ReportWire

Tag: ballots

  • Need ID for beer, but not voting? That’s misleading

    [ad_1]

    As Republicans pushed for a national photo voter ID law, they made a familiar argument: If people need an ID for everyday purchases, why not for voting? 

    The Save America Act, which passed the House Feb. 11 with unanimous GOP support, would mandate that all states require a photo ID to vote in person or by mail. 

    U.S. Rep. Bryan Steil, R-Wis., said during debate that when he recently went to buy a six-pack, the clerk asked to see his ID even though she recognized him. Steil is 44.

    “I think it’s nuts that we protect our beer in this country more than our ballots in jurisdictions,” Steil said Feb. 11. 

    Hold my beer. Is that true? 

    Comparing ID rules for purchasing alcohol and casting a ballot is about as satisfying as a warm beer on a hot day.

    Let’s tap into the facts.

    Not every state requires stores to card all beer buyers

    When, how and why alcohol retailers ask customers for IDs is typically dictated by state law. Retailers can impose stricter requirements for ID checks if they wish.

    A 2024 Oklahoma law gives businesses discretion as to whether they ask for ID. The law is named for a 90-year-old man denied a beer because he lacked ID. 

    Utah’s law requires an ID check for every customer purchasing alcohol.

    In Steil’s home state of Wisconsin, employees “should demand proof of age of anyone entering the premises who appears to be under the legal drinking age,” a state guide says. Under the law, employees “may require a person” to present ID and proof of age.

    The guide lists several acceptable forms of ID: a driver’s license, state ID, passport, military or tribal identification or “any other form of identification or proof of age acceptable to the licensee.” 

    That “any other form” language is more expansive than Wisconsin’s voter ID law.

    Some states require a photo ID to vote

    Social media users and politicians sometimes spread the misconception that voter ID isn’t required.

    Steil’s spokesperson pointed to several states that don’t require a photo ID.

    Most states — 36 — request or require voters to show some form of ID at the polls. The remaining 14 states and Washington, D.C., require no form of identification, but they use other methods to verify voters’ identities, such as matching signatures or asking for personal information. Federal law requires first-time voters to show ID when requesting mail ballots, while some states have additional ID requirements for voters mailing in ballots.

    Wisconsin is one of about 10 states that have strict photo ID laws, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

    The law requires voters to bring their photo IDs to the polls. (Voters felt so strongly they enshrined it in the state constitution in 2025.) Acceptable forms include a valid Wisconsin driver’s license, a state ID card or a passport. The law says student IDs from accredited Wisconsin colleges or universities are allowed, if they meet the requirements.

    Why the beer vs ballots comparison falls short

    Keep these points in mind when you hear the photo ID voting and alcohol comparison.

    • Legal rights: The right to vote and the right to drink beer are not the same. The right to vote is a right enshrined by constitutional amendments. No such constitutional rights pertain to beer buying. “Voting is a right and is a public act,” said Barry Burden, University of Wisconsin political scientist. “Purchasing alcohol is a private activity.”

    • Scope of problem: The proof of age law doesn’t exist to “protect” beer, said Derek Clinger, senior staff attorney with the State Democracy Research Initiative at the University of Wisconsin law school. It is meant to prevent underage drinking, which poses health risks. Voter fraud is far more rare than youth alcohol consumption

    • Election laws provide additional protections: States have laws beyond voter ID to protect ballots. Every state but North Dakota requires people to register to vote. People who register attest to their eligibility, including U.S. citizenship. There is no such registration step to purchase alcohol. 

    “The registration step requires documentation to prove that a person is a legal resident,” Burden said. “Only after that is it possible to take part in an election. An alcohol purchase is a more superficial interaction where the purchaser’s eligibility is determined on the spot with no prior knowledge.” 

    In case readers were wondering, we asked Steil spokesperson Michael Donatello what kind of beer Steil was buying when the clerk asked for ID.

