theguardian--2020-02-23--Bernie Sanders' plans may be expensive but inaction would cost much more | Robert Reich

In Wednesday night ’ s Democratic debate , the former South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg charged that the Vermont senator Bernie Sanders ’ policy proposals would cost $ 50tn .
Holy Indiana .
Larry Summers , formerly chief White House economic adviser for Barack Obama , puts the price tag at $ 60tn .
“ We are in a kind of new era of radical proposal , ” he told CNN .
Maya MacGuineas , president of the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget , claims Sanders ’ agenda would at least double federal spending .
Putting aside the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ omit the other side of the equation : what , by comparison , is the cost of doing nothing ?
A Green New Deal might be expensive but doing nothing about climate change will almost certainly cost far more .
California is already burning , the midwest and south are flooding , New England is eroding , Florida is sinking .
If we don ’ t launch something as bold as a Green New Deal , we ’ ll spend trillions coping with the consequences of our failure to be bold .
Medicare @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but the price of doing nothing about America ’ s increasingly dysfunctional healthcare system will soon be in the stratosphere .
The nation already pays more for healthcare per person and has worse health outcomes than any other advanced country .
A new study in the Lancet estimates that Medicare for All would save $ 450bn and prevent 68,000 unnecessary deaths each year .
Investing in universal childcare , public higher education and woefully outdated and dilapidated infrastructure will be expensive too , but the cost of not making these investments would be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and millions of families can ’ t afford decent childcare , college or housing – whose soaring costs are closely related to inadequate transportation and water systems .
Focusing only on the costs of doing something about these problems without mentioning the costs of doing nothing is misleading , but this asymmetry is widespread .
Journalists wanting to appear serious about public policy continue to rip into Sanders and the Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren ( whose policies are almost as ambitious ) for the costs of their proposals but never ask self-styled moderates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the costs of doing nothing or too little .
A related criticism of Sanders and Warren is that they haven ’ t come up with ways to pay for their proposals .
Sanders “ only explained $ 25tn worth of revenue , which means the hole in there is bigger than the size of the entire economy of the United States ” , charged Buttigieg .
Sanders ’ and Warren ’ s wealth taxes would go a long way toward paying for their plans .
But even if it paid a small @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , so what ?
As long as every additional dollar of spending reduces by more than a dollar the future costs of climate change , inadequate healthcare and insufficient public investment , it makes sense to spend more .
Republican administrations have doled out gigantic tax cuts to big corporations and the wealthy without announcing specific cuts in public spending or other tax increases because – despite decades of evidence to the contrary – they claim the cuts will generate economic growth that will more than make up for any lost revenue .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ plans for reducing empirically verifiable costs of large and growing public problems , they are skewered by fellow Democrats and the press for not having ways to pay for them .
A third line of criticism is that Sanders ’ and Warren ’ s proposals are just too big : they ’ re risky , they may fail or have unintended consequences , they ’ ll be difficult to implement .
This argument might be convincing if the problems Sanders and Warren address were growing slowly .
But if anything , they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ environment , health , education and infrastructure are nearly unanimous : these problems are worsening exponentially .
Climate change is upon us ; the environment is altering far more quickly than scientists feared even a few years ago .
The cost of health insurance is soaring , as are the costs of preventive care .
So too with childcare , college and a crumbling infrastructure .
And let ’ s not forget widening inequality , as most families continue to face stagnant wages while wealth and power accumulate at the top .
On @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing nothing is surging .
Cautious incrementalism is wise under most circumstances .
But where headwinds are turning into a gale , incrementalism drives us backwards .
One of the least-acknowledged costs of the Trump years is how far the failure to address these growing problems has set us back .
Dubbing Sanders and Warren “ extremists ” or “ radicals ” is absurd when they are seeking to remedy problems which themselves are extreme and will radically harm Americans if left unattended .
The status quo is not sustainable .
Young people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bear more of the costs of inaction .
An Emerson poll of Iowa found that 44 % of Democrats under 50 support Sanders and 10 % favor Warren .
No other candidate reached double digits .
In New Hampshire , Sanders won more voters under 30 than the other candidates combined , according to CNN exit polls .
The reason to support Sanders ’ and Warren ’ s proposals isn ’ t because they inspire and mobilize voters .
It is because they are necessary .
We can no longer pretend that climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a yawning deficit in public investment pose insignificant challenges .
Doing nothing or doing too little will make them far worse .
Obsessing about the cost of addressing them without acknowledging the cost of failing to address them is dangerously irresponsible .
• None Robert Reich , a former US secretary of labor , is professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley and the author of Saving Capitalism : For the Many , Not the Few and The Common Good .
His next book , The System : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It , will be out in March .
He is a columnist for Guardian US

In Wednesday night’s Democratic debate, the former South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg charged that the Vermont senator Bernie Sanders’ policy proposals would cost $50tn. Holy Indiana.
Larry Summers, formerly chief White House economic adviser for Barack Obama, puts the price tag at $60tn. “We are in a kind of new era of radical proposal,” he told CNN.
Maya MacGuineas, president of the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, claims Sanders’ agenda would at least double federal spending.
Putting aside the accuracy of these cost estimates, they omit the other side of the equation: what, by comparison, is the cost of doing nothing?
A Green New Deal might be expensive but doing nothing about climate change will almost certainly cost far more. California is already burning, the midwest and south are flooding, New England is eroding, Florida is sinking. If we don’t launch something as bold as a Green New Deal, we’ll spend trillions coping with the consequences of our failure to be bold.
Medicare for All will cost a lot, but the price of doing nothing about America’s increasingly dysfunctional healthcare system will soon be in the stratosphere. The nation already pays more for healthcare per person and has worse health outcomes than any other advanced country. A new study in the Lancet estimates that Medicare for All would save $450bn and prevent 68,000 unnecessary deaths each year.
Investing in universal childcare, public higher education and woefully outdated and dilapidated infrastructure will be expensive too, but the cost of not making these investments would be astronomical. American productivity is already suffering and millions of families can’t afford decent childcare, college or housing – whose soaring costs are closely related to inadequate transportation and water systems.
Focusing only on the costs of doing something about these problems without mentioning the costs of doing nothing is misleading, but this asymmetry is widespread. Journalists wanting to appear serious about public policy continue to rip into Sanders and the Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren (whose policies are almost as ambitious) for the costs of their proposals but never ask self-styled moderates like Buttigieg how they plan to cope with the costs of doing nothing or too little.
A related criticism of Sanders and Warren is that they haven’t come up with ways to pay for their proposals. Sanders “only explained $25tn worth of revenue, which means the hole in there is bigger than the size of the entire economy of the United States”, charged Buttigieg.
Sanders’ and Warren’s wealth taxes would go a long way toward paying for their plans.
But even if it paid a small fraction of the costs of their proposals, so what? As long as every additional dollar of spending reduces by more than a dollar the future costs of climate change, inadequate healthcare and insufficient public investment, it makes sense to spend more.
Republican administrations have doled out gigantic tax cuts to big corporations and the wealthy without announcing specific cuts in public spending or other tax increases because – despite decades of evidence to the contrary – they claim the cuts will generate economic growth that will more than make up for any lost revenue.
Yet when Warren and Sanders propose ambitious plans for reducing empirically verifiable costs of large and growing public problems, they are skewered by fellow Democrats and the press for not having ways to pay for them.
A third line of criticism is that Sanders’ and Warren’s proposals are just too big: they’re risky, they may fail or have unintended consequences, they’ll be difficult to implement.
This argument might be convincing if the problems Sanders and Warren address were growing slowly. But if anything, they’re speeding up. Experts on the environment, health, education and infrastructure are nearly unanimous: these problems are worsening exponentially.
Climate change is upon us; the environment is altering far more quickly than scientists feared even a few years ago. The cost of health insurance is soaring, as are the costs of preventive care. So too with childcare, college and a crumbling infrastructure. And let’s not forget widening inequality, as most families continue to face stagnant wages while wealth and power accumulate at the top.
Elizabeth Warren speaks during a town hall in Las Vegas. Photograph: Matt York/AP
On all these fronts, the cost of doing nothing is surging. Cautious incrementalism is wise under most circumstances. But where headwinds are turning into a gale, incrementalism drives us backwards. One of the least-acknowledged costs of the Trump years is how far the failure to address these growing problems has set us back.
Dubbing Sanders and Warren “extremists” or “radicals” is absurd when they are seeking to remedy problems which themselves are extreme and will radically harm Americans if left unattended. The status quo is not sustainable.
Young people understand this, perhaps because they will bear more of the costs of inaction. An Emerson poll of Iowa found that 44% of Democrats under 50 support Sanders and 10% favor Warren. No other candidate reached double digits. In New Hampshire, Sanders won more voters under 30 than the other candidates combined, according to CNN exit polls.
The reason to support Sanders’ and Warren’s proposals isn’t because they inspire and mobilize voters. It is because they are necessary.
We can no longer pretend that climate change, a wildly dysfunctional healthcare system and a yawning deficit in public investment pose insignificant challenges. Doing nothing or doing too little will make them far worse. Obsessing about the cost of addressing them without acknowledging the cost of failing to address them is dangerously irresponsible.


