csmonitor--2020-02-13--Bloomberg bets old rules of politics no longer apply. He may be right.

“ Between [ Trump and Bloomberg ] , what I think they ’ re doing is demonstrating the end of traditional political organizations as we know them , ” says Ken Sherrill , professor emeritus of political science at Hunter College in New York .
But even if he doesn ’ t win , he ’ s revealing how much presidential politics are changing – not unlike another wealthy New Yorker , who in 2016 dispensed with various political traditions and harnessed the digital worlds of social media and precision data in new ways .
Critics accuse the billionaire of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ argue the former Republican is an unlikely standard-bearer for a party that has been shifting left .
And it may be working .
Even as New Hampshire voters were confirming Bernie Sanders and Pete Buttigieg as the early Democratic front-runners on Tuesday , the former mayor of New York – who announced his candidacy too late to get on the ballots of the first four states – vaulted to 3rd place in national polls .
Michael Bloomberg is running both a stealth and carpet-bomb campaign .
Until recently , he ’ s been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ via online ads , YouTube videos , and television spots blanketing both national and local airwaves – especially in the 14 states participating in next month ’ s mammoth Super Tuesday vote .
Just a month ago , most political observers believed former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg ’ s chances of winning the Democratic nomination for president were decidedly not very good .
The New York billionaire announced his candidacy too late to get his name on the ballots of the first four states .
And in the modern era , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has won their party ’ s nomination without placing at least 2nd in either Iowa or New Hampshire .
Bill Clinton was the only candidate to capture the nomination without winning at least one of the two .
But Mayor Bloomberg believes he can do what has never been done before .
Perceiving a political landscape radically altered by the plate tectonics of digital media and targeted messaging – as well as Democratic voters ’ growing antipathy toward the influence of two overwhelmingly white states – he saw a path that didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hampshire living rooms .
In some ways , Mr. Bloomberg is running both a stealth and carpet-bomb campaign .
Until recently , he ’ s been deemphasizing retail politics , instead communicating with voters via targeted online ads , YouTube videos , and traditional television spots that are blanketing both national and local airwaves – especially in the 14 states participating in next month ’ s mammoth Super Tuesday vote .
And it may be working .
Even as New Hampshire voters were confirming Bernie Sanders and Pete Buttigieg as the early Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from New York vaulted to third place in national polls .
Mr. Bloomberg ’ s late-entry gambit has proven particularly prescient on two fronts : It presumed a collapse by former Vice President Joe Biden , whose campaign is now on the ropes after poor results in Iowa and New Hampshire .
It also banked on Senator Sanders – whom many Democratic voters believe is too liberal to beat President Donald Trump – emerging as an early front-runner .
Still , Mr. Bloomberg faces a number of hurdles .
Critics accuse the billionaire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and argue the former Republican is an unlikely standard-bearer for a party that has been shifting left .
His most glaring weakness may be the legacy of New York ’ s stop-and-frisk police tactic , which a federal judge ruled racially biased and unconstitutional near the end of his three-term tenure .
The former mayor will not appear on ballots in the South Carolina primary later this month , in which African-American voters will have their first significant say in the race for the Democratic nomination .
But his campaign believes he will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tuesday , when nearly a third of the overall delegates to the convention will be awarded in a single day .
Even if he doesn ’ t win the nomination , experts say the success he ’ s already demonstrated reveals how much presidential politics are changing .
Four years ago , another wealthy New Yorker , Donald Trump , also confounded experts as he dispensed with various traditions of presidential politics , harnessing the boundless digital worlds of social media and the wizardry of precision data and targeted online ads .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I think they ’ re doing is demonstrating the end of traditional political organizations as we know them , ” says Ken Sherrill , professor emeritus of political science at Hunter College in New York .
What makes all this possible , of course , is money .
The world ’ s 13th richest man , Mr. Bloomberg appears ready to spend at least $ 2 billion of his personal fortune on this electoral strategy , some news reports say .
His paid campaign staff is already three times larger than that of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that of Mr. Biden , and twice that of Sen. Elizabeth Warren , according to Axios .
Last week , after the Iowa caucuses became a national punchline , the Bloomberg campaign pounced , announcing it would double its current advertising efforts , which already topped $ 350 million , expand the messaging to new markets , and hire more paid staff in 40 states .
“ While other campaigns have been focused on Iowa and New Hampshire , our campaign has been building a massive operation in some of the biggest battleground @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and will be critical to defeating Trump in November , ” says Sabrina Singh , senior national spokesperson for the Bloomberg campaign .
Indeed , the campaign is building an infrastructure and operation parallel to – and perhaps larger than – the Democratic Party ’ s own national organization .
“ What ’ s so unprecedented is the amount of money Bloomberg can spend without needing the party , ” says Christina Greer , professor of political science at Fordham University in New York .
“ The purpose of political parties is to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you no longer need that support , you have to wonder , what is the role of the party ?
” It ’ s all indicative of larger structural changes that have been reshaping American politics over the past decade , says Robert Boatright , professor and chair of the department of political science at Clark University .
He points to the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court ruling , which found that political spending is a form of protected speech under the Constitution , and lifted limits on spending by corporations and unions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is kind of novel – skipping the first few states – the emergence of his candidacy isn ’ t , ” Professor Boatright says .
“ The ability of both the Democratic and Republican parties to confer the nomination in an organized way has been destroyed by the Citizens United decision and by the declining use of public funding in presidential elections.
” Just a few wealthy super PAC donors were able to boost Republican candidates in 2012 and 2016 who wouldn ’ t have made it off the ground in previous cycles @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic candidates have spoken out against Citizens United and eschewed the use of super PACs , “ instead we get people like [ Tom ] Steyer and Bloomberg , who are financing themselves , ” Professor Boatright says .
Others note that Mr. Bloomberg has committed to keeping his resources on the ground , even if he ’ s not the nominee .
“ So regardless of where he ends up in the nominating process , he ’ s going to have an impact , ” says Mara Suttmann-Lea , professor of government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s made-for-TV showmanship , Mr. Bloomberg projects a kind of technocratic competence that , at least so far , has skated above the rancorous ideological conflicts now raging in American politics .
And as top-tier Democratic candidates increasingly attack one another , the former mayor has been focusing his barbs exclusively on the president , as if adapting Ronald Reagan ’ s famous 11th commandment to read : “ Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Democrat.
” As he ’ s risen in the polls , however , he ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ audio recording of Mr. Bloomberg discussing the stop-and-frisk policy in 2015 , posted online this week by a supporter of Senator Sanders , may be a sign of what ’ s to come .
When he announced his candidacy in November , Mr. Bloomberg apologized for the controversial tactic , saying it was wrong .
But the recording presents a stark reminder of his once-adamant support for stop-and-frisk .
“ The way you get the guns out of the kids ’ hands is to throw them up against the wall and frisk them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recording .
“ Murderers and murder victims fit one M.O .
...
They are male , minorities , 16-25 .
That ’ s true in New York , that ’ s true in virtually every city .
... You ’ ve got to get the guns out of the hands of people that are getting killed.
” It remains to be seen whether the issue will dampen what has been a remarkable surge in national polls , particularly among black voters .
In just over a month , Mr. Bloomberg tripled his support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 22 % of black voters according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Monday .
Mr. Biden , the top choice of black voters for months , dropped to 27 % from 52 % in Quinnipiac ’ s previous poll .
“ My gut feeling is that black voters in 2020 will take an approach towards Bloomberg in a way similar to some white Trump voters in 2016 , ” says Professor Greer .
“ It ’ s not a popular thing to say or to do , it ’ s not popular to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ m supporting Bloomberg , ’ but I think some black voters are just keeping quiet.
” Significantly , a number of powerful black mayors have endorsed Mr. Bloomberg .
Muriel Bowser in Washington , D.C. , Michael Tubbs in Stockton , California , Steve Benjamin in Columbia , South Carolina , Sylvester Turner in Houston , Texas , and Vi Lyles of Charlotte , North Carolina , have all thrown their support behind him .
“ I think that he realizes the mistake of the past , ” San Francisco Mayor London Breed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told NPR this week .
In an ad that began to run last week , the Bloomberg campaign invoked the legacy of President Barack Obama , showing a old clip of the popular former president praising the New York mayor .
“ It ’ s like a dagger in the heart for the Biden campaign , ” says Professor Sherrill , who will be on a slate of New York City delegates supporting Mayor Buttigieg .
And while critics don ’ t see him generating the necessary enthusiasm among the Democratic base to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump himself will provide enough motivation .
“ The ultimate uniter of the Republican Party in 2016 was beating Hillary Clinton , ” says Kent Syler , professor of political science and public policy at Middle Tennessee State University .
“ The ultimate uniter of the Democrats this time will be beating Donald Trump.
” Either way , Professor Greer notes that many of her students seem to be talking about Mr. Bloomberg .
They ’ ve all been exposed to a steady stream of Bloomberg campaign ads on YouTube .
Indeed , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ad “ verbatim.
” “ Something is happening , ” she says .
“ He ’ s resonating with people .
”