    “Congressman Steil was purchasing a Potosi Czech-Style Pilsner at the time of this incident,” he said in an email. “He has been spotted purchasing Miller Lite, Gray Brewing Co., and Lakefront Brewing Co. depending on the occasion.”

    RELATED: Thirsty for more facts about voter ID? Read PolitiFact.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • More than 1 million ballots turned in for California special election on Prop 50, data firm says

    [ad_1]

    More than 1 million ballots turned in for California special election on Prop 50, data firm says

    NEXT MONTH’S SPECIAL ELECTION. IF APPROVED, PROP 50 WILL GIVE CALIFORNIA LAWMAKERS THE POWER TO REDRAW CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS, CREATING FIVE HOUSE SEATS FOR DEMOCRATS. KCRA 3’S CECIL HANNIBAL JOINS US LIVE IN DOWNTOWN SACRAMENTO. SO, CECIL, WHAT ARE VOTERS SAYING ABOUT THE PROCESS SO FAR? WE SPOKE TO SEVERAL VOTERS TODAY WHO SAY THAT IT’S BEEN A SMOOTH AND EASY PROCESS SO FAR. ONE, BECAUSE THEY CAN SIMPLY WALK UP OR DRIVE UP TO A BALLOT BOX AND PUT THEIR VOTE RIGHT IN THERE. OR ALSO BECAUSE THEY SAY WHAT’S ON THE BALLOT IS SIMPLE. IT’S 70 WORDS. ONE QUESTION WITH TWO OPTIONS YES OR NO FOR PROP 50. NOW, ELECTION OFFICIALS TODAY SAY THEY WANT THIS TO BE A SIMPLE AND SMOOTH PROCESS FOR VOTERS. PROBABLY WONDERING WHY WE’RE HERE IN DOCO. WELL, THAT’S BECAUSE THIS IS ONE LOCATION WHERE VOTERS IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY CAN COME DROP OFF THEIR BALLOT INSIDE OF THE KINGS TEAM STORE. ACTUALLY, AN EMPLOYEE JUST TOLD ME THEY’VE HAD THREE PEOPLE SHOW UP TODAY, TWO YESTERDAY. SO PEOPLE ARE GETTING OUT AND CASTING THEIR VOTES NOW. SACRAMENTO, EL DORADO AND SAN JOAQUIN COUNTIES ALL SAY THAT BALLOTS HAVE BEEN MAILED OUT, AND IF YOU HAVEN’T RECEIVED IT ALREADY, YOU SHOULD VERY SOON. WELL, YOU KNOW, VOTING LASTS UNTIL NOVEMBER 4TH. ANOTHER REMINDER FOR YOU WHEN YOU’RE DROPPING OFF YOUR BALLOT, MAKE SURE YOU SIGN THE PINK ENVELOPE. THAT’S VERY, VERY IMPORTANT. SO ELECTION OFFICIALS CAN VERIFY THAT IT IS YOU AND NOT VOTER FRAUD. YOU CAN ALSO MAIL IT IN FOR FREE THROUGH USPS. NOW WE TALKED ABOUT PROP 50, BUT IT’S NOW TIME FOR VOTERS TO DECIDE WITHOUT DISCUSSING PARTY AFFILIATION. WE TALKED TO VOTERS IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY TODAY ABOUT THE MEASURE. WELL, IT’S REALLY ONE SINGLE QUESTION. AND THAT QUESTION IS CLEAR TO ME. I THINK THAT IT’S THE RIGHT THING TO DO AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME. I THINK IT’S REALLY UNFORTUNATE THAT WE HAVE TO DO THIS, BUT I FEEL LIKE WE’VE BEEN FORCED BY THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. ONLY ONE VOTE. YOU KNOW, GOT TO DO WHAT I THINK IS RIGHT. YEAH. BACK OUT HERE LIVE AGAIN. THIS IS ONE LOCATION WHERE VOTERS CAN DROP OFF THEIR BALLOTS. IF YOU’RE HEADING TO A KINGS PRESEASON GAME THIS WEEK, RIGHT ON YOUR WAY TO THE ARENA OR SOMEWHERE TO WATCH THE GAME, YOU CAN JUST COME DROP OFF YOUR BALLOT. NOW WE’RE TALKING ABOUT DROP OFF YOUR BALLOT. IF YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT SECURITY. TODAY, WE TALKED TO ELECTION OFFICIALS FROM SACRAMENTO, EL DORADO AND SAN JOAQUIN COUNTIES ABOUT JUST THAT SECURITY AND STAFFING FOR THIS SPECIAL ELECTION. WE’LL HAVE MORE ON THOSE DISCUSSIONS COMING UP TONIGHT AT SIX. LIVE IN DOCO. CECIL HANNIBAL KCRA THREE NEWS, OKC. SO THANK YOU. AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE’S OFFICE OFFERS A WAY FOR VOTERS TO TRACK THEIR BALLOTS. IT’S CALLED WHERE’S MY BALLOT? VOTERS COULD SIGN UP WITH THEIR NAME, THEIR BIRTH DATE, AND ZIP CODE. ONCE LOGGED IN, YOU CAN TRACK WHERE THE BALLOT IS FROM WHEN IT’S MAILED TO YOU, SENT BACK TO COUNTY ELECTIONS OFFICE, AND RECEIVED AND THEN COUNTED. JUST A REMINDER, THE LAST DAY TO REGISTER IS OCTOBER 20TH AND TODAY IS THE SEVENTH. SO AS OF LAST MONTH, NEARLY HALF OF ALL VOTERS ARE REGISTERED. DEMOCRATS, 25% A

