Are there any Democrats left in Alabama? BUT? WHO is running the state AFL-CIO?

To put it another way, Democraps are running SO FEW (how few?) candidates for state House and Senate seats that the state AFL-CIO has felt compelled to endorse more than 25 Libertarians in hopes of cock-blocking some Rethuglicans. 

And, you of course guessed it; there's no Democraps in any of those races.

That said, this is also on the Bammy state AFL-CIO; Independent Political Report also notes that it's endorsing NINE Rethuglicans. Really? Is that just a circle jerking of thinking you have to endorse a candidate in every race, even if it's a craptacular Rethug vs an even worse, in this case, Libertarian-tard?

UNfortunately, and this IS a callout, the new and allegedly improve IPR, with an actual managing editor (paid?) writing this piece, didn't look behind the curtain at Ballotpedia.

Because (and I posted there last night) it would have told Jordan Willow-Evans that yes, the AFL-CIO is doing exactly such a circle jerk. In state Senate District 5, it's endorsing an unopposed Rethug. (And I see nothing in Greg Reed's background to mandate an endorsement, as far as AL Senate committees, etc.) BUT, in Districts 8-11, which also have no opposition, there's no endorsement. But, in Sen 14, another unopposed Rethug is endorsed. (Also, sidebar for Independent Political Report saying "LOOK, Libertarians," why didn't they recruit one for this race? Yes, Weaver was in the state House before, but still.)

S16? Unopposed Rethug.

Without bothering to link, they're endorsing multiple unopposed Rethugs in the state House as well. 

WHY?

I actually halfway understand endorsing Libertarians over Rethugs. With their civil liberties angle, re freedom of assembly including the right to organize, they're more supportive of that than Rethugs. But, as far as supporting actual union activity? It may be closer to peas in a pod.

I tagged both the state AFL-CIO and A-list freelance labor reporter Mike Elk on Twitter, separately. Neither has responded.

Roundup part 2: Smoke if you've got it in Dallas, worship the Golden Calf

Plenty of stuff for a breakout second Roundup beyond the weather stuff, especially given the looniness at CPAC.

So, let's dig in!

CPAC

Cancun Ted Cruz said he remained Trump's lapdog.

Oh, that Golden Calf Trump statue? Hecho en Mexico. What? "Get a rope!"

Jan. 6

Why hasn't the FBI worked harder to "talk to Luke Coffee"? For that matter, why hasn't the DOJ indicted him? Turns out he HAS been charged and has surrendered to authorities and that the (lazy-ass?) Monthly hasn't updated its story. (I insert the adjective per the first half of the roundup and a Texas Monthly piece flat-out lying about Texas' grid disconnection being problematic. Texas Monthly semi-sucks or worse on a semi-regular, if not regular, basis.)

Texana

Once again, Willie Nelson can't wait to be on the road again.

Another Texas tradition that coronavirus can't kill off? Scarborough Faire will start its 40th season in weeks.

The assassination of Chicago Black Panther Fred Hampton has a Texas tie. The Monthly discusses the new movie.

Politics

Tony Tinderholt and Katrina "Bullets" Pierson are among the wingnuts who might run for the late Ron Wright's Sixth Congressional District seat.

North Texas

Dallas' new police chief may have officers doing less marijuana enforcement.

Politics, national

Glass half full or half empty? I kind of agree with this USA Today piece that if Trump, out of the Oval Office only five weeks, had 45 percent of people at CPAC say they'd take someone else for prez, he is closer to burned-out supernova than lurking land mine. On the other hand, Trumpianism is still here in spades. After all, the top alternative to Trump at CPAC was Ron DeSantis.

G. Elliott Morris notes the corrosive effect of a misinformed public on democracy and governance. 

Matt Mohn shows how Joe Biden would have done under the 2004 Tom DeLay re-redistricting.

Solar Winds — the big picture

Bruce Schneier talks about the price of capitalism on cybersecurity.
 