“Between [Trump and Bloomberg], what I think they’re doing is demonstrating the end of traditional political organizations as we know them,” says Ken Sherrill, professor emeritus of political science at Hunter College in New York.
But even if he doesn’t win, he’s revealing how much presidential politics are changing – not unlike another wealthy New Yorker, who in 2016 dispensed with various political traditions and harnessed the digital worlds of social media and precision data in new ways.
Critics accuse the billionaire of trying to buy the nomination, and argue the former Republican is an unlikely standard-bearer for a party that has been shifting left.
Bypassing early states while blanketing airwaves elsewhere, the former New York mayor tries to chart a new path to the presidency – showing how U.S. politics are being changed by digital and targeted messaging, and the power of money.
And it may be working. Even as New Hampshire voters were confirming Bernie Sanders and Pete Buttigieg as the early Democratic front-runners on Tuesday, the former mayor of New York – who announced his candidacy too late to get on the ballots of the first four states – vaulted to 3rd place in national polls.
Michael Bloomberg is running both a stealth and carpet-bomb campaign. Until recently, he’s been deemphasizing retail politics, communicating with voters via online ads, YouTube videos, and television spots blanketing both national and local airwaves – especially in the 14 states participating in next month’s mammoth Super Tuesday vote.
Just a month ago, most political observers believed former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s chances of winning the Democratic nomination for president were decidedly not very good.
The New York billionaire announced his candidacy too late to get his name on the ballots of the first four states. And in the modern era, no candidate – Republican or Democrat – has won their party’s nomination without placing at least 2nd in either Iowa or New Hampshire. Bill Clinton was the only candidate to capture the nomination without winning at least one of the two.
But Mayor Bloomberg believes he can do what has never been done before. Perceiving a political landscape radically altered by the plate tectonics of digital media and targeted messaging – as well as Democratic voters’ growing antipathy toward the influence of two overwhelmingly white states – he saw a path that didn’t involve glad-handing in Iowa and New Hampshire living rooms.
Why We Wrote This Bypassing early states while blanketing airwaves elsewhere, the former New York mayor tries to chart a new path to the presidency – showing how U.S. politics are being changed by digital and targeted messaging, and the power of money.
In some ways, Mr. Bloomberg is running both a stealth and carpet-bomb campaign. Until recently, he’s been deemphasizing retail politics, instead communicating with voters via targeted online ads, YouTube videos, and traditional television spots that are blanketing both national and local airwaves – especially in the 14 states participating in next month’s mammoth Super Tuesday vote.
And it may be working. Even as New Hampshire voters were confirming Bernie Sanders and Pete Buttigieg as the early Democratic front-runners on Tuesday, the three-term mayor from New York vaulted to third place in national polls.
Mr. Bloomberg’s late-entry gambit has proven particularly prescient on two fronts: It presumed a collapse by former Vice President Joe Biden, whose campaign is now on the ropes after poor results in Iowa and New Hampshire. It also banked on Senator Sanders – whom many Democratic voters believe is too liberal to beat President Donald Trump – emerging as an early front-runner.
Still, Mr. Bloomberg faces a number of hurdles. Critics accuse the billionaire of trying to buy the nomination, and argue the former Republican is an unlikely standard-bearer for a party that has been shifting left. His most glaring weakness may be the legacy of New York’s stop-and-frisk police tactic, which a federal judge ruled racially biased and unconstitutional near the end of his three-term tenure.
The former mayor will not appear on ballots in the South Carolina primary later this month, in which African-American voters will have their first significant say in the race for the Democratic nomination. But his campaign believes he will emerge as a serious force on Super Tuesday, when nearly a third of the overall delegates to the convention will be awarded in a single day.
Even if he doesn’t win the nomination, experts say the success he’s already demonstrated reveals how much presidential politics are changing. Four years ago, another wealthy New Yorker, Donald Trump, also confounded experts as he dispensed with various traditions of presidential politics, harnessing the boundless digital worlds of social media and the wizardry of precision data and targeted online ads.
“Between the both of them, what I think they’re doing is demonstrating the end of traditional political organizations as we know them,” says Ken Sherrill, professor emeritus of political science at Hunter College in New York.
Paul Hayes/Caledonian-Record/AP View caption Hide caption The name of Democratic candidate and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is written on the tote board, Feb. 11, 2020, in Dixville Notch, New Hampshire, as primary balloting in the state got underway. Mr. Bloomberg, as a write-in candidate, received three of the five votes cast during the midnight vote.
A $2 billion campaign
What makes all this possible, of course, is money. The world’s 13th richest man, Mr. Bloomberg appears ready to spend at least $2 billion of his personal fortune on this electoral strategy, some news reports say. His paid campaign staff is already three times larger than that of Mr. Trump, five times larger than that of Mr. Biden, and twice that of Sen. Elizabeth Warren, according to Axios.
Last week, after the Iowa caucuses became a national punchline, the Bloomberg campaign pounced, announcing it would double its current advertising efforts, which already topped $350 million, expand the messaging to new markets, and hire more paid staff in 40 states.
“While other campaigns have been focused on Iowa and New Hampshire, our campaign has been building a massive operation in some of the biggest battleground states across the country that is unmatched and will be critical to defeating Trump in November,” says Sabrina Singh, senior national spokesperson for the Bloomberg campaign. Indeed, the campaign is building an infrastructure and operation parallel to – and perhaps larger than – the Democratic Party’s own national organization.
“What’s so unprecedented is the amount of money Bloomberg can spend without needing the party,” says Christina Greer, professor of political science at Fordham University in New York. “The purpose of political parties is to give you institutional support, and when you no longer need that support, you have to wonder, what is the role of the party?”
It’s all indicative of larger structural changes that have been reshaping American politics over the past decade, says Robert Boatright, professor and chair of the department of political science at Clark University. He points to the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court ruling, which found that political spending is a form of protected speech under the Constitution, and lifted limits on spending by corporations and unions.
“While Bloomberg’s strategy is kind of novel – skipping the first few states – the emergence of his candidacy isn’t,” Professor Boatright says. “The ability of both the Democratic and Republican parties to confer the nomination in an organized way has been destroyed by the Citizens United decision and by the declining use of public funding in presidential elections.”
Just a few wealthy super PAC donors were able to boost Republican candidates in 2012 and 2016 who wouldn’t have made it off the ground in previous cycles, he says. And while most Democratic candidates have spoken out against Citizens United and eschewed the use of super PACs, “instead we get people like [Tom] Steyer and Bloomberg, who are financing themselves,” Professor Boatright says.
Others note that Mr. Bloomberg has committed to keeping his resources on the ground, even if he’s not the nominee. “So regardless of where he ends up in the nominating process, he’s going to have an impact,” says Mara Suttmann-Lea, professor of government at Connecticut College.
Stop-and-frisk
Unlike President Trump’s made-for-TV showmanship, Mr. Bloomberg projects a kind of technocratic competence that, at least so far, has skated above the rancorous ideological conflicts now raging in American politics. And as top-tier Democratic candidates increasingly attack one another, the former mayor has been focusing his barbs exclusively on the president, as if adapting Ronald Reagan’s famous 11th commandment to read: “Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Democrat.”
As he’s risen in the polls, however, he’s inevitably attracting more scrutiny. An audio recording of Mr. Bloomberg discussing the stop-and-frisk policy in 2015, posted online this week by a supporter of Senator Sanders, may be a sign of what’s to come.
When he announced his candidacy in November, Mr. Bloomberg apologized for the controversial tactic, saying it was wrong. But the recording presents a stark reminder of his once-adamant support for stop-and-frisk.
“The way you get the guns out of the kids’ hands is to throw them up against the wall and frisk them,” Mr. Bloomberg says on the recording. “Murderers and murder victims fit one M.O. ... They are male, minorities, 16-25. That’s true in New York, that’s true in virtually every city. ... You’ve got to get the guns out of the hands of people that are getting killed.”
It remains to be seen whether the issue will dampen what has been a remarkable surge in national polls, particularly among black voters. In just over a month, Mr. Bloomberg tripled his support nationwide, including garnering the backing of 22% of black voters according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Monday. Mr. Biden, the top choice of black voters for months, dropped to 27% from 52% in Quinnipiac’s previous poll.
“My gut feeling is that black voters in 2020 will take an approach towards Bloomberg in a way similar to some white Trump voters in 2016,” says Professor Greer. “It’s not a popular thing to say or to do, it’s not popular to say, ‘Oh, I’m supporting Bloomberg,’ but I think some black voters are just keeping quiet.”
Significantly, a number of powerful black mayors have endorsed Mr. Bloomberg. Muriel Bowser in Washington, D.C., Michael Tubbs in Stockton, California, Steve Benjamin in Columbia, South Carolina, Sylvester Turner in Houston, Texas, and Vi Lyles of Charlotte, North Carolina, have all thrown their support behind him. “I think that he realizes the mistake of the past,” San Francisco Mayor London Breed, who also endorsed Mayor Bloomberg, told NPR this week.
In an ad that began to run last week, the Bloomberg campaign invoked the legacy of President Barack Obama, showing an old clip of the popular former president praising the New York mayor. “It’s like a dagger in the heart for the Biden campaign,” says Professor Sherrill, who will be on a slate of New York City delegates supporting Mayor Buttigieg.
And while critics don’t see him generating the necessary enthusiasm among the Democratic base to defeat President Trump, others say Mr. Trump himself will provide enough motivation.
“The ultimate uniter of the Republican Party in 2016 was beating Hillary Clinton,” says Kent Syler, professor of political science and public policy at Middle Tennessee State University. “The ultimate uniter of the Democrats this time will be beating Donald Trump.”
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
Either way, Professor Greer notes that many of her students seem to be talking about Mr. Bloomberg. They’ve all been exposed to a steady stream of Bloomberg campaign ads on YouTube. Indeed, her 8-year-old niece can recite a Bloomberg ad “verbatim.”
“Something is happening,” she says. “He’s resonating with people.”