theguardian--2020-02-23--Bernie Sanders celebrates thunderous Nevada caucuses win – video

Bernie Sanders has celebrated a huge win at the caucuses in Nevada , putting him clearly in front of the @ @ @ @ @ nomination a week before the South Carolina primary and then Super Tuesday on 3 March @ @ @ @ @ vote .
Sanders , who had already moved on to San Antonio Texas , celebrated @ @ @ @ @ a multigenerational , multiracial coalition ' after winning in Nevada , a state that is @ @ @ @ @ 10 % black and has a rapidly growing Asian American community • Sanders widens primary @ @ @ @ @ Nevada caucuses – as it happened • Analysis : Sanders ' Nevada win is a @ @ @ @ @ are toast

Bernie Sanders has celebrated a huge win at the caucuses in Nevada, putting him clearly in front of the race for the Democratic presidential nomination a week before the South Carolina primary and then Super Tuesday on 3 March, when 14 states will vote.
Sanders, who had already moved on to San Antonio Texas, celebrated a win that 'brought together a multigenerational, multiracial coalition' after winning in Nevada, a state that is nearly 30% Latino, 10% black and has a rapidly growing Asian American community


theguardian--2020-02-23--South Carolina: how black Americans' reverse migration is reshaping next state to vote

Najeema Davis Washington spent more than 15 years as a federal employee in Washington DC before she returned to Charleston , the city she left in 1996 .
She brought with her a progressive outlook that ran counter to the traditionally moderate views of her old hometown .
She also noticed , she says , that the evolution of her community extended beyond mere gentrification .
“ It ’ s rapidly growing around me and I sometimes don ’ t recognize it anymore , ” she said .
“ And that ’ s not just because of how the city @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Since the 1970s , the US has experienced a reverse migration : black Americans from cities like New York , Detroit and Chicago have moved back south to places like Houston , Charlotte and Atlanta .
In doing so , they have changed voting behavior .
“ African Americans relocating to the south over the past three decades are making these southern states more competitive for Democrats , ” said Bill Frey , a senior fellow and demographer with the Brookings Institution .
It is a proposition that will be tested on Saturday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Most often , black Americans move to communities where they were born or where their families were rooted prior to the Great Migration , an epochal shift between 1916 and 1970 in which 6 million African Americans left southern states to pursue jobs up north .
The reversal accelerated in the early 2000s , as many sought refuge from economic decline in the Rust Belt states .
According to Frey , such new residents add to black voter percentages , boosting African American power in primary and general elections .
He points to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support in the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial race was boosted by an influx of new black residents in cities like Atlanta .
“ There ’ s a clear understanding that a growing , energized bloc of African American voters can be a tipping point for any electorate , ” Frey said .
“ It ’ s an example of what we can see moving forward where many thought , and still think , that Georgia will eventually turn blue.
” The top states for black population gains , Frey said , are all swing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , North Carolina , Virginia .
Nonetheless , it is in Democratic primaries in places like South Carolina that the demographic shift may make its greatest impact .
Adding nearly 65,000 residents of all races between 2018 and 2019 , South Carolina was the sixth-fastest-growing state .
It is now home to more than 5 million people and the black population had been the second-largest contributor to population growth since the last official US census in 2010 .
Such newcomers , Frey said , now shape black voting blocs .
“ Hillary Clinton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the black vote , ” he said .
“ With most African Americans living in and moving south , those races become more competitive because the range of political ideologies among them widens.
” Washington said she herself was representative of a growing diversity among southern black voters that is frequently overlooked .
“ This antiquated monolith of the southern black moderate just isn ’ t as present as folks think anymore ” she said .
“ Political talk is all over the place because folks understand how our votes are taken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fits their values , not just the candidates.
” After Cory Booker and Kamala Harris ended their bids for the White House , Washington backed Tom Steyer .
She said the billionaire “ caught [ her ] attention years ago ” for aggressive attempts to combat climate change and the racial wealth gap , issues that she said “ speak to what affects African Americans most ” .
The Brookings Institution notes that while progressive attitudes are most often held by younger , college-educated blacks , the influence of retirees and older Americans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voting blocs left .
Through her own work , Washington said , she has encountered “ older , urban and moderate black voters ” who many “ assume are going to support Joe Biden ” but in fact demand a more progressive agenda .
“ They may be stumping for Bernie , or [ were ] canvassing for [ Andrew ] Yang , ” she said , “ but there ’ s a consistent energy surrounding progressive approaches to inequality , education and healthcare ” .
Antjuan Seawright is a Columbia-based Democratic strategist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Carolina ” , one that will change how Democrats build the coalition necessary to defeat Donald Trump .
“ The mindset of our people has changed , ” he said .
“ And when the people change , elected officials and parties have no choice but to respond .
Democrats realize now that them being engaged is required at levels that haven ’ t been seen before in our political lifetime.
” This month , for the first time , South Carolina registered a million voters of color .
That , Seawright said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic attempts to “ galvanize the most consequential constituency in modern day political history ” .
That said , he doesn ’ t underestimate Biden ’ s popularity among longtime black South Carolinians and predicts such turnout will reignite the former vice-president ’ s campaign .
African American voters , Seawright said , are loyal .
“ This is a trust election and voters will want to go with who they know , ” he said .
“ And they know Joe .
Joe has been there for the people of South Carolina @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people being there for him on 29 February.
” Analysis of national polls by FiveThirtyEight does show support for Biden among black voters in South Carolina has slipped 12 % since the New Hampshire primary , creating opportunities for rivals including the former South Bend , Indiana , mayor Pete Buttigieg and the Vermont senator Bernie Sanders .
Black voters are also discerning , Seawright said , adding that he considers the primary a “ fight for second place ” should Biden lose steam .
“ What second place looks like is different @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Candidates now are tasked with developing relationships in this state , not just for one election but to demonstrate that their long-term values will have the best opportunity for the party to be successful here long after.
” State party leaders , he said , must capitalize on that momentum , generating down-ballot votes in the general election .
Among moderates and progressives , therefore , coalition-building is imperative .
‘ It ’ s about how we message ’ Population shifts have already factored into Democratic gains in South Carolina , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Joe Cunningham , but the state hasn ’ t elected a Democrat to the US Senate since 2006 .
Jaime Harrison , the former chair of the state party , is determined to change that .
He is challenging a three-term incumbent Republican , Lindsey Graham .
In a state Trump won by more than 300,000 votes his campaign is ambitious but Harrison has achieved record-breaking fundraising and one December a poll showed him only two points behind Graham , once a stringent Trump critic but now one of the president ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the impact of demographic shifts , noting that he has “ been in and around all of South Carolina [ his ] entire life ” and has not “ seen growth like this before ” .
Longtime residents and transplants care about the same issues , he said , just in different ways .
“ Healthcare affects us all , like in our urban counties where access can be expensive and timely to residents , or in the eight rural counties that don ’ t have a single OB-GYN , ” he said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2016 , in which a bitter primary between Sanders and Clinton led some voters to sit out the general election .
His team has released a seven-page memo , offering guidance on building a coalition .
“ It ’ s about how we message and who we message to , ” he said .
“ We need to be having conversations in South Carolina that speak less to the head and more to the heart and the gut , drawing in these various camps in by recognizing their presence .
“ Otherwise we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get anything done.
” As his campaign connects with former city dwellers in suburban Columbia , older voters and recent graduates around Greenville and farmers in the Lowcountry , he ’ s betting on Graham being seen as out of touch .
“ The south is changing , ” he said , arguing that for demographic shifts , his state is on a par with Texas , North Carolina and Georgia .
“ Folks are losing hope in all communities and they ’ re looking for policies that speak to their challenges , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how the pulse of the people is diversifying would do the party a disservice in elections to come .
In Charleston , Washington said she often straddles two identities : a lifelong Carolinian in tune with the conservative culture of the south and a relocating transplant sometimes out of touch with such traditional views .
This week ’ s primary may come too soon to reveal a full identity crisis .
Even Washington predicts a strong turnout for Biden , adding : “ No one touches him on experience.
” Still , she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is coming .
“ We know who we are and where we ’ ve been but as the south evolves , we evolve .
For some of us , that yearning for something bold , something new is just the beginning .
”

