New Hampshire primary voters wrestle with Haley admonition to ‘correct’ Iowa

HAMPTON, New Hampshire — Granite State officials are very proud of holding the first-in-the-nation primary — and aren’t shy about throwing shade at the other leadoff state in the nominating process.

“With all due respect to Iowa, thanks for playing but give me a break,” GOP Gov. Chris Sununu told a rally over the weekend. “Did you know [Donald] Trump got 56,000 votes in Iowa, out of over 3 million people!?”

“Is that going to dictate the choice of the Republican Party? I don’t think so,” he went on. “You know what’s going to dictate that choice? You guys.”

Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley leaned in to that spirit when she told a town hall in Milford Jan. 3, “You know Iowa starts it. You know that you correct it.”

Twenty days later, New Hampshire voters will decide whether or not they do, in fact, want to “correct” Iowa.

While the Hawkeye State has a spotty track record of picking Republican nominees, with George W. Bush in 2000 the last contested caucus winner to get the nod, New Hampshire foreshadowed the GOP choice in 2008, 2012 and 2016, the last three times Republicans had a contested primary.

And with the 77-year-old Trump coming off a near-30-point blowout win in Iowa last week, and boasting a double-digit polling lead in New Hampshire, the “correction” may turn into a coronation.

New Hampshire voters are going to decide whether or not to follow suit with Iowa. REUTERS

“Absolutely,” Lizabeth McLaughlin, a Haley backer from Marlborough, told The Post when asked if New Hampshire’s result meant more than Iowa’s..

“We only got like roughly 18% of the voter turnout in Iowa. That’s not an indicator.”

Kim Rice, a Haley backer and former Speaker pro tempore of the New Hampshire House of Representatives, stressed that it was all in good fun between the two early states.

“I have a very good friend in Iowa and I said to her, ‘Thank god Iowans have a sense of humor because Ron DeSantis tried to turn it into something negative,’” Rice said.

“My friend in Iowa, she and I always go back and forth over who’s actually the first in the nation. We’ll see what happens.”

Nikki Haley is hoping for a strong performance in New Hampshire and then plans to turn to South Carolina next. CJ GUNTHER/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock

While Haley voters are hoping to change the narrative, backers of Trump are totally fine with following Iowa’s lead.

“New Hampshire is basically a Trump state,” said Dennis Malboeuf, 58.

Trump himself has basked in polling data showing him with a commanding lead.

“Now we’re down to two people and I think one person will be gone probably tomorrow. The other one will be gone in November,” Trump proclaimed at a rally in Laconia on primary eve.

Manufacturing worker Andy Davis, 56, from Hopkinton, was confident that New Hampshire voters would get behind the former president.

Donald Trump has drawn monster crowds in New Hampshire. REUTERS

“I think she’s just part of the system,” he said of Haley. “Whenever the media goes after somebody or if the system goes after somebody, they’re probably telling the truth.”

“I was never a Trump fan prior to politics. I thought he was just a loudmouth New Yorker,” he went on. “But I like what he’s done for the country.”

Former first son Donald Trump Jr. was careful about expectation-setting, though he had no doubt what the final outcome would be.

New Hampshire voters are sorting through the top two Republican contenders. Getty Images

“I don’t like setting unrealistic expectations so that if you miss, it gives the media and the other side and the billionaire donors, that window to drag this on in perpetuity,” Trump Jr. told reporters.

Early polling data has indicated that Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ Sunday exit from the race and subsequent endorsement of Trump has been a boost to the 45th president.

Trump is averaging 55.8% support in New Hampshire, dwarfing Haley’s 36.5% average backing, per the most recent RealClearPolitics aggregate.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

To win in 2024, Biden and Trump must fight for our hearts

As an election year dawns, Republicans and Democrats should stop to reflect on why our politics seems so stagnant.

No one expects President Biden to earn a mandate even if he wins re-election — it won’t be a victory for Biden so much as a defeat for Donald Trump.

Progressives don’t see Biden, or Kamala Harris, as an architect for the future.

A second Biden term promises an older, ever less vigorous president facing a world afire and a nation divided to the point of political divorce — with big Republican gains in the 2026 midterms, if history is any guide.

But what if Trump defeats Biden?