csmonitor--2020-02-13--Why a Bloomberg nomination has long concerned Team Trump

Michael Bloomberg ’ s path to the Democratic presidential nomination remains wide open .
Yes , Bernie Sanders won the New Hampshire primary yesterday – but just by a hair and with less than 26 percent of the vote .
The Democratic field is splintered .
That feeds right into the Bloomberg playbook : open the mega-billionaire ’ s wallet , flood the airwaves with ads , rake in endorsements ( notably , so far , from mayors of cities with large African American populations ) , and watch Democratic voter support grow .
The former New York City mayor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ polls of Democrats .
Mr. Bloomberg ’ s plan is to compete in the primaries starting March 3 , Super Tuesday .
He certainly has his work cut out .
He has to perform well in the coming debates , if he actually participates ( and assuming he will qualify ) .
He also has to overcome deep concerns about his record as mayor , notably his “ stop and frisk ” policy .
A recording released this week by a progressive podcaster had Mr. Bloomberg defending the policy in blunt terms long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ responding , the ex-mayor made claims that a New York Times fact-checker found misleading .
But Mr. Bloomberg is still very much in the hunt .
And he has long been on Team Trump ’ s radar .
At a Monitor Breakfast in August 2018 , Corey Lewandowski – President Donald Trump ’ s first campaign manager and still an informal adviser – was asked who he thought would be the president ’ s toughest challenger in 2020 .
His response : Mr. Bloomberg .
`` Michael Bloomberg has created tens of thousands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the American people like , and he ’ s an outsider .
So I think it would be a very , very competitive race , '' Mr. Lewandowski said .
To see his full response , watch this C-SPAN clip starting at the 1:20 mark .
Now , President Trump says he would rather face Mr. Bloomberg over the Vermont senator , “ because Sanders has real followers.
” Mr. Lewandowski , speaking on Fox News , agreed .
Both also highlighted Senator Sanders ’ democratic socialist views .
We think that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one considers which Democrat Mr. Trump spends the most time attacking , then it may be that Mr. Lewandowski had it right the first time .
Let us know what you ’ re thinking at csmpolitics @ csmonitor.com .

Dear reader:
Michael Bloomberg’s path to the Democratic presidential nomination remains wide open. Yes, Bernie Sanders won the New Hampshire primary yesterday – but just by a hair and with less than 26 percent of the vote. The Democratic field is splintered.
That feeds right into the Bloomberg playbook: open the mega-billionaire’s wallet, flood the airwaves with ads, rake in endorsements (notably, so far, from mayors of cities with large African American populations), and watch Democratic voter support grow. The former New York City mayor is now averaging third place in national polls of Democrats.
Mr. Bloomberg’s plan is to compete in the primaries starting March 3, Super Tuesday. He certainly has his work cut out. He has to perform well in the coming debates, if he actually participates (and assuming he will qualify). He also has to overcome deep concerns about his record as mayor, notably his “stop and frisk” policy. A recording released this week by a progressive podcaster had Mr. Bloomberg defending the policy in blunt terms long after he had left office. In responding, the ex-mayor made claims that a New York Times fact-checker found misleading.
But Mr. Bloomberg is still very much in the hunt. And he has long been on Team Trump’s radar. At a Monitor Breakfast in August 2018, Corey Lewandowski – President Donald Trump’s first campaign manager and still an informal adviser – was asked who he thought would be the president’s toughest challenger in 2020. His response: Mr. Bloomberg.
"Michael Bloomberg has created tens of thousands of jobs... That is a story the American people like, and he’s an outsider. So I think it would be a very, very competitive race," Mr. Lewandowski said.
To see his full response, watch this C-SPAN clip starting at the 1:20 mark.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
Now, President Trump says he would rather face Mr. Bloomberg over the Vermont senator, “because Sanders has real followers.” Mr. Lewandowski, speaking on Fox News, agreed. Both also highlighted Senator Sanders’ democratic socialist views. We think that’s the real point. And if one considers which Democrat Mr. Trump spends the most time attacking , then it may be that Mr. Lewandowski had it right the first time.
Let us know what you’re thinking at csmpolitics@csmonitor.com.


csmonitor--2020-02-14--Virginia’s ‘amazing moment’: The view from ground zero of U.S. gun debate

“ It is an amazing moment , ” says Adam Winkler , author of “ Gunfight : The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America.
” “ A lot of people since [ the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre ] have expressed disappointment that nothing has changed , but we have actually seen a real shift in American gun politics .
Virginia is really the crucible of that.
” Virginia , a historically gun-friendly Southern state , has become a front line in the battle over gun rights in the United States , as newly elected Democrats move forward @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assault-style rifles .
But if you are like the 22,000 people who gathered in Richmond , Virginia , late last month , openly carrying an assault-style rifle is a form of protest and a reminder of Second Amendment rights .
“ The pictures that are taken from here ... can live forever and encourage people to remember our rights , ” says Jeff Hulbert , a gun-rights advocate from Maryland who attended the rally .
If you are like Laura Kinzinger of Cape Charles , Virginia , you might call the police and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ It might be legal , ” she says .
“ But it ’ s not normal.
” How would you react to a plainclothes resident strolling down the street with an AR-15 tossed over his shoulder ?
As chants of “ USA !
USA !
” poured over him , Jeff Hulbert stood at the ready – a soldier , in his eyes , of democracy .
Behind him rose the peak of the Virginia Capitol in the state that has become ground zero in the shifting politics of gun rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fence fluttered a “ We Will Not Comply ” banner .
Strapped around his shoulder , an Israeli Tavor rifle , which fires the same ammunition as an AR-15 – a military-style weapon that has become popular as an avatar of armed citizenship on the right and decried as a machine of mass death on the left .
“ We think it ’ s very symbolic to wear our sidearms , to wear a rifle , because the pictures that are taken from here ... can live forever and encourage people to remember @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a Maryland resident and founder of Patriot Picket , a gun-rights advocacy group .
But Cape Charles resident Laura Kinzinger has an opposite reaction .
If she saw someone openly carrying a long rifle , she says she ’ d call the police and then duck , run , and hide .
“ It might be legal .
But it ’ s not normal , ” she says .
“ That person might suddenly use it .
I mean , there could be accidents .
The thought of walking around with an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They are designed to kill people .
That ’ s what they do.
” As complaints of government overreach still echo from the 22,000-strong show of largely armed force in Richmond late last month , newly elected Democrats are moving forward with a ban on new sales of the assault-style rifles , including misdemeanor penalties for possession of magazines that hold more than seven rounds .
The turn of a historically gun-friendly Southern state toward gun restrictions comes as the U.S. Supreme Court takes its first gun rights case in a decade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to restrict guns .
Given that a conservative majority is unlikely to OK broad new restraints , battles at the state level have come to define an epic shift for Second Amendment reformers .
“ It is an amazing moment , ” says Adam Winkler , a law professor at the University of California , Los Angeles , and author of “ Gunfight : The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America.
” “ A lot of people since [ the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre ] have expressed disappointment that nothing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seen a real shift in American gun politics .
Virginia is really the crucible of that.
” On Monday , the House of Delegates advanced the assault-style ban to its final reading , with Democratic lawmakers contending that it will not infringe on anybody ’ s Second Amendment rights .
Republicans argue otherwise , saying it would criminalize ownership of some magazines , even after Democrats tempered penalties to a misdemeanor .
At one point , police escorted protesters out of the chamber .
“ Whose side are you on ?
” they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fight between blue suburbs and red rural areas over the proposed ban has also bared tensions among gun owners themselves .
Does open carry , as Mr. Hulbert hopes , normalize the image of an armed citizenry ?
Or does it further entrench the idea that the right to carry a long rifle infringes on the freedoms of non-gun owners ?
Williamsburg , Virginia , resident Josiah Gray says open carry should be restricted to police officers .
The parking officer says carrying a gun might make some people feel safer , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , especially if they lost someone they knew to gun violence .
“ You never know how it affects other people , ” he says .
“ If you don ’ t have a uniform , it looks kind of off to the other people that you have a gun.
” Some gun owners share those doubts .
Few gun owners question the right , but many ask about the “ pragmatic aspect of open carry , ” says Wake Forest University sociologist David Yamane , founder of the Gun Culture 2.0 blog @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the gun community who really dislike open carry as a method of normalizing firearms.
” In essence , an open source platform that has sold more than 8 million exemplars on its journey to become “ America ’ s Gun , ” the Armalite Rifle , gun owners say , is basically a slick-looking single-fire rifle .
Mechanically and caliber-wise , that is correct .
But it is also a masterpiece of war .
Its military cousin was a replacement for the unreliable M-14 ; its ability to kill Viet Cong in tight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was first introduced to the civilian population as a hunting rifle , and its advertising slogan belies its appeal : If it is good enough for the military , it is good enough for all of us .
The sunsetting of the federal assault weapons ban in 2004 opened an era of gun rights expansion , where three-quarters of states have now loosened regulations on concealed and open carry , and have expanded the rights of lethal self defense .
But that arc has been complicated by the gun ’ s use in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as well as the rise of violent far-right nationalism , members of which law enforcement said posed credible threats as they sought to infiltrate the Richmond rally .
As a result , some of the states that led the expansion of gun rights – like Florida – are tapping the brakes .
Gun control advocates like Everytown for Gun Safety , which is backed by Democratic presidential hopeful Michael Bloomberg , are building on success in turning Virginia blue by spending $ 60 million this election cycle to elect reformers in states like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Democrats in Virginia aren ’ t doing anything different than what they promised to do , what they ran on , ” says Ernest McGowen , a political scientist at the University of Richmond .
At the same time , he adds , open carry of AR-15s in protest “ is also a statement to the strength of our democracy : [ Gun owners ] were there about politics , about policies , about working out , how do we reasonably deal with this thing with guns in our country ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ support an assault-style weapons ban .
Those poll numbers and the renewed passion of gun-control advocates after the Parkland massacre in Florida , some gun owners say , has hastened a push to normalize the weapons – and their use in place of protest placards .
“ I think they wanted to show that carrying weapons , whether it ’ s open or concealed , is a normal thing that millions of Americans do every day , ” says Tom Ferguson , a University of Virginia senior who came to Richmond in January @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ We have just normal people coming in who just care about making their voices heard.
” The symbolism of the AR-15 is apparent to both sides , and it ’ s unclear whether a ban would reduce gun deaths .
Rifle deaths make up about 300 out of 30,000 gun deaths in the U.S. a year , making the toll from handguns far more dramatic .
As Democrats mull gun-control legislation , nearly 100 Virginia counties have declared themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries , where local sheriffs vowed to not enforce laws @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t meet constitutional muster .
( So far , U.S. courts have allowed assault-style weapon bans . )
“ The right has understood that the battle of ideas is terribly important , because people want to feel that they are part of a crusade that is inspired by a philosophically sophisticated ... and morally significant agenda or purpose , ” says Colin Bird , a political philosopher at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville .
While the largest share of gun owners are older white men over the age of 40 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ increasingly diverse gun culture .
For Anna-Marie Lewis , who owns a shooting range in Bergen , New York , carrying a gun is both practical and empowering .
At the rally , she is wearing a helmet and carrying a small AR-15 style rifle .
“ No one walks around like this at all , ever , but we do just to show we can , ” says Ms. Lewis .
“ This is very peaceful .
We have no intent of ever using these in this scenario , but it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be able to ... that it ’ s our right .
”

