theguardian--2020-02-02--Rachel Maddow on her critics: ‘Your hatred makes me stronger. Come on! Give me more!’

Rachel Maddow , the US TV host , has a message for her critics : “ Bring it .
Your hatred makes me stronger .
Come on .
Give me more .
Give me more .
I love it !
” That is just as well , given the way she has polarised viewers in the past few years .
Maddow , 46 , has presented her primetime show on MSNBC , a 24-hour cable news channel , on weeknights since 2008 .
If most cable news and social media is fast food , she tries to rustle up a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sometimes painfully detailed and replete with oblique references to half-forgotten politicians of yesteryear .
Since Donald Trump ’ s rise in 2016 , however , The Rachel Maddow Show has become a nightly safety blanket for many progressives who identify with the “ resistance ” .
“ Her figure has ascended , in the liberal imagination , from beloved cable news host to a kind of oracle for the age of Trump , ” the New York Times Magazine noted recently , describing her show as the “ gathering place for a congregation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Trump ’ s nihilism and disregard for civic norms ” .
The view from the right is rather different .
Maddow is demonised as an avatar of the “ liberal elite ” and “ Trump derangement syndrome ” .
Even ideological fellow travellers worry that she is “ strident ” and “ shrill ” .
She dedicates her new book , Blowout , which explores the pernicious influence of the global oil and gas industry , “ to the bots and trolls , all of you , with love ” .
There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Maddow than her screen persona .
A practising Catholic as well as the first openly gay host of a US primetime news programme , she has suffered cycles of depression all her life and enjoys fishing , shooting and reading Robert Harris historical yarns .
She is also , it turns out , a lot of fun .
At a receptionist ’ s desk outside her understated office in New York ’ s art deco Rockefeller Center sits a decaying lifesize waxwork of the former Republican president Dwight Eisenhower .
Inside , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s face rests on a bookcase .
Crutches are propped up in a corner “ as a talisman ” – she broke her ankle last year in a fishing accident .
With bookshelves overflowing – the Mueller report , examining Russian interference in the 2016 election , lies on a crate below – and ideas scribbled on whiteboards , it is the den of a promiscuous intellect .
Maddow , dressed in a black jacket , turned-up jeans , camo trainers and her trademark black-rimmed specs , spots my voice recorder – a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – and snaps a photo of it with her phone , lest it be useful to her team .
The media will be on trial in November ’ s presidential election .
Many observers fear a repeat of 2016 , when Trump ’ s vulgar antics gained endless air time , pundits were insufficiently critical and even serious newspapers appeared to treat baseless allegations against Hillary Clinton as if they were equivalent to Trump ’ s financial and sexual transgressions .
The day after we speak , Maddow demonstrates another way of working @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of her career – when her interview with a key figure in Trump ’ s Ukraine scandal pulls in 4.5 million viewers , beating all the competition .
Her explosive conversation with Lev Parnas , an associate of Rudy Giuliani , Trump ’ s lawyer , is a timely riposte to the claims that she is too partisan , polemical and fixated with international conspiracy theories .
It makes the political weather for several days .
“ I think part of the reason Trump got so much ‘ earned media ’ during the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transgressive , ” Maddow says .
“ It was a relatively rational newsworthiness assessment to put a camera on him at all times , because there was a reasonably good chance he was going to do something shocking , wrong , transgressive or unbelievably disruptive .
“ But that also dovetails with the question of whether or not his falsehoods and reversals and self-contradictions and professed ignorance got the critical coverage that they deserved .
When nobody ’ s expecting you to tell the truth , you telling a lie isn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and said something that was proveably false or maybe not the whole truth , you ’ d have the whole media , not just Fox News , going crazy for a month at a time .
Donald Trump ’ s mendacity has never been notable .
It ’ s just been baked in.
” Trump made more than 16,000 false or misleading claims in his first three years as president , according to the Washington Post – and that number is likely to accelerate as the election hots up .
But he is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Media outlets will have to choose whether or not to broadcast his campaign rallies and interview his surrogates unfettered , as well as how far to go in editing , fact-checking or simply “ no-platforming ” .
“ We went through our own transformation fairly early on when I realised that I couldn ’ t put Trump administration officials on the air as guests because they did not tell the truth , ” says Maddow .
“ Having to clean up after your guest is a sort of ‘ fool me once ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told my audience that you were somebody worth listening to because you had something to contribute to our understanding of the world , I was wrong .
I ’ ve goodnighted you .
I won ’ t invite you back.
’ ” She adds : “ I can play the tape of the president saying something that ’ s not true and then clean up after him – but then I ’ ve also just played the tape of him saying something not true , and maybe that ’ s more compelling to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than the part where I corrected it .
“ I feel like there ’ s a responsibility level there .
So we ’ re not going to give people a platform who are lying to the public .
But I ’ m assuming everybody else in the media is going through that same thing.
” Observers of all political stripes have taken Maddow to task for her coverage of Trump ’ s alleged collusion with Russia .
Presidential cheerleader Sean Hannity , whose Fox News show airs in direct opposition , has called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In a critique of her handling of a 35-page dossier on the subject compiled by the former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele , Erik Wemple of the Washington Post wrote : “ She was there for the bunkings , absent for the debunkings – a pattern of misleading and dishonest asymmetry.
” But Maddow , whose new book was inspired by Putin ’ s motives for attacking US democracy , describes some of the criticism as dishonest and makes no apologies for being obsessive , especially since there is every prospect of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Russia interfered in the 2016 election to try to elect Donald Trump , and Donald Trump got elected and he is weirdly and irreversibly supplicant toward Russia and Putin .
Like , OK , I ’ m going to cover that , ” she says .
“ I don ’ t care what anybody says about me .
I don ’ t play requests and I don ’ t worry about the criticism .
If we get something wrong , I ’ ll correct it , but , in the absence of that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news stories that bother people – that ’ s what I get paid to do.
” You have to grow a thick skin , she says .
“ Getting a show on the air , even all these years in , is like merging on to the freeway at 80 miles an hour at night in a rainstorm with no headlights and no windshield wipers and a bunch of semi-trucks coming up right behind me .
Somebody telling me that they don ’ t like the colour of my car ?
I am @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve got a job to do here.
” That freeway sounds terrifying and yet also an adrenaline rush .
The Trump presidency is a liberal ’ s worst nightmare and a dream for many journalists .
Jim Acosta , the chief White House correspondent at Maddow ’ s rival network CNN , has said : “ I ’ m having the time of my life right now .
This is the biggest story of my life .
I ’ m like a kid in a candy store.
” So , despite the daily @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
“ I don ’ t know if ‘ enjoy ’ is the right word , but I do have the best job in the world , ” she says .
“ I talk to a lot of people who feel strongly about what ’ s going on in the world , whether they ’ re in public affairs or they ’ re just concerned citizens who pay attention to what ’ s going on .
People say : ‘ Don ’ t you find it incredibly demoralising ?
How do you think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ I feel the opposite .
If you ’ re at all engaged with what ’ s going on in the country and in the world , you have to be concerned .
But my job , what they actually pay me to do , is to read the news all day long and do original reporting and try to figure out what is and isn ’ t reliable information .
I feel like I ’ m doing mental health work all day long.
” Maddow , who grew up in a small @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a labourer , a messenger , a waitress and a bucket washer at a coffee-bean factory .
“ I am not a planner .
This definitely wasn ’ t like the thing that I set my mind toward and then I put together all the pieces to get there .
I had much more of a drunken stumble through my career than you might expect , but now that I have landed here , I value it.
” She came out at Stanford University by posting an open letter inside every bathroom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was a lesbian , an incident that was reported in the student newspaper .
“ Classy , right ?
I was 17 .
Why did we do anything ?
I don ’ t know .
I haven ’ t thought about it in a long time .
I think that I was very full of myself and thought that this was a very important piece of news that everybody needed to have .
And I also liked needling people and confronting them in ways that I thought would be both funny and self-aggrandising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on that with particular pride.
” Her conservative Catholic parents were stunned .
“ I didn ’ t handle it well .
I wasn ’ t very respectful and didn ’ t have much emotional peripheral vision in terms of the way that my actions would affect others , which I think was a product both of my ego and self-regard and where I was in my own development at that time .
They had a really hard time at first and we had a few rocky years .
“ But now my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ m Catholic and I come from a Catholic family and the church ’ s teachings on this have been a factor .
But , ultimately , where we ’ ve ended up is at the best possible place and I am super-blessed to have the support of my whole extended family.
” Maddow has been with her partner , Susan Mikula , a photographer , for two decades .
Counterintuitively for a “ liberal icon ” , their first date involving throwing tomahawks and firing guns at a “ Ladies Day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ National Rifle Association , of which Mikula ’ s sister is a lifetime member .
Maddow , who does not own a gun , says cheerfully : “ Going to gun ranges is fun .
Have you ever done it ?
You should go .
You go and you pick which gun you want , you pay to use the time and they show you how to use it and you learn about the gun and then shoot a target .
And then you leave the gun there and you go home .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , an interesting way to demystify guns , particularly if you ’ re engaged in reporting on or commenting on the politics and culture around guns stuff .
I don ’ t have any problem with that at all .
It ’ s super-fun .
Susan , it turns out , is a really good shot , which was a shock.
” It says something about the times that Maddow ’ s ease with guns is more shocking to some than her sexuality .
The CNN anchors Don Lemon and Anderson Cooper both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Same-sex marriage was legalised in 2015 .
Now Pete Buttigieg , the former mayor of South Bend , Indiana , is bidding to become the first openly gay US president .
Nothing , however , should be taken for granted .
Under cover of myriad distractions , the Trump administration is attacking gay and transgender rights .
Maddow reflects : “ Civil rights and social justice issues often advance in what I describe as a sawtooth pattern of progress , where you take two steps forward , one step back .
It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ itself .
It has to be done by human beings who are working in a concerted way , in a way that is nimble and that appreciates the potential for backsliding and even backlash .
“ That ’ s the one piece of this that I feel like we ’ re learning more and more : that civil rights aren ’ t a given .
They ’ re asserted and protected – or assailed.
” Blowout by Rachel Maddow is published by Bodley Head .
To order a copy for £17.60 ( RRP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ call 0330 333 6846 .
Free UK P & P over £15 ; online orders only .
Phone orders minimum P & P of £1.99 .

