thewashingtonexaminer--2020-03-05--60% of GOP say media using coronavirus as ‘tool to get Trump’: Rasmussen

Most Republicans believe that the nonstop media coverage of the coronavirus , and hits that the White House has bumbled the scare , are aimed at knocking President Trump , according to a new survey just released .
In the poll shared with Secrets , Rasmussen Reports found that 60 % of Republicans believe the virus is being used as a “ tool to get Trump.
” Said the analysis : “ 60 % of Republicans believe instead that the media and some politicians are playing up the threat of coronavirus to hurt President Trump.
” The poll revealed good @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many believe that the White House has handled the crisis well .
“ 46 % of all likely U.S. voters rate the federal government ’ s response to the coronavirus as good or excellent .
Thirty percent ( 30 % ) say it ’ s doing a poor job , ” it said .
While the administration has been working on the issue for nearly two months , starting with congressional meetings , a ban on flights from China , and a focus on testing and illegal border crossers from China , Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Even Vice President Mike Pence ’ s selection by Trump to lead the united government effort was initially rapped .
But over the past week , the administration has won applause for its efforts , and Pence ’ s calming influence has helped to steer attention to the effort to stop the spread of the virus .
Rasmussen also found that the public has a better view of how Trump is handling the crisis than former President Barack Obama ’ s handling of the ebola scare .
“ By comparison , 40 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s response to Ebola good or excellent marks in October 2014 after the first case was diagnosed in this country .
Less than three weeks later , that number had fallen to 31 % , ” said Rasmussen .

Most Republicans believe that the nonstop media coverage of the coronavirus, and hits that the White House has bumbled the scare, are aimed at knocking President Trump, according to a new survey just released.
In the poll shared with Secrets, Rasmussen Reports found that 60% of Republicans believe the virus is being used as a “tool to get Trump.”
Said the analysis: “60% of Republicans believe instead that the media and some politicians are playing up the threat of coronavirus to hurt President Trump.”
The poll revealed good news for the administration, noting that many believe that the White House has handled the crisis well. “46% of all likely U.S. voters rate the federal government’s response to the coronavirus as good or excellent. Thirty percent (30%) say it’s doing a poor job,” it said.
While the administration has been working on the issue for nearly two months, starting with congressional meetings, a ban on flights from China, and a focus on testing and illegal border crossers from China, Democrats and the media initially ripped the response.
Even Vice President Mike Pence’s selection by Trump to lead the united government effort was initially rapped.
But over the past week, the administration has won applause for its efforts, and Pence’s calming influence has helped to steer attention to the effort to stop the spread of the virus.
Rasmussen also found that the public has a better view of how Trump is handling the crisis than former President Barack Obama’s handling of the ebola scare.
“By comparison, 40% of Americans gave the government’s response to Ebola good or excellent marks in October 2014 after the first case was diagnosed in this country. Less than three weeks later, that number had fallen to 31%,” said Rasmussen.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-03-05--VP odds: Kamala Harris 5-2, Stacey Abrams 4-1, Amy Klobuchar 5-1

Women top the list of favorite Democratic vice presidential picks , with Sen. Kamala Harris in the lead , according @ @ @ @ @ following Joe Biden ’ s string of Super Tuesday victories .
Eight of the top @ @ @ @ @ according to BetOnline.ag , one of the world 's largest sportsbooks offering political betting markets @ @ @ @ @ and author James Murphy said that Biden is the overwhelming favorite in sports markets to @ @ @ @ @ Sen. Bernie Sanders .
He said that Biden stands at 15-2 to win the nomination @ @ @ @ @ still the odds-on favorite to win it all .
What ’ s more , Murphy @ @ @ @ @ of reelection are the best he ’ s had now that it looks like Biden @ @ @ @ @ In the emerging vice presidential race , there are lots of choices , said BetOnline @ @ @ @ @ Mason .
`` There are more than 15 potential Democratic VPs listed in all , @ @ @ @

Women top the list of favorite Democratic vice presidential picks, with Sen. Kamala Harris in the lead, according to the latest betting odds following Joe Biden’s string of Super Tuesday victories.
Eight of the top 10 picks are women, according to BetOnline.ag, one of the world's largest sportsbooks offering political betting markets.
Meanwhile, veteran oddsmaker and author James Murphy said that Biden is the overwhelming favorite in sports markets to win the Democratic nomination from Sen. Bernie Sanders. He said that Biden stands at 15-2 to win the nomination.
But President Trump is still the odds-on favorite to win it all. What’s more, Murphy said that Trump's odds of reelection are the best he’s had now that it looks like Biden will be the competition.
In the emerging vice presidential race, there are lots of choices, said BetOnline's Sportsbook Brand Manager Dave Mason. "There are more than 15 potential Democratic VPs listed in all," he said.
The list:


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-03-05--Biden seeks knockout blow against Bernie Sanders in Michigan primary

Just weeks ago , Joe Biden 's third White House run seemed dead in the water .
Now , pollsters and Democratic insiders say he can end the primary on March 10 with a win in Michigan .
A victory there for the former vice president once seemed like a long shot , particularly after Bernie Sanders 's resounding victories in New Hampshire , Nevada , and his near-win in Iowa .
Polling in the state before Biden 's double-digit win in South Carolina last Saturday had him with just a narrow lead over the Vermont senator , with Massachusetts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But now , Biden has a chance to emerge next Tuesday as the party 's leader with a delegate edge that could prove insurmountable for Sanders .
`` I am assuming that Biden winning is likely , given what ’ s happened in other states , '' said Michigan pollster Bernie Porn , who is currently conducting a survey of Michigan Democrats that he believes will show Biden with a substantial lead when completed .
`` Knowing that black participation is likely to be fairly strong , and there ’ s this almost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ moving towards him being the likely nominee . ''
Already , Sanders is indicating he faces challenges in Michigan .
On Thursday afternoon , he canceled a rally in Mississippi scheduled for Friday afternoon in order to travel to Michigan instead .
In 2016 , Sanders won the state in an upset against Hillary Clinton , with just under 50 % of the vote compared to her 48.3 % .
In days leading up to the contest , Clinton was leading him by over 25 % in some polls .
That shock result @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confidence , even as its chances diminish .
In calls with staff , the campaign is imploring field workers not to be discouraged by the sudden turn in the race .
Replicating those results , however , could prove near impossible considering Biden 's high favorability ratings in comparison to Clinton .
`` If you look at the map of Bernie ’ s narrow win over Clinton , Sanders won almost every county or the vast majority of counties , '' said Kyle Kondik , an elections expert at the University of Virginia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ look at Kent County or Grand Rapids , historically Republican but becoming more competitive , he won it by 20 points .
Is that going to happen again ?
I highly doubt it . ''
A win in Michigan would require a groundswell of support over large portions of the state that he has yet accomplished in states with similar demographics , such as Minnesota or Massachusetts .
The Michigan primary electorate is roughly 30 % black , which means Sanders would need tremendous turnout in the white portions of the state — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do .
`` Is Sanders essentially going to sweep all of northern Michigan ?
I just don ’ t think so , '' said Kondik .
`` Is Sanders going to do considerably better in the Detroit area ?
Not from what we ’ ve seen . ''
The influx of endorsements toward Biden is n't helping either .
On Friday , Michigan 's Democratic Gov .
Gretchen Whitmer , seen as a rising star in the party , announced her endorsement of Biden .
“ Joe Biden is the candidate we need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He ’ s always had our backs , '' she said in a statement .
`` Now , I ’ m proud to have his.
” Soon after , the Detroit Free Press released its endorsement of Biden and outlined concerns about the damage a Sanders nomination would have on down-ballot Democrats in November .
Those points will likely help pursue suburban moderates who have voted in record numbers for Biden this cycle so far .
A loss in Michigan could irreversibly diminish Sanders 's chances of winning the nomination .
After Tuesday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for him with delegate-rich states such as Florida and Georgia holding their primaries a week later .
Sanders 's entire campaign strategy revolves around momentum , and another disappointing finish could leave him with no plan B .
`` There just are n't enough delegates there for Bernie in the rest of the primaries to make up for his losses .
The only areas where Bernie is favored is in Washington state , which votes the same day as Michigan , '' Porn said .
`` Another issue for Sanders is that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yet , and that could end up closer than what Bernie initially thought .
Biden could pick up more support as early voting tallies come up .
That would only narrow Sanders 's delegate share even more . ''