“It is an amazing moment,” says Adam Winkler, author of “Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America.” “A lot of people since [the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre] have expressed disappointment that nothing has changed, but we have actually seen a real shift in American gun politics. Virginia is really the crucible of that.”
Virginia, a historically gun-friendly Southern state, has become a front line in the battle over gun rights in the United States, as newly elected Democrats move forward with a ban on new sales of assault-style rifles.
But if you are like the 22,000 people who gathered in Richmond, Virginia, late last month, openly carrying an assault-style rifle is a form of protest and a reminder of Second Amendment rights. “The pictures that are taken from here ... can live forever and encourage people to remember our rights,” says Jeff Hulbert, a gun-rights advocate from Maryland who attended the rally.
A seismic shift underway in Virginia has lawmakers asking a question once unthinkable for the home of the NRA: How do you ban “America’s gun”?
If you are like Laura Kinzinger of Cape Charles, Virginia, you might call the police and then duck, run, and hide. “It might be legal,” she says. “But it’s not normal.”
How would you react to a plainclothes resident strolling down the street with an AR-15 tossed over his shoulder?
As chants of “USA! USA!” poured over him, Jeff Hulbert stood at the ready – a soldier, in his eyes, of democracy. Behind him rose the peak of the Virginia Capitol in the state that has become ground zero in the shifting politics of gun rights across the United States.
On a fence fluttered a “We Will Not Comply” banner. Strapped around his shoulder, an Israeli Tavor rifle, which fires the same ammunition as an AR-15 – a military-style weapon that has become popular as an avatar of armed citizenship on the right and decried as a machine of mass death on the left.
“We think it’s very symbolic to wear our sidearms, to wear a rifle, because the pictures that are taken from here ... can live forever and encourage people to remember our rights,” says Mr. Hulbert, a Maryland resident and founder of Patriot Picket, a gun-rights advocacy group.
Why We Wrote This A seismic shift underway in Virginia has lawmakers asking a question once unthinkable for the home of the NRA: How do you ban “America’s gun”?
But Cape Charles resident Laura Kinzinger has an opposite reaction. If she saw someone openly carrying a long rifle, she says she’d call the police and then duck, run, and hide.
“It might be legal. But it’s not normal,” she says. “That person might suddenly use it. I mean, there could be accidents. The thought of walking around with an [assault-style] rifle is just horrific. They are designed to kill people. That’s what they do.”
As complaints of government overreach still echo from the 22,000-strong show of largely armed force in Richmond late last month, newly elected Democrats are moving forward with a ban on new sales of the assault-style rifles, including misdemeanor penalties for possession of magazines that hold more than seven rounds.
The turn of a historically gun-friendly Southern state toward gun restrictions comes as the U.S. Supreme Court takes its first gun rights case in a decade to determine how far municipalities can go to restrict guns. Given that a conservative majority is unlikely to OK broad new restraints, battles at the state level have come to define an epic shift for Second Amendment reformers.
“It is an amazing moment,” says Adam Winkler, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, and author of “Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America.” “A lot of people since [the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre] have expressed disappointment that nothing has changed, but we have actually seen a real shift in American gun politics. Virginia is really the crucible of that.”
On Monday, the House of Delegates advanced the assault-style ban to its final reading, with Democratic lawmakers contending that it will not infringe on anybody’s Second Amendment rights. Republicans argue otherwise, saying it would criminalize ownership of some magazines, even after Democrats tempered penalties to a misdemeanor. At one point, police escorted protesters out of the chamber. “Whose side are you on?” they shouted at officers.
But the political fight between blue suburbs and red rural areas over the proposed ban has also bared tensions among gun owners themselves. Does open carry, as Mr. Hulbert hopes, normalize the image of an armed citizenry? Or does it further entrench the idea that the right to carry a long rifle infringes on the freedoms of non-gun owners?
Williamsburg, Virginia, resident Josiah Gray says open carry should be restricted to police officers. The parking officer says carrying a gun might make some people feel safer, but others could be intimidated or possibly traumatized, especially if they lost someone they knew to gun violence.
“You never know how it affects other people,” he says. “If you don’t have a uniform, it looks kind of off to the other people that you have a gun.”
Some gun owners share those doubts. Few gun owners question the right, but many ask about the “pragmatic aspect of open carry,” says Wake Forest University sociologist David Yamane, founder of the Gun Culture 2.0 blog. “There are many people in the gun community who really dislike open carry as a method of normalizing firearms.”
In essence, an open source platform that has sold more than 8 million exemplars on its journey to become “America’s Gun,” the Armalite Rifle, gun owners say, is basically a slick-looking single-fire rifle. Mechanically and caliber-wise, that is correct. But it is also a masterpiece of war. Its military cousin was a replacement for the unreliable M-14; its ability to kill Viet Cong in tight quarters stunned Army researchers.
The AR was first introduced to the civilian population as a hunting rifle, and its advertising slogan belies its appeal: If it is good enough for the military, it is good enough for all of us. The sunsetting of the federal assault weapons ban in 2004 opened an era of gun rights expansion, where three-quarters of states have now loosened regulations on concealed and open carry, and have expanded the rights of lethal self defense.
But that arc has been complicated by the gun’s use in a growing number of mass killings, as well as the rise of violent far-right nationalism, members of which law enforcement said posed credible threats as they sought to infiltrate the Richmond rally.
As a result, some of the states that led the expansion of gun rights – like Florida – are tapping the brakes. Gun control advocates like Everytown for Gun Safety, which is backed by Democratic presidential hopeful Michael Bloomberg, are building on success in turning Virginia blue by spending $60 million this election cycle to elect reformers in states like North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Arizona.
“Democrats in Virginia aren’t doing anything different than what they promised to do, what they ran on,” says Ernest McGowen, a political scientist at the University of Richmond.
Stephanie Keith/Reuters View caption Hide caption A large crowd gathers on Gun Lobby Day in front of the Virginia Capitol in Richmond, Jan. 20, 2020.
At the same time, he adds, open carry of AR-15s in protest “is also a statement to the strength of our democracy: [Gun owners] were there about politics, about policies, about working out, how do we reasonably deal with this thing with guns in our country?”
Gallup says 6 in 10 Americans support an assault-style weapons ban. Those poll numbers and the renewed passion of gun-control advocates after the Parkland massacre in Florida, some gun owners say, has hastened a push to normalize the weapons – and their use in place of protest placards.
“I think they wanted to show that carrying weapons, whether it’s open or concealed, is a normal thing that millions of Americans do every day,” says Tom Ferguson, a University of Virginia senior who came to Richmond in January to lobby on behalf of gun rights. “We have just normal people coming in who just care about making their voices heard.”
The symbolism of the AR-15 is apparent to both sides, and it’s unclear whether a ban would reduce gun deaths. Rifle deaths make up about 300 out of 30,000 gun deaths in the U.S. a year, making the toll from handguns far more dramatic.
As Democrats mull gun-control legislation, nearly 100 Virginia counties have declared themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries, where local sheriffs vowed to not enforce laws that, in their estimation, don’t meet constitutional muster. (So far, U.S. courts have allowed assault-style weapon bans.)
“The right has understood that the battle of ideas is terribly important, because people want to feel that they are part of a crusade that is inspired by a philosophically sophisticated ... and morally significant agenda or purpose,” says Colin Bird, a political philosopher at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
While the largest share of gun owners are older white men over the age of 40, women and minorities are part of an increasingly diverse gun culture. For Anna-Marie Lewis, who owns a shooting range in Bergen, New York, carrying a gun is both practical and empowering.
At the rally, she is wearing a helmet and carrying a small AR-15 style rifle. “No one walks around like this at all, ever, but we do just to show we can,” says Ms. Lewis. “This is very peaceful. We have no intent of ever using these in this scenario, but it’s just to show that we should be able to ... that it’s our right.”


