Evelyn Reynolds

More stories

  • 150 Shares169 Views

    in US Politics

    Trump takes sexist Harris attacks to ‘whole other level’ on Truth Social

    Donald Trump has reposted a crudely misogynistic comment about Kamala Harris on Truth Social in a move that reprised his past record of sexist behaviour and brazenly flouted pleas from members of his own party to emphasize issues over personal attacks.With fresh polls showing Harris further improving her standing – and widening the gap with her opponent among women voters – Trump drew online opprobrium by sharing a vulgar post on his social media site implying that the Democratic nominee owed her political rise to sexual favours.The post – originally posted by another user – featured photos of Harris and Hillary Clinton alongside the comment: “Funny how blowjobs impacted both their careers differently…”The comment was an oblique reference to innuendo surrounding Harris’s former relationship with Willie Brown, the San Francisco mayor. The mention of Clinton – Trump’s defeated opponent in the 2016 presidential election – alluded to the affair between Monica Lewinsky, a former White House intern, and her husband Bill Clinton in the 1990s, which came close to ending his presidency.It was not the first time Trump had made lewd references to Harris. On 18 August, he shared a video by the Dilley Meme Team, a group of rightwing content creators, to the soundtrack of a parody of the Alanis Morrisette song Ironic that contained the lines, “She spent her whole damn life down on her knees”, as an image of Brown appeared behind a picture of the US vice-president and her husband, Doug Emhoff.But the latest post appeared among a flurry of other extreme posts on Wednesday that also included tributes to the QAnon conspiracy theory that holds that Trump is waging war against an elite network of Satan-worshipping pedophiles in government, business and the media.He reposted: “WWG1WGA! RETRUTH IF YOU AGREE.” The acronym is short for the QAnon slogan: “where we go one, we go all.” He similarly reposted another QAnon phrase: “nothing can stop what is coming.”The FBI has previously identified fringe theories like QAnon – which Trump has stopped short of endorsing while praising its supporters – as likely to fuel domestic terrorism.In yet another incendiary communication, Trump posted manipulated images of some of his favourite targets – including the entrepreneur Bill Gates, Anthony Fauci, who spearheaded the US vaccine effort against Covid-19, Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi – imprisoned and wearing orange jumpsuits.The Harris campaign made no immediate response to Trump’s latest burst of social media activity, which followed disclosures of an altercation between his campaign team and staff at Arlington national cemetery, the resting place of fallen US military heroes, during a visit on Monday.However, the CNN host Anderson Cooper – in a lengthy segment – said the posts took Trump’s previous campaigning to a “whole other level”.“This is the Republican candidate for president and the 45th president of the United States, talking about two women who, no matter what you think of their politics, are two of the most accomplished women in American political history,” Cooper said.Wednesday’s online outbursts came as a new Reuters/Ipsos poll showed Harris with a four-point nationwide lead, 45% to 41%, over Trump. Among women, the survey showed the vice-president increasing her lead to 13%, compared with an average of 9% in polls for July.A separate Fox News survey showed Harris leading or increasing her support in four southern Sun belt states, all considered vital battlegrounds in November.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIn a two-way race, Harris was up by one point in Arizona and by two points in Georgia and Nevada, while Trump is ahead by one point in North Carolina, according to the poll.Beyond the polls, there was irritation among Republicans strategists who had previously urged Trump to desist from attacking Harris personally and focus on issues of concern to voters, such as the economy, inflation and immigration.“I think people are incredibly frustrated,” Jason Roe, a former executive director of the Michigan Republican party, told the Washington Post.He said Harris’s campaign and policy stances gave “opportunities for the Trump campaign to talk about issues that actually will matter to swing voters. And rather than doing that, he’s delving into this nonsense.”Stuart Stevens, a member of the anti-Trump Republican group, the Lincoln Project, and a strategist for Mitt Romney’s failed 2012 presidential bid, challenged widespread predictions of a close election by suggesting that Trump’s approach would eventually alienate voters and enable Harris to win convincingly.“There’s been a lot of talk – it’s sort of a universal truth – that this election is going to be close,” he told CNN. “I have a different opinion. I think it’ll be close till about October 20th, and then I think it’s going to be like Carter versus Reagan [in 1980, when Reagan won in a landslide], that the bottom is going to start to drop out [of Trump’s campaign].“I think this is going to be a race that Democrats are going to win by more than Biden did,” he added. More