The reality behind the Lincoln Project

Three of the four NeverTrumper Republican founders of the Lincoln Project? Trump-level grifters, more specificially, deadbeat tax delinquents. Vox further calls out Lincoln Project founders and top brass as having been enablers of Trump through helping get Poppy and Shrub Bush elected in part with racist dogwhistles by and for them and for downballot candidates. This is all true. Vox also reminds us that Steve Schmidt foisted Sarah Palin on us. In addition, they all produced the same type of dark ads that Trump only ramped up. He, his messages, and his message framing didn't come out of nowhere. And now, they're trying to trump Trump, which doesn't happen unless one plays for really scorched-earth tactics.

The Vox story also links to Open Secrets on the grifting angle. It finally notes that playing to Twitter isn't much of a strategy for defeating Trump, just for lining their pockets. (Well, Vox doesn't add the latter party, but c'mon.)

The biggest problem is that it's an attempt to normalize the modern Republican party to national Democrats. Given that those Democrats have invited hardcore conservative John Kasich to speak to the DNC, it's worked!

Republicans can't take a joke

You knew that already, but it's now more official.

Reggie Brown, an impersonator of President Obama, was keynote entertainment at the Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans.

And, he was fine as long as he skewered Obama .... even as his skewering, like jokes about the president celebrating just half of Black History Month, skirted some edges.

But, make fun of the GOP candidates for president? Well, read first:

The act, which included a fake Secret Service detail, a recorded video address from the Oval Office and a presidential seal, came one day after Govs. Haley Barbour of Mississippi and Bobby Jindal of Louisiana urged fellow Republicans to stay disciplined — and focused on economic issues — in their quest to defeat Mr. Obama next year.

The act included photographs of Anthony D. Weiner, a Democrat who resigned his seat in Congress because of lewd pictures he sent to some of his Twitter followers. Then, the impersonator turned to the implosion of Mr. Gingrich’s campaign, after many of his aides resigned 10 days ago, saying, “His supporters are dropping faster than Anthony Weiner’s pants.”

Taking aim at Mr. Pawlenty, a former Minnesota governor, Mr. Brown mocked his performance in a debate last week in which he softened his criticism of the health care plan that Mr. Romney had signed into law in Massachusetts.

He said Mr. Pawlenty missed the event because he was “having his foot surgically removed from his mouth.” He added: “Don’t worry. It’s covered under Obamneycare. Along with spinal transplants.” The impersonator also made an issue of Mr. Romney’s Mormon faith, referring to polygamy and showing a picture of a man with multiple wives.

As a backdrop picture of Michelle Bachmann appeared, Brown's mic was cut off and he was physically "escorted" off the stage.

Too bad; I wonder how he would have sent her up, and certainly Rick Perry.

Majority of U.S. supports legal same-sex marriage

Per Gallup, legal same-sex marriage now has 53 percent support.

The shift was all among Democrats and self-identified independents; Republicans didn't move. However, by political philosophy, self-described conservatives did become slightly more favorable.

On the age break, it gets above 50 percent for all age groups of women, and at 50 percent or above for all age groups of men.

So, how long will the GOP continue to resist and how long with the Democrats kowtow to a resisting GOP?

Dear America, dear GOP: there ARE third parties

A new Gallup poll shows a majority of Republicans want a third party, as shown below:

I note in reply:

Dear GOPers — there ARE third parties. Now, all you have to do is vote for them. In fact, there's already a "Religious Right" party in place for you. It's called the Constitution Party, and it's where Ron Paul should have run in 1988, since he's not a real libertarian. (Gary Johnson IS, and I wonder, in a GOP subplot, if he can best Paul.)

For non-social con types, Randians, etc., there is the Libertarian Party.

The poll graphic notes that it's the party out of power, specifically, out of White House power, that bitches about the need for a third party. And, yes, the American system is geared against third parties in a variety of ways, organically, and the organic impediments are amplified by both halves of the two-party duopoly.

Nonetheless, consistent, conscientious third-party voting, by enough people for long enough, can force change. It has in the past, with populists, etc. of the late 1800s eventually leading the Dems to nominate William Jennings Bryan in 1896 and the GOP to counter with Teddy Roosevelt for Veep four years later.

The same holds true for bitching Dems.

More Americans want a third party - I'd settle for a second one

So says Gallup.