    More than 1 million ballots turned in for California special election on Prop 50, data firm says

    Updated: 4:30 PM PDT Oct 17, 2025

    Editorial Standards

    More than 1 million ballots have been returned so far in California’s special election to decide Proposition 50, according to a data firm used by political campaigns.Political Data Inc. said on X Wednesday that 4.49% of ballots sent out to California voters have already been returned. The firm cited a rate that was “close to recall election numbers,” in a reference to the 2021 vote over whether to recall Gov. Gavin Newsom. According to the early mail-in vote, 5% of Democrats and 5% of Republicans have turned in their ballots. That equates to more than 530,000 votes from Democrats and more than 293,000 from Republicans. About 76% of ballots returned were from people ages 50 or older. White voters have been overrepresented with 72% of the vote so far. California voters on Nov. 4 will decide if the state should temporarily toss its current congressional district map drawn by the state’s independent commission and replace it with a new one that was quickly drawn by Democrats. It’s part of a larger national fight in which Republicans and Democrats are trying to gerrymander their congressional districts to determine which party controls the U.S. House of Representatives halfway through President Donald Trump’s term.The proposed maps target five California Republicans in an attempt to offset the five Republicans Texas is aiming to add.If approved, the maps would be in place for the 2026, 2028 and 2030 elections. State leaders have said the power to draw maps would return to the independent redistricting commission in 2031.One of the people who works at Political Data Inc., Paul Mitchell, is the owner of a consulting firm that helped to create the congressional redistricting maps for Democrats. He said he is not campaigning for the measure. The last day to register to vote is Oct. 20, though people can also vote on Nov. 3 with Conditional Voter Registration. | RELATED | Everything you need to know about California’s Proposition 50See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channelPHNjcmlwdCB0eXBlPSJ0ZXh0L2phdmFzY3JpcHQiPiFmdW5jdGlvbigpeyJ1c2Ugc3RyaWN0Ijt3aW5kb3cuYWRkRXZlbnRMaXN0ZW5lcigibWVzc2FnZSIsKGZ1bmN0aW9uKGUpe2lmKHZvaWQgMCE9PWUuZGF0YVsiZGF0YXdyYXBwZXItaGVpZ2h0Il0pe3ZhciB0PWRvY3VtZW50LnF1ZXJ5U2VsZWN0b3JBbGwoImlmcmFtZSIpO2Zvcih2YXIgYSBpbiBlLmRhdGFbImRhdGF3cmFwcGVyLWhlaWdodCJdKWZvcih2YXIgcj0wO3I8dC5sZW5ndGg7cisrKXtpZih0W3JdLmNvbnRlbnRXaW5kb3c9PT1lLnNvdXJjZSl0W3JdLnN0eWxlLmhlaWdodD1lLmRhdGFbImRhdGF3cmFwcGVyLWhlaWdodCJdW2FdKyJweCJ9fX0pKX0oKTs8L3NjcmlwdD4=