  • 163 Shares199 Views

    in US Politics

    The Wisconsin race that could tip the Democratic majority in the US Senate

    Tammy Baldwin faces a race in November that will test the rural-urban coalition the Democratic Wisconsin senator has built and help determine whether Democrats will be able to hold onto their narrow majority in the US senate.Baldwin faces Eric Hovde, a real estate mogul and banker, who has campaigned on popular Republican issues like immigration and the economy, while linking Baldwin to Joe Biden.Baldwin, who was first elected in 2012 on a tide of progressive support, is one of 23 Democratic US senators up for re-election this year; her ability to keep the support of voters in purple and red districts could determine the outcome of the critical race.Baldwin has maintained relationships and a support base among farmers and rural voters, even as Democratic attrition from rural parts of the state has eroded Democratic margins in other statewide races. It’s a trend so persistent that “Trump-Tammy” voters are recognized as a constituency in Badwin’s base – with the senator winning 17 counties during her 2016 election that Trump won the same year.“That’s definitely Tammy’s bread and butter right there,” said campaign spokesperson Jackie Rosa, of Baldwin’s rural supporters.On the campaign trail, Baldwin has made stops at farms and in rural areas, launching a “Rural Leaders for Tammy” coalition to make her case in areas of the state that tend to lean red. Issues like healthcare access and hospital deserts and subsidies for farmers form core aspects of her platform. She has highlighted populist-leaning bills, like one she drafted with JD Vance, the Republican senator and vice-presidential candidate, to require goods and services developed with federal dollars in the US to be manufactured in the US. She has even taken up issues that are less popular with liberals, like removing gray wolves from Wisconsin’s endangered species list – a move supported by some farmers but criticized by environmental and conservation groups.“She never shied away from going out into the countryside,” said Hans Breitenmoser, a dairy farmer from northern Wisconsin and a member of the Lincoln county Democratic party. “I think her message has resonated to an extent, because, you know, it’s not just all BS – she tries to understand the issues, and understands the issues at a level that some other politicians don’t.”For Hovde to win the seat, he will have to erode that support and hope for high turnout outside heavily Democratic areas like Milwaukee and Dane county, which have generated historic voter turnout in recent elections.Polling so far shows a close race, with Baldwin holding an approximately seven-point lead over Hovde, according to a poll conducted at the end of July by the Marquette University Law School. An earlier poll, conducted in June – before Joe Biden dropped out of the presidential race – showed Hovde trailing Baldwin more closely.Hovde, whose campaign did not agree to an interview, is something of a blank slate. On his website, he highlights a few key issues – among them, immigration, foreign policy and healthcare – but does not specify policy solutions he supports. He has earned Trump’s endorsement – a possible boost for the businessman – but has not held public office, and will need to overcome accusations from the Baldwin campaign of carpetbagging. That could be challenging.Although Hovde grew up in Madison and maintains numerous real estate properties there, the Baldwin campaign has cast him as an out-of-touch rich guy, pointing to his mansion in Laguna Beach, California – and his status in years past as one of Orange county’s most influential businessmen – as evidence of his position as an outsider.Baldwin has focused much of her campaign messaging on the fact that with a net worth of more than $195m, Hovde would be among the wealthiest members of the Senate if elected.In recent political ads, Hovde has highlighted his diagnosis of multiple sclerosis and the numerous international charities he operates to offer a more personal side and present his wealth as a political asset.But he handles the topic of his finances sometimes uncomfortably. In numerous talk radio interviews, Hovde, who has slammed the Democrats for persistently inflated consumer prices, acknowledged that inflation could be good for a wealthy businessman like himself.“Look – inflation helps in the short to medium term, people who own assets – I’ve benefitted, because my real estate values go up, my equity portfolio goes up, the value of my private companies go up,” said Hovde in 2021, during a Wisconsin talk radio show hosted by Vicki McKenna, a popular rightwing radio personality. “But it hammers people who have a set salary, or lower-income people.”On an episode of a rightwing podcast called The Truth with Lisa Boothe in March, he echoed a similar sentiment, decrying the rise of inflation and its impact on the middle class before noting that he himself had somewhat enjoyed the period of inflation. “For those that own assets, you know, I benefit because I own real estate and stocks and companies. So, yeah, it makes me wealthier, but it’s hammering, you know, 90% of Americans,” said Hovde.According to his most recent filings with the Federal Election Commission (FEC), Hovde has loaned $13m to his campaign, which has raised about $16m in total so far. Baldwin’s campaign had raised $27m by the end of the most recent FEC reporting period.Biden’s decision to drop out of the presidential race, with Kamala Harris ascending to the top of the ballot, likely offered Baldwin a boost in the tight race.Baldwin, who did not join calls for Biden to drop out of the race, nonetheless refrained from campaigning with Biden when he made stops in Wisconsin. Hovde seized on Biden’s unpopularity and flailing campaign to cast Baldwin as a close Biden ally, even suggesting she had played a part in a Democratic party conspiracy to hide Biden’s age from voters.“Just how long has Tammy Baldwin been involved in the Biden coverup?” asked one ad that ran in July.The impact of the shakeup at the top of the Democratic party ticket in July also quickly led to a deluge of funding for Democrats, including in Wisconsin.“Every single thing that I can measure is going up,” Ben Wikler, chair of the Wisconsin Democratic party, told Wisconsin Public Radio on 19 August. “Fundraising has shot up, hundreds of thousands of dollars came in the 48 hours after that big decision, and the contributions have not stopped.” Rosa, the Baldwin campaign spokesperson, noted that after the vice-president announced her presidential bid, she had seen a “noticeable difference” in terms of enthusiasm and crowd sizes at Baldwin’s events.“But we’re always just really focused on our race,” said Rosa. “Of course, supporting up and down the ballot, Democrats getting across the finish line. Because Wisconsin is going to determine the White House – we’re going to determine the Senate majority.” More

