The Conflict On Florida's Recount

 The recount is on! After 18 years, Florida is once again the state to hold a close call on the election. Many republicans such as Donald Trump and Gov. Rick Scott are in fury against Florida's midterm recount. They claim the recount by being rigged, and in the end it would favor the Democrats. The Democrats in the other hand claim that a recount is to be made in order to count the ballots that were missed during the election day. Hence forth brings the conflict between both political sides.

 “Any margins under 0.5 percent trigger an automatic recount in the state.”

The Senate Race
 Recently Sen. Bill Nelson joins the League of Women voters for then to call out Gov. Rick Scott to rescue himself from overseeing the Florida midterm recount. Even so they have filed a federal lawsuit that would require Gov. Rick Scott to stay out of the picture during the recount. In one of his recent videos, Nelson indirectly claims that Rick Scott is to be seen as a "dictator" that would torment people's decisions when it came to the midterm election: “[Rick Scott] should remove himself from any role in the recount process so the people can have the confidence in the integrity of the election.”
 On the very same day the Democratic National Committee, Democratic Senatorial Campaign, and many more, "filed yet another lawsuit in Broward County court seeking to count vote-by-mail ballots that were cast before the deadline, but not received until after the deadline for unspecified problems with mail service."
The Governor Race
Democratic candidate Andrew Gillum has accepted his loss an decided to give an early-morning concession speech the day after the election night. Throughout the speech he has given the public the hope that he will continue fighting for what he believes is right. After hearing the recount being put in action, he then decided to rescind his concession. By this very action, he is telling the public that there is still a chance to come "glorious." Making one of the reasons that many democratic protestors have risen.

Links:
The Washington Post
 Politico
CBS Evening News

Florida Restores Voting Rights to Felons

Wilfredo Lee/AP

This past week, Florida voters passed an amendment that can restore the right to vote to over a million citizens guilty of any felony with the exception of murder or sexual offenses. These individuals now have the ability to participate in the government again after serving their sentences or probationary periods. The previous policy made applying for restoration of civil rights an extremely difficult and lengthy process that not many could complete.

About 64% of Florida voters voted in favor of this amendment to grant ex-felons the right vote, not only increasing the potential size of the Florida electorate, but also leaving just two states, Iowa and Kentucky, left with voting bans on felons. Statistics show that the additional voters will add to Democratic power in the state due to an ex-felon's likely support of the Democratic party. Despite this notion, support for the amendment came from both the Democratic and the Republican parties as the people of Florida made clear their desire for every citizen to have the ability to vote.

The 2018 mid-terms have made significant changes to the U.S. government, such as restoring voting rights in Florida or securing a Democratic control over the House of Representatives. This amendment is a huge step forward for representation of citizens in Florida, and on a larger scale, the United States, as Florida has historically been an important swing state in presidential elections. How could changes such as this one in Florida affect any legislation or policies in the future?

Links:
https://www.npr.org/2018/11/07/665031366/over-a-million-florida-ex-felons-win-right-to-vote-with-amendment-4
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/in-florida-amendment-4-restores-more-than-a-right-to-vote
https://www.economist.com/democracy-in-america/2018/11/09/why-the-restoration-of-felons-voting-rights-in-florida-is-a-big-deal
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/11/florida-just-passed-the-largest-expansion-of-voting-rights-in-decades/

Trump Addresses California's Deadly Wildfires

Photo: David McNew/Getty Images

This past Saturday, President Trump tweeted his opinion on the numerous wildfires devastating California families and property owners. While the President produced a series of tweets on the issue, one in particular stands out due to his statement, "Billions of dollars are given each year, with so many lives lost, all because of gross mismanagement of the forests. Remedy now, or no more Fed payments!"

The northern California Camp Fire's current toll has taken 29 lives and affected thousands. Trump's belief that forest management is at fault only addressed a small part of the complex issue. Governor Jerry Brown later commented on Trump's tweet, pointing out the contribution of climate change to an especially hot, dry, and lengthy fire season.

In addition to responses from politicians, Trumps tweets generated backlash from celebrities such as Katy Perry or Leonardo DiCaprio and many citizens affected by the fires. I would agree with many responses to his tweets in that supporting firefighters and those affected should be the first priority. Trump's threat to remove funding from an emergency situation arguably ignores the complexity of possible causes of the fires, such as the current climate or overgrowth of vegetation. The President used the situation to highlight his policy position which many saw as inappropriate. While Trump did tweet sympathetic responses among his opinionated ones, he approached the topic with finger-pointing and blame. What do you think? What role do politics have in remedying emergency situations?

