunned down nearly two dozen people. The shooter surrendered to police and admitted he’d been targeting Hispanics.
“We will not tolerate hate-fueled violence in our communities,” FBI Director Christopher Wray testified to the House Judiciary Committee earlier this week. “I’ve elevated the racially motivated violent extremists threat to the same national threat priority, along with ISIS and homegrown violent extremists.”
Jaime Esparza, El Paso County’s district attorney, announced in August that Crusius would be charged on the state level with capital murder and that he would also be seeking the death penalty. Crusius pleaded not guilty to those state charges and will face the new DOJ charges in federal court next Wednesday.