csmonitor--2020-02-14--Bloomberg's campaign prompts Facebook to reverse its ad policy

Facebook decided Friday to allow a type of paid political message that had sidestepped many of the social network 's rules governing political ads , in a reversal that highlights difficulties tech companies and regulators have in keeping up with the changing nature of paid political messages .
Its policy change comes days after presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg exploited a loophole to run humorous messages promoting his campaign on the accounts of popular Instagram personalities followed by millions of younger people .
It used to be clearer what 's an ad and what is n't – and thus what 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ With social media , a campaign can pay celebrities and other influential users to spread a message on their behalf , without ever buying an ad and be subject to its rules .
`` This is a new kind of activity that simply did n't exist when the rules for internet political communications were last updated , '' said Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub of the Federal Election Commission .
The change involves what Facebook calls `` branded content '' – sponsored items posted by ordinary users who are typically paid by companies or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ directly to post about their brand .
Facebook makes no money from such posts and does not consider them advertising .
As a result , branded content is n't governed by Facebook 's advertising policies , which require candidates and campaigns to verify their identity with a U.S. ID or mailing address and disclose how much they spent running each ad .
Until Friday , Facebook tried to deter campaigns from using such branded content by barring them from using a tool designed to help advertisers run such posts on Facebook and Instagram @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Friday 's rule change will now allow campaigns in the U.S. to use this tool , provided they 've been authorized by Facebook to run political ads and disclose who paid for the sponsored posts .
`` After hearing from multiple campaigns , we agree that there 's a place for branded content in political discussion on our platforms , '' Facebook said in an exclusive statement to The Associated Press .
`` We 're allowing U.S.-based political candidates to work with creators to run this content . ''
Politicians still wo n't @ @ @ @ @ @ @ paid the influencers to run the posts .
The Bloomberg campaign had taken the unconventional step of paying social media influencers – individuals with huge followings – to post Bloomberg memes using their Instagram accounts .
Different versions of the sponsored posts from the Bloomberg campaign ran on more than a dozen influential Instagram accounts , each of which have millions of followers .
That effort skirted many of the rules that tech companies have imposed on political ads to safeguard U.S. elections from malicious foreign and domestic interference and misinformation .
Online @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after it was revealed Russia used them in an attempt to influence the 2016 presidential election .
In response , Facebook has rolled out a number of rules to prevent a repeat of that , though it has declined to fact-check political ads and refuses to ban even blatantly false messages .
The Bloomberg campaign 's memes showed the candidate , in a tongue-in-cheek awkward fashion , chatting with popular social media influencers with names like `` Tank Sinatra , '' asking them to help him raise his profile among younger folk .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign said it was reaching those who might not be normally interested in the day-to-day of politics .
`` You want to engage people at every platform and you want them to feel like they 're not just getting a canned generic statement , '' campaign spokeswoman Sabrina Singh said of the campaign 's strategy .
The Bloomberg posts were n't much more than self-deprecating humor used to sell a candidate 's old guy appeal , using a tactic that until now was largely used to sell skin care products or clothing-subscription services @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clear rules around influencer marketing , not to mention their effectiveness in reaching younger audiences , makes them ripe for misuse .
It 's not yet clear if Facebook 's sudden policy change will close all the loopholes , though the company says the issue represents a new territory and its approach could change over time .
The same goes for regulation , too , which is even further behind than the tech companies .
The Bloomberg campaign declined to say how much it paid for the sponsored posts , or if it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The posts did not appear in Facebook 's ad transparency library , which catalogs the political ads that campaigns buy directly from Facebook or Instagram , and tells users how much was spent on them .
Mr. Bloomberg 's campaign told the AP on Thursday that Instagram did not require the campaign to disclose that information on the sponsored posts it ran earlier this week .
With Friday 's change , the campaign would need to add the posts to the library , though it still would n't need to disclose spending @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Associated Press .
Amanda Seitz reported from Chicago .

Facebook decided Friday to allow a type of paid political message that had sidestepped many of the social network's rules governing political ads, in a reversal that highlights difficulties tech companies and regulators have in keeping up with the changing nature of paid political messages.
Its policy change comes days after presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg exploited a loophole to run humorous messages promoting his campaign on the accounts of popular Instagram personalities followed by millions of younger people.
It used to be clearer what's an ad and what isn't – and thus what's subject to disclosures and other rules. With social media, a campaign can pay celebrities and other influential users to spread a message on their behalf, without ever buying an ad and be subject to its rules.
"This is a new kind of activity that simply didn't exist when the rules for internet political communications were last updated," said Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub of the Federal Election Commission.
The change involves what Facebook calls "branded content" – sponsored items posted by ordinary users who are typically paid by companies or organizations. Advertisers pay the influential users directly to post about their brand.
Facebook makes no money from such posts and does not consider them advertising. As a result, branded content isn't governed by Facebook's advertising policies, which require candidates and campaigns to verify their identity with a U.S. ID or mailing address and disclose how much they spent running each ad.
Until Friday, Facebook tried to deter campaigns from using such branded content by barring them from using a tool designed to help advertisers run such posts on Facebook and Instagram, which is owned by Facebook. Friday's rule change will now allow campaigns in the U.S. to use this tool, provided they've been authorized by Facebook to run political ads and disclose who paid for the sponsored posts.
"After hearing from multiple campaigns, we agree that there's a place for branded content in political discussion on our platforms," Facebook said in an exclusive statement to The Associated Press. "We're allowing U.S.-based political candidates to work with creators to run this content."
Politicians still won't be required to disclose how much it paid the influencers to run the posts.
The Bloomberg campaign had taken the unconventional step of paying social media influencers – individuals with huge followings – to post Bloomberg memes using their Instagram accounts. Different versions of the sponsored posts from the Bloomberg campaign ran on more than a dozen influential Instagram accounts, each of which have millions of followers.
That effort skirted many of the rules that tech companies have imposed on political ads to safeguard U.S. elections from malicious foreign and domestic interference and misinformation. Online political ads have been controversial, especially after it was revealed Russia used them in an attempt to influence the 2016 presidential election. In response, Facebook has rolled out a number of rules to prevent a repeat of that, though it has declined to fact-check political ads and refuses to ban even blatantly false messages.
The Bloomberg campaign's memes showed the candidate, in a tongue-in-cheek awkward fashion, chatting with popular social media influencers with names like "Tank Sinatra," asking them to help him raise his profile among younger folk.
With the sponsored posts, Bloomberg's campaign said it was reaching those who might not be normally interested in the day-to-day of politics.
"You want to engage people at every platform and you want them to feel like they're not just getting a canned generic statement," campaign spokeswoman Sabrina Singh said of the campaign's strategy.
The Bloomberg posts weren't much more than self-deprecating humor used to sell a candidate's old guy appeal, using a tactic that until now was largely used to sell skin care products or clothing-subscription services. But the lack of oversight and clear rules around influencer marketing, not to mention their effectiveness in reaching younger audiences, makes them ripe for misuse.
It's not yet clear if Facebook's sudden policy change will close all the loopholes, though the company says the issue represents a new territory and its approach could change over time. The same goes for regulation, too, which is even further behind than the tech companies.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
The Bloomberg campaign declined to say how much it paid for the sponsored posts, or if it had more of them in the works. The posts did not appear in Facebook's ad transparency library, which catalogs the political ads that campaigns buy directly from Facebook or Instagram, and tells users how much was spent on them. Mr. Bloomberg's campaign told the AP on Thursday that Instagram did not require the campaign to disclose that information on the sponsored posts it ran earlier this week. With Friday's change, the campaign would need to add the posts to the library, though it still wouldn't need to disclose spending amounts.
This story was reported by The Associated Press. Amanda Seitz reported from Chicago.