Rachel Maddow, the US TV host, has a message for her critics: “Bring it. Your hatred makes me stronger. Come on. Give me more. Give me more. I love it!”
That is just as well, given the way she has polarised viewers in the past few years. Maddow, 46, has presented her primetime show on MSNBC, a 24-hour cable news channel, on weeknights since 2008. If most cable news and social media is fast food, she tries to rustle up a three-course meal: sensible, sober, sometimes painfully detailed and replete with oblique references to half-forgotten politicians of yesteryear. Since Donald Trump’s rise in 2016, however, The Rachel Maddow Show has become a nightly safety blanket for many progressives who identify with the “resistance”.
“Her figure has ascended, in the liberal imagination, from beloved cable news host to a kind of oracle for the age of Trump,” the New York Times Magazine noted recently, describing her show as the “gathering place for a congregation of liberals hungering for an antidote to President Trump’s nihilism and disregard for civic norms”.
The view from the right is rather different. Maddow is demonised as an avatar of the “liberal elite” and “Trump derangement syndrome”. Even ideological fellow travellers worry that she is “strident” and “shrill”. She dedicates her new book, Blowout, which explores the pernicious influence of the global oil and gas industry, “to the bots and trolls, all of you, with love”.
There is, of course, much more to Maddow than her screen persona. A practising Catholic as well as the first openly gay host of a US primetime news programme, she has suffered cycles of depression all her life and enjoys fishing, shooting and reading Robert Harris historical yarns. She is also, it turns out, a lot of fun.
‘My job is to try to figure out what is and isn’t reliable information’ ... Maddow on set in 2008, in her first week on air. Photograph: Carolyn Cole/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images
At a receptionist’s desk outside her understated office in New York’s art deco Rockefeller Center sits a decaying lifesize waxwork of the former Republican president Dwight Eisenhower. Inside, a Russian doll bearing Vladimir Putin’s face rests on a bookcase. Crutches are propped up in a corner “as a talisman” – she broke her ankle last year in a fishing accident.
With bookshelves overflowing – the Mueller report, examining Russian interference in the 2016 election, lies on a crate below – and ideas scribbled on whiteboards, it is the den of a promiscuous intellect. Maddow, dressed in a black jacket, turned-up jeans, camo trainers and her trademark black-rimmed specs, spots my voice recorder – a vintage Tascam device that resembles a Taser – and snaps a photo of it with her phone, lest it be useful to her team.
The media will be on trial in November’s presidential election. Many observers fear a repeat of 2016, when Trump’s vulgar antics gained endless air time, pundits were insufficiently critical and even serious newspapers appeared to treat baseless allegations against Hillary Clinton as if they were equivalent to Trump’s financial and sexual transgressions.
The day after we speak, Maddow demonstrates another way of working – and gains the biggest ratings win of her career – when her interview with a key figure in Trump’s Ukraine scandal pulls in 4.5 million viewers, beating all the competition. Her explosive conversation with Lev Parnas, an associate of Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s lawyer, is a timely riposte to the claims that she is too partisan, polemical and fixated with international conspiracy theories. It makes the political weather for several days.
“I think part of the reason Trump got so much ‘earned media’ during the 2016 campaign is that he was so transgressive,” Maddow says. “It was a relatively rational newsworthiness assessment to put a camera on him at all times, because there was a reasonably good chance he was going to do something shocking, wrong, transgressive or unbelievably disruptive.
Getting a show on the air is like merging on to the freeway at 80 miles an hour at night in a storm with no headlights
“But that also dovetails with the question of whether or not his falsehoods and reversals and self-contradictions and professed ignorance got the critical coverage that they deserved. When nobody’s expecting you to tell the truth, you telling a lie isn’t news. If Barack Obama got up and said something that was proveably false or maybe not the whole truth, you’d have the whole media, not just Fox News, going crazy for a month at a time. Donald Trump’s mendacity has never been notable. It’s just been baked in.”
Trump made more than 16,000 false or misleading claims in his first three years as president, according to the Washington Post – and that number is likely to accelerate as the election hots up. But he is undeniably good for ratings and clicks. Media outlets will have to choose whether or not to broadcast his campaign rallies and interview his surrogates unfettered, as well as how far to go in editing, fact-checking or simply “no-platforming”.
“We went through our own transformation fairly early on when I realised that I couldn’t put Trump administration officials on the air as guests because they did not tell the truth,” says Maddow. “Having to clean up after your guest is a sort of ‘fool me once’ thing, like: ‘When I told my audience that you were somebody worth listening to because you had something to contribute to our understanding of the world, I was wrong. I’ve goodnighted you. I won’t invite you back.’”
She adds: “I can play the tape of the president saying something that’s not true and then clean up after him – but then I’ve also just played the tape of him saying something not true, and maybe that’s more compelling to you and more of what you remember than the part where I corrected it.
“I feel like there’s a responsibility level there. So we’re not going to give people a platform who are lying to the public. But I’m assuming everybody else in the media is going through that same thing.”
Maddow with (from left) Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg, Cory Booker and Tom Steyer after moderating a debate between Democratic presidential candidates on 20 November. Photograph: Brendan McDermid/Reuters
Observers of all political stripes have taken Maddow to task for her coverage of Trump’s alleged collusion with Russia. Presidential cheerleader Sean Hannity, whose Fox News show airs in direct opposition, has called her “the chief conspiracy theorist”. In a critique of her handling of a 35-page dossier on the subject compiled by the former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele, Erik Wemple of the Washington Post wrote: “She was there for the bunkings, absent for the debunkings – a pattern of misleading and dishonest asymmetry.”
But Maddow, whose new book was inspired by Putin’s motives for attacking US democracy, describes some of the criticism as dishonest and makes no apologies for being obsessive, especially since there is every prospect of Putin trying again this year. “Russia interfered in the 2016 election to try to elect Donald Trump, and Donald Trump got elected and he is weirdly and irreversibly supplicant toward Russia and Putin. Like, OK, I’m going to cover that,” she says. “I don’t care what anybody says about me. I don’t play requests and I don’t worry about the criticism. If we get something wrong, I’ll correct it, but, in the absence of that, the criticism for focusing on real news stories that bother people – that’s what I get paid to do.”
You have to grow a thick skin, she says. “Getting a show on the air, even all these years in, is like merging on to the freeway at 80 miles an hour at night in a rainstorm with no headlights and no windshield wipers and a bunch of semi-trucks coming up right behind me. Somebody telling me that they don’t like the colour of my car? I am not focusing on you! I’ve got a job to do here.”
That freeway sounds terrifying and yet also an adrenaline rush. The Trump presidency is a liberal’s worst nightmare and a dream for many journalists. Jim Acosta, the chief White House correspondent at Maddow’s rival network CNN, has said: “I’m having the time of my life right now. This is the biggest story of my life. I’m like a kid in a candy store.” So, despite the daily horrors, is Maddow secretly enjoying this?
Civil rights aren’t a given. They’re asserted and protected – or assailed
“I don’t know if ‘enjoy’ is the right word, but I do have the best job in the world,” she says. “I talk to a lot of people who feel strongly about what’s going on in the world, whether they’re in public affairs or they’re just concerned citizens who pay attention to what’s going on. People say: ‘Don’t you find it incredibly demoralising? How do you think about all this stuff all day?’ I feel the opposite. If you’re at all engaged with what’s going on in the country and in the world, you have to be concerned. But my job, what they actually pay me to do, is to read the news all day long and do original reporting and try to figure out what is and isn’t reliable information. I feel like I’m doing mental health work all day long.”
Maddow, who grew up in a small town in California, has previously worked as a labourer, a messenger, a waitress and a bucket washer at a coffee-bean factory. “I am not a planner. This definitely wasn’t like the thing that I set my mind toward and then I put together all the pieces to get there. I had much more of a drunken stumble through my career than you might expect, but now that I have landed here, I value it.”
She came out at Stanford University by posting an open letter inside every bathroom stall in her dormitory announcing that she was a lesbian, an incident that was reported in the student newspaper. “Classy, right? I was 17. Why did we do anything? I don’t know. I haven’t thought about it in a long time. I think that I was very full of myself and thought that this was a very important piece of news that everybody needed to have. And I also liked needling people and confronting them in ways that I thought would be both funny and self-aggrandising. I don’t look back on that with particular pride.”
Her conservative Catholic parents were stunned. “I didn’t handle it well. I wasn’t very respectful and didn’t have much emotional peripheral vision in terms of the way that my actions would affect others, which I think was a product both of my ego and self-regard and where I was in my own development at that time. They had a really hard time at first and we had a few rocky years.
“But now my parents could not be more supportive. I’m Catholic and I come from a Catholic family and the church’s teachings on this have been a factor. But, ultimately, where we’ve ended up is at the best possible place and I am super-blessed to have the support of my whole extended family.”
‘If you’re at all engaged with what’s going on in the country and in the world, you have to be concerned’ ... Maddow in 2010, reporting from New Orleans, Louisiana, on the city’s recovery from Hurricane Katrina five years earlier. Photograph: Brian Lawdermilk/NBCUniversal via Getty Images
Maddow has been with her partner, Susan Mikula, a photographer, for two decades. Counterintuitively for a “liberal icon”, their first date involving throwing tomahawks and firing guns at a “Ladies Day on the Range” sponsored by the National Rifle Association, of which Mikula’s sister is a lifetime member.
Maddow, who does not own a gun, says cheerfully: “Going to gun ranges is fun. Have you ever done it? You should go. You go and you pick which gun you want, you pay to use the time and they show you how to use it and you learn about the gun and then shoot a target. And then you leave the gun there and you go home.
“Shooting sports is, I think, an interesting way to demystify guns, particularly if you’re engaged in reporting on or commenting on the politics and culture around guns stuff. I don’t have any problem with that at all. It’s super-fun. Susan, it turns out, is a really good shot, which was a shock.”
It says something about the times that Maddow’s ease with guns is more shocking to some than her sexuality. The CNN anchors Don Lemon and Anderson Cooper both came out almost a decade ago. Same-sex marriage was legalised in 2015. Now Pete Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, is bidding to become the first openly gay US president. Nothing, however, should be taken for granted. Under cover of myriad distractions, the Trump administration is attacking gay and transgender rights.
Maddow reflects: “Civil rights and social justice issues often advance in what I describe as a sawtooth pattern of progress, where you take two steps forward, one step back. It’s work that doesn’t do itself. It has to be done by human beings who are working in a concerted way, in a way that is nimble and that appreciates the potential for backsliding and even backlash.
“That’s the one piece of this that I feel like we’re learning more and more: that civil rights aren’t a given. They’re asserted and protected – or assailed.”
Blowout by Rachel Maddow is published by Bodley Head. To order a copy for £17.60 (RRP £20), go to guardianbookshop.com or call 0330 333 6846. Free UK P&P over £15; online orders only. Phone orders minimum P&P of £1.99.