Najeema Davis Washington spent more than 15 years as a federal employee in Washington DC before she returned to Charleston, the city she left in 1996.
She brought with her a progressive outlook that ran counter to the traditionally moderate views of her old home town. She also noticed, she says, that the evolution of her community extended beyond mere gentrification.
“It’s rapidly growing around me and I sometimes don’t recognize it any more,” she said. “And that’s not just because of how the city looks. The mindset has changed.”
Since the 1970s, the US has experienced a reverse migration: black Americans from cities like New York, Detroit and Chicago have moved back south to places like Houston, Charlotte and Atlanta. In doing so, they have changed voting behavior.
“African Americans relocating to the south over the past three decades are making these southern states more competitive for Democrats,” said Bill Frey, a senior fellow and demographer with the Brookings Institution.
It is a proposition that will be tested on Saturday, in the South Carolina primary.
This antiquated monolith of the southern black moderate just isn’t as present as folks think any more Najeema Davis Washington, South Carolina resident
Most often, black Americans move to communities where they were born or where their families were rooted before the Great Migration, an epochal shift between 1916 and 1970 in which 6 million African Americans left southern states to pursue jobs up north. The reversal accelerated in the early 2000s, as many sought refuge from economic decline in the rust belt states.
According to Frey, such new residents add to black voter percentages, boosting African American power in primary and general elections. He points to the case of Stacey Abrams, whose support in the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial race was boosted by an influx of new black residents in cities like Atlanta.
“There’s a clear understanding that a growing, energized bloc of African American voters can be a tipping point for any electorate,” Frey said. “It’s an example of what we can see moving forward where many thought, and still think, that Georgia will eventually turn blue.”
The top states for black population gains, Frey said, are all swing states: Georgia, Texas, Florida, North Carolina, Virginia. Nonetheless, it is in Democratic primaries in places like South Carolina that the demographic shift may make its greatest impact.
Adding nearly 65,000 residents of all races between 2018 and 2019, South Carolina was the sixth-fastest-growing state. It is now home to more than 5 million people and the black population had been the second-largest contributor to population growth since the last official US census in 2010.
Such newcomers, Frey said, now shape black voting blocs.
Voters listen to the Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speak on 12 February 2016 in Denmark, South Carolina. Photograph: Spencer Platt/Getty Images
“Hillary Clinton won early primaries in 2016 largely because of the black vote,” he said. “With most African Americans living in and moving south, those races become more competitive because the range of political ideologies among them widens.”
Washington said she herself was representative of a growing diversity among southern black voters that is frequently overlooked.
“This antiquated monolith of the southern black moderate just isn’t as present as folks think any more,” she said. “Political talk is all over the place because folks understand how our votes are taken for granted, assessing whether the party fits their values, not just the candidates.”
After Cory Booker and Kamala Harris ended their bids for the White House, Washington backed Tom Steyer. She said the billionaire “caught [her] attention years ago” for aggressive attempts to combat climate change and the racial wealth gap, issues that she said “speak to what affects African Americans most”.
The Brookings Institution notes that while progressive attitudes are most often held by younger, college-educated blacks, the influence of retirees and older Americans from more liberal cities can also skew voting blocs left.
Through her own work, Washington said, she has encountered “older, urban and moderate black voters” who many “assume are going to support Joe Biden” but in fact demand a more progressive agenda.
“They may be stumping for Bernie, or [were] canvassing for [Andrew] Yang,” she said, “but there’s a consistent energy surrounding progressive approaches to inequality, education and healthcare”.
‘This is a trust election’
Antjuan Seawright is a Columbia-based Democratic strategist. He describes a “changing South Carolina”, one that will change how Democrats build the coalition necessary to defeat Donald Trump.
“The mindset of our people has changed,” he said. “And when the people change, elected officials and parties have no choice but to respond. Democrats realize now that them being engaged is required at levels that haven’t been seen before in our political lifetime.”
This month, for the first time, South Carolina registered a million voters of color. That, Seawright said, was “a testament” to Democratic attempts to “galvanize the most consequential constituency in modern-day political history”.
That said, he doesn’t underestimate Biden’s popularity among longtime black South Carolinians and predicts such turnout will reignite the former vice-president’s campaign. African American voters, Seawright said, are loyal.
Joe Biden arrives at the Columbia Urban League annual Dr Martin Luther King Jr breakfast in West Columbia, South Carolina, 20 January 2020. Photograph: Randall Hill/Reuters
“This is a trust election and voters will want to go with who they know,” he said. “And they know Joe. Joe has been there for the people of South Carolina and he will be rewarded by the people being there for him on 29 February.”
Analysis of national polls by FiveThirtyEight does show support for Biden among black voters in South Carolina has slipped 12% since the New Hampshire primary, creating opportunities for rivals including the former South Bend, Indiana, mayor Pete Buttigieg and the Vermont senator Bernie Sanders.
Black voters are also discerning, Seawright said, adding that he considers the primary a “fight for second place” should Biden lose steam.
“What second place looks like is different for different people,” he said. “Candidates now are tasked with developing relationships in this state, not just for one election but to demonstrate that their long-term values will have the best opportunity for the party to be successful here long after.”
State party leaders, he said, must capitalize on that momentum, generating down-ballot votes in the general election. Among moderates and progressives, therefore, coalition-building is imperative.
‘It’s about how we message’
Population shifts have already factored into Democratic gains in South Carolina, mostly recently flipping a House seat for Joe Cunningham, but the state hasn’t elected a Democrat to the US Senate since 2006. Jaime Harrison, the former chair of the state party, is determined to change that.
He is challenging a three-term incumbent Republican, Lindsey Graham. In a state Trump won by more than 300,000 votes his campaign is ambitious but Harrison has achieved record-breaking fundraising and one December a poll showed him only two points behind Graham, once a stringent Trump critic but now one of the president’s closest allies.
Harrison said he recognizes the impact of demographic shifts, noting that he has “been in and around all of South Carolina [his] entire life” and has not “seen growth like this before”. Longtime residents and transplants care about the same issues, he said, just in different ways.
“Healthcare affects us all, like in our urban counties where access can be expensive and timely to residents, or in the eight rural counties that don’t have a single OB-GYN,” he said.
Harrison urged Democrats to learn from 2016, in which a bitter primary between Sanders and Clinton led some voters to sit out the general election. His team has released a seven-page memo, offering guidance on building a coalition.
“It’s about how we message and who we message to,” he said. “We need to be having conversations in South Carolina that speak less to the head and more to the heart and the gut, drawing in these various camps in by recognizing their presence.
Jaime Harrison with presidential candidates Tulsi Gabbard, Joe Biden, Amy Klobuchar, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders in Columbia, South Carolina. Photograph: Sean Rayford/Getty Images
“Otherwise we lose future generations over an inability to get anything done.”
As his campaign connects with former city dwellers in suburban Columbia, older voters and recent graduates around Greenville and farmers in the Lowcountry, he’s betting on Graham being seen as out of touch.
“The south is changing,” he said, arguing that for demographic shifts, his state is on a par with Texas, North Carolina and Georgia.
“Folks are losing hope in all communities and they’re looking for policies that speak to their challenges,” Harrison said, adding that ignoring how the pulse of the people is diversifying would do the party a disservice in elections to come.
In Charleston, Washington said she often straddles two identities: a lifelong Carolinian in tune with the conservative culture of the south and a relocating transplant sometimes out of touch with such traditional views.
“I’m basically South Carolina in human form,” she joked.
This week’s primary may come too soon to reveal a full identity crisis. Even Washington predicts a strong turnout for Biden, adding: “No one touches him on experience.”
Still, she echoes Harrison, saying: “Change is coming.
“We know who we are and where we’ve been but as the south evolves, we evolve. For some of us, that yearning for something bold, something new is just the beginning.”


theguardian--2020-02-23--Tom Steyer qualifies for South Carolina Democratic debate ahead of primary