csmonitor--2020-02-14--Barr says Trump didn't influence his decision in Stone case

House Democrats frustrated over the Senate 's acquittal of President Donald Trump are pushing their oversight efforts toward the Justice Department and what they call Attorney General William Barr 's efforts to politicize federal law enforcement .
Democrats have demanded more information about Mr. Barr 's intervention in the case of Roger Stone , a longtime Trump confidant who was convicted in November of lying to Congress and other charges .
Mr. Barr this week overruled prosecutors who had recommended that Mr. Stone be sentenced to 7 to 9 years in prison .
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi criticized Mr. Barr @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mr. Trump 's `` henchmen . ''
`` The attorney general has stooped to such levels , '' Ms. Pelosi said .
`` What a sad disappointment .
The American people deserve better . ''
Mr. Barr appeared to try and deflect some of the rising criticism on Thursday , saying in an interview with ABC News that Mr. Trump 's tweets about Justice Department prosecutors and cases `` make it impossible for me to do my job . ''
But he also said the decision to undo the sentencing recommendation was made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and he said the president had not asked him to intervene in any cases .
That answer wo n't be enough for Democrats , who also want to ask Mr. Barr about his decision to take information from Mr. Trump 's personal lawyer , Rudy Giuliani , about Joe Biden and his son .
Those same efforts by Mr. Giuliani in Ukraine were at the heart of Mr. Trump 's impeachment .
`` In the past week alone , you have taken steps that raise grave questions about your leadership , '' the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barr .
The sharpened look at Mr. Barr 's activities comes at a time when many Democrats appear wary of prolonging the Ukraine inquiry that led to Mr. Trump 's impeachment .
Ms. Pelosi and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff have put off – but not ruled out – a subpoena for former National Security Adviser John Bolton , who refused to participate in the House impeachment inquiry but later said he would testify in the Senate trial .
Mr. Bolton is writing a book .
Issuing a subpoena for Mr. Bolton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's conduct , but also risk a court fight that could take months to resolve .
Many Democrats privately say they want to look forward , not backward , and conduct oversight of the Republican president 's actions in real time .
First up will be examining whether Mr. Barr inappropriately intervened in the Stone case .
Mr. Stone was convicted of lying to Congress , witness tampering , and obstructing the House investigation into whether the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia to tip the 2016 election .
Mr. Trump congratulated the attorney @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the four prosecutors on the case immediately withdrew .
The turmoil within the Justice Department has given Democrats a new way forward for their investigations after the sting of the Senate 's impeachment acquittal .
While there is little interest in pursuing another impeachment case , Democrats want to leverage the power of their majority to conduct oversight as they try to defeat Mr. Trump at the polls in November .
`` The resignation and defection of these prosecutors is a huge alarm bell going off in our system , '' said Rep. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most vocal Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee who pushed for impeachment .
`` So , that is the immediate emergency . ''
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler announced Wednesday that Mr. Barr will testify before the committee on March 31 and that lawmakers will ask him about his involvement in the Stone case .
People familiar with the committee 's plans said there could be other Judiciary Committee hearings before then that examine the politicization of the department .
The people requested anonymity because the plans are n't yet set @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interest in grilling the attorney general .
Republicans defended the department 's decision to reduce Mr. Stone 's sentence and said they did n't expect to request Mr. Barr 's testimony .
`` President Trump , in selecting Bill Barr to be attorney general , has done a great service to the people serving in the Department of Justice and our nation as a whole , '' Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham , R-S.C. , said in a statement Thursday .
Mr. Graham added that Mr. Barr has his `` complete confidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Associated Press .
AP writer Lisa Mascaro contributed to this report .

House Democrats frustrated over the Senate's acquittal of President Donald Trump are pushing their oversight efforts toward the Justice Department and what they call Attorney General William Barr's efforts to politicize federal law enforcement.
Democrats have demanded more information about Mr. Barr's intervention in the case of Roger Stone, a longtime Trump confidant who was convicted in November of lying to Congress and other charges. Mr. Barr this week overruled prosecutors who had recommended that Mr. Stone be sentenced to 7 to 9 years in prison.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi criticized Mr. Barr on Thursday, calling him one of Mr. Trump's "henchmen."
"The attorney general has stooped to such levels," Ms. Pelosi said. "What a sad disappointment. The American people deserve better."
Mr. Barr appeared to try and deflect some of the rising criticism on Thursday, saying in an interview with ABC News that Mr. Trump's tweets about Justice Department prosecutors and cases "make it impossible for me to do my job." But he also said the decision to undo the sentencing recommendation was made before Mr. Trump tweeted about it, and he said the president had not asked him to intervene in any cases.
That answer won't be enough for Democrats, who also want to ask Mr. Barr about his decision to take information from Mr. Trump's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, about Joe Biden and his son. Those same efforts by Mr. Giuliani in Ukraine were at the heart of Mr. Trump's impeachment.
"In the past week alone, you have taken steps that raise grave questions about your leadership," the Democrats wrote in a letter to Mr. Barr.
The sharpened look at Mr. Barr's activities comes at a time when many Democrats appear wary of prolonging the Ukraine inquiry that led to Mr. Trump's impeachment. Ms. Pelosi and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff have put off – but not ruled out – a subpoena for former National Security Adviser John Bolton, who refused to participate in the House impeachment inquiry but later said he would testify in the Senate trial. Mr. Bolton is writing a book.
Issuing a subpoena for Mr. Bolton could bring dramatic testimony about Mr. Trump's conduct, but also risk a court fight that could take months to resolve. Many Democrats privately say they want to look forward, not backward, and conduct oversight of the Republican president's actions in real time.
First up will be examining whether Mr. Barr inappropriately intervened in the Stone case. Mr. Stone was convicted of lying to Congress, witness tampering, and obstructing the House investigation into whether the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia to tip the 2016 election.
Mr. Trump congratulated the attorney general afterward on Twitter. Meanwhile, the four prosecutors on the case immediately withdrew.
The turmoil within the Justice Department has given Democrats a new way forward for their investigations after the sting of the Senate's impeachment acquittal. While there is little interest in pursuing another impeachment case, Democrats want to leverage the power of their majority to conduct oversight as they try to defeat Mr. Trump at the polls in November.
"The resignation and defection of these prosecutors is a huge alarm bell going off in our system," said Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, one of the most vocal Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee who pushed for impeachment. "So, that is the immediate emergency."
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler announced Wednesday that Mr. Barr will testify before the committee on March 31 and that lawmakers will ask him about his involvement in the Stone case. People familiar with the committee's plans said there could be other Judiciary Committee hearings before then that examine the politicization of the department. The people requested anonymity because the plans aren't yet set.
The GOP-led Senate has shown less interest in grilling the attorney general. Republicans defended the department's decision to reduce Mr. Stone's sentence and said they didn't expect to request Mr. Barr's testimony.
"President Trump, in selecting Bill Barr to be attorney general, has done a great service to the people serving in the Department of Justice and our nation as a whole," Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said in a statement Thursday.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
Mr. Graham added that Mr. Barr has his "complete confidence."
This story was reported by The Associated Press. AP writer Lisa Mascaro contributed to this report.


csmonitor--2020-02-18--As Nevada prepares to vote, caucuses themselves are on the line