Links:
https://www.npr.org/2018/11/12/666951838/megafires-more-frequent-because-of-climate-change-and-forest-management
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/11/the-california-fires-and-the-threat-of-climate-change.html
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/11/politics/california-wildfires-trump-tweets/index.html
https://www.vox.com/2018/8/7/17661096/california-wildfires-2018-camp-woolsey-climate-change

The Conflict of the "Birther" Conspiracy Theory

Former First Lady Michelle Obama recently released her autobiography titled Becoming in which she talks "about her roots and how she found her voice, as well as her time in the White House, her public health campaign, and her role as a mother." One of the things that caught many people's eye was her personal opinion and response towards Trump's belief in the "birther" conspiracy.

“What if someone with an unstable mind loaded a gun and drove to Washington? What if that person went looking for our girls? Donald Trump, with his loud and reckless innuendos, was putting my family’s safety at risk. And for this I’d never forgive him.”

The "birther" conspiracy is the belief that former president Barack Obama was born in Kenya not in the US. President Trump started to make these claims in 2011, shortly before the 2012 election. At one point, Trump claimed that he had seen Obama's birth certificate. He even went far as insisting that the president should reveal his birth certificate: "if he wasn’t born in this country, which is a real possibility ... then he has pulled one of the great cons in the history of politics.”(Donald Trump) Trump's accusations are clearly false since he has contradicted himself many times, and cannot find a right answer. Which then can lead to the explanation on why he has decided to stop talking about the "birther" conspiracy.

The conspiracy has been brought up by more and more conspiracy theorists over time. It was first brought up by American journalist Andy Martin in 2004, not Hillary Clinton as the president claims. During Trump's presidential campaign in 2016, he decided to stop mentioning his beliefs on the conspiracy. Throughout his campaign, many reporters questioned on his role in promoting the "racially charge[d] smear" in which then he responded by saying, "'I don't talk about it because if I talk about that, your whole thing will be about that,"' he told reporters last week. "'So I don't talk about it."'

As a result Michelle Obama was angered "because she felt he was putting her family at risk."  As a wife she has done the right thing to do, and that is to protect and support her one and only husband.

Links:
CNN    CNBC  Independent
Politico  The Hill   Politico 2

Kanye's Exit on Politics

As many may know, famous rap singer Kanye West has decided to take a step away from politics. During the years of his political involvement, he was seen as a "hero" for the Republican Party. He was known for praising president Trump's "dragon energy" and ambition. His decision to leave the political scene left many people wondering about his motive.

On October 30th, Kanye posted a series of tweets that expressed his gratitude for his family and support for veterans, refugees, immigrants, and a change in gun laws. Shortly after, he posted a tweet announcing his decision to leave the political scene.

 One might wonder why Kanye expresses feeling as if he was being used to support ideas he did not believe in. Who was using him? Could he be be referring to the president, the media, or the Republican Party in general. It is also interesting when he mentions the idea of spreading messages he did not believe in. Although he did not specify what those ideas were, some ideas he was known to openly support in recent years include: the removal of 13th amendment and on how slavery should be a choice, and the overall participation in a African American conservative group known as Blexit.

Many claims were made on his decision for leaving the political world. Some claimed that he has left due to the "bullying" that he has received for supporting president Trump. Others may claim that it was his decrement of fame and support that he was getting throughout his career.

Before his announcement of exiting his involvement in politics. In an interview with TMZ Host, Harvey Lenin, Lenin was disturbed by the MAGA hat that Kanye West was wearing throughout. Later on, Lenin questions Kanye's support for Donald Trump in which then he responds, "Well first of all is pause I'm American. I support and give my ideas and support and brilliance to whoever ends up in office. That's my stance as an American. I support our president. Bottom line! ... mentioning the hat this represents y'all can't bully me." I personally agree with his statement, as a citizen of this country we must respect the president no matter who they are, but that does not necessarily mean we must agree with them. Kanye has had many interviews with many talk shows hosts in which he explains and gives many reasons on why he stills supports president Donald J Trump.

In my personal opinion, I believe he has left because of all the drama that was being centered around him. Until the point that it had stressed him too much that he had made a decision to put a stop on it.

What are your thoughts on this matter?
What do you believe his reason was behind this decision?
Do you believe he will return or once and for all or leave his publicity on politics ?

Links:

The NY Times

Washington Post 

Time
The Guardian

Kanye's Interview with Harvey Lenin

EVERYTHING ON THE LINE IN MIDTERMS

These midterms have been more partisan than ever with Democrats and Republicans both pitching in to get in as many voters in the polls as possible. Many seats in Congress and governor races are up for grabs as everyone will look to who will control Congress and the swing states to determine the future of our nation. Former President Obama has even been campaigning around the country to vote no matter where you are. Democrats and Republicans have deployed different strategies to rally their voter base and gain more support.

Republicans have been using fear and have been accused of violating voting laws in order to gain an advantage. They, along with Trump, have used immigration as a primary policy to target when rallying their voter base for the midterms. They have been using the migrant caravan currently in Mexico and border security as top issues to concentrate on, stroking fear in Americans’ hearts of a possible immigrant “invasion.” Moreover, the Republicans have been accused of violating voting laws, such as the ones in Georgia where failures in governor candidate Kemp’s cybersecurity in his online registration system have been exposed when accusing the Democrats of the same thing.