In a nonconsecutive second term, Trump will be as old as Biden is now, and he too would likely find the next midterms devastating.

Trump is more spry than Biden and may still personify his party’s ongoing evolution.

He’ll also have a fresh running mate come November, which should help his ticket appear future-oriented.


Columnist Daniel McCarthy believes President Joe Biden and Donald Trump will have to fight hard for votes in 2024. AP/Morry Gash

But the “lawfare” that mostly blue-state and blue-city prosecutors have been waging against Trump will continue if he wins, and the same media that hyped conspiracy theories about Russian collusion in his first term won’t be more fair the second time.

Paralysis seems inevitable.

The reasons for this transcend the parties and their leading personalities — these reasons are rooted in Americans’ changing beliefs about expertise and competence.

In an age when much of rural America didn’t have access to electricity, Franklin Roosevelt and his New Deal seemed like an expressway to the future.

From FDR all the way to Richard Nixon, presidents could rely upon Americans’ trust in technocracy.

It was a time when “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help” wasn’t yet a punchline.

But by the mid-1970s the federal government’s reputation for competence was in tatters, thanks to Vietnam, inflation, fuel shortages and monumental burdens imposed by rising taxes and overregulation.

The era of faith in federal competence thus gave way to an era of hope for a private-sector competence that would be unleashed if only government got out of the way.

This first took shape in the Jimmy Carter years, when a combination of blue-dog Democrats and Republicans in Congress pushed for deregulation.

Ronald Reagan’s presidency was the symbolic zenith of this new confidence in unleashing entrepreneurship, though just as Republicans like Dwight Eisenhower and Nixon testified to the epoch-defining influence of the New Deal mentality, Democrats like Bill Clinton would demonstrate, however reluctantly, the power of the new Reaganite dispensation.

Congress again played a leading role: Once the GOP won the House and Senate in 1994, sweeping reforms to welfare became possible.

By 1996, Clinton himself was announcing, “The era of big government is over.”

The truth is government expanded even as deregulation continued, but public confidence in federal expertise declined relative to faith in the possibilities of the “new economy,” represented above all by the telecommunications industry and the Internet.

But both parties soon changed their emphasis again.

George W. Bush didn’t campaign, or govern, as a slasher of red tape.

Instead his vision was one of competent collaboration between government and the private sector: what he called “compassionate conservatism.”

Barack Obama imagined much the same: Obamacare, after all, was about government creating rules for private insurance companies and their customers (who were, of course, forced to buy their products on pain of government-imposed penalties).

This new philosophy of government backfired spectacularly when instead of restoring faith in expert government, it exposed how incestuous the relationship between corporate America, both parties and higher education had become.

The result was the Tea Party — and Trump.

America was only partly industrialized when expert government first appeared capable of meeting any challenge.

And America was at the dawn of the information revolution when deregulation seemed to answer every question.

Today faith in expertise, public and private, is depleted — and as Harvard reels from its president’s plagiarisms, prospects for renewed confidence in the credentialed elite are bleak.

Instead of pretending to competence they do not possess, both parties would be better off learning to feel what other Americans feel.

Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Donald Trump, for all their differences, each sensed that empathy, not expertise, would be the key to victory.

Alas, Clinton’s empathy was only that of a seducer, while Obama’s elitism came to the fore as soon as he was elected.

Now the 2024 election hinges on Donald Trump’s emotional connection with the public — a balance of love and hate, trust and fear.

Biden is almost a bystander.

This isn’t a fluke, it’s the future: One way or another, the majorities of tomorrow will be built on emotional relationships, not new New Deals or retro-Reaganism.

The challenge, however, isn’t simply to win but to connect strongly enough to govern.

Daniel McCarthy is the editor of Modern Age: A Conservative Review.

Twitter: @ToryAnarchist

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Don’t count DeSantis out — he may yet take down Trump

The Ron DeSantis presidential campaign sure was good while it lasted. 

The conventional wisdom has turned so decidedly against the Florida governor that he’s getting buried a couple of months before he even announces. 

There’s flaming out on the launch pad, and there’s flaming out while you’re drinking a cup of coffee early in the morning at your home before getting in a car to drive to Cape Canaveral to check in for your mission.