The billionaire Tom Steyer has qualified for Tuesday night ’ s Democratic debate in Charleston , South Carolina , ahead of the state ’ s primary next weekend .
The former vice-president is seeking victory in the first southern state to vote , in order to establish himself as the moderate alternative to Bernie Sanders , the progressive Vermont senator who won Nevada on Saturday .
Biden finished a distant second as Sanders performed strongly with minority voters .
Nonetheless the former VP ’ s campaign manager , Greg Schultz , tweeted : “ Make no mistake : the Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ broadcast on CBS ’ s Face the Nation on Sunday , Biden said a recent fall in his support with African Americans in South Carolina , a key bloc for a man who won elections with Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012 , was due to “ Steyer spending hundreds of millions , tens of thousands of dollars , millions of dollars , out campaigning there .
“ And so I think a lot is happening in terms of the amount of money being spent by the billionaires to try to cut into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that has a lot to do with it.
” Biden denied that Steyer was melting his “ firewall ” and expressed confidence in his chances .
Steyer also spent heavily in Nevada but failed to qualify for its debate .
On Sunday , with results still coming in , he was in a close contest for fifth place with Amy Klobuchar , a senator from Minnesota .
Former South Bend , Indiana , mayor Pete Buttigieg – whose campaign formally queried the Nevada results after placing third – Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also debate in South Carolina .
Bloomberg , another billionaire , is not competing in South Carolina , focusing instead on Super Tuesday , 3 March , when a host of states will vote .
The Hawaii congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard is the only candidate left in the race who has not yet qualified for the South Carolina debate .
The deadline for meeting poll-based qualifications set by the Democratic National Committee is Monday .
On Twitter , Steyer said he was “ proud of everything we accomplished in Nevada .
We ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more diverse and more representative of the country.
” In South Carolina , Steyer has campaigned heavily and focused on issues important to black voters including support for historically black colleges and universities and reparations for slavery .
Speaking to the Guardian this week , one South Carolina voter , Najeema Davis Washington , said Steyer “ caught [ her ] attention years ago ” with his advocacy for combating climate change and the racial wealth gap , issues she said “ speak to what affects African Americans most ” .
But the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in South Carolina with 24.5 % support – followed by Sanders on 21.5 % and Steyer on 16.5 % – and many in the state still expect a Biden win .
Antjuan Seawright , a Columbia-based Democratic strategist , said : “ This is a trust election and voters will want to go with who they know .
And they know Joe .
Joe has been there for the people of South Carolina and he will be rewarded by the people being there for him.
” On Sunday at a black church in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election could rip out the roots of systemic racism , if voters help him win the nomination and beat Donald Trump .
Speaking from the pulpit of Royal Missionary Baptist Church , Biden drew an ovation with a reference to a racist governor of Alabama who ran for president in 1968 and 1972 .
Trump , Biden said , “ is more George Wallace than George Washington ” .
• None Additional reporting by Kenya Evelyn and the Associated Press

The billionaire Tom Steyer has qualified for Tuesday night’s Democratic debate in Charleston, South Carolina, ahead of the state’s primary next weekend.
The news may concern Joe Biden.
The former vice-president is seeking victory in the first southern state to vote, in order to establish himself as the moderate alternative to Bernie Sanders, the progressive Vermont senator who won Nevada on Saturday.
Biden finished a distant second as Sanders performed strongly with minority voters. Nonetheless the former VP’s campaign manager, Greg Schultz, tweeted: “Make no mistake: the Biden comeback starts tonight.”
In an interview broadcast on CBS’s Face the Nation on Sunday, Biden said a recent fall in his support with African Americans in South Carolina, a key bloc for a man who won elections with Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, was due to “Steyer spending hundreds of millions, tens of thousands of dollars, millions of dollars, out campaigning there.
“And so I think a lot is happening in terms of the amount of money being spent by the billionaires to try to cut into the African American vote. I think that has a lot to do with it.”
Biden denied that Steyer was melting his “firewall” and expressed confidence in his chances.
Steyer also spent heavily in Nevada but failed to qualify for its debate. On Sunday, with results still coming in, he was in a close contest for fifth place with Amy Klobuchar, a senator from Minnesota.
Former South Bend, Indiana, mayor Pete Buttigieg – whose campaign formally queried the Nevada results after placing third – Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren and former New York mayor Mike Bloomberg will also debate in South Carolina.
Bloomberg, another billionaire, is not competing in South Carolina, focusing instead on Super Tuesday, 3 March, when a host of states will vote.
The Hawaii congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard is the only candidate left in the race who has not yet qualified for the South Carolina debate. The deadline for meeting poll-based qualifications set by the Democratic National Committee is Monday.
On Twitter, Steyer said he was “proud of everything we accomplished in Nevada. We’re only gaining strength as the electorate gets more diverse and more representative of the country.”
In South Carolina, Steyer has campaigned heavily and focused on issues important to black voters including support for historically black colleges and universities and reparations for slavery.
Speaking to the Guardian this week, one South Carolina voter, Najeema Davis Washington, said Steyer “caught [her] attention years ago” with his advocacy for combating climate change and the racial wealth gap, issues she said “speak to what affects African Americans most”.
But the realclearpolitics.com polling average still puts Biden top in South Carolina with 24.5% support – followed by Sanders on 21.5% and Steyer on 16.5% – and many in the state still expect a Biden win.
Antjuan Seawright, a Columbia-based Democratic strategist, said: “This is a trust election and voters will want to go with who they know. And they know Joe. Joe has been there for the people of South Carolina and he will be rewarded by the people being there for him.”
On Sunday at a black church in North Charleston, Biden said the 2020 election could rip out the roots of systemic racism, if voters help him win the nomination and beat Donald Trump.
Speaking from the pulpit of Royal Missionary Baptist Church, Biden drew an ovation with a reference to a racist governor of Alabama who ran for president in 1968 and 1972.
Trump, Biden said, “is more George Wallace than George Washington”.


theguardian--2020-02-23--Bernie Sanders sets sights on Super Tuesday after crushing Nevada win

Bernie Sanders took a resounding victory in the Nevada caucuses on Saturday , bolstered significantly by Latino voters and extending his lead in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination .
Some party insiders raised concerns about whether the progressive senator from Vermont can hope to beat Donald Trump in November .
The next state to vote is South Carolina , which holds its primary next Saturday .
On Sunday , on ABC ’ s This Week , the most powerful Democrat in the southern state was asked if Sanders describing himself as a democratic socialist would be off-putting to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think so , ” congressman Jim Clyburn said .
“ I do believe it will be an extra burden for us to have to carry .
This is South Carolina , and South Carolinians are pretty leery about that title ‘ socialist ’ .
“ And so I think that that would be a real burden for us in these states or congressional districts that we have to do well in .
If you look at how well we did [ in the 2018 midterms ] and look at the congressional districts , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might call progressive districts .
These were basically moderate and conservative districts that we did well in .
“ And in those districts , it ’ s going to be tough to hold on to these jobs if you have to make the case for accepting a self-proclaimed democratic socialist.
” Sanders ’ win also prompted alarm among the punditocracy .
The MSNBC Host Chris Matthews landed in hot water after comparing the senator ’ s surge – he ran strongly in Iowa and won New Hampshire – to the Nazi invasion of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Carville was more measured , saying on the same network : “ If you want to vote for Bernie Sanders because you feel good about his programme , because you don ’ t like the banks on Wall Street , you don ’ t like pharmaceuticals , that ’ s completely legitimate , I understand that .
“ If you ’ re voting for him because you think he ’ ll win the election because he ’ ll galvanize heretofore sleepy parts of the electorate , then politically you ’ re a fool @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact.
” The demographics of Sanders ’ victory , however , suggested that he may have earned a foothold in diverse states which mirror the Democratic base more closely than Iowa and New Hampshire .
In Nevada , according to CNN entrance polls , Sanders took 51 % of the Latino vote , way ahead of any rival , and did well with African Americans .
Perhaps indicating his confidence that Nevada would not be a close finish , Sanders gave his victory speech in Texas .
The Lone Star state votes on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tuesday – the day on which the candidacy of the billionaire former New York mayor Mike Bloomberg will be tested at the polls for the first time .
“ We ’ ve brought together a multigenerational , multiracial coalition that is not only going to win Nevada , it ’ s going to sweep this country , ” Sanders said in San Antonio .
No clear rival has yet emerged .
In Nevada , former vice-president Joe Biden finished second , followed by former South Bend , Indiana , mayor Pete Buttigieg and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sanders ’ main rival in Iowa and New Hampshire .
Biden is targeting a win in South Carolina , where he is popular with African American voters .
Speaking to CBS ’ Face the Nation , Biden disputed that South Carolina was “ my firewall ” and said : “ I ’ m running for the same exact reason when I started : to restore some dignity to the office , to make sure African Americans and minorities get treated well , and … to unify the country and the party.
” He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ African Americans in South Carolina were down to greater spending by other candidates , including the billionaire Tom Steyer .
Despite a bruising week of news reports and a poor debate performance , Bloomberg is aiming to emerge as a hugely well-financed standard-bearer for moderates who fear a Sanders nomination .
Kevin Sheekey , his campaign manager , said in a statement : “ The Nevada results reinforce the reality that this fragmented field is putting Bernie Sanders on pace to amass an insurmountable delegate lead.
” Sanders supporters maintain that he can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Alexandra Rojas , executive director of Justice Democrats , a leftwing group born out of the senator ’ s 2016 campaign , said that in Nevada , “ in a diverse electorate that looks the most like Super Tuesday states , Democrats chose Bernie Sanders as their candidate to defeat Donald Trump .
“ It ’ s clear the Democratic voters with the most energy behind them look and think a lot more like [ New York congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ] than Joe Biden.
” Polls show Sanders leading in California and Texas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Latino populations .
Not all mainstream Democrats professed themselves worried about Sanders .
On CNN ’ s State of the Union on Sunday the Connecticut senator Chris Murphy said his Vermont counterpart was as viable as the moderates against him .
“ I think Bernie Sanders will beat Donald Trump , ” he said .
“ I think Joe Biden would beat Donald Trump .
I think Elizabeth Warren would beat Donald Trump.
” In general , polling backs that up although notional head-to-heads are tight and Trump ’ s approval rating is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Sunday said 65 % of voters expect the president to win re-election .
Murphy continued : “ What we need is a candidate who has a base of enthusiastic supporters … who ’ s authentic , who speaks truth to power , who can throw a punch and who can take a punch .
“ I think anybody who ’ s polling in the top four or five fits that bill , but Bernie ’ s base of support , the enthusiasm behind him , I think speaks to the strength of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and as a general election candidate as well.
” Saying he was “ not endorsing anyone ” , Murphy added : “ Bernie ’ s done very well in the opening primaries , but this thing is not a done deal .
”