theguardian--2020-02-02--'My party is a cult': Republican Joe Walsh on his Iowa challenge to Trump

About 50 people gathered around the room .
Several had no intention of voting for the candidate .
Several more were journalists from as far afield as Britain and the Czech Republic .
Sandwiches and cookies were laid out on a side table .
Joe Walsh has modest ambitions for the Republican caucuses in Iowa on Monday .
Challenging an incumbent president from the same party is usually a thankless task .
When that incumbent is Donald Trump , it is doomed not only to failure but indifference .
While Democrats are locked in a titanic struggle , captivating the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2020 pitch Trump against Walsh , a former congressman from Illinois , and Bill Weld , a former governor of Massachusetts .
Both seem token efforts , tennis balls bouncing off a tank .
“ There are a lot of people who don ’ t know a Republican caucus is happening , ” said Charles Siler , communications director for Walsh , after the campaign stop at a community organisation called Urban Dreams in Des Moines on Friday night .
“ We expect the turnout to be low but there ’ s a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : we have the advantage of low expectations.
” An outright victory , he admitted , would be “ the most insane thing ever ” .
Siler accused the Republican National Committee ( RNC ) and state parties of stitching up the nomination before the race has begun , denying access to voter data , threatening to blacklist donors and , in some states , keeping Walsh off the ballot altogether .
“ It ’ s basically a campaign on the outside , ” he said .
Trump ’ s absolute monarch status @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ vote on Friday to block witnesses and documents at his impeachment trial , assuring him of a speedy acquittal .
There is zero appetite for a challenger .
If the party ’ s objective is make sure Walsh and Weld don ’ t get talked about , it appears to be succeeding .
Walsh tweeted on Saturday that Jeff Kaufmann , the Republican chairman in Iowa , “ is a Trump tool .
Like so many of these GOP state party chairs , he kisses Donald Trump ’ s ring on a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Jeff Kaufmann will lie all the time.
” The previous night at Urban Dreams , wearing blue jacket , blue shirt and blue jeans , Walsh admitted it has been a steep learning curve .
“ I knew when I did this it was a long shot , ” he told the Guardian .
“ I said at the beginning , I thought it was really , really important that a Republican do this .
I ’ ve been discouraged because I did not see all the mean un-American things the party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a cult .
I ’ m a conservative Republican ; Fox News won ’ t have me on .
Conservative media will ignore me because they ’ re a cult with Trump .
The Republican parties in each state : they are a cult for Trump .
I didn ’ t sufficiently get all of that and that ’ s made this really hard.
” But the 58-year-old added : “ Every time I ’ m out there talking primarily to Republican voters , because that ’ s what I ’ m trying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Republicans that get angry at me and we get threats every day and it can get ugly… but I ’ m always amazed at the number of Republicans who tell me , ‘ I like some of the things Trump ’ s done , Joe , but I ’ m exhausted with Trump.
’ Every day it ’ s the Donald Trump show .
So I think I have an opportunity to do better than people think and I hope I can do that in Iowa.
” Voters questioned Walsh about topics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , diplomacy and his pernicious lie , since recanted , that Barack Obama is Muslim .
“ I think we ’ re all a little bit racist , period , ” the candidate replied , adding that the catalyst for his apology was the 2016 election .
“ I think Trump is the worst of all of us .
Having him in the White House was like a cold slap for me … I asked , ‘ Oh my God , on my worst day , did I sound like Trump ?
’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ less likely that Walsh , who belonged to the Tea Party and is now a Chicago-area radio talk-show host , will dent Trump ’ s monopoly .
John Olsen , a voting rights activist , said afterwards : “ I think he ’ s a political shock jock .
That ’ s what this was more than anything else .
But I do respect how he came here and had conversations with us .
He was willing to listen.
” Olsen , 50 , agreed that the uncompetitive Republican caucuses have hardly registered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might as well change it to the ‘ Trump party ’ instead of the ‘ Republican party ’ .
He totally dominates .
The No 1 reason he mustn ’ t be re-elected is he ’ s a bully.
” Andrea Black , 61 , a retired physician , welcomed Walsh ’ s efforts .
“ I ’ m a Democrat but I am so supportive of a Republican who is willing to step out of the gridlock and point out Trump is a demagogue.
” Weld , 74 , who ran for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is also campaigning in Iowa .
In a Guardian interview in October , he said : “ My sense more broadly , being on the hustings , is everyone ’ s exhausted by Trump … They ’ d rather think about healthcare and other issues that have more to do with their daily lives.
” Walsh and Weld are expected to fight on in the New Hampshire primary on 11 February , but South Carolina and Nevada cancelled their contests in a show of allegiance to Trump .
And both men ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s war chest .
The Trump campaign is dispatching more than 80 surrogates to Iowa to gather recruits and donations , keep its operation match fit and steal at least some of the Democrats ’ thunder .
Chris Ager , one of New Hampshire ’ s three representatives on the RNC , told the Associated Press : “ Even though it ’ s a foregone conclusion that the president will win the Republican primary , we still want them to go out and vote .
We don ’ t want to cede @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they have more enthusiasm .
”

About 50 people gathered around the room. Several had no intention of voting for the candidate. Several more were journalists from as far afield as Britain and the Czech Republic. Sandwiches and cookies were laid out on a side table.
Joe Walsh has modest ambitions for the Republican caucuses in Iowa on Monday. Challenging an incumbent president from the same party is usually a thankless task. When that incumbent is Donald Trump, it is doomed not only to failure but indifference.
While Democrats are locked in a titanic struggle, captivating the media, the forgotten Iowa caucuses of 2020 pitch Trump against Walsh, a former congressman from Illinois, and Bill Weld, a former governor of Massachusetts. Both seem token efforts, tennis balls bouncing off a tank.
“There are a lot of people who don’t know a Republican caucus is happening,” said Charles Siler, communications director for Walsh, after the campaign stop at a community organisation called Urban Dreams in Des Moines on Friday night. “We expect the turnout to be low but there’s a real chance for us because of that: we have the advantage of low expectations.”
An outright victory, he admitted, would be “the most insane thing ever”.
Siler accused the Republican National Committee (RNC) and state parties of stitching up the nomination before the race has begun, denying access to voter data, threatening to blacklist donors and, in some states, keeping Walsh off the ballot altogether.
“It’s basically a campaign on the outside,” he said.
Trump’s absolute monarch status in the party was emphasised by senators’ vote on Friday to block witnesses and documents at his impeachment trial, assuring him of a speedy acquittal. There is zero appetite for a challenger. If the party’s objective is make sure Walsh and Weld don’t get talked about, it appears to be succeeding.
Walsh tweeted on Saturday that Jeff Kaufmann, the Republican chairman in Iowa, “is a Trump tool. Like so many of these GOP state party chairs, he kisses Donald Trump’s ring on a daily basis. And like his master, Jeff Kaufmann will lie all the time.”
The previous night at Urban Dreams, wearing blue jacket, blue shirt and blue jeans, Walsh admitted it has been a steep learning curve.
“I knew when I did this it was a long shot,” he told the Guardian. “I said at the beginning, I thought it was really, really important that a Republican do this. I’ve been discouraged because I did not see all the mean un-American things the party would do.
“My party is a cult. I’m a conservative Republican; Fox News won’t have me on. Conservative media will ignore me because they’re a cult with Trump. The Republican parties in each state: they are a cult for Trump. I didn’t sufficiently get all of that and that’s made this really hard.”
But the 58-year-old added: “Every time I’m out there talking primarily to Republican voters, because that’s what I’m trying to do, there are a lot of Republicans that get angry at me and we get threats every day and it can get ugly… but I’m always amazed at the number of Republicans who tell me, ‘I like some of the things Trump’s done, Joe, but I’m exhausted with Trump.’ Every day it’s the Donald Trump show. So I think I have an opportunity to do better than people think and I hope I can do that in Iowa.”
Voters questioned Walsh about topics including student loans, the national debt, diplomacy and his pernicious lie, since recanted, that Barack Obama is Muslim.
“I think we’re all a little bit racist, period,” the candidate replied, adding that the catalyst for his apology was the 2016 election. “I think Trump is the worst of all of us. Having him in the White House was like a cold slap for me … I asked, ‘Oh my God, on my worst day, did I sound like Trump?’”
Such past flaws make it even less likely that Walsh, who belonged to the Tea Party and is now a Chicago-area radio talk-show host, will dent Trump’s monopoly. John Olsen, a voting rights activist, said afterwards: “I think he’s a political shock jock. That’s what this was more than anything else. But I do respect how he came here and had conversations with us. He was willing to listen.”
Olsen, 50, agreed that the uncompetitive Republican caucuses have hardly registered in the public consciousness.
Walsh speaks to Ernie Rairdin at Riley’s Cafe in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Photograph: Matt Rourke/AP
“They might as well change it to the ‘Trump party’ instead of the ‘Republican party’. He totally dominates. The No 1 reason he mustn’t be re-elected is he’s a bully.”
Andrea Black, 61, a retired physician, welcomed Walsh’s efforts. “I’m a Democrat but I am so supportive of a Republican who is willing to step out of the gridlock and point out Trump is a demagogue.”
Weld, 74, who ran for vice-president in 2016 as a Libertarian, is also campaigning in Iowa. In a Guardian interview in October, he said: “My sense more broadly, being on the hustings, is everyone’s exhausted by Trump … They’d rather think about healthcare and other issues that have more to do with their daily lives.”
Walsh and Weld are expected to fight on in the New Hampshire primary on 11 February, but South Carolina and Nevada cancelled their contests in a show of allegiance to Trump. And both men’s financial resources are dwarfed by the president’s war chest.
The Trump campaign is dispatching more than 80 surrogates to Iowa to gather recruits and donations, keep its operation match fit and steal at least some of the Democrats’ thunder.
Chris Ager, one of New Hampshire’s three representatives on the RNC, told the Associated Press: “Even though it’s a foregone conclusion that the president will win the Republican primary, we still want them to go out and vote. We don’t want to cede the ground to the Democrats just because they have more enthusiasm.”