It’s the latter that’s supposedly happening to DeSantis.

This is a bit much. Rumors of his political death are not just greatly exaggerated, they are absurdly overwrought, although that’s what a bout of bad national polling will do. 

To listen to the pundits, DeSantis has gone from the political force who steamrolled his way to a historic re-election victory in a large, diverse former swing state to a socially awkward stumblebum who would stay out of the 2024 race if he knew what’s good for him

It’s wrong to characterize the last couple of months as a loss for DeSantis.

His book was a success, and he’s in the process of racking up an impressive string series of victories during this Florida legislative session.

But there’s no doubt he’s hit turbulence.


A RealClearPolitics polling average said that 50% of Republicans want to elect Trump in 2024.
AP

He, in effect, walked back the line in his statement about the Ukraine war calling the fight with Russia “a territorial dispute,” and he’s never forcefully hit back at Donald Trump, even though the former president has made slamming the governor one of his favorite pastimes. 

Trump has taken a jag up in national polling lately and DeSantis a step down.

In the RealClearPolitics national polling average, Trump sits above 50%, a formidable position by any standard.

DeSantis is far back at about 24%. 

Clearly, some of the shine has come off DeSantis as his re-election win has become more distant, whereas Trump has benefited from getting further away from the debacle of the midterms — and from the free publicity and the GOP sympathy created by the Alvin Bragg indictment. 

Still, DeSantis is a strong second in most states and is well-liked in crucial Iowa.

If the Bragg bump wears off over time and DeSantis gets a bump from his announcement — neither is inevitable, but neither is far-fetched, either — it will look like a very competitive race at the top of the field. 

Besides the latest polling, much of the new conventional wisdom about DeSantis is driven by the assumptions he will never attack Trump and he will be a poor campaigner.

If either is true, he won’t be the nominee.


Joe Biden is topping Donald Trump in many 2024 polls.
REUTERS

But his super PAC is already shooting back at Trump, and if DeSantis isn’t a natural backslapper, he didn’t become the twice-elected governor of Florida by spending all of his time alone at home playing Wordle. 

There’s much about the campaign we still don’t know, and will find out as it takes place.

How does the DeSantis announcement go?

Does the Bragg indictment — and possible subsequent indictments — continue to buoy Trump or eventually weigh him down?

Who else gets in the race?

How vulnerable is the former president to an electability critique?

Who wins and loses the first debate in August?

Does someone else in the field pop?

If Mike Pence gets in, how much traction does he get in Iowa?

And so on. This is why we have primary campaigns, and they always hold surprises.

What we have definitely learned the last couple months is that Donald Trump isn’t going to fade away.

He is the odds-on favorite to be the Republican nominee a third time in a row, and if he is going to be stopped someone is going to have to go out and affirmatively beat him.

Can DeSantis — or in the right circumstances someone else — do that?

It’s an enormous task, but the governor shouldn’t be counted out before he’s in.

Twitter: @RichLowry

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Louisiana Rep. Jeremy LaCombe switches from Democrat to Republican party

Democrats were dealt another blow from within their own ranks this week as yet another state lawmaker declared he was leaving the party.

According to a Monday report by The Advocate, a Louisiana-based newspaper, state Rep. Jeremy LaCombe announced he had left the Democratic Party and would be registering as a Republican.

It was not immediately clear what prompted LaCombe’s departure, however he is now the second Louisiana Democrat in less than a month to switch party affiliations, and the third nationwide after another state lawmaker in North Carolina did the same.

Last month, Louisiana state Rep. Francis Thompson gave Republicans in the state House a supermajority after he switched his party affiliation, and earlier this month, North Carolina state Rep. Tricia Cotham gave Republicans in the state House a supermajority with her switch as well.

The switches come as President Biden faces a near-record low approval rating among key groups, including women (43% now vs. 42% low), voters ages 45+ (41% vs. 39% low), suburban voters (41% vs. 39% low), rural voters (31% vs. 30% low) and Democrats (81% vs. 78% low) – Democratic men in particular (79% vs. 78% low), according to a recent Fox News poll.