Just weeks ago, Joe Biden's third White House run seemed dead in the water. Now, pollsters and Democratic insiders say he can end the primary on March 10 with a win in Michigan.
A victory there for the former vice president once seemed like a long shot, particularly after Bernie Sanders's resounding victories in New Hampshire, Nevada, and his near-win in Iowa. Polling in the state before Biden's double-digit win in South Carolina last Saturday had him with just a narrow lead over the Vermont senator, with Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren not far behind.
But now, Biden has a chance to emerge next Tuesday as the party's leader with a delegate edge that could prove insurmountable for Sanders.
"I am assuming that Biden winning is likely, given what’s happened in other states," said Michigan pollster Bernie Porn, who is currently conducting a survey of Michigan Democrats that he believes will show Biden with a substantial lead when completed. "Knowing that black participation is likely to be fairly strong, and there’s this almost inexplicable coalition building around Joe that is moving towards him being the likely nominee."
Already, Sanders is indicating he faces challenges in Michigan. On Thursday afternoon, he canceled a rally in Mississippi scheduled for Friday afternoon in order to travel to Michigan instead.
In 2016, Sanders won the state in an upset against Hillary Clinton, with just under 50% of the vote compared to her 48.3%. In days leading up to the contest, Clinton was leading him by over 25% in some polls.
That shock result is allowing the Sanders campaign to project confidence, even as its chances diminish. In calls with staff, the campaign is imploring field workers not to be discouraged by the sudden turn in the race.
Replicating those results, however, could prove near impossible considering Biden's high favorability ratings in comparison to Clinton.
"If you look at the map of Bernie’s narrow win over Clinton, Sanders won almost every county or the vast majority of counties," said Kyle Kondik, an elections expert at the University of Virginia Center for Politics. "If you look at Kent County or Grand Rapids, historically Republican but becoming more competitive, he won it by 20 points. Is that going to happen again? I highly doubt it."
A win in Michigan would require a groundswell of support over large portions of the state that he has yet accomplished in states with similar demographics, such as Minnesota or Massachusetts. The Michigan primary electorate is roughly 30% black, which means Sanders would need tremendous turnout in the white portions of the state — something he has yet been able to do.
"Is Sanders essentially going to sweep all of northern Michigan? I just don’t think so," said Kondik. "Is Sanders going to do considerably better in the Detroit area? Not from what we’ve seen."
The influx of endorsements toward Biden isn't helping either.
On Friday, Michigan's Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, seen as a rising star in the party, announced her endorsement of Biden.
“Joe Biden is the candidate we need to defeat Donald Trump in November. He’s always had our backs," she said in a statement. "Now, I’m proud to have his.”
Soon after, the Detroit Free Press released its endorsement of Biden and outlined concerns about the damage a Sanders nomination would have on down-ballot Democrats in November. Those points will likely help pursue suburban moderates who have voted in record numbers for Biden this cycle so far.
A loss in Michigan could irreversibly diminish Sanders's chances of winning the nomination. After Tuesday, the map only becomes more difficult for him with delegate-rich states such as Florida and Georgia holding their primaries a week later. Sanders's entire campaign strategy revolves around momentum, and another disappointing finish could leave him with no plan B.
"There just aren't enough delegates there for Bernie in the rest of the primaries to make up for his losses. The only areas where Bernie is favored is in Washington state, which votes the same day as Michigan," Porn said. "Another issue for Sanders is that the California primary isn’t definitively over yet, and that could end up closer than what Bernie initially thought. Biden could pick up more support as early voting tallies come up. That would only narrow Sanders's delegate share even more."


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-03-05--Andrew Yang explains to Joy Behar why AOC is not old enough to be vice president

Former 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang had to explain to The View 's Joy Behar why Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is not old enough to be vice president .
On Thursday 's show , Behar suggested the 30-year-old New York Democrat would be a good choice .
“ Besides yourself , who do you think would be a great VP ?
” Behar asked Yang during Thursday 's show on ABC .
`` I do think that if Joe [ Biden ] is the front-runner , which he is right now , he needs to shore up his support among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think his running mate might have a good opportunity to do that , ” Yang said .
`` AOC would actually be a good choice , except she ’ s a Bernie person , ” Behar said .
Meghan McCain interjected : `` She ’ s also not old enough . ''
“ The Constitution has a minimum age for president , and it ’ s conceivable that the vice president is going to be president , ” Yang said .
The minimum age to be president is 35 , according to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adhere to the same requirements .
Democratic front-runner Joe Biden has not announced his vice presidential pick .
Late last year , Ocasio-Cortez said it would `` be an honor '' to be picked as someone 's vice president .
She has endorsed Sen. Bernie Sanders for president .

Former 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang had to explain to The View's Joy Behar why Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is not old enough to be vice president.
On Thursday's show, Behar suggested the 30-year-old New York Democrat would be a good choice.
“Besides yourself, who do you think would be a great VP?” Behar asked Yang during Thursday's show on ABC.
"I do think that if Joe [Biden] is the front-runner, which he is right now, he needs to shore up his support among young people in particular, and I think his running mate might have a good opportunity to do that,” Yang said.
"AOC would actually be a good choice, except she’s a Bernie person,” Behar said.
Meghan McCain interjected: "She’s also not old enough."
"She’s not?" Behar asked. "As a VP?”
Yang provided further explanation.
“The Constitution has a minimum age for president, and it’s conceivable that the vice president is going to be president,” Yang said.
The minimum age to be president is 35, according to the Constitution. The vice president must also adhere to the same requirements.
Democratic front-runner Joe Biden has not announced his vice presidential pick.
Late last year, Ocasio-Cortez said it would "be an honor" to be picked as someone's vice president. She has endorsed Sen. Bernie Sanders for president.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-03-05--Bloomberg moves to retool dead campaign for fight against Bernie Sanders and Trump

Michael Bloomberg will form a new political organization that will absorb large swathes of his 2020 campaign staff and infrastructure as he looks to help Joe Biden beat Bernie Sanders and President Trump .
Bloomberg , 78 , quit the Democratic race for the White House this week promising to `` work '' in assistance of the two-term vice president for the rest of the primary and in the general election .
Bloomberg 's creation of a new independent expenditure operation , first reported by the Washington Post , was essential to that plan , given strict campaign finance laws @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nominee with his 2,000-plus team and data cache .
He also faces a personal cap when it comes to donating .
Along with keeping Bloomberg offices open in six key battleground states , the group will allow the billionaire former New York City mayor to spend big on advertising against Trump and congressional Republicans , though he ca n't coordinate directly with the Democratic campaign .
He doled out more than $ 500 million for airtime during his own failed bid .
Bloomberg offices in states other than Arizona , Florida , Michigan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wisconsin will be shuttered in the coming weeks .
The investment , however , is still an advantage going into a fall fight against Trump and his existing reelection infrastructure .
Bloomberg has not nixed the idea of deploying the network , the name of which is still pending , to boost Biden against Sanders in the primary .
To placate nervous Democrats , Bloomberg , an information services entrepreneur worth in excess of $ 50 billion , has long promised not to launch an independent , third-party effort for the White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his assistance , Sanders , the Vermont senator and chief rival for the nomination , has not .
`` I do n't think we 're going to need that money because , interestingly enough , I think , when you have an agenda , as we have , that speaks to the needs of working families .
You can have millions and millions and millions of people chipping in 10 bucks a piece , '' Sanders said in February after being asked multiple times .

Michael Bloomberg will form a new political organization that will absorb large swathes of his 2020 campaign staff and infrastructure as he looks to help Joe Biden beat Bernie Sanders and President Trump.
Bloomberg, 78, quit the Democratic race for the White House this week promising to "work" in assistance of the two-term vice president for the rest of the primary and in the general election.
Bloomberg's creation of a new independent expenditure operation, first reported by the Washington Post, was essential to that plan, given strict campaign finance laws prevent him from simply gifting the eventual nominee with his 2,000-plus team and data cache. He also faces a personal cap when it comes to donating.
Along with keeping Bloomberg offices open in six key battleground states, the group will allow the billionaire former New York City mayor to spend big on advertising against Trump and congressional Republicans, though he can't coordinate directly with the Democratic campaign. He doled out more than $500 million for airtime during his own failed bid.
Bloomberg offices in states other than Arizona, Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin will be shuttered in the coming weeks. The investment, however, is still an advantage going into a fall fight against Trump and his existing reelection infrastructure.
Bloomberg has not nixed the idea of deploying the network, the name of which is still pending, to boost Biden against Sanders in the primary.
To placate nervous Democrats, Bloomberg, an information services entrepreneur worth in excess of $50 billion, has long promised not to launch an independent, third-party effort for the White House.
While Biden has been receptive to his assistance, Sanders, the Vermont senator and chief rival for the nomination, has not.
"I don't think we're going to need that money because, interestingly enough, I think, when you have an agenda, as we have, that speaks to the needs of working families. You can have millions and millions and millions of people chipping in 10 bucks a piece," Sanders said in February after being asked multiple times.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-03-05--MSNBC anchor labels Bernie Sanders ad highlighting Obama praise 'misleading'

MSNBC anchor Craig Melvin called Sen. Bernie Sanders 's new ad prominently featuring former President Barack Obama `` misleading '' in an interview with a member of the senator 's campaign staff .
The self-proclaimed socialist attempted to draw himself closer to Obama in the ad , which included clips of the two leaders and various quotes from the former president praising Sanders .
Melvin played a clip of the ad and asked Sanders deputy campaign manager Ari Rabin-Havt if it was sending a false message to voters because the audio of Obama was from a multitude of speeches .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ president ’ s voice from different settings and edited that together , and you give the impression that President Obama is a Bernie guy , ” Melvin said .
“ How is that not misleading ?
” “ I don ’ t think it ’ s misleading .
They are President Obama ’ s words about Bernie Sanders , ” Rabin-Havt began , but Melvin reiterated his stance that the argument was `` disingenuous . ''
“ Is it disingenuous ?
They are his words about Bernie Sanders .
How is that disingenuous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Since the ad was released earlier this week , Biden spokesman Andrew Bates has condemned it and noted that `` no quantity of ads can rewrite history , '' according to the New York Post .
In response , the independent senator from Vermont acknowledged that he 's `` not going to say he and I are best friends . ''
`` Words taken from literally , as I understand it , three or four different speeches , over a span of five or six years , '' Melvin pointed out .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ show voters Bernie Sanders ’ s track record and contrast ourselves with our opponent , '' Rabin-Havt replied .
`` This is an ad that shows Bernie Sanders ’ s track record and somebody else ’ s words about Bernie Sanders .
It is a completely fair ad , one that shows an important aspect of Bernie Sanders ’ s legacy . ''

MSNBC anchor Craig Melvin called Sen. Bernie Sanders's new ad prominently featuring former President Barack Obama "misleading" in an interview with a member of the senator's campaign staff.
The self-proclaimed socialist attempted to draw himself closer to Obama in the ad, which included clips of the two leaders and various quotes from the former president praising Sanders. Melvin played a clip of the ad and asked Sanders deputy campaign manager Ari Rabin-Havt if it was sending a false message to voters because the audio of Obama was from a multitude of speeches.
“You’ve taken the former president’s voice from different settings and edited that together, and you give the impression that President Obama is a Bernie guy,” Melvin said. “How is that not misleading?”
“I don’t think it’s misleading. They are President Obama’s words about Bernie Sanders,” Rabin-Havt began, but Melvin reiterated his stance that the argument was "disingenuous."
“Is it disingenuous? They are his words about Bernie Sanders. How is that disingenuous?” the Sanders campaign spokesman retorted.
Since the ad was released earlier this week, Biden spokesman Andrew Bates has condemned it and noted that "no quantity of ads can rewrite history," according to the New York Post. In response, the independent senator from Vermont acknowledged that he's "not going to say he and I are best friends."
"Words taken from literally, as I understand it, three or four different speeches, over a span of five or six years," Melvin pointed out.
"Look, we run ads that show voters Bernie Sanders’s track record and contrast ourselves with our opponent," Rabin-Havt replied. "This is an ad that shows Bernie Sanders’s track record and somebody else’s words about Bernie Sanders. It is a completely fair ad, one that shows an important aspect of Bernie Sanders’s legacy."