And, it's understandable why. We have one political party (GOP), its Dark Shadows alter ego (Tea Partiers) and a GOP Jaycees slouching toward Gomorrah (Democrats).

Unfortunately, the "third party" most Americans want is something between what Republicans are and what Democrats are stereotyped as being. In that case, we actually have a third party now in existence - THE DEMOCRATS.

Sad to say, though, we don't have a second party at the moment.

Ambinder right on cons, wrong on libs

Mark Ambinder rues the increasing purity demands of hardcore conservatives, and the lack of party discipline, unity and message. But, he then totally spoils his column with some crazy counservative-liberal, Republican-Democratic equivalency claim on this issue.

Seriously. The never-before-elected Joe Miller, a fringe Palinite, is the same as three-term House veteran Joe Sestak? And, no, I'm not joking:

Democrats, too, have had their share of bickering. Arkansas Lt. Gov. Bill Halter — galvanized by the state’s labor unions — challenged Senator Blanche Lincoln; she barely won the June runoff. In Colorado, when Senator Michael Bennet was not responsive enough to party liberals, the state’s former House speaker Andrew Romanoff decided to challenge him. Mr. Romanoff sold his house to pay for his campaign and might have won the Aug. 10 vote were it not for strategic mistakes he made late in the campaign.

In May in Pennsylvania, Representative Joe Sestak would not let the Democratic establishment coronate Senator Arlen Specter — who had just been persuaded to switch parties by the White House after conservatives made it impossible for him to win the Republican primary. These anti-party forces are not likely to wane.

Indeed, conservatives and liberals alike will continue to insist on nominating unadulterated candidates and will become more successful in doing so. And those candidates are likely to distrust their own establishments as much as they ideologically oppose the people at the other end of the political spectrum.

Neither Romanoff nor Halter nor Sestak was an ideologue.

Even if Bernie Sanders, in Vermont, were to decide to become a Democrat and run against Pat Leahy, even HE wouldn't be Joe Miller and Ambinder's "equivalency" would still be untrue.

Also, contra claims Ambinder makes elsewhere in the column, there's no well of left-liberal funding anything like the Koch brothers and others.

Finally, so far at least, the tea party challenge has done fairly little to dissolve GOP party discipline. Of course, we'll have to wait not just until the end of the primary season, but until after midterm elections in November to test this, for various reasons. We'll need to see how many nutbars win, and how that affects the GOP with them inside the electoral tent. We'll also need to see how many nutbars lose, and how much that affects sniping at the GOP "establishment."

But, Dems, without even Bernie Sanders types, let alone, say, Alexander Cockburn types, challenging on their left, continue to be more fractious than Republicans. Blame Rahm Emanuel for the Blue Dog Congressional candidates he recruited. Blame President Kumbaya for not cracking a whip on party discipline, which his predecessor did. In other words, Obama needs Rahmbo to be Rove, and he's not pushing Rahmbo to do that, in that way.

Newt Gingrich's laugh of the day

The old salamander, along with Bill Frist and others, tells us how to fix health care.

Maybe, doing just the opposite of what he says might work.

When "markets" is in the first graf, and after that, time after time, you know it's the same old tired dreck.

Distinguishing Republicans and Democrats at a glance

No, really. Apparently, it can be done, says Scientific American, reporting on a PLoS study.

I would worry if I were Democrats too

In a commissioned national poll, DailyKos notes that Democrats' enthusiasm for voting in 2010 is FAR lower than Republicans. And, though some liberal bloggers poo-poohed fears after the 2009 off-term elections just a few weeks ago, The One won't be on the ballot with "The Politics of Hope Personality" next year, either, for better or worse.

That said, one silver lining is that independents are still leaning Democratic and are more likely to vote than registered Dems.

Douthat reams Palin, Huckabee and GOP

First, the two 2012 presidential frontrunners are chewed out for leaning to celebritydom. After that, the rest of the party gets it for being vacuous on serious economic issues in part because the folks at the top are chasing celebrity.

Cal GOP – will ‘no new taxes’ fall to ‘tough on crime’?

The two have been political stalking points of conservative Republicans for decades, and the new California budget deal put them on a head-on collision. Some Repubilcans now want to back out of the deal because it will release almost 30,000 inmates.