Still , some experts can see the Nevada caucuses surviving if they can make this new hybrid work .
Switching back to a primary is not as simple as it might sound – state Republicans pushed for a primary in 2014 and failed .
And then there ’ s the much bigger question of what might happen to Nevada ’ s place in the presidential primary calendar .
“ My main question is , will Nevada lose its standing in the country ?
” asks Ms. Cole .
In order to open up the process to more people , Nevada @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this year .
And if the early voting process offers any indication of how Saturday will go , Nevada may be in for a bumpy ride .
As the first day of early voting began at the Cardenas Market in east Las Vegas , just two volunteers were working with iPads to check a long line of people in .
They ’ re asking , why not just get rid of caucuses and hold a simple primary instead , says Ms. Cole , rural caucus chair of the Nevada Democratic Party in Douglas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ever since the debacle in Iowa , Kimi Cole has been fielding multiple calls a day from Nevadans feeling anxious about their state ’ s upcoming presidential caucuses .
Ever since the debacle in Iowa , Kimi Cole has been fielding multiple calls a day from Nevadans feeling anxious about their state ’ s upcoming presidential caucuses .
They ’ re asking , why not just get rid of caucuses and hold a simple primary instead , says Ms. Cole , rural caucus chair of the Nevada Democratic Party in Douglas County , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eyes on Nevada as it prepares for Saturday ’ s voting , Iowa is a “ fresh wound in many people ’ s minds , ” she says .
Even before Iowa , Ms. Cole says she was asked whether it made sense to continue holding caucuses .
The problems with Iowa ’ s app for recording results – software Nevada was also planning to use but has now dropped – has dramatically intensified the debate about the future of caucuses in the Silver State and elsewhere .
Democratic National Committee chair Tom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ urging an end to the process altogether .
Caucuses date back to the early 1800s , when party bosses chose nominees behind closed doors .
More accessible primaries gained ground in the Progressive Era , but were nonbinding .
Democratic reforms in the 1970s led to today ’ s primary system , but a dwindling number of states and territories still hang on to caucuses .
Today ’ s debate pits a complex system that favors party activists and rewards a candidate ’ s ground game against a streamlined process that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many argue , is more democratic .
Nevada is actually a relative newcomer to caucuses .
At the urging of former Democratic Sen. Harry Reid , Nevada switched in 2008 from holding a presidential primary in June to a caucus in February .
This made Nevada the “ first in the West , ” balancing out Iowa and New Hampshire in both geographic and racial diversity , and greatly raising the state ’ s profile and influence .
It still holds a primary in June , but for other offices .
Interviews at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the weekend found many voters eager to ditch the caucus system .
This city , by far the state ’ s largest , runs 24/7 .
Not everyone can commit to an hourslong gathering on a given date , where voters try to convince each other to back their preferred candidate , and delegates are apportioned based on a complex formula .
“ It ’ s a thing of the past century , ” says Jose Martinez , who works as a porter at The Mirage hotel and casino , and favors returning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faulty app was the least of its problems , adds Wayne Steger , professor of political science at DePaul University in Chicago and a native Iowan .
The bigger issue was new DNC rules requiring precincts to report the first alignment of votes , the second alignment of votes , and the final delegate count , even as caucus participants arrive late and leave early .
“ It ’ s so easy to make a mistake , ” he says .
In order to open up the process to more people , Nevada @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this year .
For four days ending Feb. 18 , Democrats could vote at any designated place in their county .
Early voters were told to mark a minimum of three choices in order of preference on paper ballots , and the results will be combined with caucus results on Saturday .
Essentially , it ’ s a caucus combined with a ranked-voting primary .
If the early voting process offers any indication of how Saturday will go , Nevada may be in for a bumpy ride .
Over the weekend , long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sites – including neighborhood libraries , grocery stores , union halls , and hotel-casino resorts on the Las Vegas strip .
On the first day of early voting at the Cardenas Market in east Las Vegas , a line stretched in front of the deli counter , turned a corner past stacks of paper towels , and finally came to a stop at a table with only two volunteers working to check people in .
“ I don ’ t want to criticize the volunteers , but I ’ ve been in line @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seen less than 10 people vote , ” offered Jimmy Emerson , an entertainer who said he was late for a church meeting .
A volunteer had to scroll on an iPad through the county ’ s enormous database of registered voters to confirm a name .
Then another volunteer , also equipped with an iPad , had to complete the process by filling out a Google-based form .
To speed things up , some voting places abandoned that second step , which they said did not affect the integrity of the process @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the supermarket , she shook her head and muttered that she should have gone to the union voting place .
Indeed , the powerful Culinary Union Local 266 had 14 volunteers checking people in and more volunteers helping with questions about the ballot .
One campaign staffer who did not want to be named expressed hope that everything will turn out fine in the end , while a staffer from another campaign was skeptical about the last-minute ditching of the Iowa app , as well as the added wrinkle of early voting .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ communication – and lack thereof – from the party , ” said this staffer .
“ We are very concerned about precinct captains being trained at the very last minute and having to learn new math.
” Nevada ’ s history with caucuses is not exactly encouraging .
In 2008 , the Nevada State Education Association sued the Democratic Party over at-large precincts that they felt disadvantaged their preferred candidate .
In 2012 , Republicans in Clark County – home to Las Vegas – had to conduct a time-consuming manual recount .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bernie Sanders decried the Nevada caucus process as rigged .
The complaints helped lead to this year ’ s changes in caucus reporting rules .
Still , “ I can see something like the Nevada caucuses surviving ” if they can make the new hybrid work , says Rebecca Gill , associate professor of political science at the University of Nevada in Las Vegas .
Caucus day satisfies the activists who are passionate about the process and makes for a major media event .
At the same time , the early voting allows @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cole , the state ’ s rural county caucus chair , says switching back to a primary is not as simple as it might sound .
For one thing , the state legislature would have to change the law .
Republicans pushed for a primary in 2014 and failed .
And then there ’ s the much bigger question of what might happen to Nevada ’ s place in the primary calendar .
“ My main question is , will Nevada lose its standing in the country ?
” she asks .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and for us to be No .
3 has made it so that now the pundits are saying we should be No .
1 , ” former Senator Reid told reporters on Saturday .
“ When we finish with Super Tuesday , we ’ ll revisit that issue as to whether we should have caucuses or direct primaries.
” By the end of this weekend , that answer could be abundantly clear .

Still, some experts can see the Nevada caucuses surviving if they can make this new hybrid work. Switching back to a primary is not as simple as it might sound – state Republicans pushed for a primary in 2014 and failed. And then there’s the much bigger question of what might happen to Nevada’s place in the presidential primary calendar. “My main question is, will Nevada lose its standing in the country?” asks Ms. Cole.
In order to open up the process to more people, Nevada Democrats added early voting to their caucus this year. And if the early voting process offers any indication of how Saturday will go, Nevada may be in for a bumpy ride. As the first day of early voting began at the Cardenas Market in east Las Vegas, just two volunteers were working with iPads to check a long line of people in.
Nervous party officials acknowledge that Saturday’s caucuses could be the last hurrah for a complex system that favors party activists. Still, a successful event, combined with early voting, could preserve the system.
They’re asking, why not just get rid of caucuses and hold a simple primary instead, says Ms. Cole, rural caucus chair of the Nevada Democratic Party in Douglas County, which borders Lake Tahoe.
Ever since the debacle in Iowa, Kimi Cole has been fielding multiple calls a day from Nevadans feeling anxious about their state’s upcoming presidential caucuses.
Ever since the debacle in Iowa, Kimi Cole has been fielding multiple calls a day from Nevadans feeling anxious about their state’s upcoming presidential caucuses.
They’re asking, why not just get rid of caucuses and hold a simple primary instead, says Ms. Cole, rural caucus chair of the Nevada Democratic Party in Douglas County, which borders Lake Tahoe. With all eyes on Nevada as it prepares for Saturday’s voting, Iowa is a “fresh wound in many people’s minds,” she says.
Even before Iowa, Ms. Cole says she was asked whether it made sense to continue holding caucuses. The problems with Iowa’s app for recording results – software Nevada was also planning to use but has now dropped – has dramatically intensified the debate about the future of caucuses in the Silver State and elsewhere. Democratic National Committee chair Tom Perez and other leading party figures are urging an end to the process altogether.
Why We Wrote This Nervous party officials acknowledge that Saturday’s caucuses could be the last hurrah for a complex system that favors party activists. Still, a successful event, combined with early voting, could preserve the system.
Caucuses date back to the early 1800s, when party bosses chose nominees behind closed doors. More accessible primaries gained ground in the Progressive Era, but were nonbinding. Democratic reforms in the 1970s led to today’s primary system, but a dwindling number of states and territories still hang on to caucuses. Today’s debate pits a complex system that favors party activists and rewards a candidate’s ground game against a streamlined process that’s more accessible to voters, and, many argue, is more democratic.
Nevada is actually a relative newcomer to caucuses. At the urging of former Democratic Sen. Harry Reid, Nevada switched in 2008 from holding a presidential primary in June to a caucus in February. This made Nevada the “first in the West,” balancing out Iowa and New Hampshire in both geographic and racial diversity, and greatly raising the state’s profile and influence. It still holds a primary in June, but for other offices.
Interviews at early voting sites in Las Vegas over the weekend found many voters eager to ditch the caucus system. This city, by far the state’s largest, runs 24/7. Not everyone can commit to an hourslong gathering on a given date, where voters try to convince each other to back their preferred candidate, and delegates are apportioned based on a complex formula.
“It’s a thing of the past century,” says Jose Martinez, who works as a porter at The Mirage hotel and casino, and favors returning to a primary.
Iowa’s faulty app was the least of its problems, adds Wayne Steger, professor of political science at DePaul University in Chicago and a native Iowan. The bigger issue was new DNC rules requiring precincts to report the first alignment of votes, the second alignment of votes, and the final delegate count, even as caucus participants arrive late and leave early. “It’s so easy to make a mistake,” he says.
In order to open up the process to more people, Nevada Democrats added early voting to their caucus this year. For four days ending Feb. 18, Democrats could vote at any designated place in their county. Early voters were told to mark a minimum of three choices in order of preference on paper ballots, and the results will be combined with caucus results on Saturday. Essentially, it’s a caucus combined with a ranked-voting primary.
Eric Thayer/Reuters View caption Hide caption Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders attends a campaign event in Carson City, Nevada, Feb. 16, 2020. In 2016, Senator Sanders decried the Nevada caucuses as rigged – complaints that led to this year’s changes in caucus reporting rules.
If the early voting process offers any indication of how Saturday will go, Nevada may be in for a bumpy ride.
Over the weekend, long lines were reported at various early voting sites – including neighborhood libraries, grocery stores, union halls, and hotel-casino resorts on the Las Vegas strip. On the first day of early voting at the Cardenas Market in east Las Vegas, a line stretched in front of the deli counter, turned a corner past stacks of paper towels, and finally came to a stop at a table with only two volunteers working to check people in.
“I don’t want to criticize the volunteers, but I’ve been in line for 45 minutes and I’ve seen less than 10 people vote,” offered Jimmy Emerson, an entertainer who said he was late for a church meeting.
A volunteer had to scroll on an iPad through the county’s enormous database of registered voters to confirm a name. Then another volunteer, also equipped with an iPad, had to complete the process by filling out a Google-based form. To speed things up, some voting places abandoned that second step, which they said did not affect the integrity of the process.
As one voter finished up at the supermarket, she shook her head and muttered that she should have gone to the union voting place. Indeed, the powerful Culinary Union Local 266 had 14 volunteers checking people in and more volunteers helping with questions about the ballot.
One campaign staffer who did not want to be named expressed hope that everything will turn out fine in the end, while a staffer from another campaign was skeptical about the last-minute ditching of the Iowa app, as well as the added wrinkle of early voting.
“We are incredibly frustrated by the communication – and lack thereof – from the party,” said this staffer. “We are very concerned about precinct captains being trained at the very last minute and having to learn new math.”
Nevada’s history with caucuses is not exactly encouraging. In 2008, the Nevada State Education Association sued the Democratic Party over at-large precincts that they felt disadvantaged their preferred candidate. In 2012, Republicans in Clark County – home to Las Vegas – had to conduct a time-consuming manual recount.
In 2016, acrimony exploded as Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders decried the Nevada caucus process as rigged. The complaints helped lead to this year’s changes in caucus reporting rules.
Still, “I can see something like the Nevada caucuses surviving” if they can make the new hybrid work, says Rebecca Gill, associate professor of political science at the University of Nevada in Las Vegas. Caucus day satisfies the activists who are passionate about the process and makes for a major media event. At the same time, the early voting allows many more people to participate.
Ms. Cole, the state’s rural county caucus chair, says switching back to a primary is not as simple as it might sound. For one thing, the state legislature would have to change the law. Republicans pushed for a primary in 2014 and failed. And then there’s the much bigger question of what might happen to Nevada’s place in the primary calendar. “My main question is, will Nevada lose its standing in the country?” she asks.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
“We were way down the list previously, and for us to be No. 3 has made it so that now the pundits are saying we should be No. 1,” former Senator Reid told reporters on Saturday. “When we finish with Super Tuesday, we’ll revisit that issue as to whether we should have caucuses or direct primaries.”
By the end of this weekend, that answer could be abundantly clear.