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-03-05--Biden holds commanding 49-point lead over Sanders in Florida: Poll

A new poll shows Joe Biden easily beating Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders in the upcoming Democratic primary in Florida .
The former vice president received approximately 61 % support , according to a St. Pete Polls survey released Thursday , nearly 49 percentage points ahead of Sanders .
Sanders , a socialist , was beaten by the 13.5 % support for former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg , who dropped out of the race after his poor performance on Super Tuesday and endorsed Biden .
`` I ’ ve always believed that defeating Donald Trump starts with uniting behind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do it .
After yesterday ’ s vote , it is clear that candidate is my friend and a great American , Joe Biden , '' Bloomberg said on Wednesday .
The billionaire former mayor spent approximately $ 558 million on campaign advertisements and staff , setting records for spending the most money on presidential campaign TV ads in one week .
Sanders ended up in third place with approximately 12 % support , falling 2 points shy of the RealClearPolitics state average .
The survey , conducted March 4 , polled 1,882 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of respondents were black , and 16 % were Hispanic .
The former vice president led in every racial category , with nearly 83 % support among black voters , 64 % support from Hispanic voters , and 88 % support from white voters .
Biden leads Sanders in the delegate fight for the Democratic nomination process , 596 to 531 .
A total of 1,991 pledged delegates are needed to secure the party 's nomination for president , and 219 are at stake in Florida .
The margin of error was plus @ @ @ @ @ @

A new poll shows Joe Biden easily beating Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders in the upcoming Democratic primary in Florida.
The former vice president received approximately 61% support, according to a St. Pete Polls survey released Thursday, nearly 49 percentage points ahead of Sanders.
Sanders, a socialist, was beaten by the 13.5% support for former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who dropped out of the race after his poor performance on Super Tuesday and endorsed Biden.
"I’ve always believed that defeating Donald Trump starts with uniting behind the candidate with the best shot to do it. After yesterday’s vote, it is clear that candidate is my friend and a great American, Joe Biden," Bloomberg said on Wednesday. The billionaire former mayor spent approximately $558 million on campaign advertisements and staff, setting records for spending the most money on presidential campaign TV ads in one week.
Sanders ended up in third place with approximately 12% support, falling 2 points shy of the RealClearPolitics state average.
The survey, conducted March 4, polled 1,882 registered Democratic voters. Nearly 29% of respondents were black, and 16% were Hispanic. The former vice president led in every racial category, with nearly 83% support among black voters, 64% support from Hispanic voters, and 88% support from white voters.
Biden leads Sanders in the delegate fight for the Democratic nomination process, 596 to 531. A total of 1,991 pledged delegates are needed to secure the party's nomination for president, and 219 are at stake in Florida.
The margin of error was plus or minus 2.3 percentage points.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-03-05--Sexism didn't stop Elizabeth Warren, but that doesn't mean it's nonexistent

Sexism .
But that doesn ’ t mean it didn ’ t hurt her chances .
As my Washington Examiner colleagues , Warren ’ s campaign was marked by dishonesty and pandering , which voters quickly saw through .
And unless she wants to blame internalized misogyny , Warren can ’ t blame sexism for her losses on Super Tuesday : In her home state of Massachusetts , 34 % of women for Joe Biden , 26 % chose Bernie Sanders , and just 24 % went for Warren .
Try to pin that on the patriarchy .
But despite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the media and the Warren campaign , there is a legitimate double standard faced by women in politics .
According to a study recently published in The Economic Journal , women need to be likable to be successful .
Men , on the other hand , don ’ t .
This is because women expect both genders to be likable , while men expect only women to be likable , but don ’ t care so much if other men have , say , the personality of Sanders .
So when Warren complained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was another example of .
But there was a grain of truth to it — just not as much as Warren claimed .
“ Gender in this race , you know , that is the trap question for every woman , ” Warren to the press on Thursday afternoon , after she dropped out of the presidential race .
“ If you say , ‘ Yeah , there was sexism in this race , ’ everyone says , ‘ Whiner.
’ And if you say , ‘ No , there was no sexism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ‘ What planet do you live on ?
’ I promise you this : I will have a lot more to say on that subject later on.
” Warren ’ s problem was not that she acknowledged that sexism can still exist , but that she played the victim card over and over , even as a against Sanders .
Voters saw that she treated sexism not as an unfortunate reality , but as a convenient cudgel against her opponents .
Warren weaponized the sexism card , perhaps leading those who dismissed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ altogether the idea that women face different barriers than men .
She may have “ a lot more to say ” about sexism later on , but because this has always been just a talking point for her , we already know exactly what she ’ ll say .
She ’ ll exaggerate her status as a victim , doing a disservice to other women who , thanks to Warren 's hyperbole , will have their own claims of discrimination reflexively dismissed .

Sexism didn’t kill Elizabeth Warren’s campaign . But that doesn’t mean it didn’t hurt her chances.
As my Washington Examiner colleagues have written , Warren’s campaign was marked by dishonesty and pandering, which voters quickly saw through. And unless she wants to blame internalized misogyny, Warren can’t blame sexism for her losses on Super Tuesday: In her home state of Massachusetts, 34% of women voted for Joe Biden, 26% chose Bernie Sanders, and just 24% went for Warren. Try to pin that on the patriarchy.
But despite the irritatingly endless claims of sexism from the media and the Warren campaign, there is a legitimate double standard faced by women in politics. According to a study recently published in The Economic Journal, women need to be likable to be successful . Men, on the other hand, don’t. This is because women expect both genders to be likable, while men expect only women to be likable, but don’t care so much if other men have, say, the personality of Sanders.
So when Warren complained about sexism throughout her campaign, that was another example of her constant pandering . But there was a grain of truth to it — just not as much as Warren claimed.
“Gender in this race, you know, that is the trap question for every woman,” Warren said to the press on Thursday afternoon, after she dropped out of the presidential race. “If you say, ‘Yeah, there was sexism in this race,’ everyone says, ‘Whiner.’ And if you say, ‘No, there was no sexism,’ about a bazillion women think, ‘What planet do you live on?’ I promise you this: I will have a lot more to say on that subject later on.”
Warren’s problem was not that she acknowledged that sexism can still exist, but that she played the victim card over and over, even as a cheap shot against Sanders. Voters saw that she treated sexism not as an unfortunate reality, but as a convenient cudgel against her opponents.
Warren weaponized the sexism card, perhaps leading those who dismissed her erroneous claims of victimhood to reject altogether the idea that women face different barriers than men. She may have “a lot more to say” about sexism later on, but because this has always been just a talking point for her, we already know exactly what she’ll say. She’ll exaggerate her status as a victim, doing a disservice to other women who, thanks to Warren's hyperbole, will have their own claims of discrimination reflexively dismissed.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-03-05--Biden tax plan would raise $4 trillion, more than twice the hike proposed by Clinton in 2016

Joe Biden 's tax plan would raise taxes by $ 4 trillion over the coming decade , mostly paid by wealthier taxpayers , the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center estimated Thursday .
The analysis shows that the former vice president 's tax agenda is well to the left of past Democratic presidential campaigns .
The same group , for instance , projected that Hillary Clinton ’ s 2016 tax proposal would have increased taxes by $ 1.4 trillion over a decade .
Under Biden 's plan , `` the highest-income households would see substantially larger tax increases than households in other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and as a share of their incomes , ” concludes Thursday 's report .
It finds that the top 1 % of taxpayers would pay about three-quarters of the tax increase , in the first year it was phased in .
Yet taxpayers at all income levels would see tax hikes , mostly because of Biden 's plan to raise the corporate income tax rate , a change the group assumes would partly be shouldered by workers .
The former vice president ’ s plan would roll back the tax cuts that President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for individuals earning more than $ 400,000 .
It would also tax capital gains at the higher ordinary income tax rates for individuals earning at least $ 1 million .
Under current law , capital gains are at 20 % for high-income earners , while tax rates on ordinary income go as high as 37 % .
Biden ’ s plan also seeks to eliminate a feature of the tax code that prevents heirs from being taxed on the increase in assets that occurred during the decedent 's life .
Democrats have described @ @ @ @ @ @ @ step up in basis , '' as a loophole for wealthy families .
In addition , the plan would increase the top corporate income tax rate from 21 % to 28 % , reversing some but not all of the reduction in the 2017 GOP tax overhaul .
Before that legislation , the rate had been 35 % , the highest among developed nations .
[ Opinion : If you 're in the middle class , Joe Biden wants to raise your taxes ]