  • 213 Shares139 Views

    in US Politics

    Project 2025 started a half century ago. A Trump win could solidify it forever | David Sirota

    You can be forgiven for thinking Vice-President Kamala Harris’s first attack ad against Donald Trump seems a little far-fetched. Launched this week, the television spot has all the hallmarks of a YouTube video promoting an internet conspiracy theory. There’s the obligatory scary music and the baritone narrator warning about a mysterious manifesto with the kind of cartoonish name that a Bond villain would label his blueprint for global conquest: Project 2025.And yet, this isn’t a Dr Evil send-up: Project 2025 is very real, it is absolutely Trump’s agenda and it wasn’t some slapdash screed that came out of nowhere. It is the culmination of the 50-year plot that our reporters at the Lever have uncovered in our new audio series Master Plan – a scheme first envisioned by the US supreme court justice who created the foundation for Citizens United and the modern era of corporate politics.Project 2025 touts itself as “the conservative movement’s unified effort to be ready for the next conservative Administration to govern at 12:00 noon, January 20, 2025” – a grandiose and self-important billing, but no overstatement. The 922-page manifesto is a plug-and-play agenda of detailed policies designed to immediately empower the conservative movement, billionaires and Republican donors the moment Trump is sworn in for a second term.Highlights include plans to kill off climate regulations; eviscerate pollution laws; terminate the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that protects Americans from Wall Street scams; raise taxes on the middle class to finance billionaire and corporate tax cuts; empower the White House to replace civil servants with ideological loyalists; and limit the government’s authority to enforce campaign finance laws designed to deter pay-to-play corruption.The blueprint’s provenance means that it isn’t some fanciful pie-in-the-sky wishlist – it is a meticulously constructed action plan designed to be implemented, just as an earlier version of it was in Trump’s first term.Project 2025 was built with the involvement of at least 140 former Trump administration officials, it is endorsed by a constellation of oligarch-funded conservative groups, and it is published by the powerful Heritage Foundation, which Trump himself lauded as “a great group” that is “going to lay the groundwork and detail plans for exactly what our movement will do and what your movement will do when the American people give us a colossal mandate to save America”.This connection to the Heritage Foundation isn’t incidental. It tells us that conservatives see a Trump presidency as the final stage of their grand half-century scheme to destroy the legacy of the New Deal and the Great Society – a scheme first outlined a half-century ago.Heritage was originally launched in the early 1970s with seed funding from the beer magnate Joseph Coors. He told a historian that his political activism at the time was specifically “stirred” by a 1971 memo authored by the soon-to-be supreme court justice Lewis Powell. That memo written for the US Chamber of Commerce implored corporations and oligarchs to be “far more aggressive” in influencing the political system, which he feared was becoming far too responsive to popular demands for the regulation of business.“It is essential that spokesmen for the enterprise system – at all levels and at every opportunity – be far more aggressive than in the past,” wrote Powell, who would soon after author a landmark supreme court ruling giving corporations new rights to spend money influencing elections. “There should be not the slightest hesitation to press vigorously in all political arenas for support of the enterprise system. Nor should there be reluctance to penalize politically those who oppose it.”According to documents unearthed in Master Plan, the chamber established a taskforce on the Powell memorandum composed of executives from some of the country’s most powerful corporations including General Electric, Phillips Petroleum, Amway and United States Steel.At a series of secret meetings in the 1970s, those powerbrokers formulated ways corporate groups could build out their political, legal and communications apparatus. The resulting political infrastructure – conservative thinktanks, law firms and advocacy groups – aimed to weaken campaign finance laws so that corporations could wield more power, and then use that power to tilt the courts and legislative systems in their favor.With Powell’s memo inspiring Coors’s lavish funding, Heritage carved out a special role for itself in all this nascent organizing: it focused intently on public policy.“Around the vortex of Heritage have spun projects, individuals and organizations devoted to Coors’ ambition to rescue the United States from the gloom and despair he believes it to be in,” the Washington Post reported in 1975. “Weyrich and Coors agree that the liberalizing trend must be halted or the United States will become, in effect, another version of godless communism.”In a White House memo just before that story was published, President Gerald Ford’s deputy chief of staff, Dick Cheney, told his boss, Donald Rumsfeld: “Coors may have problems by using this tax exempt foundation to support political activities.”But as the Powell memo movement’s conservative legal groups secured supreme court victories gutting campaign finance laws and ushering in the era of dark money, such groups faced little scrutiny in how they blurred the legal distinction between dispassionate charity and political machine.Heritage was most certainly the latter, and within a few years of its launch, it was focused on influencing presidential administrations with the original version of Project 2025 – Mandate for Leadership, described in the press at the time as “a blueprint for grabbing the government by its frayed New Deal lapels and shaking out 48 years of liberal policy”.“Mandate for Leadership was published in January 1981 – the same month Ronald Reagan was sworn into his presidency,” Heritage gushes in the foreword of Project 2025, which is officially the ninth installment of the Mandate for Leadership series. “By the end of that year, more than 60 percent of its recommendations had become policy.”Underscoring that success, Reagan delivered a speech at Heritage lauding “the importance of the Heritage Foundation, the remarkable work of Ed Feulner, Joe and Holly Coors [and] so many of you in this room in bringing to Washington the political revolution.”Fast forward through the neoliberal rampage of tax cuts and deregulation that defined Reagan’s term and three more Republican presidencies, and the question now is: would that same political revolution inspired by the Powell memo’s master plan continue if Trump wins again?The recent past offers clues: during the first year of Trump’s first term, Heritage boasted that two-thirds of its 2016 Mandate for Leadership recommendations were championed by the Republican president.Will Project 2025 and the Heritage Foundation’s agenda find the same receptive audience in a second Trump administration? Or should we trust Trump when now – under assault by Harris’s criticism – he insists he doesn’t even know what Project 2025 is?The answer to that can be found in the words of Trump’s own running mate.“The Heritage Foundation isn’t some random outpost on Capitol Hill,” wrote the Republican vice-presidential nominee, JD Vance. “It is and has been the most influential engine of ideas for Republicans from Ronald Reagan to Donald Trump.”