    More than 1 million ballots have been returned so far in California’s special election to decide Proposition 50, according to a data firm used by political campaigns.

    Political Data Inc. said on X Wednesday that 4.49% of ballots sent out to California voters have already been returned.

    The firm cited a rate that was “close to recall election numbers,” in a reference to the 2021 vote over whether to recall Gov. Gavin Newsom.

    This content is imported from Twitter.
    You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

    According to the early mail-in vote, 5% of Democrats and 5% of Republicans have turned in their ballots. That equates to more than 530,000 votes from Democrats and more than 293,000 from Republicans.

    About 76% of ballots returned were from people ages 50 or older. White voters have been overrepresented with 72% of the vote so far.

    California voters on Nov. 4 will decide if the state should temporarily toss its current congressional district map drawn by the state’s independent commission and replace it with a new one that was quickly drawn by Democrats. It’s part of a larger national fight in which Republicans and Democrats are trying to gerrymander their congressional districts to determine which party controls the U.S. House of Representatives halfway through President Donald Trump’s term.

    The proposed maps target five California Republicans in an attempt to offset the five Republicans Texas is aiming to add.

    If approved, the maps would be in place for the 2026, 2028 and 2030 elections. State leaders have said the power to draw maps would return to the independent redistricting commission in 2031.

    One of the people who works at Political Data Inc., Paul Mitchell, is the owner of a consulting firm that helped to create the congressional redistricting maps for Democrats. He said he is not campaigning for the measure.

    The last day to register to vote is Oct. 20, though people can also vote on Nov. 3 with Conditional Voter Registration.

    | RELATED | Everything you need to know about California’s Proposition 50

    See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Newsmax to pay $67M to Denver’s Dominion Voting Systems to settle defamation case over 2020 election claims

    [ad_1]

    The conservative network Newsmax will pay $67 million to settle a lawsuit accusing it of defaming a Denver-based voting equipment company by spreading lies about President Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss, according to documents filed Monday.

    [ad_2]

    Nicholas Riccardi

    Source link

  • How Central Florida leaders are ensuring voter safety after lost ballots in US

    How Central Florida leaders are ensuring voter safety after lost ballots in US

    [ad_1]

    Election Day is less than a week away, and there are concerns about keeping mail-in ballots safe. Following incidents of ballot drop box fires in Oregon and Washington and a mishap in Miami-Dade, supervisors of elections across Central Florida say they have plans put in place to keep people’s votes secure. “I treat ballots and votes like money. You don’t want to give it to anyone else. You want to make sure it’s secure,” said Lisa Lewis, Volusia County Supervisor of Elections. “Somebody who has ill intent like that couldn’t get into our offices and pull off those tricks,” said Alan Hays, Lake County Supervisor of Elections.Lewis says the only time people can drop off their mail-in ballots is during their voting hours. “They are manned, and we have someone who stands with them. Then that person stamps them, and they check to make sure people have signed it,” Lewis said. She said the mail-in ballot box is brought in every night. “Our box is kind of small, so we have two cameras on it, as well as someone standing there next to it,” Lewis said. Alan Hays, the Lake County Supervisor of Elections, says his office follows the same protocols. “We never leave voted ballots in a polling place overnight; they are always returned to our office,” said Hays.RELATED: Orange County leaders making historic safety enhancements after ballot box fires around US Florida law mandates that drop boxes at early voting sites be manned 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Another way to track your mail-in ballot is by going to your county election’s website. You click on BallotTrax and enter your information. All mail-in ballots are due by 7 p.m. on Election Day.