Joe Biden's tax plan would raise taxes by $4 trillion over the coming decade, mostly paid by wealthier taxpayers, the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center estimated Thursday.
The analysis shows that the former vice president's tax agenda is well to the left of past Democratic presidential campaigns. The same group, for instance, projected that Hillary Clinton’s 2016 tax proposal would have increased taxes by $1.4 trillion over a decade.
Under Biden's plan, "the highest-income households would see substantially larger tax increases than households in other income groups, both in dollar amounts and as a share of their incomes,” concludes Thursday's report. It finds that the top 1% of taxpayers would pay about three-quarters of the tax increase, in the first year it was phased in. Yet taxpayers at all income levels would see tax hikes, mostly because of Biden's plan to raise the corporate income tax rate, a change the group assumes would partly be shouldered by workers.
The former vice president’s plan would roll back the tax cuts that President Trump signed into law in December 2017 for individuals earning more than $400,000. It would also tax capital gains at the higher ordinary income tax rates for individuals earning at least $1 million. Under current law, capital gains are at 20% for high-income earners, while tax rates on ordinary income go as high as 37%.
Biden’s plan also seeks to eliminate a feature of the tax code that prevents heirs from being taxed on the increase in assets that occurred during the decedent's life. Democrats have described that wrinkle, known as the "step up in basis," as a loophole for wealthy families.
In addition, the plan would increase the top corporate income tax rate from 21% to 28%, reversing some but not all of the reduction in the 2017 GOP tax overhaul. Before that legislation, the rate had been 35%, the highest among developed nations.
[Opinion: If you're in the middle class, Joe Biden wants to raise your taxes]


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-03-05--'Let's take a deep breath': Warren declines to endorse Biden or Bernie Sanders yet

Sen. Elizabeth Warren is n't ready to endorse former rivals Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders as the 2020 Democratic presidential primary narrows to a head-to-head matchup .
`` Well , let 's take a deep breath and spend a little time on that , '' Warren told reporters in Cambridge , Massachusetts , during a press conference Thursday .
`` We don ’ t have to decide that this minute . ''
Flanked by husband Bruce Mann and golden retriever Bailey , the senator , 70 , explained that her difficulty in deciding to bow out hours earlier was the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in politics .
`` One of the hardest parts of this is all those pinky promises , '' she said , referring to her habit of giving girls `` pinky promises '' and telling them running for the White House is what girls do .
`` And all those little girls who are going to have to wait four more years . ''
Warren , who placed third in her home state of Massachusetts on Super Tuesday , was adamant her weak performance was n't embarrassing .
She said she was `` grateful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was told at the beginning of this whole undertaking that there are two lanes : the progressive lane that Bernie Sanders is the incumbent for , and a moderate lane that Joe Biden is the incumbent for , and there 's no room for anyone else in this , '' she explained .
`` I thought that was n't right , but evidently , I was wrong . ''
In a call with her team on Thursday morning , Warren ran through ways she said she 'd shaped the race with their help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ action committee donors .
She had , however , accepted super PAC help in recent weeks .
The former Harvard Law School professor also touted her takedown of Michael Bloomberg during the Nevada and South Carolina debates .
`` In this campaign , we have been willing to fight , and , when necessary , we left plenty of blood and teeth on the floor .
And I can think of one billionaire who has been denied the chance to buy this election , '' she said .
The senator added , `` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for president in 2020 , but this fight — our fight — is not over .
And our place in this fight has not ended . ''

Sen. Elizabeth Warren isn't ready to endorse former rivals Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders as the 2020 Democratic presidential primary narrows to a head-to-head matchup.
"Well, let's take a deep breath and spend a little time on that," Warren told reporters in Cambridge, Massachusetts, during a press conference Thursday. "We don’t have to decide that this minute."
Flanked by husband Bruce Mann and golden retriever Bailey, the senator, 70, explained that her difficulty in deciding to bow out hours earlier was the impression it left girls regarding perceived sexism in politics.
"One of the hardest parts of this is all those pinky promises," she said, referring to her habit of giving girls "pinky promises" and telling them running for the White House is what girls do. "And all those little girls who are going to have to wait four more years."
Warren, who placed third in her home state of Massachusetts on Super Tuesday, was adamant her weak performance wasn't embarrassing. She said she was "grateful" to her constituents.
"I was told at the beginning of this whole undertaking that there are two lanes: the progressive lane that Bernie Sanders is the incumbent for, and a moderate lane that Joe Biden is the incumbent for, and there's no room for anyone else in this," she explained. "I thought that wasn't right, but evidently, I was wrong."
In a call with her team on Thursday morning, Warren ran through ways she said she'd shaped the race with their help, including shunning billionaire and corporate political action committee donors. She had, however, accepted super PAC help in recent weeks. The former Harvard Law School professor also touted her takedown of Michael Bloomberg during the Nevada and South Carolina debates.
"In this campaign, we have been willing to fight, and, when necessary, we left plenty of blood and teeth on the floor. And I can think of one billionaire who has been denied the chance to buy this election," she said.
The senator added, "I may not be in the race for president in 2020, but this fight — our fight — is not over. And our place in this fight has not ended."
[Opinion: Elizabeth Warren's persistent dishonesty killed her campaign]


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-03-05--Bernie Sanders on possibility of unity ticket with Biden: 'You mean two old white guys on the ticket

Bernie Sanders on possibility of unity ticket with Biden: 'You mean two old white guys on the ticket?'

Sen. Bernie Sanders dismissed the possibility that he and fellow 2020 Democrat Joe Biden could team up for a unity ticket to take on President Trump .
“ Is it 100 % impossible to imagine a unity ticket , despite your differences , ” MSNBC host Rachel Maddow asked Sanders on Wednesday .
“ You mean two old white guys on the ticket ?
” Sanders said .
“ Probably not .
I think the American people don ’ t want — one old white guy is probably one too many for some.
” A slew of Democratic presidential candidates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the last week , leaving Biden and Sanders as the only two viable candidates for the nomination .
After losing ten Super Tuesday states to Biden , socialist Sanders criticized his more moderate rival for being ” heavily supported by the corporate establishment . ''
`` What this campaign , I think , is increasingly about is , which side are you on ? ''
Sanders said .
`` Does anyone seriously believe that a president backed by the corporate world is going to bring about the changes in this country that working @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people desperately need ? ''

Sen. Bernie Sanders dismissed the possibility that he and fellow 2020 Democrat Joe Biden could team up for a unity ticket to take on President Trump.
“Is it 100% impossible to imagine a unity ticket, despite your differences,” MSNBC host Rachel Maddow asked Sanders on Wednesday.
“You mean two old white guys on the ticket?” Sanders said. “Probably not. I think the American people don’t want — one old white guy is probably one too many for some.”
A slew of Democratic presidential candidates have dropped out of the race in the last week, leaving Biden and Sanders as the only two viable candidates for the nomination. After losing ten Super Tuesday states to Biden, socialist Sanders criticized his more moderate rival for being ”heavily supported by the corporate establishment."
"What this campaign, I think, is increasingly about is, which side are you on?" Sanders said. "Does anyone seriously believe that a president backed by the corporate world is going to bring about the changes in this country that working families and the middle class and lower-income people desperately need?"


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-03-06--Judge questions Barr's 'credibility' in handling Mueller report and may make more public

A federal judge rebuked Attorney General William Barr over his handling of special counsel Robert Mueller ’ s report .
In a Tuesday order , D.C. District Court Judge Reggie Walton second-guessed the redactions appearing in the 448-page report and demanded the Justice Department hand over an unredacted version so he could decide if more should be made public .
Walton , a President George W. Bush appointee , said , “ The Court has grave concerns about the objectivity of the process that preceded the public release of the redacted version of the Mueller Report ” as well as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s subsequent justifications ” that its redactions of the report were authorized under the Freedom of Information Act .
The judge said he agreed with the Electronic Privacy Information Center and BuzzFeed , which sued for the report in its entirety under FOIA , that Barr had “ dubiously handled the public release of the '' Mueller report .
A DOJ representative did not immediately respond to the Washington Examiner 's request for comment .
Walton specifically took issue with the March 2019 letters Barr wrote prior to the release of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and press conference the attorney general gave the morning the report was made public .
“ The speed by which Attorney General Barr released to the public the summary of Special Counsel Mueller ’ s principal conclusions , coupled with the fact that Attorney General Barr failed to provide a thorough representation of the findings set forth in the Mueller Report , causes the Court to question whether Attorney General Barr ’ s intent was to create a one-sided narrative about the Mueller Report , ” the judge wrote , adding that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in some respects substantively at odds with the redacted version of the Mueller Report.
” The judge wrote , “ The Court can not reconcile certain public representations made by Attorney General Barr with the findings in the Mueller Report ” and claimed the “ inconsistencies ” between Barr ’ s statements in the lead-up to the Mueller report ’ s release and the contents of the report itself “ cause the Court to seriously question whether Attorney General Barr made a calculated attempt to influence public discourse about the Mueller Report in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the redacted version of the Mueller Report to the contrary.
” Mueller delivered his report to the Justice Department on March 22 , and Barr informed Congress that day he was reviewing it and might be able to advise them of Mueller ’ s “ principal conclusions ” that weekend .
Barr told Congress on March 24 that Mueller ’ s investigation “ did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election.
” The attorney @ @ @ @ @ @ @ draw a conclusion one way or the other as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction.
” Mueller sent a letter on March 27 , claiming Barr ’ s letter “ did not fully capture the context , nature , and substance ” of his investigation ’ s “ work and conclusions.
” Barr followed up with another letter on March 29 stating some media and public figures “ mischaracterized ” his prior letter as a “ summary ” of Mueller ’ s report and emphasized that it “ was not and did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” of Mueller ’ s investigation .
The attorney general stated at an April news conference that , “ thanks to the special counsel ’ s thorough investigation , we now know that the Russian operatives who perpetrated these schemes did not have the cooperation of President Trump or the Trump campaign.
” Mueller ’ s report noted his investigation “ identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign '' but `` did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of possible obstruction of justice , Mueller said he “ determined not to apply an approach that could potentially result in a judgment that the president committed crimes ” but that , “ while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime , it also does not exonerate him.
” Walton said on Thursday that Barr ’ s “ lack of candor ” called into question his “ credibility.
” The judge said he would “ conduct an independent review of the unredacted version of the '' Mueller report to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too much .