They’re joining L.A. County, threatening to sue the state for other reasons, and many other folks.

Assembly GOP leader Sam Blakeslee claims this is a double-cross and he didn’t know about it, even though newspapers have reported it for a couple of days already.

For GOP, it’s not about healthcare but Obama

South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint has now explicitly said so:

“If we’re able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo,” DeMint said Friday during a conference call with conservative activists. “It will break him.”

And, that’s the bottom line why the GOP doesn’t offer its own plan.

It’s also a measure of how tawdry? (that’s not quite the right word)… how amateurish American politics is to, say, the British House of Commons.

Anyway, now that DeMint has made that clear, it’s good that the Democratic National Committee is joining folks like MoveOn and running ads against its own senators that don’t fall in line.

From the ‘GOP in the wilderness’ department

Whatever genius inside the Republican National Committee had the bright idea that renaming the Democrats as the “Democrat Socialist Party” reflects why the Republicans remain doomed to wander in the wilderness.

And, actually, that’s a shame. The Democrats need more of a challenge of any sort, especially since most “progressives” refuse to initiate that challenge themselves by voting Green, Socialist (real Socialist) or other similar options.

Instead, the more benignly smiling half of the two-party duopoly will get more of a head start on getting its 2010, and 2012, electoral success ticket punched.

Utah Gov: GOP can’t ‘just say no’

We’re not in Nancy Reaganland anymore is the message of the Republican governor of one of the nation’s most conservative states. Jon Huntsman wants positive proposals (are you listening, “tea partiers”?) and not just “grousing and complaining.”

It would do us all a whole lot of good if we actually started engaging directly in finding compromises and common ground and shared solutions.

Odds are tea partiers are still holding their breath and pouting right now.

Independents shift GOP

Charlie Cook reports that political self-identified independents are now equally likely to lean Republican as Democratic, That’s surely not good news for national Democrats, who have to figure out how to counteract the clear damage they’re picking up over AIG and other bailout issues.

California GOP gets nuttier

As state budget negotiations continue at an impasse, the state Senate GOP has given the boot to minority leader Dave Cogdill, seen as a moderate within the state GOP and Senate on the budget issue.

The crystal ball for top Republicans says …

Just as Hillary Clinton’s Democratic primary campaign failure can be reduced to one event – deciding to campaign in Iowa – so McCain’s failure in the general election can largely be reduced to one event.

In this case, Sarah Palin was McCain’s Achilles heel.

And, it’s not just me; 59 percent of Americans, which has to include at least a few Republicans, find her a drag on the ticket.

I don’t think he ever totally got over the petulance he had at being told by Karl Rove that he couldn’t pick Joe Lieberman as his Veep. (And, some “maverick,” eh? If he really were a maverick, he would have told Rove and Steve Schmidt where to get off.)

Another turning point? McCain’s “the fundamentals of the economy are strong” line. But, I think he could have done more to overcome that without the Palin baggage.

That said, what’s ahead for McCain?

He’s a 72-year-old senator whose one signature piece of legislation was passed in the face of massive opposition from senators in his own party. And, for the next two years, he’ll be in a Senate with shrunken GOP membership and, on many issues, an inability to filibuster. On other issues, Harry Reid, assuming he stays as majority leader, is likely to call Republican filibuster bluffs.

If you thought McCain was in danger of melting down during this year’s election, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

He’s up for re-election in 2010, and there’s already plenty of speculation popular Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, who has shown she can stand up to the GOP, will run for his seat.

I actually hope he doesn’t retire in 2010; I’d like to see him get another beatdown.

Meanwhile, here’s what happens to some other top Republicans.

Sarah Palin? Well, her future has taken yet another twist in the last week or so, with Ted Stevens’ conviction followed by his re-election. Assuming his appeals fail and he finally gets the boot from the Senate, she has to be eyeing his seat.

If not? I expect she’ll face both a primary challenge and a three-way general election race for governor in 2010. That’s unless she decides to run for Lisa Murkowski’s Senate seat, in which case she’ll have her head handed back to her in a hat. She may try to run for president in 2012, in which case she’d better have a hat ready for her head again. After that, the Peter principle kicks in and she goes to Fox News.