theguardian--2020-02-02--The new class war: did a liberal elite pave the way for rise of Trump?

Michael Lind , the author of The New Class War : Saving Democracy from the Managerial Elite , has a theory .
Today ’ s political villain , he argues , is a phenomenon he calls “ technocratic neoliberalism ” – a geographically clustered , managerial or metropolitan , university-educated elite who have in large part won control of the US political , economic and cultural life .
The failure of this group to comprehend its upper hand over sparsely populated , white working-class heartlands , and the group ’ s subsequent refusal to compromise on differences of approach , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ creates a vacuum for populist demagogues like Donald Trump to fill , Lind argues .
Lind ’ s analysis is reminiscent of the one espoused by philosopher Richard Rorty , who in 1998 ’ s Achieving Our Country predicted the working class would eventually be seduced into supporting a demagogic populist after being abandoned by the middle class .
“ Within the contemporary elite , there is this idea that if you set out the facts , everyone will agree , ” Lind says .
“ And if you agree on the facts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ side .
But in my agonist view of politics , people don ’ t disagree on facts , but about how to fit them with their values.
” The result is a standoff that has one side pitted against the other with no way to compromise .
“ We need the ability to build consensus because it ’ s too destabilizing to have one half of the population trying to ride roughshod over the other , ” Lind says .
“ But you can ’ t get there by appealing to facts.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of differing values , Lind argues , the dispute between left and right is unresolvable .
“ You can only have compromise if you acknowledge the legitimacy of the prior conflict .
If you claim that conflict is based on the ignorance of one side , or their insanity , or ignorance , then there ’ s no point in compromise ; they should either be converted or defeated.
” The book ’ s arrival is exquisitely timed : midway through an impeachment trial that appears as unlikely as the Mueller report to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before the start of primary contests to select a challenger who might be able to beat Trump .
The success of that candidate could hinge on whether Trump is an aberration or symptomatic of failures on the left that Lind seeks to describe .
That Trump was able to win the US presidency , Lind says , is merely a symptom of a metropolitan class that is profoundly out of touch with traditional working-class voters .
He argues that the rise of the populist demagogues – Trump , whom he describes as an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ racial prejudices ” ; Brazil ’ s Jair Bolsonaro ; Italy ’ s former deputy prime minister Matteo Salvini – represents a breakdown of value pluralism , the philosophical idea that opposing values may be equally correct or , in the words of Rorty , “ there are no facts , only interpretations , and no interpretation is any closer to reality than any other ” .
But , Lind warns , technocratic neoliberals ( the said managerial class of culturally privileged voters ) and demagogic populists like Trump are roads to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a symptom .
Technocratic neoliberalism is the disease .
Democratic pluralism is the cure , ” he writes .
Since it was published last week , his analysisof how the Democratic-leaning base of America ’ s heartland was “ effectively locked out of the decision-making ” of the country ’ s political structures has been widely critiqued .
The New York Times argued that Lind presented “ a highly distorted portrait of Trump supporters as victims ” and suggested that Lind should break out of his institutional confines and go into the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his own .
The criticism stung , but Lind says his goal “ is to save the system from Trump and Farage ” by tracing the failure of technocratic neoliberalism back to the dissolution of regional , social and political institutions that could respond to the needs of diverse groups .
“ Institutions that used to magnify the power of working-class people – trades unions , local political parties and religious congregations – have all dissolved for different reasons .
By default , power has siphoned upwards in the culture , politics and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Without grassroots organisations , he argues , politicians are unlikely to get the policies right .
In the place of those channels , he points out , we have telephone polls that inform social science studies or , he says , “ they send someone from New York or Washington to the mysterious primitive heartland , to Ohio or Indiana , and interview the natives .
Then you go back and write like a missionary.
” In each case , he says , “ you hear what you want to hear ” and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This patronising view extends to Hispanic voters , Lind claims , noting that 29 % of them voted for Trump in 2016 .
“ If those groups vote for Republicans , they ’ re accused of betrayal or of suffering from false consciousness.
” But the idea that Trump was put over the top by white nationalism is not what the vote totals show , Lind says , pointing to polling data that after 2010 shows that white progressives have moved far to the left of African and Latino Americans .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whites , not by members of minority groups necessarily .
They pose as saviors and champions of victimized groups and take a highly melodramatic view of politics.
” Between an oligarchy in technocratic form and outsider populism , Lind predicts that oligarchs with money and connections will win nine times out of 10 .
But as they turn narrow and nepotistic , the ruling class will further lose their connection to reality .
His recommendation ?
Lind ’ s interpretation is that the right have lost on so many issues , from Roe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the winner of the war is not seriously in question .
“ But there ’ s an intolerant streak on the left which worries me .
I think it ’ s up to the left to offer an olive branch .
”

Michael Lind, the author of The New Class War: Saving Democracy from the Managerial Elite, has a theory. Today’s political villain, he argues, is a phenomenon he calls “technocratic neoliberalism” – a geographically clustered, managerial or metropolitan, university-educated elite who have in large part won control of the US political, economic and cultural life.
The failure of this group to comprehend its upper hand over sparsely populated, white working-class heartlands, and the group’s subsequent refusal to compromise on differences of approach, is a failure that threatens democracy and creates a vacuum for populist demagogues like Donald Trump to fill, Lind argues.
Lind’s analysis is reminiscent of the one espoused by philosopher Richard Rorty, who in 1998’s Achieving Our Country predicted the working class would eventually be seduced into supporting a demagogic populist after being abandoned by the middle class.
“Within the contemporary elite, there is this idea that if you set out the facts, everyone will agree,” Lind says. “And if you agree on the facts, then there is only one correct side. But in my agonist view of politics, people don’t disagree on facts, but about how to fit them with their values.” The result is a standoff that has one side pitted against the other with no way to compromise.
“We need the ability to build consensus because it’s too destabilizing to have one half of the population trying to ride roughshod over the other,” Lind says. “But you can’t get there by appealing to facts.”
Until there’s a mutual acknowledgment of differing values, Lind argues, the dispute between left and right is unresolvable.
“You can only have compromise if you acknowledge the legitimacy of the prior conflict. If you claim that conflict is based on the ignorance of one side, or their insanity, or ignorance, then there’s no point in compromise; they should either be converted or defeated.”
The book’s arrival is exquisitely timed: midway through an impeachment trial that appears as unlikely as the Mueller report to hold Trump to account, and days before the start of primary contests to select a challenger who might be able to beat Trump. The success of that candidate could hinge on whether Trump is an aberration or symptomatic of failures on the left that Lind seeks to describe.
That Trump was able to win the US presidency, Lind says, is merely a symptom of a metropolitan class that is profoundly out of touch with traditional working-class voters. He argues that the rise of the populist demagogues – Trump, whom he describes as an “typical 80s New York Democrat with racial prejudices”; Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro; Italy’s former deputy prime minister Matteo Salvini – represents a breakdown of value pluralism, the philosophical idea that opposing values may be equally correct or, in the words of Rorty, “there are no facts, only interpretations, and no interpretation is any closer to reality than any other”.
But, Lind warns, technocratic neoliberals (the said managerial class of culturally privileged voters) and demagogic populists like Trump are roads to the same autocratic destination.
“Demagogic populism is a symptom. Technocratic neoliberalism is the disease. Democratic pluralism is the cure,” he writes.
Brazil’s President Jair Bolsonaro and his US counterpart, Donald Trump, are both symptoms of an out-of-touch metropolitan class, Lind argues. Photograph: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters
Since it was published last week, his analysisof how the Democratic-leaning base of America’s heartland was “effectively locked out of the decision-making” of the country’s political structures has been widely critiqued.
The New York Times argued that Lind presented “a highly distorted portrait of Trump supporters as victims” and suggested that Lind should break out of his institutional confines and go into the heartland to do some firsthand reporting of his own.
The criticism stung, but Lind says his goal “is to save the system from Trump and Farage” by tracing the failure of technocratic neoliberalism back to the dissolution of regional, social and political institutions that could respond to the needs of diverse groups.
“Institutions that used to magnify the power of working-class people – trades unions, local political parties and religious congregations – have all dissolved for different reasons. By default, power has siphoned upwards in the culture, politics and the economy,” he says.
Without grassroots organisations, he argues, politicians are unlikely to get the policies right. In the place of those channels, he points out, we have telephone polls that inform social science studies or, he says, “they send someone from New York or Washington to the mysterious primitive heartland, to Ohio or Indiana, and interview the natives. Then you go back and write like a missionary.”
In each case, he says, “you hear what you want to hear” and then get punished at the ballot box.
This patronising view extends to Hispanic voters, Lind claims, noting that 29% of them voted for Trump in 2016. “If those groups vote for Republicans, they’re accused of betrayal or of suffering from false consciousness.”
But the idea that Trump was put over the top by white nationalism is not what the vote totals show, Lind says, pointing to polling data that after 2010 shows that white progressives have moved far to the left of African and Latino Americans.
“This is really being driven by elite whites, not by members of minority groups necessarily. They pose as saviors and champions of victimized groups and take a highly melodramatic view of politics.”
Between an oligarchy in technocratic form and outsider populism, Lind predicts that oligarchs with money and connections will win nine times out of 10. But as they turn narrow and nepotistic, the ruling class will further lose their connection to reality.
His recommendation? Lind’s interpretation is that the right have lost on so many issues, from Roe v Wade to same-sex marriage, that the winner of the war is not seriously in question. “But there’s an intolerant streak on the left which worries me. I think it’s up to the left to offer an olive branch.”


