Did you notice how easy it was for Copeland to pivot from hating Trump to loving him? A while back Josh Marshall dissected the #nevertrump mindset and sketched a path by which Establishment Republicans like Charlie Copeland could come to love for Trump quickly and completely.
He began by asking about the basic policy differences someone like Copeland might have with Trump. There aren’t many because Trump is essentially a doctrinaire Republican, only more so.
Several times when I have mentioned by distaste for Hillary Clinton, one of the common replies from the Hillaryites has been, “I guess you will be voting for Trump in November.” The first thing that bothers me about this comment is that is supposes there are only two choices on the ballot in November. Either […]
From the fingers of George F. Will: “In losing disastrously, Trump probably would create down-ballot carnage sufficient to end even Republican control of the House. Ticket splitting is becoming rare in polarized America: In 2012, only 5.7 percent of voters supported a presidential candidate and a congressional candidate of opposite parties…Were he to be nominated, conservatives would have two tasks. One would be to help him lose 50 states — condign punishment for his comprehensive disdain for conservative essentials, including the manners and grace that should lubricate the nation’s civic life. Second, conservatives can try to save from the anti-Trump undertow as many senators, representatives, governors and state legislators as possible.”
Sherry Freebury. Elmer Setting. Lisa Dean Moseley.
We all know that Freebury and Setting, at the time they accepted favors from Moseley, were/are among the most powerful people in New Castle County and deeply connected to the county police.
Freebury received, and publicly admitted that she would never have had to repay, a $2.3 million sweetheart loan from Linda Dean Moseley allegedly in exchange for county approvals for a country club that Moseley wanted. At the time she received that loan, she was Tom Gordon’s CEO, as she was from 1997 to 2004. She previously was the head of NCC police, as was Gordon. There’s so much more on Freebury and Gordon. This article serves as a good starting point.
More recently, the longstanding ‘rent-free’ deal that current NCC Police Commissioner has enjoyed from Moseley was documented in the this WDEL story. He claims he provides ‘security and maintenance’ for the property. (BTW, didja know that one of Lisa Dean Moseley’s marriages was to her gardener? Another was to her gynecologist. But more on that later.)
Lisa Dean Moseley died recently. Here is the obit from the paper.
I searched for anything recent in the News-Journal to place her life and death in context. After all, context is everything. So far, nothing. If she had merely had the two clearly inappropriate relationships with Freebury and Setting, that alone would have warranted such an article. Two law enforcement officers at the highest level being paid off for their ‘services’.
But here’s another reason why anyone from law enforcement should have had nothing to do with Moseley, and perhaps a reason why they did.
One thing Obama could do when he is out of office is go on tour — he’s hilarious: “There’s one area where Donald’s experience could be invaluable, and that’s closing Guantanamo. Because Trump knows a thing or two about running waterfront properties into the ground.” The Shade is fierce with this one.
Matt Yglesias thinks Donald Trump could do to the national Republican Party what Pete Wilson did to the California Republican Party:
Donald Trump might doom the Republican party. As he inches closer to the nomination, national polling suggests he is in a very weak position in the general election. A loss in November could leave the party in shambles, more divided than ever. That’s a big deal, but some right-of-center Trump skeptics are trying to talk themselves into the idea that he’s only a temporary setback to the party.
RealClearPolitics’ Sean Trende notes correctly that there is a long history of pundits over-reading single landslide elections and writing parties out of history, only to see them bounce back two or four — or even six — years later. Even a really bad 2016 election could be the just the same for the GOP. That may be right. But there’s a chance that it could be wrong. Just ask Pete Wilson, the former governor of California who managed to turn a contested state into a Democratic stronghold by over-indulging a shrinking white majority’s fear of uncontrolled immigration and ending up defining his party as permanently unacceptable to the state’s new diverse majority.
What happened in California should serve as a warning to future of the Republican party.