Bernie Sanders took a resounding victory in the Nevada caucuses on Saturday, bolstered significantly by Latino voters and extending his lead in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Some party insiders raised concerns about whether the progressive senator from Vermont can hope to beat Donald Trump in November.
The next state to vote is South Carolina, which holds its primary next Saturday.
On Sunday, on ABC’s This Week, the most powerful Democrat in the southern state was asked if Sanders describing himself as a democratic socialist would be off-putting to voters.
“A lot of people think so,” congressman Jim Clyburn said. “I do believe it will be an extra burden for us to have to carry. This is South Carolina, and South Carolinians are pretty leery about that title ‘socialist’.
“And so I think that that would be a real burden for us in these states or congressional districts that we have to do well in. If you look at how well we did [in the 2018 midterms] and look at the congressional districts, these were not liberal or what you might call progressive districts. These were basically moderate and conservative districts that we did well in.
“And in those districts, it’s going to be tough to hold on to these jobs if you have to make the case for accepting a self-proclaimed democratic socialist.”
Sanders’ win also prompted alarm among the punditocracy. The MSNBC Host Chris Matthews landed in hot water after comparing the senator’s surge – he ran strongly in Iowa and won New Hampshire – to the Nazi invasion of France.
The former Bill Clinton strategist James Carville was more measured, saying on the same network: “If you want to vote for Bernie Sanders because you feel good about his programme, because you don’t like the banks on Wall Street, you don’t like pharmaceuticals, that’s completely legitimate, I understand that.
“If you’re voting for him because you think he’ll win the election because he’ll galvanize heretofore sleepy parts of the electorate, then politically you’re a fool – and that’s just a fact.”
The demographics of Sanders’ victory, however, suggested that he may have earned a foothold in diverse states which mirror the Democratic base more closely than Iowa and New Hampshire.
In Nevada, according to CNN entrance polls, Sanders took 51% of the Latino vote, way ahead of any rival, and did well with African Americans.
Perhaps indicating his confidence that Nevada would not be a close finish, Sanders gave his victory speech in Texas. The Lone Star state votes on 3 March, also known as Super Tuesday – the day on which the candidacy of the billionaire former New York mayor Mike Bloomberg will be tested at the polls for the first time.
“We’ve brought together a multigenerational, multiracial coalition that is not only going to win Nevada, it’s going to sweep this country,” Sanders said in San Antonio.
No clear rival has yet emerged. In Nevada, former vice-president Joe Biden finished second, followed by former South Bend, Indiana, mayor Pete Buttigieg and Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren. Buttigieg was Sanders’ main rival in Iowa and New Hampshire. Biden is targeting a win in South Carolina, where he is popular with African American voters.
Speaking to CBS’s Face the Nation, Biden disputed that South Carolina was “my firewall” and said: “I’m running for the same exact reason when I started: to restore some dignity to the office, to make sure African Americans and minorities get treated well, and … to unify the country and the party.”
He also said drops in his support among African Americans in South Carolina were down to greater spending by other candidates, including the billionaire Tom Steyer.
Despite a bruising week of news reports and a poor debate performance, Bloomberg is aiming to emerge as a hugely well-financed standard-bearer for moderates who fear a Sanders nomination.
Kevin Sheekey, his campaign manager, said in a statement: “The Nevada results reinforce the reality that this fragmented field is putting Bernie Sanders on pace to amass an insurmountable delegate lead.”
Sanders supporters maintain that he can play well in racially diverse areas. Alexandra Rojas, executive director of Justice Democrats, a leftwing group born out of the senator’s 2016 campaign, said that in Nevada, “in a diverse electorate that looks the most like Super Tuesday states, Democrats chose Bernie Sanders as their candidate to defeat Donald Trump.
“It’s clear the Democratic voters with the most energy behind them look and think a lot more like [New York congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] than Joe Biden.”
Polls show Sanders leading in California and Texas, huge Super Tuesday prizes with large Latino populations.
Not all mainstream Democrats professed themselves worried about Sanders. On CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday the Connecticut senator Chris Murphy said his Vermont counterpart was as viable as the moderates against him.
“I think Bernie Sanders will beat Donald Trump,” he said. “I think Joe Biden would beat Donald Trump. I think Elizabeth Warren would beat Donald Trump.”
In general, polling backs that up although notional head-to-heads are tight and Trump’s approval rating is climbing. A CBS News poll released on Sunday said 65% of voters expect the president to win re-election.
Murphy continued: “What we need is a candidate who has a base of enthusiastic supporters … who’s authentic, who speaks truth to power, who can throw a punch and who can take a punch.
“I think anybody who’s polling in the top four or five fits that bill, but Bernie’s base of support, the enthusiasm behind him, I think speaks to the strength of his candidacy – both in the primary and as a general election candidate as well.”
Saying he was “not endorsing anyone”, Murphy added: “Bernie’s done very well in the opening primaries, but this thing is not a done deal.”


theguardian--2020-02-23--Trump security adviser slammed for 'politicizing intelligence' on Russian meddling

Donald Trump ’ s national security adviser has said he has not “ seen any intelligence that Russia is doing anything ” to get the president re-elected , but also seemed to accept reports that Russia is backing Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary .
In response , one senior Democrat slammed the “ politicisation of intelligence ” by the Trump administration and said Robert O ’ Brien should “ stay out of politics ” .
O ’ Brien ’ s claim , in an interview with ABC ’ s This Week , came at the end of a week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials briefed the House intelligence committee that Russia was again trying to help get Trump elected .
Reports of Trump ’ s furious reaction were followed by the departure of Joseph Maguire , the acting director of national intelligence , and his replacement by Richard Grenell , formerly ambassador to Germany and a Trump loyalist .
The president has tweeted extensively on the subject , blaming Democrats and the media for “ disinformation hoax number 7 ” .
It was also reported this week that Trump , congressional leaders and Sanders himself were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from 2016 and backing the Vermont senator .
Sanders told Russia to stay out of US elections , then won convincingly in Nevada .
O ’ Brien said Russian backing for Sanders would be “ no surprise .
He honeymooned in Moscow.
” Sanders has described a 10-day visit to the then Soviet capital in 1988 as “ a very strange honeymoon ” .
O ’ Brien was repeating a line used by Trump at campaign events .
Speaking to CNN ’ s State of the Union , Chris Murphy , a Connecticut @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , said O ’ Brien had made a “ political statement ” and as national security adviser should “ stay out of politics ” .
Asked if he had seen analysis showing a Russian aim in its election interference efforts was to help the president , O ’ Brien said : “ I have not seen that , and … the national security adviser gets pretty good access to our intelligence .
I haven ’ t seen any intelligence that Russia is doing anything to attempt to get President Trump reelected.
” O @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a distinction between seeing actual intelligence material and seeing analysis of it .
“ No , I haven ’ t seen any intelligence on that , ” he said .
“ And I haven ’ t seen any analysis on that.
” He also said Grenell and CIA director Gina Haspel had not seen such material and contended : “ President Trump has rebuilt the American military to an extent we haven ’ t seen since Ronald Reagan .
So I don ’ t think it ’ s any surprise that Russia or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than President Trump.
” Murphy countered that it “ stands to reason ” that Russia “ wants Trump elected because he has been a gift to Russia .
He has essentially ceded the Middle East to Russian interests , he has accomplished more in undermining Nato than Russia has in the last 20 years and he continues to effectively deny that they have an ongoing political operation here in the United States that by and large is an attempt to support Donald Trump.
” US intelligence concluded that Russia ran interference efforts through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump against Hillary Clinton and stoke divisions in US society .
Trump has rejected such conclusions , including standing with the Russian leader in Helsinki in July 2018 and saying : “ I have President Putin .
He just said it ’ s not Russia .
I will say this .
I don ’ t see any reason why it would be.
” O ’ Brien , Trump ’ s fourth national security adviser , is a lawyer and former hostage negotiator who according to a New York Times report runs National Security @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tweets .
Like the president , he said reports about the House briefing were based on leaks .
Speaking to reporters on Sunday as he left Washington for a visit to India , Trump accused House intelligence chair Adam Schiff of leaking the information about Russia and Sanders .
He also said he had not been briefed about the Sanders link .
O ’ Brien said he had “ seen the reports from that briefing at the intel committee [ and ] also heard that from the briefers that that ’ s not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So , look … I haven ’ t seen any evidence that Russia is doing anything to attempt to get President Trump reelected .
And our message to the Russians is stay out of the US elections .
We ’ ve been very tough on Russia and we ’ ve been great on election security.
” Senate Republicans this month blocked three bills meant to strengthen election security , shortly after being told by intelligence agencies the US was not doing enough to guard against a repeat of 2016 .
O ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ working very hard with the states ” .
“ We ’ re going to paper ballots in many cases to harden our election infrastructure , ” he said , “ to make sure that not only is there not election influence through trolls and Twitter and that sort of thing , but to make sure that countries can ’ t hack into our secretaries of state in our 50 states and change election results or cause mischief on election day.
” Reports of Trump ’ s fury at Maguire were incorrect , O @ @ @ @ @ @ @ director ’ s time in the role had simply expired .
“ We needed a Senate-confirmed official to come in and replace him , ” O ’ Brien said .
“ And so we went with a highly qualified person , Ambassador Grenell.
” Most observers think Grenell is not qualified and would not be confirmed by the Senate .
Filling the role in an acting capacity – as many Trump aides do – lets him avoid that hurdle .
O ’ Brien said Trump would “ move quickly ” to make a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s move made him “ worried about the politicisation of intelligence by this administration ” .
“ The new acting head of intelligence has no background in intel , ” he said .
“ He is a Trump loyalist .
And I think we all worry about this administration controlling massive amounts of intelligence , massive amounts of classified information , and leaking it out to the press when it advantages them .
”