    David Sirota is a Guardian US columnist and an award-winning investigative journalist. He is an editor at large at Jacobin, and the founder of the Lever. He served as Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaign speechwriter More

  • 125 Shares179 Views

    in US Politics

    Trump campaign strategy pivots to praying he wins September debate

    ​Donald Trump’s campaign insists that they’re pursuing multiple strategies against Kamala Harris, but the true picture that is emerging is that the Trump senior advisers’ grand plan, for now, is to pray that the former US president ​has a good night at the presidential debate next month.​The game plan, in other words, has become one of hoping that Trump wins the debate so they can regain momentum – a stunning approach that shows the serious predicament for Trump and his campaign as he struggles to find ways to land effective attacks against the vice-president just months before the election.​What has happened internally in the Trump campaign in recent weeks is the realization that nothing they do in the period up to the debate is likely to cut through in a significant way that blunts Harris’s gains that have her level in key swing state polls, according to people close to the matter.​And because they don’t think the messaging will cut through, senior advisers are left hoping that Trump can energize voters with his performance on stage, the people said.Trump is certain to continue his day-to-day campaign work until the debate on 10 September: he has a busy travel schedule that will see him do a town hall event in Wisconsin and a rally in Pennsylvania this week, after his visit to the Arlington national cemetery became mired in controversy.​He has also had some success in cutting through the news cycle in recent days, including when he took over headlines at the end of last week when Robert F Kennedy Jr gave his endorsement.​But the reality is that good news has been in short supply. Since Joe Biden exited the race in July and Harris rapidly replaced him, her campaign has flipped the narrative, turning a consistent Biden loss in the polls into a narrow but solid Harris lead.With Trump struggling to frame the narrative against Harris, the general posture inside campaign leadership is to write off the regular programming that won’t change the race – and look to a debate that might.View image in fullscreenThe pivot to praying Trump does well at the debate is practical, even if writing off two weeks is unusual. Trump can perform on stage, and knocked opponents back in 2016 and 2020 and against Biden in 2024 with sarcastic quips and an avalanche of disorientating false claims.The campaign also feels that Trump can use the debate as an opportunity to get across to a national primetime audience his messaging points criticizing Harris on policy – accusing Harris of allowing waves of illegal immigrants and not cracking down on crime – that have so far not broken through.As the reasoning goes, even if the television networks decline to air Trump’s rallies or remarks criticizing Harris day-to-day, they will be forced to air Trump and his attack lines when he has the floor.Trump’s advisers have also been buoyed by the likelihood that microphones will be muted when it is not a candidate’s turn to speak, believing it defangs Harris in being able to fact-check him in real time and in her ability to make quips of her own.The muted microphones have been a particularly big deal for Trump’s advisers, who internally have been repeatedly pushing for “CNN rules”, in a reference to the disastrous CNN debate with Biden last month when microphones were muted.It comes as several Trump advisers have warned about Harris’s jabs in debates in 2020: telling Mike Pence: “Mr Vice-President, I’m speaking”, and responding to former congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard – now involved in Trump’s debate prep – in the Democratic primary debate with chiding comments. More

  • 188 Shares179 Views

    in US Politics

    Black voters in Georgia want affordable access to healthcare. Will Kamala Harris win them over?