    Election Day is less than a week away, and there are concerns about keeping mail-in ballots safe.

    Following incidents of ballot drop box fires in Oregon and Washington and a mishap in Miami-Dade, supervisors of elections across Central Florida say they have plans put in place to keep people’s votes secure.

    “I treat ballots and votes like money. You don’t want to give it to anyone else. You want to make sure it’s secure,” said Lisa Lewis, Volusia County Supervisor of Elections.

    “Somebody who has ill intent like that couldn’t get into our offices and pull off those tricks,” said Alan Hays, Lake County Supervisor of Elections.

    Lewis says the only time people can drop off their mail-in ballots is during their voting hours.

    “They are manned, and we have someone who stands with them. Then that person stamps them, and they check to make sure people have signed it,” Lewis said.

    She said the mail-in ballot box is brought in every night.

    “Our box is kind of small, so we have two cameras on it, as well as someone standing there next to it,” Lewis said.

    Alan Hays, the Lake County Supervisor of Elections, says his office follows the same protocols.

    “We never leave voted ballots in a polling place overnight; they are always returned to our office,” said Hays.

    RELATED: Orange County leaders making historic safety enhancements after ballot box fires around US

    Florida law mandates that drop boxes at early voting sites be manned 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

    Another way to track your mail-in ballot is by going to your county election’s website.

    You click on BallotTrax and enter your information.

    All mail-in ballots are due by 7 p.m. on Election Day.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fires Set In Drop Boxes Destroy Hundreds Of Ballots In Washington And Damage 3 In Oregon – KXL

    Fires Set In Drop Boxes Destroy Hundreds Of Ballots In Washington And Damage 3 In Oregon – KXL

    [ad_1]

    SEATTLE (AP) — Authorities, including the FBI, were investigating Monday after early morning fires were set in ballot drop boxes in Portland, Oregon, and in nearby Vancouver, Washington, where hundreds of ballots were destroyed.

    The Portland Police Bureau reported that officers and firefighters responded to a fire in one ballot drop box at about 3:30 a.m. and determined an incendiary device had been placed inside. Multnomah County Elections Director Tim Scott said a fire suppressant inside the drop box protected nearly all the ballots; only three were damaged, and his office planned to contact those voters to help them obtain replacement ballots.

    A few hours later, across the Columbia River in Vancouver, television crews captured footage of smoke pouring out of a ballot box at a transit center. Vancouver is the biggest city in Washington’s 3rd Congressional District, the site of what is expected to be one of the closest U.S. House races in the country, between first-term Democratic Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez and Republican challenger Joe Kent.

    “I hope the perpetrator of this reprehensible act is quickly apprehended — and local and federal law enforcement have my full support in working to keep our democratic process safe and secure,” Gluesenkamp Perez said in a statement.

    She said she’s requesting an overnight law enforcement presence posted at all ballot drop boxes in Clark County through Election Day.

    “Southwest Washington cannot risk a single vote being lost to arson and political violence,” her statement said.

    Representatives for Kent’s campaign didn’t immediately return phone and email messages seeking comment.

    Clark County Auditor Greg Kimsey in Vancouver told The Associated Press that the ballot drop box at the Fisher’s Landing Transit Center also had a fire suppression system inside, but for some reason it wasn’t effective. Responders pulled a burning pile of ballots from inside the box, and Kimsey said hundreds were lost.

    “Heartbreaking,” Kimsey said. “It’s a direct attack on democracy.”

    There were surveillance cameras that covered the drop box and surrounding area, he said.