Donald Trump’s national security adviser has said he has not “seen any intelligence that Russia is doing anything” to get the president re-elected, but also seemed to accept reports that Russia is backing Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary.
In response, one senior Democrat slammed the “politicisation of intelligence” by the Trump administration and said Robert O’Brien should “stay out of politics”.
O’Brien’s claim, in an interview with ABC’s This Week, came at the end of a week in which it was reported that US officials briefed the House intelligence committee that Russia was again trying to help get Trump elected.
Reports of Trump’s furious reaction were followed by the departure of Joseph Maguire, the acting director of national intelligence, and his replacement by Richard Grenell, formerly ambassador to Germany and a Trump loyalist. The president has tweeted extensively on the subject, blaming Democrats and the media for “disinformation hoax number 7”.
It was also reported this week that Trump, congressional leaders and Sanders himself were briefed that Moscow was repeating another tactic from 2016 and backing the Vermont senator.
Sanders told Russia to stay out of US elections, then won convincingly in Nevada.
O’Brien said Russian backing for Sanders would be “no surprise. He honeymooned in Moscow.”
Sanders has described a 10-day visit to the then Soviet capital in 1988 as “a very strange honeymoon”. O’Brien was repeating a line used by Trump at campaign events.
Speaking to CNN’s State of the Union, Chris Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat on the Senate foreign relations committee, said O’Brien had made a “political statement” and as national security adviser should “stay out of politics”.
Asked if he had seen analysis showing a Russian aim in its election interference efforts was to help the president, O’Brien said: “I have not seen that, and … the national security adviser gets pretty good access to our intelligence. I haven’t seen any intelligence that Russia is doing anything to attempt to get President Trump re-elected.”
O’Brien said he was not making a distinction between seeing actual intelligence material and seeing analysis of it.
“No, I haven’t seen any intelligence on that,” he said. “And I haven’t seen any analysis on that.”
He also said Grenell and the CIA director, Gina Haspel, had not seen such material and contended: “President Trump has rebuilt the American military to an extent we haven’t seen since Ronald Reagan. So I don’t think it’s any surprise that Russia or China or Iran would want somebody other than President Trump.”
Murphy countered that it “stands to reason” that Russia “wants Trump elected because he has been a gift to Russia. He has essentially ceded the Middle East to Russian interests, he has accomplished more in undermining Nato than Russia has in the last 20 years and he continues to effectively deny that they have an ongoing political operation here in the United States that by and large is an attempt to support Donald Trump.”
US intelligence concluded that Russia ran interference efforts through the 2016 election, aiming to boost Trump against Hillary Clinton and stoke divisions in US society.
Trump has rejected such conclusions, including standing with the Russian leader in Helsinki in July 2018 and saying: “I have President Putin. He just said it’s not Russia. I will say this. I don’t see any reason why it would be.”
O’Brien, Trump’s fourth national security adviser, is a lawyer and former hostage negotiator who according to a New York Times report runs National Security Council meetings that include printouts of presidential tweets. Like the president, he said reports about the House briefing were based on leaks. Speaking to reporters on Sunday as he left Washington for a visit to India, Trump accused the House intelligence chair, Adam Schiff, of leaking the information about Russia and Sanders. He also said he had not been briefed about the Sanders link.
O’Brien said he had “seen the reports from that briefing at the intel committee [and] also heard that from the briefers that that’s not what they intended the story to be. So, look … I haven’t seen any evidence that Russia is doing anything to attempt to get President Trump re-elected. And our message to the Russians is stay out of the US elections. We’ve been very tough on Russia and we’ve been great on election security.”
Senate Republicans this month blocked three bills meant to strengthen election security, shortly after being told by intelligence agencies the US was not doing enough to guard against a repeat of 2016. O’Brien said the White House was “working very hard with the states”.
“We’re going to paper ballots in many cases to harden our election infrastructure,” he said, “to make sure that not only is there not election influence through trolls and Twitter and that sort of thing, but to make sure that countries can’t hack into our secretaries of state in our 50 states and change election results or cause mischief on election day.”
Reports of Trump’s fury at Maguire were incorrect, O’Brien added, saying the acting director’s time in the role had simply expired.
“We needed a Senate-confirmed official to come in and replace him,” O’Brien said. “And so we went with a highly qualified person, Ambassador Grenell.”
Most observers think Grenell is not qualified and would not be confirmed by the Senate. Filling the role in an acting capacity – as many Trump aides do – lets him avoid that hurdle.
O’Brien said Trump would “move quickly” to make a permanent appointment but Murphy said Grenell’s move made him “worried about the politicisation of intelligence by this administration”.
“The new acting head of intelligence has no background in intel,” he said. “He is a Trump loyalist. And I think we all worry about this administration controlling massive amounts of intelligence, massive amounts of classified information, and leaking it out to the press when it advantages them.”


theguardian--2020-02-23--Trump’s approval rating rises, boosting chances of winning second term

Donald Trump ’ s popularity rating is improving at a key moment in election year – boosting his chances of winning a second term in the White House .
As Bernie Sanders stormed to victory in the Nevada caucuses , establishing a grip on the Democratic primary , a new Gallup poll gave Trump a 49 % approval rating and a disapproval rating of 48 % .
It was the first net positive for the president in the poll since the beginning of his presidency in January 2017 .
The FiveThirtyEight website average of popularity polls shows Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proceedings began .
Acquitted in his Senate impeachment trial , Trump ’ s average approval rating now stands at 43.3 % , to 52.2 % disapproving .
Regarding the Gallup poll , CNN analyst Harry Enten – formerly of the Guardian – wrote : “ Trump ’ s approval rating is going up at the right time .
… [ Approval ratings ] become much more predictive by March of the election year .
“ Presidents with approval ratings between roughly 46 % and 54 % at this point usually face close re-election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 45 % or below usually lose .
If past history holds , Trump ’ s approval rating may continue to rise just enough to make him a favourite.
” On Sunday , a CBS News poll said 65 % of Americans think Trump will win re-election in a tight race against the eventual Democratic nominee .
The RealClearPolitics.com average of head-to-head polls puts Trump down four points against Sanders in a notional general election match-up .
“ That is far from a dominant advantage and suggests Trump could win the popular vote , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strong position regarding the electoral college , the means by which the president is elected and which provided a path to the White House in 2016 despite defeat by Hillary Clinton in the popular vote by nearly 3 million ballots .
“ Sanders did lead Trump in Quinnipiac University polls out this week from Michigan and Pennsylvania , ” Enten wrote , regarding swing states which went for Trump four years ago .
“ But even if you add both of those to the states Clinton won in 2016 , it would still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the minimal number needed to win the electoral college .
“ The state that Trump won by the smallest margin in 2016 besides Michigan and Pennsylvania was Wisconsin .
A new poll out this week from Quinnipiac showed that Trump was beating all the Democrats in Wisconsin by seven points or more.
” In the poll , Trump ’ s approval rating among Wisconsin voters stood at 51 % .
If Wisconsin is lost , Enten wrote , Democrats will need their presidential candidate to win another Trump state as well as Michigan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be such targets , the former having proved a fruitful hunting ground in the 2018 midterms .
As party moderates debated the best response to Sanders ’ progressive surge , Enten suggested Democratic voters “ better hope that they choose the most electable candidate ( whomever that may be ) in their primary .
“ Because if they don ’ t , it could be the difference between barely beating Trump and barely losing to him in November .
”