csmonitor--2020-02-18--Bloomberg makes Democratic debate stage for first time

Billionaire Mike Bloomberg has qualified for the upcoming Democratic presidential debate , marking the first time he 'll stand alongside the rivals he has so far avoided by bypassing the early voting states and using his personal fortune to define himself through television ads .
A new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll published Tuesday shows Mr. Bloomberg with 19 % support nationally in the Democratic nominating contest .
The former New York City mayor , who launched his presidential campaign in November , will appear in Wednesday 's debate in Las Vegas alongside former Vice President Joe Biden , Sens .
Bernie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Klobuchar , and former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg .
Fellow billionaire and philanthropist Tom Steyer is still hoping to qualify .
Mr. Bloomberg 's campaign said that it was seeing `` a groundswell of support across the country '' and that qualifying for Wednesday 's debate `` is the latest sign that Mike 's plan and ability to defeat Donald Trump is resonating with more Americans . ''
`` Mike is looking forward to joining the other Democratic candidates on stage and making the case for why he 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and unite the country , '' Bloomberg campaign manager Kevin Sheekey said in a statement .
The Democratic National Committee recently changed its rules for how a candidate qualifies for the debate , opening the door for Mr. Bloomberg to be on stage and drawing the ire of some candidates who dropped out of the race for failing to make prior stages .
The candidates were previously required to receive a certain number of campaign contributions to qualify , but Mr. Bloomberg , who is worth an estimated $ 60 billion , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be a stark departure from Mr. Bloomberg 's highly choreographed campaign .
He 's poured more than $ 300 million into television advertising , a way to define himself for voters without facing criticism .
While he 's campaigned in more than two dozen states , he does not take questions from voters and delivers a standard stump speech that lasts less than 15 minutes , often reading from a teleprompter .
He encounters the occasional protester , including one who jumped on stage recently in Chattanooga , Tennessee , yelling , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a plutocracy ! ''
But his friendly crowds usually quickly overwhelm the protesters with chants of `` We like Mike ! ''
Mr. Bloomberg is likely to face far more direct fire in the debate .
His fellow Democratic contenders have stepped up their attacks against him in recent days , decrying him for trying to `` buy the election '' and criticizing his support of the `` stop-and-frisk '' tactic while mayor of New York City that led police to target mostly black and Hispanic men for searches .
Mr. Bloomberg @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with his fellow Democrats .
He decided to skip the first four voting states of Iowa , New Hampshire , Nevada , and South Carolina in favor of focusing on the 14 states that vote on March 3 and the contests that come afterward .
He rarely mentions his rivals by name , though his campaign is centered on the idea that none of them can beat President Donald Trump .
And Mr. Bloomberg , more than anyone , has predicated his campaign on a potential Biden collapse .
He 's been aggressive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ South , a core demographic for Mr. Biden 's campaign .
Mr. Biden said he does n't think `` you can buy an election . ''
`` I 'm going to get a chance to debate him on everything from redlining to stop and frisk to a whole range of other things , '' Mr. Biden told reporters last week .
The poll released Tuesday shows Mr. Sanders leading in the Democratic primary contest , at 31 % support nationally .
After Mr. Bloomberg at 19 % , Mr. Biden is at 15 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Ms. Klobuchar at 9 % , and Mr. Buttigieg at 8 % .
Mr. Steyer is at 2 % , and Rep. Tulsi Gabbard is at less than 1 % , with 5 % undecided .
The telephone survey of 527 Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents was conducted by the Marist Poll at the Marist Institute for Public Opinion .
It has a margin of error of plus or minus 5.4 percentage points .
This story was reported by The Associated Press .

Billionaire Mike Bloomberg has qualified for the upcoming Democratic presidential debate, marking the first time he'll stand alongside the rivals he has so far avoided by bypassing the early voting states and using his personal fortune to define himself through television ads.
A new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll published Tuesday shows Mr. Bloomberg with 19% support nationally in the Democratic nominating contest.
The former New York City mayor, who launched his presidential campaign in November, will appear in Wednesday's debate in Las Vegas alongside former Vice President Joe Biden, Sens. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Amy Klobuchar, and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg. Fellow billionaire and philanthropist Tom Steyer is still hoping to qualify.
Mr. Bloomberg's campaign said that it was seeing "a groundswell of support across the country" and that qualifying for Wednesday's debate "is the latest sign that Mike's plan and ability to defeat Donald Trump is resonating with more Americans."
"Mike is looking forward to joining the other Democratic candidates on stage and making the case for why he's the best candidate to defeat Donald Trump and unite the country," Bloomberg campaign manager Kevin Sheekey said in a statement.
The Democratic National Committee recently changed its rules for how a candidate qualifies for the debate, opening the door for Mr. Bloomberg to be on stage and drawing the ire of some candidates who dropped out of the race for failing to make prior stages. The candidates were previously required to receive a certain number of campaign contributions to qualify, but Mr. Bloomberg, who is worth an estimated $60 billion, is not taking donations.
The prime-time event will be a stark departure from Mr. Bloomberg's highly choreographed campaign. He's poured more than $300 million into television advertising, a way to define himself for voters without facing criticism. While he's campaigned in more than two dozen states, he does not take questions from voters and delivers a standard stump speech that lasts less than 15 minutes, often reading from a teleprompter.
He encounters the occasional protester, including one who jumped on stage recently in Chattanooga, Tennessee, yelling, "This is not democracy. This is a plutocracy!" But his friendly crowds usually quickly overwhelm the protesters with chants of "We like Mike!"
Mr. Bloomberg is likely to face far more direct fire in the debate. His fellow Democratic contenders have stepped up their attacks against him in recent days, decrying him for trying to "buy the election" and criticizing his support of the "stop-and-frisk" tactic while mayor of New York City that led police to target mostly black and Hispanic men for searches.
Mr. Bloomberg has barely crossed paths on the trail with his fellow Democrats. He decided to skip the first four voting states of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina in favor of focusing on the 14 states that vote on March 3 and the contests that come afterward.
He rarely mentions his rivals by name, though his campaign is centered on the idea that none of them can beat President Donald Trump. And Mr. Bloomberg, more than anyone, has predicated his campaign on a potential Biden collapse. He's been aggressive in targeting African American voters in the South, a core demographic for Mr. Biden's campaign.
Mr. Biden said he doesn't think "you can buy an election."
"I'm going to get a chance to debate him on everything from redlining to stop and frisk to a whole range of other things," Mr. Biden told reporters last week.
The poll released Tuesday shows Mr. Sanders leading in the Democratic primary contest, at 31% support nationally. After Mr. Bloomberg at 19%, Mr. Biden is at 15%, Ms. Warren at 12%, Ms. Klobuchar at 9%, and Mr. Buttigieg at 8%. Mr. Steyer is at 2%, and Rep. Tulsi Gabbard is at less than 1%, with 5% undecided.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
The telephone survey of 527 Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents was conducted by the Marist Poll at the Marist Institute for Public Opinion. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 5.4 percentage points.
This story was reported by The Associated Press.