theguardian--2020-02-02--US Congresswoman Ilhan Omar: ‘I always stand up to bullies’

Longworth House , which stands just south of the Capitol in Washington DC , is one of three offices used by members of the House of Representatives .
A vast neoclassical building , its corridors are austere , their anonymous expanses broken only by American flags and identical brass plates identifying which Congressman or woman may be found behind each door .
Turning a corner , however , something else suddenly appears on the horizon : a multicoloured cloud of butterflies that turns out , on closer examination , to be a collection of hundreds of Post-It notes .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says one .
“ You ’ re the best of what America can be , ” says a second .
A third , heart-shaped and embellished with a smiley face , announces simply : “ You are home.
” Almost , but not entirely , obscured by this outpouring of love is another regulation brass plate .
This one reads : Representative Ilhan Omar , Minnesota .
Even by its own standards , the atmosphere in Washington this afternoon is febrile .
Yesterday , the articles of impeachment against President Trump were finally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Meanwhile the two leading candidates on the left in the race to be the Democratic presidential candidate , Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders , had a very public falling out , the former having accused the latter of calling her a liar on live television .
Outside , news crews seem to be around every corner .
But to meet Congresswoman Omar , you would never know all this .
Amid the noise and excitement , she is an unexpectedly still , quiet point .
In her office she sits , tiny @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cup of soup , as if this was just another ordinary day .
Does it feel slightly unreal to be here at such a highly charged moment ?
Omar smiles .
“ Many of the plot lines in my story feel preposterous at times , ” she says , wiping her mouth with a napkin .
“ Maybe that ’ s why I ’ m so drawn to watching dramas that are over the top .
It ’ s more bizarre than House of Cards .
But my situation is also an example @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We live in a time of hopefulness , with so many firsts , yet we can also be in complete despair , a tyrant in the White House.
” Her serenity – minutes can tick by before she answers a question – comes as a surprise at first .
You expect fire .
After all , since her election to Congress , when she became not only the first representative to wear a hijab on the floor of the House , but also the first naturalised citizen from Africa and one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , controversy has trailed her almost unceasingly .
She ’ s a member of the so-called Squad , a group of four women elected to Congress in 2018 ( the others are Ayanna Pressley , Rashida Tlaib and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ) who are pushing for such progressive ideals as the Green New Deal , a Democrat-sponsored resolution that aims to address climate change and economic inequality , and Medicare for All , in which universal healthcare would be funded by taxation .
On the left of the Democratic party , she often draws @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well as that of the right – particularly when it comes to Israel .
Last February , for instance , the Democratic House leadership accused Omar , who is critical of Israel and a supporter of the Boycott , Divestment , Sanctions ( BDS ) movement , of having engaged in antisemitic tropes ; she later apologised , and thanked Jewish colleagues for their efforts to “ educate ” her .
Nevertheless , it is from the Republican side that the worst abuse comes .
Last year , the campaign Twitter account for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to unseat her in Minnesota , posted two messages suggesting she be tried for treason – alleging she had shared sensitive information that found its way to Iran – and hanged .
On social media , the rage against her never lets up .
No wonder her staff are reluctant to take down the adoring Post-It notes left by more supportive visitors – by those who regard her as a symbol of hope and American diversity – for all that the Capitol Hill authorities have quietly asked them to .
Did it feel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Senate ?
“ It did .
We have a corrupt , lawless president who has subjected the American people to a great deal of harm and this is our opportunity to uphold our oath of office.
” She believes that the impeachment is the morally correct course of action for Democrats , irrespective of whether Trump is acquitted or of its potential effect on the presidential election later this year .
“ As the Speaker said , this is the highest form of patriotism .
It ’ s not about partisanship @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republic.
” All the same , does she worry that it might ultimately boost Trump ?
She shakes her head .
“ This is country over party , regardless of what the retributions might be for us.
” As a supporter of Bernie Sanders , what does she make of his spat with Warren ?
“ It ’ s not about leaders , it ’ s about ideology , ” she says .
“ I ’ m someone who is interested in policies , not identities.
” Like Sanders , she is in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and free tuition for college students from low-income families ; of reform of the private prison service ; and of the automatic registration of voters when they turn 18 .
And both are opposed to the sealing of the US border with Mexico , and in favour of a more liberal immigration programme generally .
( Though they differ when it comes to foreign policy , Sanders having suggested he would not cancel the US drone programme . )
Will he win the candidacy ?
“ I believe he will.
” And if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ?
It ’ s not only that some Americans regard Sanders as a communist .
Omar followed the British general election closely , for which reason she must know that all the evidence suggests the question of leadership does matter , in the end .
But she won ’ t waver .
“ Yes .
The policies we are fighting for , contrary to what the right says , are supported by the majority of Americans .
In our battleground states , Bernie speaks to the mother who is working three jobs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the table ; to the woman who wants to start a family or a business , but is shackled by student debt .
I ’ m confident people are going to be for Bernie , because they know he sees them and hears them and will make their lives better .
He has an ability , unlike anyone else , to organise a multiracial , multifaith , multiclass movement.
” Still , better any Democrat in the White House than no Democrat , she says .
Ultimately , whoever runs will have her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s The Late Show last April , resplendent in huge yellow earrings – under questioning , she apologised again for her comments about the Israel lobby ; like many people , she said , she didn ’ t always fully understand the historic context of certain words and the pain they might cause – I was vaguely amazed by her star power .
Her words were politician-careful , almost to the point of dreariness and yet , somehow , she dazzled .
What ’ s her secret ?
In person , you quickly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In Britain , politicians complain loudly about the hate they receive .
But when I ask her about the trolls and the threats , about what it feels like to be such a lightning rod , her attitude is almost blithe .
Yes , when Trump tweeted last summer that the Squad , all of whom are women of colour , should “ go back ” to “ the places from which they came ” , there was an alarming spike in the online attacks against her ; she continues to receive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mail .
But when she insists it doesn ’ t make her feel vulnerable , that it causes her only to worry about how it “ impacts on those who inhabit the same identities as me , ” I find that I believe her .
Where does it come from , this stubborn sense of purpose , this refusal to flinch in the face of a fight ?
Last week , she launched her campaign for re-election with the slogan “ Send her back to Congress ” , jokily taunting Trump by playing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ traces it to her childhood .
“ At a very young age , I was made to believe I had a role in creating my own destiny , ” she says .
“ I was a tiny kid , but I always refused to acknowledge this .
I believed I was somehow both bigger and more invisible .
What happened was that my father ’ s father would call us into his room before school , and he would say we were Arawelos .
Do you know who Arawelo was ?
She was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : small in stature , but mighty in the way she ruled .
There is a grave in what is now Somaliland : the women throw flowers at it and the men throw rocks.
” She laughs .
“ What ’ s funny is that my sisters and I each thought we were the only one he said this to , so I walked around for my entire life thinking I was the special Arawelo in the family until three years ago , when I told this story on a panel , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that was me.
’ ” Her mother died when she was two and she was brought up by her father and grandfather , both of whom had forward-thinking ideas about the raising of girls .
She believes now that the latter , in particular , hoped to ignite an interior fierceness that would help her to face inequality later on – and as it turns out , he was successful .
“ The fact I truly never feel inferior in any way , or afraid in any situation , has always been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ I would stand up to boys who were bullying , not even me , but other kids .
They would laugh , and say : ‘ Who do you think you are ?
We ’ re going to beat you up after class ’ – and I would actually show up for the fight .
So yes , I think the reverse psychology that my grandfather engaged in has paid dividends.
” Omar was born in Mogadishu , Somalia , the youngest of seven , and thanks to this , war @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Following the assassination of Qassem Suleimani in Iraq last month , she stated publicly that the escalation of tensions between the US and Iran had triggered her post-traumatic stress disorder – a comment one Republican denounced as “ offensive to our nation ’ s veterans ” .
But she ’ s not about to go back on what she said .
Why would anyone want to deny her experiences ?
“ I understand how quickly a society can deteriorate , ” she says , softly .
“ There are other Congress members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ under an oppressive regime , and who , as children , fled conflict .
But I ’ m unique in being a Representative who lived through active war and who remembers the destruction.
” It ’ s this that , at least in part , lies behind the progressive foreign policy ideas she hopes to announce in the coming weeks , a package that will include the prohibition of arms sales to countries that cross humanitarian red lines and a demand that the US ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the war ?
“ I remember it in moments .
I vividly remember the first sounds of gunshots through concrete walls .
I would have been eight .
I remember the distinct noise that a rocket makes as it flies over your home .
I remember the desire to escape your own body as you hid under the bed , not knowing whether that rocket is going to hit your home .
When the war began , we lived between the rebel forces and the regime .
I was truly caught up in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be hit by rockets multiple times .
I lived through an invasion of militia men into our home.
” She lost no one close , but several people in her wider family were killed .
The family fled to a refugee camp in Kenya where they remained for four years .
“ I have memories of arriving there , too .
One thing that has stayed with me , and which helps guide my advocacy now , is that I remember what a relief it was to show up there , to receive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kid in the open field , as people are being processed and assigned tents , you get to roam .
When I see images of kids in cages at our border [ with Mexico ] , I know their mind is not getting the break that mine got ; that moment of feeling like their childhood is being restored to them , when they ’ re allowed to play .
The process we are putting children through is retraumatising.
” Did the camp come to feel like home ?
“ It did , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leaving – something my family made fun of me for .
You get into a routine and for someone like me , who ’ d grown up in a very protected environment , watched over in a big family compound , there was lots of new freedom .
The rules shifted .
When you ’ re little , you can get away with a lot ; you can sneak off .
To run around between tents , to stand in line for water , to have the ability to move and to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So , the restart wasn ’ t something I looked forward to .
When everything you know no longer exists , and you ’ ve created a new reality , to do it again… that was hard.
” Her father decided the family would seek asylum in the US ; having been a teacher trainer in Somalia , he would make his living in Minneapolis as a cab driver and working for the post office .
She was 12 when they arrived , and 17 when she became an American citizen .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s hard to see his smiling face and to imagine what he survived .
The yearning for home never goes away .
But it ’ s a lot easier to come to the US and have the opportunity of a start than it is to stay in a refugee camp , in limbo .
The challenges were really all mine.
” She hated not being able to speak English .
“ In effect , you ’ re rendered mute .
It was lonely and maddening .
I have moved my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a divorcee , she ’ s been married twice and has three children by her first husband .
Last summer , the rightwing press gleefully reported that she was having a “ secret affair with a married aide ” ] .
When they used to complain about it , I would say : ‘ Imagine doing that in a new culture , with no acknowledgement of your faith , and no ability to communicate.
’ It ’ s a good disciplinary tool .
Kids like mine can ’ t complain because their mothers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stories.
” Was this new world racist ?
“ I grew up in a black world until I was 12 , so I ’ d never even had a conversation about being black – and even in Kenya , people were predominantly Muslim , so that wasn ’ t talked about either .
So arriving in the US was brutal , yes .
Not only was I made aware that I was black and Muslim ; I was also a refugee and a female .
But being Muslim was the thing about me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hijab was an odd thing .
The other kids called it out , because that ’ s what children do .
I was made aware that I was not normal .
I realised discrimination was part of the system.
” Nevertheless , she thrived .
She read political science at university in North Dakota , after which she worked in child nutrition back in Minnesota .
Having managed the campaigns of other local politicians , by 2016 , she had been elected to the Minnesota House of Representatives herself , challenging an incumbent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , she stood for Congress .
“ I think it speaks to something the people have acknowledged , ” she says , of her resounding victory in that election .
“ By sending me to Washington , they ’ ve established a counter-narrative ; I am an antidote to the rhetoric of Trump .
That we have come into the ring is a loss for him , not for us.
” She ’ s proud of what she has achieved .
She is still only 37 , after all .
She sees the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cautious , too ; resolute .
“ This is a place that is designed to mould and change you .
Except , we don ’ t want to be changed .
We want to change it – and we have.
” As one aide begins knocking at the door , and another begins gesturing for me to wind up , her hands go to her scarf .
“ There is room here for a hijab.
” How high does she want to go ?
Where does her ambition end ?
She says something @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but looking at her face , I can ’ t help but notice that , just for a moment , she seems suddenly coy .
“ We can be as bold and courageous as we want , ” she says , in the seconds before she darts from the room .
“ We have… opportunities.
” • None This article was amended on 3 February 2020 to correct the fact that the assassination of Suleimani took place in Iraq and not in Iran .