Donald Trump’s popularity rating is improving at a key moment in election year – boosting his chances of winning a second term in the White House.
As Bernie Sanders stormed to victory in the Nevada caucuses, establishing a grip on the Democratic primary, a new Gallup poll gave Trump a 49% approval rating and a disapproval rating of 48%. It was the first net positive for the president in the poll since the beginning of his presidency in January 2017.
The FiveThirtyEight website average of popularity polls shows Trump’s approval rising since September, when impeachment proceedings began.
Acquitted in his Senate impeachment trial, Trump’s average approval rating now stands at 43.3%, to 52.2% disapproving.
Regarding the Gallup poll, CNN analyst Harry Enten – formerly of the Guardian – wrote: “Trump’s approval rating is going up at the right time. … [Approval ratings] become much more predictive by March of the election year.
“Presidents with approval ratings between roughly 46% and 54% at this point usually face close re-election battles. Presidents with approval ratings at 45% or below usually lose. If past history holds, Trump’s approval rating may continue to rise just enough to make him a favourite.”
On Sunday, a CBS News poll said 65% of Americans think Trump will win re-election in a tight race against the eventual Democratic nominee.
The RealClearPolitics.com average of head-to-head polls puts Trump down four points against Sanders in a notional general election match-up.
“That is far from a dominant advantage and suggests Trump could win the popular vote,” Enten wrote.
Trump maintains a strong position regarding the electoral college, the means by which the president is elected and which provided a path to the White House in 2016 despite defeat by Hillary Clinton in the popular vote by nearly 3m ballots.
“Sanders did lead Trump in Quinnipiac University polls out this week from Michigan and Pennsylvania,” Enten wrote, regarding swing states which went for Trump four years ago.
“But even if you add both of those to the states Clinton won in 2016, it would still leave Trump at 270 electoral votes – the minimal number needed to win the electoral college.
“The state that Trump won by the smallest margin in 2016 besides Michigan and Pennsylvania was Wisconsin. A new poll out this week from Quinnipiac showed that Trump was beating all the Democrats in Wisconsin by seven points or more.”
In the poll, Trump’s approval rating among Wisconsin voters stood at 51%.
If Wisconsin is lost, Enten wrote, Democrats will need their presidential candidate to win another Trump state as well as Michigan and Pennsylvania. Arizona and Florida could be such targets, the former having proved a fruitful hunting ground in the 2018 midterms.
As party moderates debated the best response to Sanders’ progressive surge, Enten suggested Democratic voters “better hope that they choose the most electable candidate (whomever that may be) in their primary.
“Because if they don’t, it could be the difference between barely beating Trump and barely losing to him in November.”


theguardian--2020-02-23--Outcry after MSNBC host compares Sanders’ Nevada win to Nazi invasion

MSNBC host Chris Matthews compared Bernie Sanders ’ victory in the Nevada caucuses on Saturday to the Nazi invasion of France , spurring calls for his firing .
“ I was reading last night about the fall of France in the summer of 1940 and the general , Reynaud , calls up Churchill and says , ‘ It ’ s over , ’ ” Matthews said on air on Saturday night .
“ And Churchill says , ‘ How can that be ?
You ’ ve got the greatest army in Europe .
How can it be over ?
’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over.
’ ” “ So I had that suppressed feeling , ” Matthews also said .
Sanders , a senator from Vermont and self-proclaimed democratic socialist , is Jewish .
He won the Nevada caucuses easily , helping solidify his status as the frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination in a primary split between moderates and progressives .
Sanders ’ win came in the wake of a strong showing in Iowa and victory in New Hampshire .
“ Bernie is Jewish and his family was killed by the Nazis , ” tweeted David @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Guardian contributor .
“ None of this is OK. ” “ This is absolutely disgusting on [ Matthews ’ ] part , ” tweeted Parker Molloy , editor-at-large at Media Matters for America .
“ Retire , get fired , whatever .
Bottom line is that Matthews needs to be out of a job.
” On air , Matthews said Republicans would disclose opposition research on Sanders that would “ kill him ” in the general election against Donald Trump .
“ It looks like Bernie Sanders is hard to beat , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ I think it ’ s a little late to stop him , and I think that ’ s the problem.
” MSNBC did not immediately respond to a request for comment .

MSNBC host Chris Matthews compared Bernie Sanders’ victory in the Nevada caucuses on Saturday to the Nazi invasion of France, spurring calls for his firing.
“I was reading last night about the fall of France in the summer of 1940 and the general, Reynaud, calls up Churchill and says, ‘It’s over,’” Matthews said on air on Saturday night.
“And Churchill says, ‘How can that be? You’ve got the greatest army in Europe. How can it be over?’ He said, ‘It’s over.’”
“So I had that suppressed feeling,” Matthews also said.
Sanders, a senator from Vermont and self-proclaimed democratic socialist, is Jewish.
He won the Nevada caucuses easily, helping solidify his status as the frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination in a primary split between moderates and progressives. Sanders’ win came in the wake of a strong showing in Iowa and victory in New Hampshire.
MSNBC’s Chris Matthews likens Sanders victory in Nevada to Nazi Germany overrunning France in 1940: “It’s too late to stop him … it’s over” pic.twitter.com/6GJetLoDkq — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) February 22, 2020
Matthews’ words prompted widespread anger.
“Bernie is Jewish and his family was killed by the Nazis,” tweeted David Sirota, a Sanders speechwriter and former Guardian contributor. “None of this is OK.”
“This is absolutely disgusting on [Matthews’] part,” tweeted Parker Molloy, editor-at-large at Media Matters for America. “Retire, get fired, whatever. Bottom line is that Matthews needs to be out of a job.”
On air, Matthews said Republicans would disclose opposition research on Sanders that would “kill him” in the general election against Donald Trump.
“It looks like Bernie Sanders is hard to beat,” Matthews said of the primary, adding: “I think it’s a little late to stop him, and I think that’s the problem.”
MSNBC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.


theguardian--2020-02-23--After Bernie Sanders' landslide Nevada win, it's time for Democrats to unite behind him | Nathan Rob

After Bernie Sanders' landslide Nevada win, it's time for Democrats to unite behind him | Nathan Robinson