The Democrats have been mainly been trying to unseat many of the Republicans that are in the majority of the House by rallying their voter base to turn up and vote. Many of the Democrats are either immigrants or young, and tend to lean left, as the Democrats have launched an aggressive campaign against the Republicans. They have been criticizing Trump on being too harsh with border security, and too complacent in our foreign policy especially with Russia. The Democrats have been desperate in gaining control of the House, as the government has been increasingly divided.

In my opinion, I believe that both parties have been using lucrative practices to gain political clout in order to gain more seats in the House. Both parties can be found trying to rally up their voter base through bashing their opponent or proposing more extreme policy ideas.

What are ways the Republicans and Democrats can have had more successfully run their campaigns?

What were your predictions for midterms and how has it changed your expectations?

Sources:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/on-eve-of-midterm-elections-democrats-republicans-make-their-final-pitch/2018/11/05/ac84d86c-e0ff-11e8-b759-3d88a5ce9e19_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.658bc83deae7

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/04/politics/georgia-voter-registration-hacking-attempt-investigation/index.html

https://www.npr.org/2018/10/11/656455226/-everything-is-at-stake-for-democrats-in-next-month-s-midterm-elections

Trade and immigration have never been so popular in America

Trump's Trade War: Not Just With China

In recent months, President Trump continues to place tariffs and engage in a trade war with China. However, these protectionist policies are not the result of a popular movement or belief. In a recent poll conducted by Gallup, 74% stated that growing business and trade ties with other countries was somewhat good or very good. In another poll conducted by Gallup, 70% said that trade was an opportunity for economic growth, illustrating that the President's economic policies are not in line with the belief of a majority of Americans.

Although President Trump's tariffs have been largely reported as a trade war between China, Canada and Europe have suffered the worst losses. Examining Trump's tariffs, $12 billion in Canadian exports have been targeted, $8 billion in European exports while the tariffs only target $3.5 billion of China's.

I do not believe that President Trump's actions towards our neighbors and allies are a smart or diplomatic decision. Not only is Trump engaging with a trade war with China, but he has damaged trade relations with some of our most important allies. Canada is the US' second largest trade partner and the largest market for US exports, while Mexico is our third largest trade partner. Trump's tariffs against them will force them to respond in kind which will only harm more Americans. However, most alarming is the rhetoric and language Trump and his administration has used against our allies such as the president's trade advisor Peter Navarro saying that "there is a special place in hell" for Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. The United States' position in global affairs has weakened and will continue to weaken if attack our allies and burn important relationships established over the years. 


https://www.economist.com/democracy-in-america/2018/10/15/trade-and-immigration-have-never-been-so-popular-in-america

https://www.vox.com/world/2018/5/31/17413172/trump-tariff-steel-aluminum-eu-canada-mexico

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/8/5/17653632/trump-tariffs-trade-war-steel\

https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/06/12/the-west-will-die-so-that-trump-can-win/

Mexico City receives first wave from migrant caravan

A few weeks ago, a caravan has been travelling from Honduras towards Mexico until they reach the United States where they hope to be granted asylum. Many migrants claim they are fleeing violence and persecution from gangs back home. Moreover, many residents Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala have been experiencing violence and poverty mostly at the hands of gangs who work off drug or extortion money. These nations have relatively poor infrastructure when combating these gangs and would need time in reducing the crime rates.

Many wish to pursue the American Dream and end their suffering when living in their home country. However, President Trump has been relentless in not letting the caravan come to the US that easily and has ordered military troops to the border. In addition, Trump has threatened to cut aid off from the Central American nations. Some have accused Trump may be trying to rally his voter base ahead of the midterm elections when he says he is sending these troops, but others have said it provides a more effective way of enforcing the law of the land.

The US needs to act fast as the caravan has already reached Mexico City and the group intends to walk the entire trek undeterred. The caravan has more than 5,000 people as many plan to seek asylum in the US for the violence that they are escaping.

In my opinion, President Trump is making a big mistake in forcing a mass deportation of Central American migrants and cutting off aid to their nations. He has stated that it is important to keep those seeking asylum out. I believe that Trump would just exacerbate the problem by cutting off aid and forcing more deportations as it will only come back to bite him, because more will probably come as a result of these policies.

Do you believe that President Trump is doing the right thing in enforcing the immigration laws or is he actually the wrong thing?