    Around 4am last Christmas Eve, Kuanita Murphy’s father suddenly became short of breath and briefly passed out. Without a medical facility nearby, Murphy had to drive him 45 miles east to Albany, Georgia, to the Phoebe Putney memorial hospital. The only hospital in their small town of Cuthbert, Georgia – Southwest Georgia regional medical center – had closed down three years earlier due to financial strain from failing infrastructure and an increase in uninsured patients.After waiting for several hours, Murphy’s dad was finally admitted at noon into a hospital room for internal bleeding and a restricted heart valve. While he eventually underwent lifesaving surgery, Murphy said that he would have received treatment faster had Cuthbert still had a hospital.“He had some pain dealing with his chest and the anxiety of not knowing exactly what was going on with him,” Murphy, the editor of Rural Leader magazine, said. “That made it worse off than it probably was, not knowing and having to wait.”Hospital closures are top of mind for Black voters throughout Georgia, since it’s one of 10 states to reject Medicaid expansion. On Wednesday, Kamala Harris launched a two-day bus tour through south Georgia that will culminate with a rally in Savannah on Thursday afternoon. “Campaigning in this part of the Peach state is critical as it represents a diverse coalition of voters, including rural, suburban and urban Georgians – with a large proportion of Black voters and working-class families,” the campaign said in a statement.Since 2013, 12 hospitals have closed down in rural and urban areas throughout the state, according to the Georgia Hospital Association. In 2022, two Wellstar Atlanta medical centers closed in the Atlanta metro area, where more than two-thirds of the 4,281 emergency room patients were Black, according to 2019 data from the private, non-profit Wellstar Health System cited by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.In Murphy’s eyes, the shuttered medical facility where she was born 49 years ago has served as a rallying cry before the upcoming presidential election. The city’s residents, she said, want to “back a candidate that is going to support Medicaid expansion, or affordable access to healthcare”.Murphy, like most residents in majority-Black Cuthbert, has long voted Democrat. Although Joe Biden won Georgia in 2020, the first Democratic presidential candidate to do so since 1992, the Republican-led state legislature has rejected expanding Medicaid coverage to more lower-income adults. The Biden-Harris administration has long urged all states to expand Medicaid – a legacy that health policy experts predict Democratic nominee Harris will continue if she becomes president.Throughout her vice-presidency, Harris has discussed the need to expand Medicaid coverage for postpartum mothers from two to 12 months after giving birth. “We also must work together to call on Congress to advance other components of our Build Back agenda, to expand Medicaid in every state,” Harris said during a speech in 2021. “People live in every state, that’s the logic.”Floundering healthcare facilities might stay open if they have received Medicaid reimbursements for patients who otherwise couldn’t pay their bills, according to health policy experts. As they gear up for state and federal elections, healthcare advocates and community organizations say they want Georgians to vote for candidates who prioritize affordable and equitable access to healthcare.Bobby Jenkins, the Cuthbert mayor, believes that the state’s hospital closures could drive voter turnout there. “That’s a way of engaging people in the electoral process to get them to understand this is a direct impact of your vote, or it could be a consequence of your lack of voting,” he said. Case in point, Jenkins said, is that Biden-Harris’s 2025 fiscal year budget includes “Medicaid-like” coverage to people in states that haven’t expanded the program. Meanwhile, Donald Trump sought to repeal Medicaid expansion and supported work requirements for people to qualify for free government healthcare during his presidency.