On Monday, Rep. Jeremy LaCombe announced that he was no longer a member of the Democrat party and was switching to the Republican party.
Twitter/@LaCombe4LA

The Louisiana State Capitol building in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
Getty Images

Rep. Francis Thompson recently switched political parties, from Democrat to Republican in March.
AP

Biden is also at a low mark of 41% approval among suburban women. 

Additionally, a separate recent poll found that only a third of Americans believed Biden deserved to be re-elected in 2024.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Democrats in New York have a real problem with Asians

It’s sure starting to look like New York’s progressives are simply anti-Asian. 

Their latest cause célèbre, the “Good Cause Eviction” bill, aims to effectively bring some 2 million apartments in the city alone under a new statewide rent-control regime.

On top of being a sure housing-killer, it’s gotten the city’s Asian community rightfully up in arms.

Strongly represented among the city’s small-landlord community, they see this as yet another oblique attack on them by arrogant, far-off leftists.

Indeed, an association of Chinese landlords, the New York Small Landlords, has been fighting back against prog policies on eviction since the eviction moratorium — disastrous for smaller landlords — was declared in 2020.

But GCE is only the latest in a string of progressives efforts in the city and Albany that have hurt New York’s Asians. 

Consider the effort to wreck the Big Apple’s merit-based admissions policies to academically rigorous schools. 

The “problem” this aims to correct is precisely that Asian students (many from poorer backgrounds; many the children of immigrants) compete so effectively: 2021 saw them win 54% of freshman seats in selective high schools. 

Mayor Bill de Blasio did major damage to the system on his way out of office, banning competitive tests for most “selective school” admissions, but the new administration left it intact in most of the city.

Which leaves Asian-Americans increasingly looking to charters as a way to find excellence in public education.

But the progs hate charters, too: They’re leading the charge against Gov. Kathy Hochul’s bid to allow dozens more charters to open in the city. If the left succeeds, it means no new charters for Asian neighborhoods.  

Which explains the recent Asian American parents’ pro-charter rally.

Above all, there’s public safety. The left’s criminal-justice “reforms” helped power a massive rise in anti-Asian hate crimes

Like the 2022 murders of Michelle Go and Christina Yuna Lee. 

When New York’s Asian community raised their voices in response, all they got from the crime lovers in the Legislature and elsewhere was pabulum about “white supremacy” — and a total refusal to budge on the cause of the crimes, i.e. laws that leave murderous thugs free to walk the streets. 

It’s no mystery why the left’s policies are so profoundly anti-Asian. 

This minority group’s economic and educational attainments blow to smithereens the lies about America being incurably racist that serve as the basis for most progressive policies. 

But electoral results — with Asian voters swinging right in the governor’s race and New York’s legislative races — shows that Dems’ policies are driving this key demographic away. 

It’s an opportunity for the GOP — and thus for actual democratic rule in the Empire State — if Republicans can only seize it. 

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

House GOP demands Biden reveal China ties to failed bank

House Republicans are pushing President Joe Biden to investigate the Chinese Communist Party’s ties to the collapsed Silicon Valley Bank – and demanding that he reveal any Biden family connections with Chinese companies set to benefit from the federal government’s bailout.

Silicon Valley Bank and a Shanghai-based subsidiary “played an indispensable role in financing China’s innovation economy,” Rep. Rich McCormick (R-Georgia) wrote to Biden Friday in a letter signed by 19 of his GOP colleagues, Fox News reported.

The letter listed four Chinese tech and pharmaceutical companies with deposits at SVB totaling $289 million — assets that have been protected by the Biden administration’s intervention.

“The Department of the Treasury, Federal Reserve, and FDIC cannot afford to be asleep at the wheel while the CCP finances its companies with the support of U.S. venture capitalists at the expense of American taxpayers,” the lawmakers wrote.


House Republicans want President Biden to reveal if any family connections with Chinese companies are set to benefit from the federal government’s bailout.
REUTERS

Republicans claim “recent revelations that members of the Biden family have received payments from Chinese companies” make this investigation “a matter of vital national interest.”
AP

The Republicans also pointed to “recent revelations that members of the Biden family have received payments from Chinese companies” — calling it “a matter of vital national interest” to find out “what influence they may have on Executive Branch policymaking.”