Is America solely responsible to what happens to the caravan? Or can it also be Mexico’s, Honduras’, El Salvador’s, or Guatemala’s?

sources:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-46092995

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/migrant-caravan-sets-sight-on-getting-to-mexico-city/2018/11/04/d01408fe-e08f-11e8-ba30-a7ded04d8fac_story.html?utm_term=.4866a74b193b

Georgia candidate for Governor investigates Georgia Democrats for alleged hacking just days before midterms

Audra Melton for the New York Times

This weekend, the current Secretary of State of Georgia, Brian Kemp, who is running as the Republican candidate for State Governor in the 2018 midterm elections, launched an investigation into the Democratic party in Georgia on allegations of a failed hacking attempt on the state's voter registration system. In prior weeks, critics of Kemp have brought up a previous controversy surrounding accusations against him for minority voter suppression due to Georgia policy's strict refusal to process any registration applications that did not exactly match up with preexisting state data, causing thousands of applications to be rejected with minorities far more likely to be among them (The Economist). This process is overseen by Kemp himself as Secretary of State who after agreed to reform the state's system of registration.

Many believe that Kemp's current investigation into the failed hacking of the aforementioned registration system is a political stunt with the intention to damage his Democratic opponent's campaign in its final days. Seeing as the accusations currently have no apparent evidence and that Kemp is spearheading the investigation into the party of his current opponent, should Georgia voters be wary when making final election decisions?

As seen in elections throughout history, when campaigns such as this one are running so close, accusations have had the power to sway voters from one candidate or party to another. Many Georgia Democrats say the investigation is an abuse of Kemp's power as acting elections official for the state. In a state that has historically struggled with voting rights issues, registration has become a central topic in the election. It will be interesting to see both how Kemp's investigation turns out and how it will effect votes in this week's election.

Sources:
https://www.economist.com/democracy-in-america/2018/10/22/georgia-and-the-right-to-vote
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/04/us/politics/georgia-elections-kemp-voters-hack.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/11/04/brian-kemps-office-orders-hacking-probe-georgia-democrats-eve-election-hes-competing/?utm_term=.6736112ce12f
https://www.balloon-juice.com/2018/11/04/brian-kemp-thinks-georgians-are-stupid/ 

Trump’s Request To The Pentagon, Rejected

Trump’s Request To The Pentagon, Rejected

A group of migrants are heading over towards the border and President Trump does not want to them to reach the US. Earlier he requested troops to be sent as crowd control for these migrants in order to discourage their passage.  He has continuously wanted to send the migrants back and to reinforce his stance on immigration in regards to the upcoming midterm elections. The Pentagon had concluded that this caravan was to be regulated by the state and local governments and that the federal government could not intervene. He stated that he would send the troops with live-fire weapons, he went on to compare shooting guns and throwing rocks as an equal offense. He stated that if the people started throwing rocks they would shoot warning shots. President Trump claims that this is an “invasion” of the US by having about 3000 Central Americans looking to improve their living conditions.

To connect to content in class this reinforces the two government system of state government and the federal government. This decision to not send troops just shows how limited the power of the federal government at the president can be. Since this caravan is no threat to the US it doesn’t require the military to get fully involved. The system of federalism also has put chains on the president so he and the government can’t just do anything that they please.

In my opinion, I now have hope on our federal government because they can counter the blasphemous decisions that our president proposes. Also, there is no need for violence in to stop unarmed people who are looking to flee from a hostile life or just looking for a better living. The comments made recently by Trump will directly influence the midterm election and he hopes to get more support on his current stances.

https://www.vox.com/2018/11/3/18059218/troops-border-law-enforcement-pentagon-dhs-trump

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/02/politics/white-house-pentagon-troops-border/index.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6348149/The-Pentagon-rejected-requests-troops-perform-crowd-control-Mexico-border.html

Massacre At A Synagogue

Massacre At A Synagogue, 11 Dead

Robert Bowers, age 46, fired shots at the Tree Of Life Synagogue in the city of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He had a history of slandering the Jewish race on social media and during the attack, he yelled out abhorrent statements targeting the Jewish customs and community. Shots were fired at 10 AM and screams were heard and the cops were instantly called. 11 were dead and  6 were injured also, two police officers were injured and two SWAT team members were injured as well during their confrontation. At 9:49 Bowers posted one last ominous post claiming that he was going in and he couldn’t stand any longer to watch his people get slaughtered which is still unclear who his people are. He was armed with an AR- 15 and at least three handguns during is attacks. Bowers was charged with 29 criminal accounts after his attacks and many sources say he is to suffer the death penalty.

This connects to the government's inability to pass laws to better the security of our nation. The president and Congress refuse to pass laws because of interest groups such as the NRA which are a pro-gun organization that claim implementing a new law restricting gun use would violate the 2nd amendment.  Also, this points to the flaw in the government to be able to address issues such as shooting effectively and ignoring the current situation in which we live in. Overall, nothing has been done the past couple of years where there has not been a major change to the country and more should be done because there has not been any change to the status quo of our country.