‘Our governor said no, which is crazy’According to surveys and canvassing sessions, access to healthcare has remained the most pressing concern only behind the economy for Black and brown communities over the past two years, said Kierra Stanford, the lead community health organizer for the non-profit New Georgia Project. At ice cream teach-ins and public meetings, Stanford tells residents that hospitals could stay open if state and federal leaders expanded Medicaid. While the group is nonpartisan, they encourage voters to research candidates’ stances on healthcare.Healthcare redlining, which Stanford defined as “the deliberate managing of healthcare resources in Black communities”, has led hospital systems to divest from historically marginalized areas. “It’s an ongoing trend,” Stanford said, that “has been exacerbated by not expanding Medicaid”.In May, Stanford held a public meeting with 30 attendees in East Point, Georgia, a majority-Black city south-west of Atlanta, to discuss the connection between hospital closures and the state’s refusal to expand Medicaid. A few days later, the New Georgia Project packed the public comment period of an East Point city council meeting to share their concerns about access to healthcare.On the state level, the New Georgia Project releases a voting guide to alert voters of pressing healthcare concerns before elections. Eventually, they plan to roll out a scorecard that shows the state politicians who didn’t vote to expand Medicaid. On the national level, Stanford explains to voters: “Georgia has literally been offered the funds, but our governor said no, which is crazy.”“I try to tell people that the money that’s being taken out of your check for federal taxes,” Stanford said, “you’re paying for healthcare for people in California, for people in these other states that have expanded Medicaid.”Hospital closures hit Black rural communities the hardest, said Sherrell Byrd, executive director of Sowega Rising, a Georgia-based non-profit focused on coalition-building and rural revitalization. “When a hospital closes in rural areas, it’s much more devastating than in urban areas, because it’s like a black hole,” Byrd said. “It takes out a whole subset of the economy side of the community.”It’s common for residents to drive up to an hour or to cross state lines to access hospitals. The organization encourages rural residents to speak to their legislators about their healthcare access concerns, but Byrd said that politicians have not shared any steps they have taken to solve the issue.“That’s where people start to be frustrated, because year after year, they still don’t have hospitals,” Byrd said. “And so that’s when people become disenfranchised.”Hospital closures are top of mind for Medlyne Zamor, a Rockdale county voter who was previously unconcerned about candidates’ healthcare platforms. She didn’t see the need to expand Medicaid and thought that the state would benefit from funding other institutions. However, after a spate of hospital visits due to fibroids in 2022, Zamor met other patients who had been personally affected by the closures. Some of them had needed to wait several months to see specialists. That opened her eyes to the issue, she said: “When I saw how the hospital closures … impacted them in the community, it definitely made me shift my vote to expansion.” Now she only votes for candidates in state and federal offices who support Medicaid expansion.As a result, Zamor began volunteering at the New Georgia Project, where she hosts events to inform Georgians about the lack of access to healthcare. She also addresses the issue by phone banking, sending out email blasts to residents and writing senators. “These hospital closures, not only does it affect the nearby citizens,” Zamor said, “but also it affects the workers, and it affects the [remaining] hospitals, too.”State and federal politicians hold the power in slowing down the closures by extending healthcare coverage to lower-income adults, “relieving fragile hospitals from providing free care to uninsured patients”, said Laura Colbert, the executive director of the non-profit Georgians for a Healthy Future. “After that, state and federal leaders should work together to slow consolidation among hospitals and other investors, which can accelerate some rural hospital closures.”Congress members have stepped up to save Cuthbert’s healthcare system after its only hospital closed four years ago. The city plans to establish a new hospital after recently receiving nearly $12m in federal funding. The Randolph County Hospital Authority is currently working with an accounting firm on a feasibility study to ensure that the facility stays in the community for good. More

  • 175 Shares159 Views

    in US Politics

    The Democrats sound less lofty, more earthy – and it’s working | Margaret Sullivan