The Post reported last week that $1,065,000 from a Chinese energy company was doled out to Biden family members — including first son Hunter Biden and his sister-in-law-turned-former lover Hallie Biden — over three months in 2017.

“The American people deserve to know whether their government is bailing out companies connected to the Chinese Communist Party,” McCormick told Fox News.

“Joe Biden should answer whether his family has received large payments from companies in China, and whether his judgment was influenced as a result.”

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Ronna McDaniel’s pathetic bid to ‘unite’ the Republican Party in 2024

Once again displaying her total obliviousness, Republican National Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel announced Sunday that 2024 presidential candidates will likely have to pledge to support the winner in the general election, or they’ll be kept out of the primary debates. Who cares?

This is nothing but a lame attempt to paper over the party’s stark divisions over ex-President Donald Trump, one of three declared candidates so far. The simple fact is that many GOP voters won’t support him if he’s the nominee, and some of his voters likely won’t show for any other Republican.

And all GOP politicians will jump whichever way they think serves their interests best. That includes the candidates themselves: Coming up with excuses to break your most solemn pledge is Politics 101, all across the spectrum.

The real questions turn on what, if any, third-party challenge the loser(s) mount, and who’s peeved enough to spend the general election dumping on the winner.

The main thing that will change all the calculations is how quickly the voters break either for Trump or some other rival, with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis the early leader to play that role. And the debates (whoever shows) will be key.

Stop pretending you can actually chart Republicans’ course, Ronna. It’s not remotely up to you.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

RNC sets up potential showdown with Trump

The head of the Republican National Committee said Sunday she expects all GOP candidates will have to sign a pledge to back the party’s eventual 2024 nominee, creating a potential showdown with ex-President Trump.

RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel told CNN’s “State of the Union” that it’s likely Republican hopefuls will have to promise to throw their backing behind the party’s candidate if they want to get on the debate stage during the primary, calling the move a “no-brainer” to present a united front to try to unseat President Biden. 

“If you’re going to be on the Republican National Committee debate stage asking voters to support you, you should say, ‘I’m going to support the voters and who they choose as the nominee,’ ” McDaniel told host Dana Bash.


Ronna McDaniel, head of the Republican National Committee, says she believes all GOP presidential candidates will have to sign a pledge to support the eventual nominee before getting on the primary debate stage.
REUTERS

McDaniel said that as the head of the RNC, she is expected to support the Republican presidential nominee — and so should the candidates, including Trump, who announced he was running in November. 

“Anybody getting on the Republican National Committee debate stage should be able to say, ‘I will support the will of the voters and the eventual nominee of our party,’ ” she said.

But Bash played a tape of Trump’s interview Feb. 2 on Hugh Hewitt’s radio show in which he was asked whether he would back whoever wins the GOP nomination. 

“It would depend. I would give you the same answer I gave in 2016 during the debates. … It would have to depend on who the nominee was,” the former president said.


Former President Donald Trump, with RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel at a fundraiser in New York in December 2017, has not committed to backing the eventual 2024 Republican presidential nominee if he’s not the choice.
AP

McDaniel said she still believes that all of the Republican candidates will ​sign on to the pledge​ — without exception​.

​”​I think the voters are very intent on winning, and they do not want to see a debate stage of people saying, ‘I’m not going to support this guy,’ ” the RNC chief said. ” ​What [candidates] need to say is, ‘I’m going to do everything I can to defeat Joe Biden. And that​means supporting the nominee of the Republican Party.’ ” 

She said she doesn’t foresee Trump backing out of a debate because he refuses to take the pledge.

“​I think President Trump would like to be on the debate stage. That’s what he likes to do. And I expect that he’ll be there​,” McDaniel said. ​



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Trump calls for McConnell to face primary challenge over $1.7 T spending bill

Former President Donald Trump called Monday for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and other GOP senators who voted with him to pass the $1.7 trillion spending bill last month to face primary challengers.

The 76-year-old Trump, writing on his Truth Social platform, first hailed Rep. Kevin McCarthy becoming House speaker and then blasted McConnell and the other GOP senators for caving on the spending bill before Republicans could take control of the House on Jan. 3.

“We must now stop Mitch McConnell,” Trump said before once again referring to his wife, Elaine Chao, with a racial slur.