Longworth House, which stands just south of the Capitol in Washington DC, is one of three offices used by members of the House of Representatives. A vast neoclassical building, its corridors are austere, their anonymous expanses broken only by American flags and identical brass plates identifying which Congressman or woman may be found behind each door. Turning a corner, however, something else suddenly appears on the horizon: a multicoloured cloud of butterflies that turns out, on closer examination, to be a collection of hundreds of Post-It notes. “Thank you for being strong,” says one. “You’re the best of what America can be,” says a second. A third, heart-shaped and embellished with a smiley face, announces simply: “You are home.” Almost, but not entirely, obscured by this outpouring of love is another regulation brass plate. This one reads: Representative Ilhan Omar, Minnesota.
Even by its own standards, the atmosphere in Washington this afternoon is febrile. Yesterday, the articles of impeachment against President Trump were finally brought from the House to the Senate. Meanwhile the two leading candidates on the left in the race to be the Democratic presidential candidate, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, had a very public falling out, the former having accused the latter of calling her a liar on live television.
Outside, news crews seem to be around every corner. But to meet Congresswoman Omar, you would never know all this. Amid the noise and excitement, she is an unexpectedly still, quiet point. In her office she sits, tiny as a bird, hunched over a cup of soup, as if this was just another ordinary day.
Does it feel slightly unreal to be here at such a highly charged moment? Omar smiles. “Many of the plot lines in my story feel preposterous at times,” she says, wiping her mouth with a napkin. “Maybe that’s why I’m so drawn to watching dramas that are over the top. It’s more bizarre than House of Cards. But my situation is also an example of how two contrary narratives can co-exist. We live in a time of hopefulness, with so many firsts, yet we can also be in complete despair, a tyrant in the White House.”
‘You’re the best of what America can be’: the door to Ilhan Omar’s office in Washington is plastered with positive Post-It notes. Photograph: David Butow/The Observer
Her serenity – minutes can tick by before she answers a question – comes as a surprise at first. You expect fire. After all, since her election to Congress, when she became not only the first representative to wear a hijab on the floor of the House, but also the first naturalised citizen from Africa and one of the first two Muslim women to serve, controversy has trailed her almost unceasingly. She’s a member of the so-called Squad, a group of four women elected to Congress in 2018 (the others are Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tlaib and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez) who are pushing for such progressive ideals as the Green New Deal, a Democrat-sponsored resolution that aims to address climate change and economic inequality, and Medicare for All, in which universal healthcare would be funded by taxation. On the left of the Democratic party, she often draws the ire of her own side as well as that of the right – particularly when it comes to Israel.
Last February, for instance, the Democratic House leadership accused Omar, who is critical of Israel and a supporter of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement, of having engaged in antisemitic tropes; she later apologised, and thanked Jewish colleagues for their efforts to “educate” her. Nevertheless, it is from the Republican side that the worst abuse comes. Last year, the campaign Twitter account for Danielle Stella, a Republican who hopes to unseat her in Minnesota, posted two messages suggesting she be tried for treason – alleging she had shared sensitive information that found its way to Iran – and hanged. On social media, the rage against her never lets up. No wonder her staff are reluctant to take down the adoring Post-It notes left by more supportive visitors – by those who regard her as a symbol of hope and American diversity – for all that the Capitol Hill authorities have quietly asked them to.
Did it feel historic to vote to send the articles to the Senate? “It did. We have a corrupt, lawless president who has subjected the American people to a great deal of harm and this is our opportunity to uphold our oath of office.” She believes that the impeachment is the morally correct course of action for Democrats, irrespective of whether Trump is acquitted or of its potential effect on the presidential election later this year. “As the Speaker said, this is the highest form of patriotism. It’s not about partisanship. It’s about protecting the Republic.” All the same, does she worry that it might ultimately boost Trump? She shakes her head. “This is country over party, regardless of what the retributions might be for us.”
As a supporter of Bernie Sanders, what does she make of his spat with Warren? “It’s not about leaders, it’s about ideology,” she says. “I’m someone who is interested in policies, not identities.” Like Sanders, she is in favour both of cancelling outstanding student debt and free tuition for college students from low-income families; of reform of the private prison service; and of the automatic registration of voters when they turn 18. And both are opposed to the sealing of the US border with Mexico, and in favour of a more liberal immigration programme generally. (Though they differ when it comes to foreign policy, Sanders having suggested he would not cancel the US drone programme.)
Voice of the people: addressing an anti-war rally. Photograph: Rex/Shutterstock
Will he win the candidacy? “I believe he will.” And if he does, can he really beat Trump? It’s not only that some Americans regard Sanders as a communist. Omar followed the British general election closely, for which reason she must know that all the evidence suggests the question of leadership does matter, in the end.
But she won’t waver. “Yes. The policies we are fighting for, contrary to what the right says, are supported by the majority of Americans. In our battleground states, Bernie speaks to the mother who is working three jobs and barely able to put food on the table; to the woman who wants to start a family or a business, but is shackled by student debt. I’m confident people are going to be for Bernie, because they know he sees them and hears them and will make their lives better. He has an ability, unlike anyone else, to organise a multiracial, multifaith, multiclass movement.” Still, better any Democrat in the White House than no Democrat, she says. Ultimately, whoever runs will have her support.
Many of the plot lines in my own story seem preposterous at times
Watching Omar on CBS’s The Late Show last April, resplendent in huge yellow earrings – under questioning, she apologised again for her comments about the Israel lobby; like many people, she said, she didn’t always fully understand the historic context of certain words and the pain they might cause – I was vaguely amazed by her star power. Her words were politician-careful, almost to the point of dreariness and yet, somehow, she dazzled. What’s her secret?
In person, you quickly grasp that her fearlessness is the key. In Britain, politicians complain loudly about the hate they receive. But when I ask her about the trolls and the threats, about what it feels like to be such a lightning rod, her attitude is almost blithe. Yes, when Trump tweeted last summer that the Squad, all of whom are women of colour, should “go back” to “the places from which they came”, there was an alarming spike in the online attacks against her; she continues to receive a “tremendous amount” of hate mail. But when she insists it doesn’t make her feel vulnerable, that it causes her only to worry about how it “impacts on those who inhabit the same identities as me,” I find that I believe her.