Meanwhile, Newsweek delivers more of the goods on the horribleness of Campaign Barbie, from the Secret Service seeing her incitements raise the threat level against Obama to just what a clothes horse she really is.

Somehow, I don’t think her and First Dumbass Todd being seen as “Wasilla hillbillies looting Neiman Marcus from coast to coast” helps her image unless Alaskans are even more down with political corruption and cynicism than say, Louisiana voters.

Mitt Romney? He’d like to bid to be the “kinder, gentler” Religious Right-focused candidate. But, especially if GOP bloodletting after this convention pushes the part further right, there’s no chance of that. Beyond general reasons, his Mormonism will remain unacceptable to many. On the flip side, the way Mormon money pushed Prop. 8 over the top, he has to be looking at 2012.

Mike Huckabee? He could be the Religious Right front-runner, but I won’t say “should be”; he’ll have to keep himself in the public eye enough in the next four years.

Tim Pawlenty? If re-elected in 2010, he could be the “sensible conservative” alternative. Obama’s victory aside, governors still have many advantages over senators in running for the presidency. (Don’t forget that before Obama, the last Senator-cum-President, Jack Kennedy, had been in the Senate less than a decade.)

Mitch Daniels, re-elected in Indiana, is a possible up-and-comer. He raised taxes there despite protests from Grover Norquist and his ilk.

Rudy Giuliani? He’ll continue to get rich off 9/11 legends of his involvement. At the same time, he misses the game. I think he has to be tempted to run against Patterson for gov in 2010, but only if he has a pretty clear GOP field. With Mike Bloomberg apparently wanting another term as mayor of the Big Apple, one potential opponent is out of the way.

Mike Bloomberg? He’ll be the Hamlet of Gracie Mansion on another third-party bid.

Arnold Schwarzenegger? I’m really not sure. I wouldn’t be surprised if he doesn’t run for re-election. I wouldn’t be surprised if he did and lost. Or won. Or ran for the Senate in 2010 against Dianne Feinstein. She’s going to be 75-plus, and I don’t doubt age will be an issue. That all said, his “No on 8” stance has probably ended what remains of his love affair with the California GOP. I think he could win a primary for the Senate as easily as he could for his current spot, if not more so.

Charlie Crist? If the GOP bloodletting turns out not to make the party into a Constitution Religious Right party writ large, Crist has to be considered a front-runner for the nomination. His dignified, quiet distancing of himself from McCain’s more nutbar attacks on Obama, ACORN, etc., stand him in good stead.

The Republican Party? McCain’s loss will probably be interpreted through the lens of Prop. 8 success in California. That said, a pro-life issue in Colorado lost, so Religious Righters could push the GOP into further trouble if they insist their view is the correct one.

Meanwhile, let the infighting begin.

Outgoing National Republican Senatorial Conference Chairman John Ensign says the GOP needs a bigger social tent, while Grover Norquist and Tony Perkins are gathering a meeting of ’wingers tomorrow.


I think the choice to head the RNC in the future will be a “tell.”

LATER – some leading Democrats.

The future of Western GOP gets fractured

High Country News, the premier all-around progressive magazine of Western states environmentalism, politics and sociology, has an excellent take on the future of the conservatives vs. the ultra-conservatives of the GOP in the West, starting with the ground zero of Idaho.

Environmental issues, especially with mushrooming natural gas and coalbed methane production in a number of states, is at the top of fracture points between conservatives and ultras.

But, it’s not just conservatives vs. ultras. It’s also the stereotypical hook and bullet Republican against the big business one, or at least, the big extractive industries one.

That said, allegedly “green” Western Republicans still fall short. Witness Wyoming Republican Congressional candidate Mark Gordon:

The modern Sierra Club “is more ideological -- not talking about management (of grazing), but talking about getting cows off public lands. ... There’s been an incredible retrenchment on both sides.”

All straw man here, of course.

Sierra (and others) are about not letting you graze your cows on federal land at subsidized rates and above good carrying capacity.

Anyway, read the full article; it’s long but in-depth.

Then, consider subscribing to HCN.