“It’s as though he just doesn’t care anymore, he pushes through anything the Democrats want. The $1.7 TRILLION quickly approved Bill of the week before was HORRIBLE. Zero for USA Border Security,” the former president said.

Former President Donald Trump is calling for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell to face
a primary challenge after voting for the $1.7 trillion spending package last month.
AFP via Getty Images

“If he waited just ten days, the now ‘United Republican Congress’ could have made it MUCH BETTER, or KILLED IT. Something is wrong with McConnell, and those Republican Senators that Vote with him. PRIMARY THEM ALL!!!” he concluded in the posting.

Trump and the Senate GOP leader, who was reelected in 2020, have been squabbling since the midterm elections in November — when Republicans won a narrow majority in the House but failed to flip the Senate even though their party’s candidates were expected to make historic gains. 

The Senate voted 68-29 to approve the bill last month and sent it to the House, which passed it the next day, averting a partial government shutdown.

Elaine Chao, Sen. Mitch McConnell’s wife, served as Transportation Secretary in the Trump administration.
Getty Images

Eighteen Republican senators voted for the spending package, including Trump ally Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC).

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell.
Getty Images

Graham said the bill was “less than perfect” but, like other Republicans, embraced the $76 billion in increased military funding it contained.

“This bill is a big win for the American military. It gives a much-needed boost to the Department of Defense and a well-deserved pay raise to our men and women in uniform. A ten percent increase in defense spending will add real dollars to our defense budget,” Graham said in a statement after the vote.

Other Senate Republicans who backed the spending bill included Roy Blunt of Missouri, John Boozman of Arkansas, Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, Susan Collins of Maine, John Cornyn of Texas, Tom Cotton of Arkansas, James Inhofe of Oklahoma, Jerry Moran of Kansas, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Rob Portman of Ohio, Mitt Romney of Utah, Mike Rounds of South Dakota, Richard Shelby of Alabama, John Thune of South Dakota, Roger Wicker of Mississippi and Todd Young of Indiana.

Of the 18, only Romney and Wicker are up for re-election in 2024.

McCarthy, then the GOP leader in the House, was incensed that Democrats pushed the legislation through before the next Congress when Republicans would be in control. 

“The country is tired of it. They fired you. They chose a new direction for our country by electing a House Republican majority for the 118th Congress,” McCarthy fumed at his Democratic counterparts.

“If you dearly cared about the people, why wouldn’t you let everybody read it? Why wouldn’t you let them debate it? Why wouldn’t you simply wait 11 days? Just wait 11 days.”

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Congress dithered while US withered

A line from legendary manager Casey Stengel fits the moment: “Can’t anybody here play this game?” He was talking about his hapless 1962 New York Mets, but the damning question can be fairly directed to both political parties and Washington itself.

In one of the most worrisome signs of our era, the federal government has never been larger, richer and wielded more power over the lives of citizens. The size, debt and reach are astounding when compared to just a generation ago.

Yet that bejeweled behemoth is failing miserably at many of its most basic duties. Public safety, border security, stable prices and quality public education are in decline, leaving many Americans angry about their government and cynical about the people who run it.

With little regard to the party of the president, polls in recent years consistently show only about three in 10 respondents believe the country is on the right track. More damning, a large Pew study last year revealed an enormous trust deficit.

Just two in 10 Americans believe the federal government does what it should, a low point in a decades-long decline. When the question was first asked in 1958, nearly 75% said they trusted the feds to do the right thing all or most of the time.

It is hard to imagine those days ever returning, with events of last week vividly demonstrating that both parties are hellbent on squandering the little goodwill that remains.

House Republicans amped up their bid to make conservatism a punchline as their inability to promptly choose a speaker made history in all the wrong ways.

Tensions rose in the House Chamber when voting seemed to stall.
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

What should have been a feel-good, routine process to kick off a new Congress turned into a bloody slog, with Kevin McCarthy needing 15 roll-call votes over four days to eke out a narrow majority.

When the end finally came about 12:30 a.m. Saturday, it felt more like a mercy rule conclusion than a victory, with McCarthy looking like he needs a vacation before starting work.