Where does it come from, this stubborn sense of purpose, this refusal to flinch in the face of a fight? Last week, she launched her campaign for re-election with the slogan “Send her back to Congress”, jokily taunting Trump by playing on his tweets about her. She traces it to her childhood. “At a very young age, I was made to believe I had a role in creating my own destiny,” she says. “I was a tiny kid, but I always refused to acknowledge this. I believed I was somehow both bigger and more invisible. What happened was that my father’s father would call us into his room before school, and he would say we were Arawelos. Do you know who Arawelo was? She was, some say, a mythical queen: small in stature, but mighty in the way she ruled. There is a grave in what is now Somaliland: the women throw flowers at it and the men throw rocks.” She laughs. “What’s funny is that my sisters and I each thought we were the only one he said this to, so I walked around for my entire life thinking I was the special Arawelo in the family until three years ago, when I told this story on a panel, and my sister said: ‘Stop lying, that was me.’”
One of the Squad: shoulder to shoulder with (from left) Democratic Representatives Rashida Tlaib, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ayanna Pressley and speaking about President Trump’s Twitter attacks against them. Photograph: Jim Lo Scalzo/EPA
Her mother died when she was two and she was brought up by her father and grandfather, both of whom had forward-thinking ideas about the raising of girls. She believes now that the latter, in particular, hoped to ignite an interior fierceness that would help her to face inequality later on – and as it turns out, he was successful.
“The fact I truly never feel inferior in any way, or afraid in any situation, has always been baffling to people,” she says. “I would stand up to boys who were bullying, not even me, but other kids. They would laugh, and say: ‘Who do you think you are? We’re going to beat you up after class’ – and I would actually show up for the fight. So yes, I think the reverse psychology that my grandfather engaged in has paid dividends.”
Omar was born in Mogadishu, Somalia, the youngest of seven, and thanks to this, war is not an abstract concept for her. Following the assassination of Qassem Suleimani in Iraq last month, she stated publicly that the escalation of tensions between the US and Iran had triggered her post-traumatic stress disorder – a comment one Republican denounced as “offensive to our nation’s veterans”. But she’s not about to go back on what she said.
Why would anyone want to deny her experiences? “I understand how quickly a society can deteriorate,” she says, softly. “There are other Congress members who know what it means to live under an oppressive regime, and who, as children, fled conflict. But I’m unique in being a Representative who lived through active war and who remembers the destruction.”
‘There is room here for a hijab’: embracing Bernie Sanders in his presidential campaign. Photograph: Allison Dinner/Rex/Shutterstock
It’s this that, at least in part, lies behind the progressive foreign policy ideas she hopes to announce in the coming weeks, a package that will include the prohibition of arms sales to countries that cross humanitarian red lines and a demand that the US ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
What does she remember of the war? “I remember it in moments. I vividly remember the first sounds of gunshots through concrete walls. I would have been eight. I remember the distinct noise that a rocket makes as it flies over your home. I remember the desire to escape your own body as you hid under the bed, not knowing whether that rocket is going to hit your home. When the war began, we lived between the rebel forces and the regime. I was truly caught up in the crossfire and our home would ultimately be hit by rockets multiple times. I lived through an invasion of militia men into our home.” She lost no one close, but several people in her wider family were killed.
Arriving in the US was brutal. I was black, Muslim and female
The family fled to a refugee camp in Kenya where they remained for four years. “I have memories of arriving there, too. One thing that has stayed with me, and which helps guide my advocacy now, is that I remember what a relief it was to show up there, to receive water and blankets – and as a kid in the open field, as people are being processed and assigned tents, you get to roam. When I see images of kids in cages at our border [with Mexico], I know their mind is not getting the break that mine got; that moment of feeling like their childhood is being restored to them, when they’re allowed to play. The process we are putting children through is retraumatising.”
Did the camp come to feel like home? “It did, to the point where I protested about leaving – something my family made fun of me for. You get into a routine and for someone like me, who’d grown up in a very protected environment, watched over in a big family compound, there was lots of new freedom. The rules shifted. When you’re little, you can get away with a lot; you can sneak off. To run around between tents, to stand in line for water, to have the ability to move and to be trusted, was one that I adored. So, the restart wasn’t something I looked forward to. When everything you know no longer exists, and you’ve created a new reality, to do it again… that was hard.”
Her father decided the family would seek asylum in the US; having been a teacher trainer in Somalia, he would make his living in Minneapolis as a cab driver and working for the post office. She was 12 when they arrived, and 17 when she became an American citizen. “My dad is ever the optimist. It’s hard to see his smiling face and to imagine what he survived. The yearning for home never goes away. But it’s a lot easier to come to the US and have the opportunity of a start than it is to stay in a refugee camp, in limbo. The challenges were really all mine.”
Touch down: arriving with her father in Washington to be sworn in at Congress. They landed at the same airport 20 years earlier as refugees. Photograph: @IlhanMN
She hated not being able to speak English. “In effect, you’re rendered mute. It was lonely and maddening. I have moved my own kids around a few times [a divorcee, she’s been married twice and has three children by her first husband. Last summer, the rightwing press gleefully reported that she was having a “secret affair with a married aide”]. When they used to complain about it, I would say: ‘Imagine doing that in a new culture, with no acknowledgement of your faith, and no ability to communicate.’ It’s a good disciplinary tool. Kids like mine can’t complain because their mothers will always go back to their refugee stories.”
Was this new world racist? “I grew up in a black world until I was 12, so I’d never even had a conversation about being black – and even in Kenya, people were predominantly Muslim, so that wasn’t talked about either. So arriving in the US was brutal, yes. Not only was I made aware that I was black and Muslim; I was also a refugee and a female. But being Muslim was the thing about me that was really noticed. Wearing a hijab was an odd thing. The other kids called it out, because that’s what children do. I was made aware that I was not normal. I realised discrimination was part of the system.”
Nevertheless, she thrived. She read political science at university in North Dakota, after which she worked in child nutrition back in Minnesota. Having managed the campaigns of other local politicians, by 2016, she had been elected to the Minnesota House of Representatives herself, challenging an incumbent of 44 years; two years later, she stood for Congress. “I think it speaks to something the people have acknowledged,” she says, of her resounding victory in that election. “By sending me to Washington, they’ve established a counter-narrative; I am an antidote to the rhetoric of Trump. That we have come into the ring is a loss for him, not for us.”
She’s proud of what she has achieved. She is still only 37, after all. She sees the miracles here. But she’s cautious, too; resolute. “This is a place that is designed to mould and change you. Except, we don’t want to be changed. We want to change it – and we have.” As one aide begins knocking at the door, and another begins gesturing for me to wind up, her hands go to her scarf. “There is room here for a hijab.”
How high does she want to go? Where does her ambition end? She says something pat about living in the present, but looking at her face, I can’t help but notice that, just for a moment, she seems suddenly coy. “We can be as bold and courageous as we want,” she says, in the seconds before she darts from the room. “We have… opportunities.”