    Back in 2016, as Michelle Obama was doing a campaign speech for Hillary Clinton, she urged a way to deal with bullies like Donald Trump.“When they go low, we go high,” the former first lady said.Later, once the catchphrase had caught on, she explained that “when someone is cruel or acts like a bully, you don’t stoop to their level”.Taking the high road sounded inspiring and possibly effective. Was it? Trump never stopped his horrid ways; but the Democrats, having lost to him in 2016, managed to defeat him in 2020 with Joe Biden, known for his empathy and decency.However you evaluate that, the Democrats feel like a different party these days. Their tone has changed from lofty to earthy.Consider the squawking chickens. When Trump waffled on whether he’d participate in the next presidential candidate debate, Kamala Harris’s campaign didn’t exactly go high. Instead, they posted barnyard sound effects and emoji over footage of Trump speaking and asked if he was getting scared.An Axios headline summarized the new tone: “Taunting Trump: Harris campaign’s sneer tactics.”The digital campaign team operating out of Wilmington, Delaware, “has pivoted from the stuffier, decorous Biden for President campaign to a saucier, more ruthless Harris for President campaign”.And don’t forget the couch jokes.Prominent Democrats, including Elizabeth Warren and Tim Walz, have made a few none-too-subtle wisecracks about an untrue rumor that Trump running mate JD Vance had an unusual relationship with some living-room furniture.The basis for this sordid tale has been debunked. The Associated Press not only fact-checked the claim, but then deleted the fact-check, which was headlined, No, JD Vance did not have sex with a couch.Nevertheless, uproarious cheers and laughter followed when Warren took her shot, speaking at the Democratic national convention about the need for an economy that benefits working people: “Trust Donald Trump and JD Vance to look out for your family? Shoot, I wouldn’t trust them to move my couch.”The conservative New York Post tut-tutted: “Elizabeth Warren makes crude couch joke in apparent reference to JD Vance.” Steven Cheung , a Trump spokesperson, complained to Axios: “Acting like whiny schoolchildren is not a political strategy, but it is a coping mechanism for the Kamala campaign who knows they have a weak candidate incapable of being authentic.”Somehow, charges of immaturity ring a little hollow from this crowd, led by a former president who specializes in dumb nicknames and cringey insults, from “Little Marco” Rubio to “Sleepy Joe” Biden.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionTrump occasionally tries to claim the high ground but may need more practice. Last year he posted about the Florida governor, then a rival for the Republican nomination: “I will never call Ron DeSanctimonious ‘Meatball’ Ron, as the Fake News is insisting I will.”Besides, the Harris campaign’s irreverence isn’t really all that low. Pete Buttigieg, the transportation secretary, who should be appointed talker-in-chief, had the perfect response when challenged to defend Barack Obama’s suggestive hand-gesture joke (big? small?) about Trump’s obsession with crowd size.“We aren’t completely above the temptation to tweak our opponents,” Buttigieg admitted, while noting that the Harris campaign’s overall tone is positive and forward-looking, not mired in darkness and grievance.How effective is this counterpunching? After hesitating for days about the debate, Trump finally agreed to show up in Philadelphia next month.Did his capitulation have anything to do with suggestions that he was a coward? Any relationship to the chickens squawking as they crossed the low road?Maybe not. But for the Harris campaign, the barnyard noises do seem to be delivering the intended message.

    Margaret Sullivan is a Guardian US columnist writing on media, politics and culture More

  • 175 Shares129 Views

    in US Politics

    This presidential race will be fought over competing understandings of ‘freedom’ | Eric Foner