In my opinion, if people claim that more laws for gun control would change something I feel like it will cause no change because thanks to the black market, people will be able to get these guns with no restrictions. So I feel that in order to make our nation safer the security should be increased at a greater amount in all places with federal aid or maybe to ban guns from the people once in for all. With all the recent events it looks like no one can be trusted with a firearm and therefore they should be taken away even if it spurs a lot of debate.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/11/03/pittsburgh-synagogue-shooting-shabat-service-vigils-tree-life/1871835002/

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/27/us/active-shooter-pittsburgh-synagogue-shooting.html

https://www.bbc.com/news/topics/c28q43x9qmzt/pittsburgh-synagogue-shooting

Executive Order To Abuse The 14th Amendment

Executive Order To Abuse The 14th Amendment

During an interview, President Trump stated that he wanted to take away the citizenship of children from immigrant parents. This goes against the 14th amendment that states "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." As the president, he is announcing the violation of the bill of rights and going against the constitution which cannot be changed or removed. Also, this executive order was to be officially passed it will immediately be challenged by the court for its removal. Many members of Congress and people of his own party have disagreed with this executive order primarily because it is in clear violation of the 14th amendment. In his interview he said “We’re the only country in the world where a person comes in and has a baby, and the baby is essentially a citizen of the United States for 85 years, with all of those benefits,” during his interview and went on to compare the US to other countries and their citizenship policy.

This connects to the checks and balances topic we learned in class because currently, Trump is trying to abuse his power as president and having too much power in the executive branch. This would bring an unbalance to the current government system. and if this is passed and is not challenged it can give future presidents the tendency to enact such executive orders that violate the Bill of rights.

In my opinion, Trump is trying to gain more popularity by announcing one of his many blasphemous statements. Also, I think that with the upcoming midterm elections he is trying to get more control of immigration and trying to stick true to what he had said at the beginning of not wanting to grant immigrants citizenship rights.  Also if this passes this will be challenged and removed by the court which gives me hope because many people even in his own party disagree with his actions and many across the nation as well.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/30/us/politics/trump-birthright-citizenship.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-eyeing-executive-order-to-end-citizenship-for-children-of-noncitizens-born-on-us-soil/2018/10/30/66892050-dc29-11e8-b3f0-62607289efee_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.756ab795bd87

https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/30/politics/donald-trump-ending-birthright-citizenship/index.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/10/30/trump-birthright-citizenship-executive-order/1816666002/

Explosive Devices Add to Climate of Overheated Partisan Rancor

AP Photo/Jeff Martin 

Say what you will about Stranger Things, horror movies, and the new Sabrina show, but the biggest scares this Halloween seem to have come from Washington.

Numerous Democratic officials and outspoken Trump critics received packages containing pipe bombs last week, including Hillary Clinton, Sen. Kamala Harris, Sen. Cory Booker, Barack Obama, Robert DeNiro and CNN.  14 packages in total were sent, allegedly by Cesar Sayoc, who was arrested Friday and made his first court appearance Monday.  Sayoc, a self-proclaimed white supremacist, could be sentenced to up to 48 years in prison.

On the one hand, this marks a rather disturbing development in the increasing polarization between the two parties.  In response to the threats, some on the far-right (including Rush Limbaugh and Mr. Infowars himself, Alex Jones) pointed the finger at the Democrats, claiming liberals sent the packages to drum up fear among the left.  The packages are believed to have been more of a scare tactic than a legitimate assassination attempt.  Intimidation has always been an effective form of dissuasion.

While Mike Pence and other Republicans have condemned the threats, Trump's approach has been less than consistent.  He attempts to call for unity, seemingly out of obligation, and then turns around and blames the media for aggravating partisan divides.  As the New Yorker points out, Trump refuses to accept any responsibility for contributing to the rhetoric that leads to polarization and the acts of violence (as also seen in Pittsburgh) that can result.  He might not condone it, but he is certainly enabling it.


Sources:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/25/nyregion/bomb-explosive-device.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/24/us/politics/bombs-sent-cnn-obama-clinton-soros.html?module=inline
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/24/us/politics/trump-bomb-cnn-obama-clintons.html?module=inline
https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/25/politics/bombs-suspicious-packages-what-we-know/index.html
https://www.vox.com/2018/10/25/18022376/pipe-bomb-targets-packages-democrats-clinton-obama-soros-de-niro
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/24/nyregion/clinton-obama-explosive-device.html
https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/why-donald-trump-cant-stop-attacking-the-media-over-the-pipe-bomb-packages
https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/31/politics/pipe-bomb-suspect-doj-letter/index.html
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/clintons-obama-suspicious-packages/index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/26/politics/suspicious-packages-arrest/index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/25/politics/bombs-suspicious-packages-what-we-know/index.html

Cash blitz could boost Democrats’ House chances

Cash blitz could boost Democrats’ House chances, but their hopes of taking the Senate remain slim

As the 2018 midterm elections draw nearer, Democratic candidates are setting new records in terms of campaign fundraising. Although Republicans are doing fine with their fundraising, raising about the same or more than the 2016 election, the Democrats are raising an unprecedented number of dollars ranging from the high six figures to millions of dollars. There seems to be a donor surge to the Democrats, fueled in part by small or infrequent donors. As a result, at least 90 Democratic candidates are raising more than a Republican incumbent with about 65 raising over one million dollars. With Democrats needing to flip 24 seats in the house to gain a majority, the chances of the Democrats taking the house are increasing.