theguardian--2020-02-01--'I don't like rich guys...but I like him': who supports billionaire Tom Steyer?

“ I will not let someone run down the field and kick my teammate in the face , ” a billionaire former-hedge fund manager and Democratic presidential candidate Tom Steyer told the crowd of voters in Clinton , Iowa , on Friday .
His audience , a mostly older , mostly white crowd huddled into a music venue on the bank of the frozen Mississippi river , nodded approvingly .
Steyer appeared to have won the support of the anti-face kicking wing of the Democratic party .
If he is to win the Democratic nomination , however , Steyer will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ His strategy so far has mostly involved spending lots and lots of money ( $ 201m in 2019 ) , but having just watched one billionaire become president , can Democrats really stomach another ?
In Clinton , Steyer said he views politics through the lens of team sports – hence the talk of faces , and kicking .
Steyer was speaking in front of a big yellow sign which said “ Beat Trump ” on it , although from the back of the room an American flag slightly obscured the “ b @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ I ’ ve spent the last 10 years putting together coalitions of people , to fight what I think is unchecked corporate power , ” Steyer said .
“ I ’ m running because I think corporations have bought the government.
” Steyer ’ s fortune – he is worth about $ 1.6bn – has drawn comparisons to Donald Trump , and like the president , Steyer was born in New York City .
Steyer hates the comparison , which is understandable , and it does miss out some important points @ @ @ @ @ @ @ poor – his dad was a lawyer and Steyer was sent to elite , fee-paying schools – but unlike Trump , Steyer made his own fortune through the Farallon Capital investment firm , which he started in 1986 .
Still , it ’ s easy to see how that background might not go over very well in somewhere like Clinton , where the high street is lined with shuttered businesses and the median household income is $ 34,000 , well below the state average .
“ But I like Tom .
Self-made rich @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And is he rich ?
I don ’ t know that he is , he gives it all away.
” The giving away of money is another difference between Steyer and Trump .
In 2012 Steyer sold his stake in Farallon , and committed himself full-time to philanthropy , becoming well-known in charity circles .
He founded NextGen America , a not-for-profit which mobilizes young people to vote , and has invested tens of millions of dollars in state elections .
In 2017 , Steyer started the Need to Impeach campaign , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , throwing tens of millions dollars into the effort .
“ He started out with not a lot and he built it up , ” said Anita Smith , a 77-year-old who used to work at the sprawling dog food factory that greets visitors to Clinton , pumping out both steam and a vague smell of meat .
“ And he stopped his job and he gives to good causes , not like Trump .
With Trump it ’ s just : ‘ Me , me , me ’ .
” Nevertheless , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s campaigning methods .
By 13 January he had spent $ 123m on tv and digital advertising , according to NPR .
Not including fellow Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg , the former New York City mayor who is even wealthier than Steyer , that is more than all the other Democratic candidates combined .
Steyer has also been able to hire more campaign staff than some of his better known rivals .
In Iowa on Friday all that money translated into a surprisingly high turnout at the Clinton event , despite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work day , and later on Friday about 100 people traveled to a Steyer town hall in Dubuque , about 60 miles north along the Mississippi .
Still , there is a big difference between getting people to come to a candidate ’ s campaign event and actually winning votes .
“ I do have a lot of reservation about Bloomberg and Steyer – just like let ’ s just buy our way in , ” said Vanessa Kettner , 40 .
She was visiting her boyfriend in Iowa , but will cast @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 March .
Kettner was open to voting for Steyer , potentially , but preferred the more progressive candidates , Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren .
Indeed , for all the goodwill Steyer received in Clinton , none of the people the Guardian spoke to actually planned to vote for him , and it was a similar story in Dubuque .
You can lead a horse to water , but you can ’ t make it vote for you .
At the Dubuque event , Steyer talked about how , as an activist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ corporations , helping to fight oil companies to protect California ’ s clean-air laws , and tackling tobacco companies .
He also railed against campaign financing .
Wealthy people and corporations have too much sway over the outcome of elections , in Steyer ’ s view , and are “ controlling our politics ” .
But given Steyer ’ s grave warnings about the influence of money in politics , his response when the Guardian asked if he was trying to buy the election seemed a little contradictory .
“ You can ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is do Americans hear you say something that ’ s differential , important , and do they trust you ?
” Steyer said .
“ There ’ s no way that anybody , including Mike Bloomberg , can buy an election , the only thing you can do is see if Americans respond to what you have to say , and who you are , and what you ’ ve done in the past .
“ And you can look at my history and see I ’ ve had over a decade of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ corporations , and Americans can see that too.
” On Monday , when Iowans go to the caucuses , we ’ ll find out if that is , actually , how Americans see it .

“I will not let someone run down the field and kick my teammate in the face,” a billionaire former-hedge fund manager and Democratic presidential candidate Tom Steyer told the crowd of voters in Clinton, Iowa, on Friday.
His audience, a mostly older, mostly white crowd huddled into a music venue on the bank of the frozen Mississippi river, nodded approvingly.
Steyer appeared to have won the support of the anti-face kicking wing of the Democratic party. If he is to win the Democratic nomination, however, Steyer will have to build a broader coalition. His strategy so far has mostly involved spending lots and lots of money ($201m in 2019), but having just watched one billionaire become president, can Democrats really stomach another?
In Clinton, Steyer said he views politics through the lens of team sports – hence the talk of faces, and kicking. Steyer was speaking in front of a big yellow sign which said “Beat Trump” on it, although from the back of the room an American flag slightly obscured the “b”, offering a rather different message.
“I’ve spent the last 10 years putting together coalitions of people, to fight what I think is unchecked corporate power,” Steyer said.
“I’m running because I think corporations have bought the government.”
Steyer’s fortune – he is worth about $1.6bn – has drawn comparisons to Donald Trump, and like the president, Steyer was born in New York City.
03:13 How the Democrats will decide who fights Trump – video
Steyer hates the comparison, which is understandable, and it does miss out some important points of difference. Steyer hardly grew up poor – his dad was a lawyer and Steyer was sent to elite, fee-paying schools – but unlike Trump, Steyer made his own fortune through the Farallon Capital investment firm, which he started in 1986.
Still, it’s easy to see how that background might not go over very well in somewhere like Clinton, where the high street is lined with shuttered businesses and the median household income is $34,000, well below the state average.
“I don’t like rich guys,” said Brian Driscoll, a 68-year-old retired hardware store owner.
“But I like Tom. Self-made rich which is totally different than inheriting it. And is he rich? I don’t know that he is, he gives it all away.”
The giving away of money is another difference between Steyer and Trump. In 2012 Steyer sold his stake in Farallon, and committed himself full-time to philanthropy, becoming well-known in charity circles. He founded NextGen America, a not-for-profit which mobilizes young people to vote, and has invested tens of millions of dollars in state elections.
Supporters listen to Tom Steyer at a town hall meeting in Davenport, Iowa. Photograph: Matt Marton/EPA
In 2017, Steyer started the Need to Impeach campaign, aiming to boot Trump out of office, throwing tens of millions dollars into the effort.
“He started out with not a lot and he built it up,” said Anita Smith, a 77-year-old who used to work at the sprawling dog food factory that greets visitors to Clinton, pumping out both steam and a vague smell of meat.
“And he stopped his job and he gives to good causes, not like Trump. With Trump it’s just: ‘Me, me, me’.”
Nevertheless, there have been grumblings, about Steyer’s campaigning methods. By 13 January he had spent $123m on tv and digital advertising, according to NPR. Not including fellow Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg, the former New York City mayor who is even wealthier than Steyer, that is more than all the other Democratic candidates combined.
Steyer has also been able to hire more campaign staff than some of his better known rivals. In Iowa on Friday all that money translated into a surprisingly high turnout at the Clinton event, despite being held in the middle of a work day, and later on Friday about 100 people traveled to a Steyer town hall in Dubuque, about 60 miles north along the Mississippi.
Still, there is a big difference between getting people to come to a candidate’s campaign event and actually winning votes.
“I do have a lot of reservation about Bloomberg and Steyer – just like let’s just buy our way in,” said Vanessa Kettner, 40. She was visiting her boyfriend in Iowa, but will cast her primary vote in California, on 3 March.
Kettner was open to voting for Steyer, potentially, but preferred the more progressive candidates, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. Indeed, for all the goodwill Steyer received in Clinton, none of the people the Guardian spoke to actually planned to vote for him, and it was a similar story in Dubuque. You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it vote for you.
I do have a lot of reservation about Bloomberg and Steyer – just like let’s just buy our way in Vanessa Kettner
At the Dubuque event, Steyer talked about how, as an activist, he has “taken on” corporations, helping to fight oil companies to protect California’s clean-air laws, and tackling tobacco companies. He also railed against campaign financing. Wealthy people and corporations have too much sway over the outcome of elections, in Steyer’s view, and are “controlling our politics”.
But given Steyer’s grave warnings about the influence of money in politics, his response when the Guardian asked if he was trying to buy the election seemed a little contradictory.
“You can’t buy an election. The question is do Americans hear you say something that’s differential, important, and do they trust you?” Steyer said.
“There’s no way that anybody, including Mike Bloomberg, can buy an election, the only thing you can do is see if Americans respond to what you have to say, and who you are, and what you’ve done in the past.
“And you can look at my history and see I’ve had over a decade of fighting as an outsider and beating these corporations, and Americans can see that too.”
On Monday, when Iowans go to the caucuses, we’ll find out if that is, actually, how Americans see it.


theguardian--2020-02-01--'A grand tragedy': Senate votes against calling witnesses in Trump impeachment trial – video

The US Senate has voted against calling witnesses and collecting new evidence in the impeachment trial of Donald Trump , @ @ @ @ @ near-certain acquittal .
The Republican-controlled Senate voted 51-49 to block the Democrats ' drive to @ @ @ @ @ former national security adviser John Bolton .
Only two Republicans , Mitt Romney and Susan @ @ @ @ @ .
Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer called the result a 'tragedy on a very large @ @ @ @ @ march over impeachment cliff – taking self-respect with them

The US Senate has voted against calling witnesses and collecting new evidence in the impeachment trial of Donald Trump, clearing the way for a near-certain acquittal. The Republican-controlled Senate voted 51-49 to block the Democrats' drive to hear testimony from witnesses including former national security adviser John Bolton. Only two Republicans, Mitt Romney and Susan Collins, supported the motion. Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer called the result a 'tragedy on a very large scale'.