    The recently concluded Democratic national convention marked a sharp turn in US political rhetoric. “Freedom, where are you?” Beyoncé sang in the video that opened the gathering. Her song proved to be a fitting introduction to the days that followed. Joe Biden had made saving democracy from the threat of Maga authoritarianism the centerpiece of his ill-fated campaign for re-election. The keynote of Kamala Harris’s convention, invoked by nearly every speaker, was “freedom”.Nearly a century ago, in the wake of the Great Depression, Franklin Delano Roosevelt linked freedom to economic security for ordinary Americans – “freedom from want” was one of the four freedoms summarizing the country’s aims in the second world war. This definition of freedom, a product of the New Deal, assumed an active role for the federal government. But since the 1980s, when Ronald Reagan in effect redefined freedom as limited government, low taxes and unregulated economic enterprise, Democrats have pretty much ceded the word to their opponents. Now they want it back.Of course freedom – along with liberty, generally used as an equivalent – has been a US preoccupation ever since the American revolution gave birth to a nation that identified itself, in Thomas Jefferson’s words, as an “empire of liberty”, a unique embodiment of freedom in a world overrun by oppression. The declaration of independence includes liberty among mankind’s unalienable rights; the constitution announces at the outset its aim of securing the “blessings of liberty”. As a result, freedom has long been a powerful rhetorical weapon. As the educator and statesman Ralph Bunche wrote in 1940: “Every man in the street, white, black, red or yellow, knows that this is ‘The land of the free’ … [and] the ‘cradle of liberty’.”Yet freedom is neither a fixed idea nor an evolutionary progress toward a predetermined goal. The history of US freedom is a tale of debates and struggles. Often, battles for control of the idea illustrate the contrast between “negative” and “positive” meanings of freedom, a dichotomy elaborated by Sir Isaiah Berlin in an influential essay in 1958. Negative liberty defines freedom as the absence of outside restraints on individual action. Positive liberty is a form of empowerment – the ability to set and fulfill one’s goals. As the contrast between FDR and Reagan illustrates, the first sees government as a threat to freedom and the second as removing barriers to its enjoyment, often by government intervention.The Democratic convention built upon this history. Positive and negative freedom co-existed and reinforced one another. The frequent calls for “reproductive freedom” – the right to make intimate decisions free of governmental interference (or as vice-presidential nominee Tim Walz put it, the principle of “mind your own damn business”) – embraced and expanded the idea of negative freedom. Never before has the 60s slogan “the personal is political” found such powerful expression at a party convention.Positive freedom also made its appearance, notably in Bernie Sanders’ litany of future government action against the likes of big oil and big pharma in the name of combating economic inequality and “corporate greed”. Walz, echoing FDR, commented that people who lack access to affordable housing and healthcare are not truly free.There is another crucial element to the ongoing debate about freedom: who is entitled to enjoy it. When the constitution was ratified, the United States was home to half a million enslaved African Americans. The first laws defining how immigrants could become citizens, enacted in the 1790s, limited the process to “white” persons. It took more than half a century for slavery to be eradicated and for Black persons, for a brief period during the era of Reconstruction that followed the civil war, to be incorporated into the body politic.This history exemplifies what the historian Tyler Stovall, in a recent book, calls “White Freedom”. Fast forward to the civil rights revolution of the 1960s. With its freedom rides, freedom songs and insistent cry “freedom now”, that revolution linked freedom with equality regardless of race or national origin. What is now remembered simply as “the movement” did more to redefine the meaning of freedom than any other development of the last century. Its fruits were visible every night in the Democratic convention’s remarkably diverse composition.Throughout our history, freedom has been defined, in large measure, by its limits. This is how the Confederacy was able to claim to be fighting for liberty. The historian Jefferson Cowie, whose book Freedom’s Dominion won the Pulitzer prize for history in 2023, argues that negative freedom, expressed as opposition to federal intervention in local affairs, has often boiled down to little more than the determination of local elites to exercise political and economic power over subordinate groups without outside interference. Civil rights were condemned as a threat to white people’s liberty (the freedom, for example, to choose who is allowed to live in one’s neighborhood). The vaunted independence of men depended on limiting the freedom of women.With the party conventions over, the campaign now becomes, in part, a contest to define the meaning of freedom. Historical precedents exist for such a battle. In 1936, the New York Times observed that the fight for possession of “the ideal of freedom” was the central issue of that year’s presidential campaign. Three decades later, the journalist Theodore White noted that freedom was the “dominant word” of both civil rights demonstrators and supporters of the conservative Republican candidate Barry Goldwater, but they meant entirely different things by it. The United States, he concluded, sorely needed “a commonly-agreed-on concept of freedom”.Freedom is often used to mobilize support in wartime. No recent president employed it for this purpose more egregiously than George W Bush, who made freedom an all-purpose justification for the invasion of Iraq. In his first inaugural address, Bush used the words “freedom”, “free” or “liberty” seven times. In his second, a 10-minute speech delivered after the invasion, they appeared no fewer than 49 times.Bush’s egregious distortion of the ideal of freedom seemed to discourage his successors from using the word at all. Barack Obama preferred the language of community and personal responsibility. Nor has freedom been a major theme of Donald Trump, who prefers to speak of raw military and economic power. But Trump’s long campaign to deny that Obama is a US citizen, and his calls for the immense deportation of undocumented immigrants, resonate with those who seek to redraw freedom’s boundaries along racial and nativist lines.The Democratic convention appears to have guaranteed that the 2024 election will be a contest over the meaning of freedom. Whatever the result, it will likely define American freedom for years to come.

    Eric Foner’s many books on American history include The Story of American Freedom More