It was a landslide .
Bernie Sanders had been expected to win the Nevada caucuses , but not like this .
With just 4 % of the vote in , news organizations called the race for Sanders , since his margin of victory was so large .
Sanders has now won the popular vote in all of the first three states , and is currently leading in the polls almost everywhere else in the country .
He was already the favorite to take the nomination before the Nevada contest , with Democratic party insiders worrying he was “ unstoppable.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now .
Importantly , Sanders ’ Nevada victory definitively disproved one of the most enduring myths about his campaign : that it could attract left-leaning young white people , but was incapable of drawing in a diverse coalition .
In fact , voters of color were a primary source of Sanders ’ strength in Nevada ; he received the majority of Latino votes .
Entrance polls showed Sanders winning “ men and women , whites and Latinos , voters 17-29 , 30-44 and 45-65 , those with college degrees and those without , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and moderate/conservatives ( narrowly ) , union and non-union households.
” The poisonous concept of the white “ Bernie Bro ” as the “ typical ” Sanders supporter should be dead .
Some members of the media establishment had no idea what to make of Sanders ’ Nevada victory .
On MSNBC , James Carville said that “ Putin ” had won Nevada , and Chris Matthews declared the primary “ over ” ( ill-advisedly comparing Sanders ’ victory to the Nazi invasion of France ) .
Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nonwhite voters than she expected , and it might now be “ too late ” to do anything about him .
The other candidates and their supporters did their best to spin a humiliating defeat .
Amy Klobuchar said her sixth-place finish “ exceeded expectations ” —if sixth place is better than you expected , you ’ re probably not a viable candidate .
Biden vowed , implausibly ( and for the third time ) that he would bounce back .
Pete Buttigieg took to the stage to denounce Sanders , who he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ideological revolution that leaves out most Democrats , not to mention most Americans.
” A Warren supporter rather charmingly said that while Sanders had won , Warren had the “ momentum , ” and the Warren campaign itself said the Nevada “ debate ” mattered more than the Nevada “ result.
” Let ’ s be clear : the other candidates were crushed , and Nevada was yet more evidence that there is no longer much serious opposition to Sanders .
Michael Bloomberg fizzled completely in his big debut , and Democrats would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every Sanders supporter by nominating a Republican billionaire .
Joe Biden has lost badly in all of the first three contests , and it ’ s very clear that he can ’ t run an effective campaign .
Elizabeth Warren ’ s campaign has nearly gone broke and in desperation she has resorted to relying on the Super PACs that she previously shunned .
Pete Buttigieg can ’ t win voters of color or young people ( and has accurately been described as sounding like “ a neural network trained on West Wing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : it ’ s over .
Bernie is dominating the fundraising , dominating the polls , and winning every primary .
I am not sure Jacobin is right that “ it ’ s Bernie ’ s party now ” —for one thing , virtually the entire Congressional Democratic party is still opposed to Bernie .
But it ’ s certainly Bernie ’ s nomination .
There is simply no other credible candidate .
Democrats shouldn ’ t worry , though : Bernie has a strong organization and a lot of money , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him in November .
He ’ s exactly the kind of candidate you should want your party to have .
And for all the fear of his “ radicalism , ” he ’ s really a moderate : his signature policies are a national health insurance program , a living wage , free public higher education , and a serious green energy investment plan .
It ’ s shocking that there is such opposition to such sensible plans .
On what planet are these things so politically toxic that Democrats are afraid to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ideas , and so long as Democrats unify behind Bernie rather than continuing to try to tear him down , they will have a very good shot at defeating a radical and unhinged president like Donald Trump .
The polling looks good for Bernie in November , so now we just need to get this primary over with and focus on the real fight .
The other candidates had their shot : they lost .
They need to accept it .
One other takeaway from Nevada is that no future election should occur @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Nevada wasn ’ t an outright catastrophe like Iowa was—at least we got results on election night .
But it was still plagued with “ voting rules confusion , calculation glitches and delays in reporting tallies.
” And the caucus process can be downright bizarre : tied results in the Las Vegas caucuses are resolved with a card game , and at one point Sanders lost a delegate to Pete Buttigieg because the Sanders team pulled an Ace and Buttigieg pulled a 3 .
( Aces were low . )
From the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American elections desperately need to reworked from the bottom up according to the simple principle “ the person with the most votes ought to win.
” And yet caucuses also produce some truly inspiring on-the-ground stories , from the cab driver who spoke up for Bernie and kept billionaire Tom Steyer from being viable to the guy who switched from Trump to Bernie because he was convinced socialists were good people .
Ordinary people gave incredible speeches as part of the caucus process—one reason why it should be fixed rather than ditched entirely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whose leadership had prominently opposed Sanders over Medicare For All , ended up defying their leaders and pushing Sanders to victory at a number of caucus sites .
All in all , Nevada was an inspiring moment for American democracy , proof that ordinary working people of all races and incomes and genders can come together around a robust progressive agenda .
Democrats need not worry : this is a good thing .
It ’ s a night to be celebrated .
The primary is not completely over , but hopefully it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bernie is cruising toward the nomination and needs to be supported rather than torn down .
• None Nathan Robinson is a Guardian US columnist and the editor of Current Affairs

It was a landslide. Bernie Sanders had been expected to win the Nevada caucuses, but not like this. With just 4% of the vote in, news organizations called the race for Sanders, since his margin of victory was so large. Sanders has now won the popular vote in all of the first three states, and is currently leading in the polls almost everywhere else in the country. He was already the favorite to take the nomination before the Nevada contest, with Democratic party insiders worrying he was “unstoppable.” His campaign will only grow more powerful now.
Importantly, Sanders’ Nevada victory definitively disproved one of the most enduring myths about his campaign: that it could attract left-leaning young white people, but was incapable of drawing in a diverse coalition. In fact, voters of color were a primary source of Sanders’ strength in Nevada; he received the majority of Latino votes. Entrance polls showed Sanders winning “men and women, whites and Latinos, voters 17-29, 30-44 and 45-65, those with college degrees and those without, liberal Democrats (by a lot) and moderate/conservatives (narrowly), union and non-union households.” The poisonous concept of the white “Bernie Bro” as the “typical” Sanders supporter should be dead.
Some members of the media establishment had no idea what to make of Sanders’ Nevada victory. On MSNBC, James Carville said that “Putin” had won Nevada, and Chris Matthews declared the primary “over” (ill-advisedly comparing Sanders’ victory to the Nazi invasion of France). Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post admitted that Sanders had been stronger with nonwhite voters than she expected, and it might now be “too late” to do anything about him.
The other candidates and their supporters did their best to spin a humiliating defeat. Amy Klobuchar said her sixth-place finish “exceeded expectations”—if sixth place is better than you expected, you’re probably not a viable candidate. Biden vowed, implausibly (and for the third time) that he would bounce back. Pete Buttigieg took to the stage to denounce Sanders, who he said “believes in an inflexible, ideological revolution that leaves out most Democrats, not to mention most Americans.” A Warren supporter rather charmingly said that while Sanders had won, Warren had the “momentum,” and the Warren campaign itself said the Nevada “debate” mattered more than the Nevada “result.”
Let’s be clear: the other candidates were crushed, and Nevada was yet more evidence that there is no longer much serious opposition to Sanders. Michael Bloomberg fizzled completely in his big debut, and Democrats would be out of their minds to enrage every Sanders supporter by nominating a Republican billionaire. Joe Biden has lost badly in all of the first three contests, and it’s very clear that he can’t run an effective campaign. Elizabeth Warren’s campaign has nearly gone broke and in desperation she has resorted to relying on the Super PACs that she previously shunned. Pete Buttigieg can’t win voters of color or young people (and has accurately been described as sounding like “a neural network trained on West Wing episodes”). As Matthews says: it’s over. Bernie is dominating the fundraising, dominating the polls, and winning every primary. I am not sure Jacobin is right that “it’s Bernie’s party now”—for one thing, virtually the entire Congressional Democratic party is still opposed to Bernie. But it’s certainly Bernie’s nomination. There is simply no other credible candidate.
Democrats shouldn’t worry, though: Bernie has a strong organization and a lot of money, and can mobilize millions of people to support him in November. He’s exactly the kind of candidate you should want your party to have. And for all the fear of his “radicalism,” he’s really a moderate: his signature policies are a national health insurance program, a living wage, free public higher education, and a serious green energy investment plan. It’s shocking that there is such opposition to such sensible plans. On what planet are these things so politically toxic that Democrats are afraid to run on them? Voters like these ideas, and so long as Democrats unify behind Bernie rather than continuing to try to tear him down, they will have a very good shot at defeating a radical and unhinged president like Donald Trump. The polling looks good for Bernie in November, so now we just need to get this primary over with and focus on the real fight. The other candidates had their shot: they lost. They need to accept it.
One other takeaway from Nevada is that no future election should occur without significant reform to the caucus process. Nevada wasn’t an outright catastrophe like Iowa was—at least we got results on election night. But it was still plagued with “voting rules confusion, calculation glitches and delays in reporting tallies.” And the caucus process can be downright bizarre: tied results in the Las Vegas caucuses are resolved with a card game, and at one point Sanders lost a delegate to Pete Buttigieg because the Sanders team pulled an Ace and Buttigieg pulled a 3. (Aces were low.) From the electoral college to the Iowa caucus, American elections desperately need to reworked from the bottom up according to the simple principle “the person with the most votes ought to win.”
And yet caucuses also produce some truly inspiring on-the-ground stories, from the cab driver who spoke up for Bernie and kept billionaire Tom Steyer from being viable to the guy who switched from Trump to Bernie because he was convinced socialists were good people. Ordinary people gave incredible speeches as part of the caucus process—one reason why it should be fixed rather than ditched entirely. Members of the Culinary Union, whose leadership had prominently opposed Sanders over Medicare For All, ended up defying their leaders and pushing Sanders to victory at a number of caucus sites.
All in all, Nevada was an inspiring moment for American democracy, proof that ordinary working people of all races and incomes and genders can come together around a robust progressive agenda. Democrats need not worry: this is a good thing. It’s a night to be celebrated. The primary is not completely over, but hopefully it is now clear to every sensible observer that Bernie is cruising toward the nomination and needs to be supported rather than torn down.


theguardian--2020-02-23--Bernie Sanders' rivals applaud his Nevada caucus win – video

Strong results in New Hampshire and Iowa helped the senator achieve a landslide victory .
He is clearly in the @ @ @ @ @ nominations and take on Donald Trump in a presidential election .
Sanders ’ rivals congratulated @ @ @ @ @ as they looked ahead to the South Carolina race and Super Tuesday in March , @ @ @ @ @

Strong results in New Hampshire and Iowa helped the senator achieve a landslide victory. He is clearly in the lead to win the democratic nominations and take on Donald Trump in a presidential election. Sanders' rivals congratulated him but galvanised their supporters as they looked ahead to the South Carolina race and Super Tuesday in March, when 14 states will vote