I can’t vouch for the tipster’s claim that two ex-sportswriters are penning the editorials, but this classic from today’s opinion page speaks for itself: “Two years ago, Ken Simpler became the highest-ranking Republican in Gov. Jack Markell’s administration when he was elected insurance commissioner.” Besides the fact that Insurance Commissioner is a separate office and not […]
John Sides: “The longest-running measure of American attitudes about the economy is the Index of Consumer Sentiment. Before I had looked at these data, I was sure I’d find that sentiment was only a bit more positive than it was when Obama took office. But in fact, the upward trend — with the exception of the drop during the 2011 debt ceiling crisis — is striking. This upward trend is also reflected in data from Pew and Gallup.”
“As of the first quarter of 2016, even with a slight downturn in the second and third quarters of 2015, consumer sentiment was as positive as it had been since the mid-2000s. It was also as positive as it had been in the mid-1980s during the recovery from the recession of 1981-1982. For example, the value of consumer sentiment at the end of 1983, as Ronald Reagan’s reelection campaign was gearing up, was 91.6. In the first three months of 2015, it was almost exactly the same: 91.5.”
“In other words, consumer sentiment is as positive as it was at the beginning of the election year when Reagan argued that it was ‘Morning in America.’”
This is why Clinton is running a positive campaign embracing Obama and why it will work.
In this week’s address, the President repeated his call for Republicans in the United States Senate to give Chief Judge Merrick Garland a fair hearing and a vote.
In his weekly message, Governor Markell talks about the benefits of homeownership and the effort to expand those opportunities through access to credit and financing assistance, financial literacy education, and partnerships among government, non-profits and the business community to drive accessible and affordable housing development statewide.
I’ve been called a purist. I’ve been ridiculed for cleaving to corny old nonsense like “values” and “integrity.” So I know where Clinton skeptics are coming from. But, I truly feel sorry for the nit wits, nutbags, and wild-eyed zealots who could be taken in by something like this.
Republican Donald Trump’s presidential campaign is planning its next coup: vying for the votes of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) supporters who say they won’t back Hillary Clinton in a general election.
“You have two candidates in Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders which have reignited a group of people who have been disenfranchised and disappointed with the way Washington, D.C. and career politicians have run the country,” campaign manager Corey Lewandowski told CNN on Friday.
The Junction Breakwater Trail is a State treasure that currently comes to a crazy dead-end just shy of Rehoboth. Props to DelDot for getting this fixed. Source: DelDOT A map of the proposed trail entering Rehoboth, with routes going either down Church Street or through a planned development next to Shoal Harbor. Rehoboth Beach — […]
While the Trumpster talks about building a literal wall between the US and Mexico, Bryan Townsend is building a figurative electoral wall around the greater Newark area. His campaign HQ is in Newark, the preponderance of his grassroots efforts so far have been in the greater Newark area, and all of these endorsements are from legislators who more or less are from that area. It makes sense to me. Shows that his grassroots campaign is paying off. He now starts with a solid group of supporters largely based on geography. That’s a nice chunk of voters who he can count on. The question will become: To what extent can he expand and replicate that grassroots either throughout the state as a whole or in a more specific sense. A great start though. Haven’t contributed to his campaign for, oh, three weeks or so. Might be time to ante up again.
This coming Wednesday, May 4, at 7 PM, the Progressive Democrats for Delaware are hosting a Congressional Candidates Forum at their regular monthly meeting at the Delaware Democratic Party HQ at 19 E. Commons Boulevard, 2nd Floor. All of the candidates, Sean Barney, Bryan Townsend, Mike Miller and Lisa Blunt Rochester, are expected to attend At their next meeting on June 1 at the same location and time, they will be hosting the first solo forum (I believe) for the Insurance Commissoner candidates: incumbent Karen Weldin Stewart, current NCCo Sheriff Trinidad Navarro, and 2012 candidate Paul Gallagher.
Scott Lemieux says Hillary will govern like her last name is Sanders rather than Clinton:
Last week, Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe announced that voting rights will be restored for convicted felons who are no longer in prison. If his executive order is upheld, this will enfranchise more than 200,000 citizens of the state who have paid their debt to society and deserve a voice in their state government. It’s a bold, progressive action, exactly the kind of policy core Democratic voters are coming to expect from their leaders.