A federal judge rebuked Attorney General William Barr over his handling of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report.
In a Tuesday order, D.C. District Court Judge Reggie Walton second-guessed the redactions appearing in the 448-page report and demanded the Justice Department hand over an unredacted version so he could decide if more should be made public.
Walton, a President George W. Bush appointee, said, “The Court has grave concerns about the objectivity of the process that preceded the public release of the redacted version of the Mueller Report” as well as its “impacts on the Justice Department’s subsequent justifications” that its redactions of the report were authorized under the Freedom of Information Act.
The judge said he agreed with the Electronic Privacy Information Center and BuzzFeed, which sued for the report in its entirety under FOIA, that Barr had “dubiously handled the public release of the" Mueller report.
A DOJ representative did not immediately respond to the Washington Examiner's request for comment.
Walton specifically took issue with the March 2019 letters Barr wrote prior to the release of the Mueller report and an April 2019 letter and press conference the attorney general gave the morning the report was made public.
“The speed by which Attorney General Barr released to the public the summary of Special Counsel Mueller’s principal conclusions, coupled with the fact that Attorney General Barr failed to provide a thorough representation of the findings set forth in the Mueller Report, causes the Court to question whether Attorney General Barr’s intent was to create a one-sided narrative about the Mueller Report,” the judge wrote, adding that it was “a narrative that is clearly in some respects substantively at odds with the redacted version of the Mueller Report.”
The judge wrote, “The Court cannot reconcile certain public representations made by Attorney General Barr with the findings in the Mueller Report” and claimed the “inconsistencies” between Barr’s statements in the lead-up to the Mueller report’s release and the contents of the report itself “cause the Court to seriously question whether Attorney General Barr made a calculated attempt to influence public discourse about the Mueller Report in favor of President Trump despite certain findings in the redacted version of the Mueller Report to the contrary.”
Mueller delivered his report to the Justice Department on March 22, and Barr informed Congress that day he was reviewing it and might be able to advise them of Mueller’s “principal conclusions” that weekend.
Barr told Congress on March 24 that Mueller’s investigation “did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election.” The attorney general also said Mueller “did not draw a conclusion one way or the other as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction.”
Mueller sent a letter on March 27, claiming Barr’s letter “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of his investigation’s “work and conclusions.”
Barr followed up with another letter on March 29 stating some media and public figures “mischaracterized” his prior letter as a “summary” of Mueller’s report and emphasized that it “was not and did not purport to be an exhaustive recounting” of Mueller’s investigation.
The attorney general stated at an April news conference that, “thanks to the special counsel’s thorough investigation, we now know that the Russian operatives who perpetrated these schemes did not have the cooperation of President Trump or the Trump campaign.”
Mueller’s report noted his investigation “identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign" but "did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”
On the issue of possible obstruction of justice, Mueller said he “determined not to apply an approach that could potentially result in a judgment that the president committed crimes” but that, “while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”
Walton said on Thursday that Barr’s “lack of candor” called into question his “credibility.” The judge said he would “conduct an independent review of the unredacted version of the" Mueller report to see if the Justice Department blacked out too much.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-03-06--Pence bumps elbows with Washington governor ahead of coronavirus talks

Vice President Mike Pence bumped elbows with Washington Gov .
Jay Inslee on Thursday after stepping off Air Force Two in Takoma , Washington .
Pence , who is leading the Trump administration 's coronavirus response , flew to Washington state , where the death toll associated with the illness is the highest in the nation , to meet with officials .
Pence landed at McChord Field Airport , where he was welcomed by Inslee , eschewing a handshake amid the coronavirus outbreak .
Health experts have warned that shaking hands is a good way to transmit COVID-19 , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will participate in a roundtable discussion with state and local officials focused on the response to the coronavirus and will tour the state emergency operations center in Takoma .
The coronavirus outbreak has been particularly pervasive in Washington state , where the number of cases nearly doubled overnight to 70 on Thursday , and the death toll has risen to 11 .
Inslee , a Democrat who ran a short-lived campaign for president , criticized the Trump administration 's response to COVID-19 after speaking over the phone with Pence last week .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ VP Mike Pence , thanking Washington state for our efforts to combat the coronavirus .
I told him our work would be more successful if the Trump administration stuck to the science and told the truth , '' he said .

Vice President Mike Pence bumped elbows with Washington Gov. Jay Inslee on Thursday after stepping off Air Force Two in Takoma, Washington.
Pence, who is leading the Trump administration's coronavirus response, flew to Washington state, where the death toll associated with the illness is the highest in the nation, to meet with officials.
Pence landed at McChord Field Airport, where he was welcomed by Inslee, eschewing a handshake amid the coronavirus outbreak. Health experts have warned that shaking hands is a good way to transmit COVID-19, which has spread across the globe.
Pence will participate in a roundtable discussion with state and local officials focused on the response to the coronavirus and will tour the state emergency operations center in Takoma.
.@Mike_Pence just walked off Air Force Two — Seeing elbow taps, no handshakes so far #coronavirus @KIRO7Seattle pic.twitter.com/7l8aOlWNov — Michael Spears (@MichaelKIRO7) March 5, 2020
The coronavirus outbreak has been particularly pervasive in Washington state, where the number of cases nearly doubled overnight to 70 on Thursday, and the death toll has risen to 11.
Inslee, a Democrat who ran a short-lived campaign for president, criticized the Trump administration's response to COVID-19 after speaking over the phone with Pence last week.
"I just received a call from @VP Mike Pence, thanking Washington state for our efforts to combat the coronavirus. I told him our work would be more successful if the Trump administration stuck to the science and told the truth," he said.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-03-06--Government attacks on encryption haven't changed in 25 years

In 1997 , I testified before Congress supporting the Security and Freedom Through Encryption Act , which would have codified the already Fourth Amendment-guaranteed freedom to use strong encryption .
I said then that “ I worry about an America in which the FBI director lies to Congress and has to be corrected by his own inspector general .
These guys want to assign me my digital signature and keep my key on file with them or someone they designate ?
” That worry has not dissipated with time .
Following the shooting at a Navy training base in Pensacola @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pressured Apple and other technology firms to create backdoors for authorities to access devices .
Giving the government the capability to unlock your iPhone is like letting the government put a camera in every room of your house with a promise not to turn it on unless you ’ ve been bad .
And of course , if the government or companies can access backdoors , foreign-backed hackers and other bad actors would figure out how to exploit intentionally inserted vulnerabilities as well .
A backdoor into one device is a backdoor into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than adequate opportunities to spy on taxpayers , take their money , and otherwise ruin their lives .
Giving the federal government the ability to access every electronic device in the United States didn ’ t make sense in 1997 , and it doesn ’ t make sense now .
Anti-encryption advocates claim that it ’ s a tool to shelter criminals .
But it ’ s important to recognize that encryption is not just a way to hide things .
U.S. businesses of all stripes need encryption to protect themselves from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ countries or malicious competitors could break into businesses ’ systems to access trade secrets , intellectual property , and other vital information .
Healthy competition is a boon for our economy , but the game could get dirty if companies can ’ t effectively protect their assets .
Hackers with nation-states backing them regularly go after retailers and financial institutions to steal customers ’ data .
In Target ’ s massive data breach , hackers stole customers ’ encrypted bank PINs , but they didn ’ t have the key , meaning they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Imagine if this had happened in a world with encryption backdoors .
Millions of Americans ’ bank accounts would have been compromised .
More sophisticated encryption protects Americans even further .
For example , Apple Pay allows individuals to make purchases with just their phones , which is more secure than paying with a traditional plastic credit card because both Apple and the retailer aren ’ t able to store the card number on the device or their servers .
With Apple Pay , a bank or card issuer sends Apple an encrypted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the card .
This token is useless to make purchases without the device in hand and thereby useless to hackers .
This issue boils down to ensuring our property rights , privacy , and security .
Quite frankly , encryption is the last bit of protection individuals have against a totalitarian state .
Countries with troubling civil rights track records consistently attack citizens ’ use of encryption — just look at Russia ’ s ( failed ) attempts to ban the encrypted messaging app Telegram .
Government officials are urged to use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be hacked — and for good reason .
It ’ s certainly interesting that at the same time , some government officials are calling to limit encryption on regular Americans ’ phones .
I sympathize with authorities ’ efforts to keep us safe , but I must point out that encryption is not the bad guy here .
Compelling companies to weaken their devices or services intentionally would only put Americans at risk without providing the benefits that anti-encryption advocates have promised .
The bottom line is that encryption secures our critical infrastructure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American citizens and businesses from cyberthreats or government overreach .
The government shouldn ’ t meddle with that .
Grover G. Norquist is president of Americans for Tax Reform .