An example of how Democratic candidates are raising more than previous years can be seen in Texas. Texas' 21st Congressional District, which incorporates parts of San Antonio and Austin, has been held by Republicans since 1978, but this year, Joe Kosper, the Democratic candidate, raised $2.4 million, more than Chip Roy, his Republican opponent and more than 10 times more than the previous Democratic candidates in the district combined since 2008. 

Looking at Kosper's fundraising, much of it came from out of Texas with money coming from New York, San Francisco and Washington illustrating a trend among most Democratic candidates: a significant amount of money raised came from online and around the country.

However, Hillary Clinton out-fundraised Donald Trump by a 2-to-1 ratio and still lost. Republicans also have a lot of advantages from gerrymandering to the fact that they are incumbents in most battleground districts. Yet, with campaigning and advertisements being so expensive, and the out-fundraising of so many Republican incumbents, Democrats retaking the house is definitely achievable. 


Sources:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/19/democrats-look-to-win-house-in-midterms-but-senate-chances-are-dim.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/paloma/the-trailer/2018/10/02/the-trailer-democrats-are-breaking-fundraising-records-republicans-blame-outsiders/5bb37b851b326b7c8a8d17be/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f5bb324597eb

https://www.vox.com/2018/7/19/17587286/midterms-2018-house-republicans-fundraising-q2

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/17/midterms-house-republicans-fundraising-728401

Heitkamp Apologizes for Embarrassing Error in Campaign Ad

Aaron P. Bernstein/Reuters via National Review

Senator Heidi Heitkamp (D) of North Dakota recently issued an apology for using the names of sexual assault survivors in a campaign ad without their consent.  The ad, which was styled as an open letter to her opponent, Representative Kevin Cramer (R), identified 127 women as sexual assault victims--some of whom weren't even survivors, and many of whom were unaware that their names were being used.  Heitkamp and the women involved believe their names were obtained through a post circulating on Facebook. 

Needless to say...yikes.  That'd be the abbreviated analysis of this situation, at least.  There's a remarkable irony in a campaign ad advocating for victims of sexual assault failing to establish clear consent.  It's incredibly disappointing and a major blunder for Senator Heitkamp's team to mishandle information in this way.  Intentional or not, the campaign showed a staggering disregard for the privacy and safety concerns of its potential voters, a number of whom were initially planning to vote for Heitkamp but now refuse to support her.

It's becoming increasingly clear, however, that the person who stands to suffer the most damage from this egregious mistake is Heitkamp herself.  Despite being the incumbent senator, Heitkamp is running for reelection in a conservative state and has already come under fire for voting against Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation.  North Dakota is considered a key seat in the battle for the Senate, and with Cramer currently leading her in the polls 53% to 41%, it seems unlikely that the Democrats will win the two seats needed to regain control.  Heitkamp's mismanaged campaign ad seems only to have added fuel to the fire, turning what was meant to be a show of solidarity with survivors into the perceived exploitation of personal trauma for political gain.

Sources:
 https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/17/politics/heitkamp-abuse-survivors-answers/index.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/16/us/politics/heitkamp-north-dakota-ad-apology.html?fallback=0&recId=1BjcUqUdNx5UNOkrV45AfSbkxo5&locked=0&geoContinent=NA&geoRegion=CA&recAlloc=contextual-bandit-home-geo&geoCountry=US&blockId=midterm-elections&imp_id=739146619&action=click&module=Election%202018&pgtype=Homepage

https://www.apnews.com/8f55736281fb487aaf68cb06b9fc3dbe

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/heidi-heitkamp-apologizes-outing-sexual-assault-survivors/

https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/06/politics/poll-of-the-week-heidi-heitkamp-is-in-trouble/index.html

Missing Journalist Jamal Khashoggi Confirmed Dead by Saudi Arabia

Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi has not been found after his last appearance of entering the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul on October 2. He entered the consulate in order to retrieve marriage documents before the wedding. According to visual and audio recordings taken from the embassy, it appears that Khashoggi was murdered after being tortured and interrogated.

White House intelligence officials speculates that a security team of 15 Saudi Arabians were sent to Istanbul in order to capture Khashoggi and take him back to Saudi Arabia. Turkish officials place the blame due to the recording evidence that includes Arabic voices and sounds of beating. However, Saudi Arabian officials have repeatedly denied the allegations and claimed that Khashoggi left the building shortly after entering.