Before assuming office, McAuliffe seemed like the ultimate political hack.
This major progressive reform didn’t come out entirely of the blue, either. On his first day in office, McAuliffe signed an executive order banning discrimination against state employees based on sexual orientation. In an action that foreshadowed his enfranchisement of felons, McAuliffe removed questions about criminal history from government job applications. He has been limited by a Republican-controlled legislature—his valiant fight to accept the Medicaid expansion ultimately failed—but he’s been a solidly progressive governor.
What’s interesting about this is that before assuming office, McAuliffe seemed like the ultimate political hack. The Clinton crony and prodigious fundraiser seemed worth voting for only because the Republicans were running the odious former state Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli against him.
I don’t know these candidates, but knowing that it takes time to build up campaign chops, these youngsters (Chapman, Delcollo, and Spadola) appear to be recruited for this cycle and the next.
Claire Snyder-Hall and the rest of the team at Common Cause Delaware want to hear your story if you had any difficulty voting at your polling place. I know that Nemski was asked for his ID before voting, and there is always some confusion regarding that procedure. It turns out that, while you are not required to show ID in Delaware, poll workers will ask for it, and if you do not have an ID or are unwilling to show it, you will be required to fill out a form before you can vote. I presume that this form has you swear under penalties of perjury that you are who you say you are.
Anyway, if you had a problem with your registration or your polling place, let Claire and Common Clause know.
Three Newark-Area state lawmakers have endorsed their fellow colleague, State Senator Bryan Townsend, this morning. These endorsements come on top of earlier endorsements by Sen. Karen Peterson, Sen. Nicole Poore, Rep. Ed Osienski, and Rep. Paul Baumbach.
Josh Marshall on Clinton v. Trump:
These two candidates aren’t just appealing to different demographics or voting coalitions. They’re operating in what almost amounts to two different political universes. In linguistic terms it is almost like two mutually unintelligible languages. I guarantee you that everyone who has voted for Trump in any primary so far loved those remarks. They hate Hillary. They hate ‘political correctness’. More than anything else they love provocation itself. But this kind of talk, while a single instance itself, reminds us that Trump has already all but disqualified himself with huge swaths of the electorate. It’s like a long fingernail drag over the chalkboard for a significant majority of voters. Trump has a 70%+ disapproval rating among women; roughly 80% disapproval among Hispanics; and the list goes on and on. At the moment he’s even doing fairly poorly among whites! But we should expect those numbers to rise significantly as Republican partisans unify around Trump.
Meanwhile Clinton is talking about opportunity, inclusion across racial groups and the gender divide. It is a message framed around inclusion for rising groups, young people and incremental improvements in the safety net and wages for those just hanging on in the 21st century economy. It really amounts to a simple continuity message with the Obama presidency. What he did. My point isn’t to pump this agenda. This is an ideologically agnostic point. It is to point out how it is virtually incomprehensible in the Trump universe. Gibberish or nonsense in a worldview based on reclaiming things your supporters believe were or are being taken away from them by others, and a powerful leader reclaiming what you lost from domestic newcomers and foreign adversaries. They’re just categorically different, not just in policy terms, but in language, manner of acting in public, concept of leadership. Everything. They’re mutually incomprehensible, seemingly indifferent to what folks on the other side of the divide even think.
Think about it this way. Can you imagine Trump and Clinton actually debating or discussing a specific issue? Let alone engaging in a formal debate?
What worries Republicans profoundly and has Democrats what I would call cautiously ecstatic is that if both candidates are doubling down on these portions of the population – Clinton’s chunk looks significantly larger than Trump’s. The biggest driver in November may turn out to be gender. But seen through a racial prism, which seems more likely: that Trump will significantly drive up the white vote or that Clinton will significantly drive up the minority vote? Trump seems dramatically less popular with Hispanic voters than Romney and it is difficult to see him making up much of that ground. Remember too that there are fewer white voters in 2016 than there were in 2012.