In 1997, I testified before Congress supporting the Security and Freedom Through Encryption Act, which would have codified the already Fourth Amendment-guaranteed freedom to use strong encryption. I said then that “I worry about an America in which the FBI director lies to Congress and has to be corrected by his own inspector general. These guys want to assign me my digital signature and keep my key on file with them or someone they designate?”
That worry has not dissipated with time. Following the shooting at a Navy training base in Pensacola, Florida, Attorney General William Barr pressured Apple and other technology firms to create backdoors for authorities to access devices.
Giving the government the capability to unlock your iPhone is like letting the government put a camera in every room of your house with a promise not to turn it on unless you’ve been bad. And of course, if the government or companies can access backdoors, foreign-backed hackers and other bad actors would figure out how to exploit intentionally inserted vulnerabilities as well. A backdoor into one device is a backdoor into all devices.
The government already has more than adequate opportunities to spy on taxpayers, take their money, and otherwise ruin their lives. Giving the federal government the ability to access every electronic device in the United States didn’t make sense in 1997, and it doesn’t make sense now.
Anti-encryption advocates claim that it’s a tool to shelter criminals. But it’s important to recognize that encryption is not just a way to hide things. U.S. businesses of all stripes need encryption to protect themselves from attacks and theft. Without encryption, countries or malicious competitors could break into businesses’ systems to access trade secrets, intellectual property, and other vital information. Healthy competition is a boon for our economy, but the game could get dirty if companies can’t effectively protect their assets.
Hackers with nation-states backing them regularly go after retailers and financial institutions to steal customers’ data. In Target’s massive data breach, hackers stole customers’ encrypted bank PINs, but they didn’t have the key, meaning they couldn’t decrypt the data. Imagine if this had happened in a world with encryption backdoors. Millions of Americans’ bank accounts would have been compromised.
More sophisticated encryption protects Americans even further. For example, Apple Pay allows individuals to make purchases with just their phones, which is more secure than paying with a traditional plastic credit card because both Apple and the retailer aren’t able to store the card number on the device or their servers. With Apple Pay, a bank or card issuer sends Apple an encrypted device account number, or token, for the card. This token is useless to make purchases without the device in hand and thereby useless to hackers.
This issue boils down to ensuring our property rights, privacy, and security. Quite frankly, encryption is the last bit of protection individuals have against a totalitarian state. Countries with troubling civil rights track records consistently attack citizens’ use of encryption — just look at Russia’s (failed) attempts to ban the encrypted messaging app Telegram.
Government officials are urged to use hypersecure devices to ensure they will not be hacked — and for good reason. It’s certainly interesting that at the same time, some government officials are calling to limit encryption on regular Americans’ phones.
I sympathize with authorities’ efforts to keep us safe, but I must point out that encryption is not the bad guy here. Compelling companies to weaken their devices or services intentionally would only put Americans at risk without providing the benefits that anti-encryption advocates have promised.
The bottom line is that encryption secures our critical infrastructure, promotes innovation, and protects both American citizens and businesses from cyberthreats or government overreach. The government shouldn’t meddle with that.
Grover G. Norquist is president of Americans for Tax Reform.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-03-06--Superdelegates line up behind 'happy warrior' Biden after Super Tuesday wins

The party `` superdelegates '' who could play a pivotal role in deciding the Democratic nominee for president are lining up behind Joe Biden now that his once-troubled campaign is winning in the primaries .
The superdelegates , who include party leaders and elected party officials , will have a say in deciding the nominee at the July Democratic National Convention if neither Biden nor Bernie Sanders is able to win a majority of pledged delegates during the primaries and caucuses .
Right now , the race is close .
Biden , the former vice president , beat rival Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in 10 out of 14 Super Tuesday contests on March 3 .
Biden ’ s victories breathed new life into his campaign after losses in New Hampshire and Iowa caused him to sink in the polls .
Biden is now leading slightly in national polls and is poised to beat Sanders in key contests , including the Michigan primary on March 10 and the Florida primary on March 17 .
But Sanders and Biden remain close in the delegate count , in part because Sanders will come out ahead in the critical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state ’ s 415 delegates .
Biden , as of late last week , had garnered 591 pledged delegates , while Sanders trailed closely with 531 delegates .
Polls indicate that Sanders is leading Biden in Wisconsin and Washington and is statistically tied with him in Pennsylvania .
If neither candidate can win a majority , or 1,991 pledged delegates , the decision may rest with the superdelegates , an elite group of 771 members of the Democratic Party who are poised to favor Biden .
Every House and Senate Democrat is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , former presidents and vice presidents , and members of the Democratic National Committee .
Biden has already won the backing of 104 superdelegates , and more are lining up behind his candidacy every day .
Sanders is backed by just 25 superdelegates , and very few of them are recent pledges .
Superdelegates began coalescing around Biden after it became clear last week that he had beaten rivals to emerge as the centrist alternative to Sanders , whose support of Medicare for All , a Green New Deal , and free college @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawmakers worried Sanders would not only lose to President Trump in November , but imperil down-ballot House and Senate races as well .
“ Joe Biden has a strong , unwavering record of fighting for healthcare for all Americans , voting rights , civil rights , equality , as well as protecting crime victims and reducing gun violence , ” Rep. Val Demings , a Florida Democrat , said last week .
Demings is among five dozen House Democrats backing Biden , and more are expected to endorse him in the coming days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only 10 congressional Democrats , including influential Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont and House freshman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , a rising star within the most liberal faction of the party .
Before his election to the Senate , Sanders served as a House member from 1991 to 2007 .
House lawmakers said that while they admire Sanders and his passion for reform , he hasn ’ t developed a connection with many of them .
Sanders has often operated as an outsider in Congress , and his agenda , coupled with a gruff demeanor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House or Senate Democrats .
Biden , in contrast , is a familiar and friendly party figure , having served in the Senate for decades and then as a liaison to Congress for President Barack Obama , who tended to keep lawmakers at an arm 's length .
“ Joe Biden is the happy warrior , ” Rep. Emanuel Cleaver , a Missouri Democrat and staunch Biden supporter , said .
Democrats who won GOP seats in 2018 are particularly wary of Sanders at the top of the ticket because his agenda won @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ I ’ m not endorsing anyone , except anyone but Bernie , ” Rep. Donna Shalala , a Florida Democrat who won in a swing district in 2018 , said .
Rep. Peter Welch , a Vermont Democrat who endorsed Sanders more than a year ago , said Sanders remains in a position to win .
“ There is just a really long way to go , ” he told the Washington Examiner .
“ There is clearly a progressive lane and a moderate lane .
And that ’ s a fair-and-square @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the majority of the party will be for the nominee.
” Welch isn ’ t worried about a party fight over the nomination .
“ The existential challenge for us is to beat Trump , ” Welch said .
“ And that will glue us together when the nominee emerges .
”

The party "superdelegates" who could play a pivotal role in deciding the Democratic nominee for president are lining up behind Joe Biden now that his once-troubled campaign is winning in the primaries.
The superdelegates, who include party leaders and elected party officials, will have a say in deciding the nominee at the July Democratic National Convention if neither Biden nor Bernie Sanders is able to win a majority of pledged delegates during the primaries and caucuses.
Right now, the race is close.
Biden, the former vice president, beat rival Sanders, a socialist U.S. senator from Vermont, in 10 out of 14 Super Tuesday contests on March 3. Biden’s victories breathed new life into his campaign after losses in New Hampshire and Iowa caused him to sink in the polls.
Biden is now leading slightly in national polls and is poised to beat Sanders in key contests, including the Michigan primary on March 10 and the Florida primary on March 17.
But Sanders and Biden remain close in the delegate count, in part because Sanders will come out ahead in the critical California primary and win a majority of the state’s 415 delegates.
Biden, as of late last week, had garnered 591 pledged delegates, while Sanders trailed closely with 531 delegates.
Polls indicate that Sanders is leading Biden in Wisconsin and Washington and is statistically tied with him in Pennsylvania.
If neither candidate can win a majority, or 1,991 pledged delegates, the decision may rest with the superdelegates, an elite group of 771 members of the Democratic Party who are poised to favor Biden.
Every House and Senate Democrat is a superdelegate, as are Democratic governors, former presidents and vice presidents, and members of the Democratic National Committee.
Biden has already won the backing of 104 superdelegates, and more are lining up behind his candidacy every day.
Sanders is backed by just 25 superdelegates, and very few of them are recent pledges.
Superdelegates began coalescing around Biden after it became clear last week that he had beaten rivals to emerge as the centrist alternative to Sanders, whose support of Medicare for All, a Green New Deal, and free college and college loan forgiveness left many Democratic lawmakers worried Sanders would not only lose to President Trump in November, but imperil down-ballot House and Senate races as well.
“Joe Biden has a strong, unwavering record of fighting for healthcare for all Americans, voting rights, civil rights, equality, as well as protecting crime victims and reducing gun violence,” Rep. Val Demings, a Florida Democrat, said last week.
Demings is among five dozen House Democrats backing Biden, and more are expected to endorse him in the coming days and weeks.
Sanders is backed by only 10 congressional Democrats, including influential Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont and House freshman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a rising star within the most liberal faction of the party.
Before his election to the Senate, Sanders served as a House member from 1991 to 2007.
House lawmakers said that while they admire Sanders and his passion for reform, he hasn’t developed a connection with many of them.
Sanders has often operated as an outsider in Congress, and his agenda, coupled with a gruff demeanor, has failed to appeal to many House or Senate Democrats.
Biden, in contrast, is a familiar and friendly party figure, having served in the Senate for decades and then as a liaison to Congress for President Barack Obama, who tended to keep lawmakers at an arm's length.
“Joe Biden is the happy warrior,” Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, a Missouri Democrat and staunch Biden supporter, said.
Democrats who won GOP seats in 2018 are particularly wary of Sanders at the top of the ticket because his agenda won’t sell in their districts.
“I’m not endorsing anyone, except anyone but Bernie,” Rep. Donna Shalala, a Florida Democrat who won in a swing district in 2018, said.
Rep. Peter Welch, a Vermont Democrat who endorsed Sanders more than a year ago, said Sanders remains in a position to win.
“There is just a really long way to go,” he told the Washington Examiner. “There is clearly a progressive lane and a moderate lane. And that’s a fair-and-square competition within the party, about where the majority of the party will be for the nominee.”
Welch isn’t worried about a party fight over the nomination.
“The existential challenge for us is to beat Trump,” Welch said. “And that will glue us together when the nominee emerges.”