Due to the vague details behind the investigation, U.N. officials and lawmakers request for better action, suggesting economic sanctions to be placed on Saudi Arabia. However, due to Saudi Arabia’s high oil supply, President Donald Trump finds sanctions harmful to the American economy and employment. On October 11, Trump did state that there will be “severe punishment” if it was discovered that Saudi Arabia was behind the disappearance.

In a recent update on October 19, Saudi Arabia released information that confirms Khashoggi’s death due to a an argument that escalated into a fist fight, which ultimately led to his death in the Saudi Arabia consulate in Istanbul. Saudi Arabia has removed five high ranking officials from their positions and detained 18 Saudi Arabians based on the report. Trump called Saudi Arabia’s confirmation a “good first step” and finds their claim “credible,” but that the U.S. has not finished their investigation yet.

Virginia Mayo -- AP/REX.Shutterstock from TIME Magazine

In relation to our course, this story emphasizes a clear connection between the media and those in authority. As we have read about George W. Bush’s scripted press conference, it has been a common theme for the media to rely on the presidency for national news coverage and for the presidency to rely on the media to relay their political agenda. However, in modern times, the Trump administration has attacked the credibility of the mass media, emphasizing the sensationalization and bias in reporting. Therefore, the credibility of the media has been twisted in an exaggerated, but arguably reasonable (in some cases for bias), fashion. Even in an interview on 60 Minutes, Trump acknowledges that “[t]here's a lot at stake, maybe especially so because this man was a reporter,” suggesting that even he realizes his own battle with the media and the possible implications of being a reporter. As Khashoggi used to have ties with the Saudi Arabian royal family but then criticized the current government and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, it is possible that the violence towards him was due to his criticism of the government who might think of him as a traitor, highlighting the dangers of a writer in light of countries who do not necessarily welcome dissenting opinions. As stated in the textbook, the media tends to focus on individuals rather than on groups. Therefore, the fact that this journalist was an American citizen and a journalist creates an interesting story for national news despite the millions of deaths happening in wars and natural disasters today.

In my opinion, it is disheartening to hear about any person’s death, but the circumstances under his situation and his status frustrate me due to the political climate. His reporter status endangered his life due to the criticisms he had for the Saudi Arabian government, criticisms that might have led to the violence and death. The idea that other countries do not have share similar ideas behind our 1st Amendment for freedom of speech concerns me because there would be less diversity and room for improvement if everyone was forced to have uniform values and was forced to stay quiet about possible critiques. If the media has to cater to those in authority, then the reality or truth of events can rarely be expressed, which might lead some people to falsely believing an overly positive story. It is quite suspicious that Saudi Arabia confirmed his death even though they kept denying that they had any knowledge, seeming that they wanted the publicity. While his death may be seen as one of many in modern times, he is being characterized as a “patriot” in the opinion article published by his fiance. I would agree with this “patriot” symbol in that he represents the importance of the whole truth, the idea of free expression and the connection between the media and the truth. As lawmakers, Trump, and the American public demanded for the truth, the current executive branch must figure out how to deal with this matter peacefully and tactfully, especially as we have economic ties with Saudi Arabia and would like to avoid another war. Khashoggi’s death serves as an important reminder to be cautious with other countries and to request the truth for any story, especially this suspiciously vague and haunting one. For a different take on this story, check out this Washington Post analysis article on the possible connection between Khashoggi's murder and Saudi Arabia's political message.

Sources: 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/turks-tell-us-officials-they-have-audio-and-video-recordings-that-support-conclusion-khashoggi-was-killed/2018/10/11/119a119e-cd88-11e8-920f-dd52e1ae4570_story.html?utm_term=.2a9153c3fbe7

https://www-m.cnn.com/2018/10/14/middleeast/khashoggi-turkey-saudi-intl/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F

https://www-m.cnn.com/2018/10/16/middleeast/khashoggi-turkish-investigation-intl/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/president-donald-trump-vows-severe-punishment-if-saudi-arabia-is-behind-saudi-missing-journalist/

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-45856318

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/15/oil-prices-could-surge-on-risk-from-jamal-khashoggi-case.html

https://www-m.cnn.com/2018/10/19/world/saudi-arabia-khashoggi-intl/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/10/20/trump-saudi-arabia-jamal-khashoggi-sot-arizona-air-force-base-vpx.cnn

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2018/10/12/case-missing-saudi-journalist-khashoggi-grisly-details-may-be-message/?utm_term=.7867bdde0844

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/13/opinion/jamal-khashoggi-saudi-arabia-fiancee-mbs-murder.html

Image source:

http://time.com/5430093/saudi-arabia-khashoggi-dead/

Republicans Won't Challenge Trump on Defense of Saudi Arabia

 

Alastair Grant/Associated Press

 

After the alleged murder of a Aaudi Arabian administration dissident who had begun working as a writer for the Washington Post, the Saudi government was quick to deny having ordered any such attack. And one unlikely ally came to say the same thing: the United States President. In typical fashion, Trump tweeted out that the Saudi Prince had  “totally denied any knowledge of what took place,” and that there may have been "rogue killers" - essentially the same propaganda line that the Saudi government would soon be spreading to its people.