Wall-to-wall TV coverage captured the stomach-churning ways the sausage was made, with the process showing intraparty pettiness and anger that obscured some substantive disagreements over how power would be shared. Midterm voters who gave the GOP a narrow majority certainly didn’t believe they would get a civil war before a single vote was taken on their behalf.

Democrats made no effort to mask their pleasure, and why should they? They united behind their leader, Brooklyn’s Hakeem Jeffries, in every round of voting, turning GOP squabbling into comic relief.

Welcome WH distraction

President Biden is set to visit the border for the first time in two years on Sunday.
John Moore/Getty Images

Dems also understood that every minute Republicans spent on the shootout in a lifeboat was a minute stolen from any serious probes of the Biden administration. As it turned out, the GOP frittered away a week in an internal struggle that should have been resolved in the two months since the election.

One inadvertent effect is that the self-neutered GOP copied the House habits of the last two years under Dem control. As Republican James Comer of Kentucky said in a fiery Friday afternoon nomination of McCarthy before the 13th ballot, the House never held a single oversight hearing on the millions who illegally crossed the border or the chaotic and deadly withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Nor did it examine the origin of COVID-19 or the Biden family’s foreign business. He pledged to probe all that and more as head of the Oversight panel — as soon as a Speaker was chosen.

The speech drew loud GOP applause, but failed to put McCarthy over the top. So the crucial probes remained on hold.

Although some of the holdouts demanded changes that smack of personal advantages and perks, others had more important concerns. Chief among these was fixing a corrupt budget-making process where leaders of both houses and parties jam virtually all spending into a gigantic bill, with members expected to vote yes without having time to read or debate it.

In his concessions to the holdouts, McCarthy sensibly vowed to end the practice, which is a major cause of the nation’s soaring debt.

Even before we know whether that and other changes will make a meaningful difference, we already know the speaker fights raised fresh doubts the GOP will accomplish anything significant. A four-seat majority doesn’t leave much margin for dissent and the wasted week reinforced the party’s image of being too divided to govern.

Hundreds of residents and activists marched in El Paso, Texas, on Jan. 7 ahead of President Biden’s visit.
Andres Leighton/AP

Meanwhile, the Biden White House proved again that it, too, doesn’t have a clue about good governance as it staged a series of strange events to draw sharp contrasts with the House hijinks.

The president, with Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell in tow, visited Kentucky to tout the bloated bipartisan infrastructure bill, a public relations coup for Biden that earned McConnell barbs from The Wall Street Journal editorial page and other conservatives.

Biden’s border bluster

On Thursday, Biden tried again to impersonate an active president by announcing a plan to deal with Cubans, Nicaraguans, Haitians and Venezuelans who come to the border. Under his order, they must apply for asylum from their home nation or a safe haven and he will admit 30,000 a month on a “parole” program.

As with Biden’s border policies for the last two years, this one is a head-scratcher. Hopefully, legal challenges will scuttle it as an overreach.

Besides, the Border Patrol reports that out of 234,000 November encounters with migrants, about 90,000 were from the four countries Biden cited.

What about the other 144,000 from other countries? And what about the hundreds of thousands of “got aways,” those who cross and disappear without encountering agents? Who knows?

Certainly not Biden, with a highlight of his remarks being another instance of his calling the vice president “President Harris.”

Biden speaks on Jan. 6 during a ceremony to mark the second anniversary of the Capitol riot.
Patrick Semansky/AP

The main point was to show he was doing public business while the GOP was eating its own, a point he will reinforce Sunday when he finally visits the border.

Biden was at it again Friday, too, holding a ceremony on the second anniversary of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. The ostensible purpose was to honor police and others for their conduct that day, but the real purpose was to remind the public about Donald Trump and what Biden calls an “insurrection” carried out by “MAGA Republicans.”

It was a hyper-partisan event, where the president repeated his false claim that defenders “gave their lives” that day. In fact, the only person who died on Jan. 6 was an unarmed protestor shot and killed by a Capitol police officer.

Such distortions highlight a cause of the decline in public trust. When officials of both parties speak in coded ways designed only for core supporters, there is no appeal to people not committed to a partisan camp. The result is the deep and bitter polarization that leaves little space for any American seeking both common sense and common ground.

Unfortunately, Washington offers very little of either these days.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Exit mobile version