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-03-06--Con-TROLLING the campaign: Trump soaks up spotlight and drives 'his opponents to distraction'

President Trump is controlling the 2020 debate with deft , vitriolic attacks on Democratic rivals that many Republicans , long concerned about the downside of his provocations , are learning to appreciate .
Trump has aggressively interjected himself into the Democratic presidential primary with broadsides unencumbered by decorum and , in some instances , facts .
In speeches , interviews , and social media posts , Trump mocks the personal appearance of would-be challengers , questions their mental fitness , uses insensitive rhetoric to highlight their faux pas , and raises unproven allegations to sow doubts about their integrity .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ shaped public opinion and driven news coverage while obscuring his own political vulnerabilities .
Even Republican strategists occasionally critical Trump ’ s preference for making seemingly sophomoric attacks instead of focusing on his strong economic record are acknowledging an upside to the president ’ s polarizing style .
“ President Trump knows he is able to own the news cycle and drive his opponents to distraction , even when , or particularly when , what he 's saying is untrue or inappropriate , ” said Michael Steel , a Republican operative .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him from lasting consequences from any one statement or any one day 's news.
” On Thursday , Trump dropped his favorite rhetorical bomb on Elizabeth Warren as she exited the Democratic presidential primary following a disappointing showing on Super Tuesday .
The president has referred to the Massachusetts senator as “ Pocahontas ” since before she launched her White House bid last year to highlight her incorrect claim of Native American heritage , for which she eventually apologized .
Trump also took swipes at Bernie Sanders and Michael Bloomberg , who also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Elizabeth ‘ Pocahontas ’ Warren , who was going nowhere except into Mini Mike ’ s head , just dropped out of the Democrat Primary , ” Trump tweeted .
“ THREE DAYS TOO LATE .
She cost Crazy Bernie , at least , Massachusetts , Minnesota and Texas .
Probably cost him the nomination !
Came in third in Mass.
” From the beginning of his first campaign in 2015 , Trump has displayed an instinctive knack for finding the weak spot in his opponents ’ armor and distilling their vulnerabilities down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican primary four years ago , he exploited doubts about Texas Sen. Ted Cruz ’ s authenticity with the moniker “ Lyin ’ Ted.
” In the general election , the ethical cloud that hovered over Democrat Hillary Clinton spawned “ Crooked Hillary.
” This time around , Trump has lampooned Bloomberg , the billionaire former New York City mayor , as “ Mini Mike ” — he is 5 ’ 8 ” tall — derided Warren as “ Pocahontas , ” and called Sanders , a Vermont senator , “ crazy.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Democratic front-runner , Trump regularly questions his mental acuity and accuses him of using the vice presidency to enrich his family .
Biden ’ s son , Hunter Biden , made millions serving on the board of a Ukrainian energy company during President Barack Obama ’ s administration .
Republicans were initially uncomfortable with this particular line of attack because allegations that Biden acted improperly as vice president have never been proven , though Hunter Biden ’ s actions were unseemly , they said .
But the charges of impropriety have weakened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ learned to love , if not embrace , Trump ’ s tactics .
“ A lot of people have realized , 'OK , this guy is pretty good at this , ' ” said Jason Miller , a Republican operative who worked on Trump ’ s 2016 campaign .
“ In a lot of these things , President Trump ends up being right.
” Doug Heye , a Republican communications strategist often critical of Trump , likened the president ’ s ability to push the Democrats off-track and influence the media environment to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Star Wars .
“ ’ These are not the droids you 're looking for ’ is a key part of Trump 's messaging , ” Heye said .
“ It allows him to distract from bad news while shaping the debate as he sees fit , with the benefit of knowing — because we all follow the Trump-directed bouncing ball — that he can do the same thing tomorrow without worrying whether or not it 's consistent.
” There are risks , however .
Trump ’ s crude behavior and politically charged rhetoric @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support for some of his signature policies .
His job approval ratings are higher since being acquitted by the Senate on two articles of impeachment .
But , in 2018 , dissatisfaction with the president led to a shellacking for the GOP in the midterm elections , with suburban voters , especially women , rejecting his polarizing style .
To prevent a repeat this November , the Trump campaign is deploying mild-mannered Vice President Mike Pence and Lara Trump , the president ’ s daughter-in-law , to suburban battlegrounds that remain a tougher @ @ @ @

President Trump is controlling the 2020 debate with deft, vitriolic attacks on Democratic rivals that many Republicans, long concerned about the downside of his provocations, are learning to appreciate.
Trump has aggressively interjected himself into the Democratic presidential primary with broadsides unencumbered by decorum and, in some instances, facts. In speeches, interviews, and social media posts, Trump mocks the personal appearance of would-be challengers, questions their mental fitness, uses insensitive rhetoric to highlight their faux pas, and raises unproven allegations to sow doubts about their integrity. In doing so, the president has shaped public opinion and driven news coverage while obscuring his own political vulnerabilities.
Even Republican strategists occasionally critical Trump’s preference for making seemingly sophomoric attacks instead of focusing on his strong economic record are acknowledging an upside to the president’s polarizing style.
“President Trump knows he is able to own the news cycle and drive his opponents to distraction, even when, or particularly when, what he's saying is untrue or inappropriate,” said Michael Steel, a Republican operative. “The constant churn often seems to protect him from lasting consequences from any one statement or any one day's news.”
[List: Trump troll train rolls right through the Democratic campaign]
On Thursday, Trump dropped his favorite rhetorical bomb on Elizabeth Warren as she exited the Democratic presidential primary following a disappointing showing on Super Tuesday. The president has referred to the Massachusetts senator as “Pocahontas” since before she launched her White House bid last year to highlight her incorrect claim of Native American heritage, for which she eventually apologized. Trump also took swipes at Bernie Sanders and Michael Bloomberg, who also ended his candidacy this week.
“Elizabeth ‘Pocahontas’ Warren, who was going nowhere except into Mini Mike’s head, just dropped out of the Democrat Primary,” Trump tweeted. “THREE DAYS TOO LATE. She cost Crazy Bernie, at least, Massachusetts, Minnesota and Texas. Probably cost him the nomination! Came in third in Mass.”
From the beginning of his first campaign in 2015, Trump has displayed an instinctive knack for finding the weak spot in his opponents’ armor and distilling their vulnerabilities down to a simple slogan. In the Republican primary four years ago, he exploited doubts about Texas Sen. Ted Cruz’s authenticity with the moniker “Lyin’ Ted.” In the general election, the ethical cloud that hovered over Democrat Hillary Clinton spawned “Crooked Hillary.”
This time around, Trump has lampooned Bloomberg, the billionaire former New York City mayor, as “Mini Mike” — he is 5 feet, 8 inches tall — derided Warren as “Pocahontas,” and called Sanders, a Vermont senator, “crazy.” To undercut Joe Biden, 77, the Democratic front-runner, Trump regularly questions his mental acuity and accuses him of using the vice presidency to enrich his family. Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, made millions serving on the board of a Ukrainian energy company during President Barack Obama’s administration.
Republicans were initially uncomfortable with this particular line of attack because allegations that Biden acted improperly as vice president have never been proven, though Hunter Biden’s actions were unseemly, they said. But the charges of impropriety have weakened Biden nonetheless, and many Republicans have learned to love, if not embrace, Trump’s tactics.
“A lot of people have realized, 'OK, this guy is pretty good at this,'” said Jason Miller, a Republican operative who worked on Trump’s 2016 campaign. “In a lot of these things, President Trump ends up being right.”
Doug Heye, a Republican communications strategist often critical of Trump, likened the president’s ability to push the Democrats off-track and influence the media environment to the Jedi mind trick from the movie Star Wars.
“'These are not the droids you're looking for' is a key part of Trump's messaging,” Heye said. “It allows him to distract from bad news while shaping the debate as he sees fit, with the benefit of knowing — because we all follow the Trump-directed bouncing ball — that he can do the same thing tomorrow without worrying whether or not it's consistent.”
There are risks, however.
Trump’s crude behavior and politically charged rhetoric sometimes undermine what would otherwise be popular support for some of his signature policies. His job approval ratings are higher since being acquitted by the Senate on two articles of impeachment. But in 2018, dissatisfaction with the president led to a shellacking for the GOP in the midterm elections, with suburban voters, especially women, rejecting his polarizing style.
To prevent a repeat this November, the Trump campaign is deploying mild-mannered Vice President Mike Pence and Lara Trump, the president’s daughter-in-law, to suburban battlegrounds that remain a tougher sell for Trump.


thewashingtonexaminer--2020-03-06--Bernie Sanders's pledge to ban oil exports could backfire