Often times with statements like these, it ends up just being Trump who says something regrettable and In a conference with Secretary of State, but in this case, the rest of his administration seems to be taking the same note. Mike Pompeo, Mohammed bin Salman told him that “We face our challenges together — the past, the day of, tomorrow,” to which Pompeo replied, “Absolutely.” Considering that this "challenge" was the de-legitimization of a critical story about the murder of a journalist, it may be either confusing or chilling that we are going to be facing it together, as they said.

Though Republican congressmen have proposed placing some sanctions on Saudi Arabia, they have not significantly addressed the president Trump's role in this story. In theory, it should not be hard for a congressman to say that the president should condemn a credible political murder allegation, but this is a time of high party loyalty, especially to Trump. “I want to hear what Mike has to say before I decide what I think we ought to do,” Said Mitch McConnel, Republican Senate Majority Leader, in lieu of giving an opinion of his own on the issue. In a time where not even the Senate majority leader will express an opinion separate from that of the executive, one must wonder whether this political trend will reduce the independence of the legislature and presidency too far, when they share the same tightly bound party allegiance.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/saudi-arabias-information-war-to-bury-news-of-jamal-khashoggi/2018/10/17/e4825a5a-d227-11e8-b2d2-f397227b43f0_story.html?utm_term=.44d066d2384d

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/what-a-thorough-transparent-and-timely-investigation-of-jamal-khashoggis-disappearance-should-look-like/2018/10/16/aaf1d670-d16f-11e8-8c22-fa2ef74bd6d6_story.html?utm_term=.ff68c1ed2ea7

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/411961-gop-leaders-hesitant-to-challenge-trump-on-saudi-arabia

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/16/world/middleeast/pompeo-saudi-arabia-turkey.html

The Gender Wars: Men, Women, and the Midterms

Ethan Miller/Getty Images North America/Getty Images via CNN

Given the wave of controversies surrounding our current president, his administration, and the general sexual mistreatment of women, it's no surprise that the dynamics between gender and politics are a major source of interest coming into the midterms--and it seems that the partisan divide between women and men could play a huge role in the elections.  Generally speaking, women are more likely to oppose Trump (and vote Democratic) while men are more favorable (and tend to vote Republican).  The gender gap initially seen in the 2016 election results has carried over to his approval ratings, with the 12-point difference being twice that of his predecessors.  Both Gallup and the New York Times have attributed this divide to self-interest:  men who were initially wary of Trump have grown supportive based on his economic policies, while women have lost significant benefits provided by the Obama administration.  NYT's Thomas B. Edsall, however, points to more fundamental differences in biology and perception--Trump seems to personify traditional displays of "alpha" behavior and masculinity, which men may find appealing in an age of social upheaval.  Polls have shown that the 2018 midterm could have the widest gender gap to date, although Trump may not necessarily be a cause so much as a contributing factor in this divide.

Both the MeToo movement and the Kavanaugh confirmation have also further exacerbated partisan differences between genders.  Although Democrats are placing their hopes in women's increased political involvement and mobilization (a direct response to Trump's alleged sexual misconduct and history of misogynistic remarks, as well as Clinton's loss), backlash spurred by the Kavanaugh hearings against the trend of sexual harassment/assault allegations could work in the Republicans' favor.  The so-called "Kavanaugh effect" appears to be repelling both men and women from the center, in opposite directions.

Historically, the current gap between men and women seems to resemble a similar gap from Reagan's election in 1980.  Back then, it was not necessarily that women were becoming more liberal, but that men were becoming more conservative.  This time around, the divide seems to be going both ways.  More women are running for office than ever, and only a third of women have said they plan on voting Republican in the midterms.  It's clear that women will play a key role in this election, though whether they can push the Democrats to victory against a strong (and male-dominated) Republican base remains to be seen.  Will we continue to see men and women divide along party lines into 2020, and how (if at all) will this affect presidential campaigns?

Sources:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/13/us/politics/trump-suburban-men-ohio.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/07/politics/poll-of-the-week-largest-gender-gap-on-record/index.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/12/opinion/trump-midterms-gender-gap.html

https://www.vox.com/2018/7/2/17528590/women-midterms-gender-gap-poll

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/10/12/midterms-gender-war-women-democrats-kavanaugh-voters-energized/1587840002/

https://news.gallup.com/poll/226178/gender-gap-trump-approval-bigger-predecessors.aspx