One of the first actions a Bernie Sanders administration might take would be to reimpose a ban on U.S. crude oil exports .
Still , it 's not clear whether doing so would significantly reduce global carbon emissions .
`` To prevent U.S. producers from exporting oil would not solve the global emissions problem , '' said Antoine Halff , a senior research scholar with the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University .
`` It would make the economics of U.S. production much more difficult , but it would not reduce the global need for oil .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
Sanders is competing with the more centrist Joe Biden for the Democratic presidential nomination , proposing an aggressive agenda to end the use of fossil fuels to combat climate change that goes further than anything his opponent would do .
Sanders 's platform includes a call to impose a nationwide ban on fracking for oil and natural gas , a policy that could imperil his chances in swing states such as Pennsylvania , where the drilling technique is prevalent .
But it also includes other less-talked-about , harder-to-project policies such as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fossil fuels , including reinstituting a ban on U.S. crude oil exports lifted in 2015 as part of a budget agreement between the Obama administration and then-Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan .
Former President Barack Obama previously threatened to veto lifting of the ban as standalone legislation .
Experts say the potential emissions-cutting benefit of preventing U.S. crude oil exports is among the least effective policies proposed by Democratic candidates , as compared to those targeting reductions in fossil fuel demand , such as a carbon tax or a zero-carbon electricity mandate .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ politics professor at the University of California , Santa Barbara , said that cutting off oil exports would reduce U.S. emissions in the short term .
Doing so would lower prices for thousands of independent oil producers that would be forced to curtail production .
But it would not decrease emissions over time , he said , because international oil companies would move to produce oil in other countries with less cumbersome regulations to serve continued global demand .
`` Among the suite of tools being proposed by candidates , this would be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
`` Candidates thinking about reducing U.S. emissions should be thinking about global emissions . ''
Stopping exports could also have geopolitical implications , the main concern cited by former 2020 candidate Michael Bloomberg .
His campaign recently he would not reimpose the ban because becoming a top exporter has reduced U.S. dependence on the Middle East and Russian oil and gas .
Increasing U.S. production and exports has also enabled world energy markets to withstand major output disruptions , such as the September attack on Saudi Arabia 's oil installations , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prices .
`` The world is awash in oil , '' said Paul Bledsoe , a former Clinton White House climate adviser and lecturer at American University 's Center for Environmental Policy .
`` Cutting off our exports will only help our enemies .
It 's a typical symbolic , do-gooder attempt that actually does harm . ''
Liberal environmental groups that fought against lifting the crude oil export ban in 2015 have been lobbying Democratic hopefuls to reinstate it , viewing it as a signal to energy investors that the fossil fuel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Defense Fund and Natural Resources Defense Council , which are less liberal , declined to comment on if they would endorse such a policy . )
A coalition of left-leaning environmental groups crafted an that lists `` immediately reinstituting the crude oil export ban '' as one of 10 things a president could do without Congress .
Greenpeace and Oil Change International released a in January saying that reimposing the crude oil export ban could slash global emissions by 73 million to 165 million metric tons per year .
That would be equal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to 42 coal plants .
The groups say the crude oil ban could be reinstated while declaring a national climate emergency .
( The 2015 budget deal that lifted the ban allows the president to impose `` export licensing requirements or other restrictions '' on crude oil exports for renewable one-year periods if a national emergency is declared . )
`` We need to use all our tools to rein in our fossil fuel production in the U.S. to achieve our climate goals , '' said David Turnbull , strategic communications director at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Oil Change International .
`` Reinstating the crude oil export ban seems like a no-brainer step . ''
Turnbull acknowledges some portion of the lost U.S. production from banning exports would be filled by increased production elsewhere , but he says the replacement is not `` one to one , '' and his group projects a net carbon benefit to the policy .
`` The economics are such that U.S. producers would have less incentive to do the massive extraction they are doing right now , '' he said , noting that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , sour crude grades produced overseas , meaning U.S. producers that specialize in light , sweet oil — with no export market — would be forced to accept a lower price from domestic refiners .
Turnbull blames the lifting of the crude oil export ban as a primary reason the United States became the largest producer of oil and gas combined in the world .
The ban was initially imposed during the 1970s oil embargo when the U.S. produced much less crude oil than it consumed .
Now , there 's too much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shale boom that has the U.S. on the cusp of being a net energy exporter later this year .
Obama reversed the ban as part of the budget plan that exchanged extensions of tax incentives for wind and solar energy .
U.S. crude exports have since climbed from an average of nearly 465,000 barrels per day in 2015 to 2.98 million barrels per day in 2019 , according to the .
`` With hindsight , we know how big a mistake that was , '' Turnbull said .
The oil and gas industry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ differently and is taking the threat seriously .
The U.S. producing a record amount of oil and gas has not resulted in higher domestic gas prices , as some opponents feared when the export ban was lifted , but instead kept oil and gas prices low in a global market .
`` We are very concerned about a ban on oil exports , '' said Frank Macchiarola , vice president of policy , economics , and regulatory affairs at the American Petroleum Institute .
`` Policymakers introducing these policies are trying to lay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to create an air of inevitability and reasonableness .
We want to cut that off to show people these are radical policies that will have detrimental effects on the American people . ''
Kevin Book , managing director for research at ClearView Energy , argued the politics of reimposing the export ban are risky for Democrats , with the potential for raising energy costs given that replacements for oil products , such as electric vehicles for transportation , are still not prevalent .
`` It 's pretty easy to see that policies of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ n't look good for anyone in a close election , '' Book said .

One of the first actions a Bernie Sanders administration might take would be to reimpose a ban on U.S. crude oil exports. Still, it's not clear whether doing so would significantly reduce global carbon emissions.
"To prevent U.S. producers from exporting oil would not solve the global emissions problem," said Antoine Halff, a senior research scholar with the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University. "It would make the economics of U.S. production much more difficult, but it would not reduce the global need for oil. It would just export emissions to other countries."
Sanders is competing with the more centrist Joe Biden for the Democratic presidential nomination, proposing an aggressive agenda to end the use of fossil fuels to combat climate change that goes further than anything his opponent would do.
Sanders's platform includes a call to impose a nationwide ban on fracking for oil and natural gas, a policy that could imperil his chances in swing states such as Pennsylvania, where the drilling technique is prevalent.
But it also includes other less-talked-about, harder-to-project policies such as banning the import and export of all fossil fuels, including reinstituting a ban on U.S. crude oil exports lifted in 2015 as part of a budget agreement between the Obama administration and then-Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan. Former President Barack Obama previously threatened to veto lifting of the ban as standalone legislation.
Experts say the potential emissions-cutting benefit of preventing U.S. crude oil exports is among the least effective policies proposed by Democratic candidates, as compared to those targeting reductions in fossil fuel demand, such as a carbon tax or a zero-carbon electricity mandate.
Paasha Mahdavi, an energy and environmental politics professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara, said that cutting off oil exports would reduce U.S. emissions in the short term. Doing so would lower prices for thousands of independent oil producers that would be forced to curtail production.
But it would not decrease emissions over time, he said, because international oil companies would move to produce oil in other countries with less cumbersome regulations to serve continued global demand.
"Among the suite of tools being proposed by candidates, this would be the least effective," Mahdavi said. "Candidates thinking about reducing U.S. emissions should be thinking about global emissions."
Stopping exports could also have geopolitical implications, the main concern cited by former 2020 candidate Michael Bloomberg. His campaign recently said he would not reimpose the ban because becoming a top exporter has reduced U.S. dependence on the Middle East and Russian oil and gas.
Increasing U.S. production and exports has also enabled world energy markets to withstand major output disruptions, such as the September attack on Saudi Arabia's oil installations, which did not produce a sustained spike in prices.
"The world is awash in oil," said Paul Bledsoe, a former Clinton White House climate adviser and lecturer at American University's Center for Environmental Policy. "Cutting off our exports will only help our enemies. It's a typical symbolic, do-gooder attempt that actually does harm."
Liberal environmental groups that fought against lifting the crude oil export ban in 2015 have been lobbying Democratic hopefuls to reinstate it, viewing it as a signal to energy investors that the fossil fuel era is ending. (The Environmental Defense Fund and Natural Resources Defense Council, which are less liberal, declined to comment on if they would endorse such a policy.)
A coalition of left-leaning environmental groups crafted an action plan that lists "immediately reinstituting the crude oil export ban" as one of 10 things a president could do without Congress.
Greenpeace and Oil Change International released a policy briefing in January saying that reimposing the crude oil export ban could slash global emissions by 73 million to 165 million metric tons per year. That would be equal to the emissions reductions from shuttering 19 to 42 coal plants. The groups say the crude oil ban could be reinstated while declaring a national climate emergency. (The 2015 budget deal that lifted the ban allows the president to impose "export licensing requirements or other restrictions" on crude oil exports for renewable one-year periods if a national emergency is declared.)
"We need to use all our tools to rein in our fossil fuel production in the U.S. to achieve our climate goals," said David Turnbull, strategic communications director at Oil Change U.S., the lobbying arm of Oil Change International. "Reinstating the crude oil export ban seems like a no-brainer step."
Turnbull acknowledges some portion of the lost U.S. production from banning exports would be filled by increased production elsewhere, but he says the replacement is not "one to one," and his group projects a net carbon benefit to the policy.
"The economics are such that U.S. producers would have less incentive to do the massive extraction they are doing right now," he said, noting that American refiners are built to process heavy, sour crude grades produced overseas, meaning U.S. producers that specialize in light, sweet oil — with no export market — would be forced to accept a lower price from domestic refiners.
Turnbull blames the lifting of the crude oil export ban as a primary reason the United States became the largest producer of oil and gas combined in the world.
The ban was initially imposed during the 1970s oil embargo when the U.S. produced much less crude oil than it consumed. Now, there's too much oil, thanks mainly to the American shale boom that has the U.S. on the cusp of being a net energy exporter later this year.
Obama reversed the ban as part of the budget plan that exchanged extensions of tax incentives for wind and solar energy.
U.S. crude exports have since climbed from an average of nearly 465,000 barrels per day in 2015 to 2.98 million barrels per day in 2019, according to the Energy Information Administration .
"With hindsight, we know how big a mistake that was," Turnbull said.
The oil and gas industry views the prospect of reimposing the ban differently and is taking the threat seriously. The U.S. producing a record amount of oil and gas has not resulted in higher domestic gas prices, as some opponents feared when the export ban was lifted, but instead kept oil and gas prices low in a global market.
"We are very concerned about a ban on oil exports," said Frank Macchiarola, vice president of policy, economics, and regulatory affairs at the American Petroleum Institute. "Policymakers introducing these policies are trying to lay down a marker and set a precedent to create an air of inevitability and reasonableness. We want to cut that off to show people these are radical policies that will have detrimental effects on the American people."
Kevin Book, managing director for research at ClearView Energy, argued the politics of reimposing the export ban are risky for Democrats, with the potential for raising energy costs given that replacements for oil products, such as electric vehicles for transportation, are still not prevalent.
"It's pretty easy to see that policies of raising energy prices and destroying jobs doesn't look good for anyone in a close election," Book said.