    The last ballot pickup at the transit center drop box was at 11 a.m. Saturday, Kimsey said. Anyone who dropped their ballot there after that was urged to contact the auditor’s office to obtain a new one.

    The office will be increasing how frequently it collects ballots, Kimsey said, and changing collection times to the evening, to keep the ballot boxes from remaining full of ballots overnight when similar crimes are considered more likely to occur.

    An incendiary device was also found on or near a ballot drop box in downtown Vancouver early on Oct. 8. It did not damage the box or destroy any ballots, police said.

    In a statement, the FBI said it is coordinating with federal, state and local partners to actively investigate the two incidents. Anyone with information is asked to contact the nearest FBI office, provide information through tips.fbi.gov or call 1-800-CALL-FBI ( 800-225-5324 ).

    Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs said the state would not tolerate threats or acts of violence meant to derail voting.

    “I strongly denounce any acts of terror that aim to disrupt lawful and fair elections in Washington state,” he said.

    Voters were encouraged to check their ballot status online at www.votewa.gov to track its return status. If a returned ballot is not marked as “received,” voters can print a replacement ballot or visit their local elections department for a replacement, the Secretary of State’s office said.

    Washington and Oregon are both vote-by-mail states. Registered voters receive their ballots in the mail a few weeks before elections and then return them by mail or by placing them in ballot drop boxes.

    In Phoenix last week, officials said roughly five ballots were destroyed and others damaged when a fire was set in a drop box at a U.S. Postal Service station there.

    [ad_2]

    Grant McHill

    Source link

  • Record number of early votes cast in Georgia as election gets underway in battleground state

    Record number of early votes cast in Georgia as election gets underway in battleground state

    [ad_1]

    A record number of early votes were cast in Georgia on Tuesday as residents headed to the polls in a critical battleground state that is grappling with the fallout from Hurricane Helene and controversial election administration changes that have spurred a flurry of lawsuits.More than 300,000 ballots were cast Tuesday, Gabe Sterling of the Georgia Secretary of State’s office said on X. “Spectacular turnout. We are running out of adjectives for this.”The previous first-day record was 136,000 in 2020, Sterling said.Related video above: Could AAPI voters help candidates win Georgia?The swing state is one of the most closely watched this election, with former President Donald Trump trying to reclaim it after losing there to President Joe Biden by a small margin four years ago, leading Trump and his allies to unsuccessfully push to overturn his defeat.Those efforts have loomed large this year as new changes to how the state conducts elections have been approved by Republican members of the State Election Board, leading Democrats and others to mount legal challenges, many of which have yet to be resolved even as Election Day nears.Despite the massive turnout on Tuesday, the process appeared to go smoother this year for some Atlanta-area voters who spoke with CNN.“Last time I voted, I voted in the city and the lines were out the door. They only had like, maybe like three people working,” said Corine Canada. “So people honestly just started leaving because it was like that. Yeah, like, ‘This is too long. I can’t sit here (and) wait, I have to go back to work.’ But here, no, it was easy.”Parts of the state are continuing to recover from Hurricane Helene, which hit the U.S. last month and wreaked havoc on several other states in the Southeast. Georgia election officials say absentee ballots went out by the U.S. Postal Service as scheduled and were not impacted by the storm.“So far, we have seen just over 250,000 voters request absentee ballots. Perhaps in the next week or so, we’ll see that rise up to 300,000 – and that we think will probably look like around 5-6% of all voters will be voting absentee this cycle,” Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, said on Tuesday.Experts say that some new state laws that tightened rules for absentee ballots and cracked down on the availability of drop boxes may make the option less appealing than early in-person voting.While many drop boxes were available 24/7 in 2020, this year there will be fewer of them, and they will be in election offices or early vote locations with hours that tend to mimic normal business hours.It’s also possible that the state could continue to see high numbers of early votes given that Georgia law now mandates two Saturdays of early voting and allows for two Sundays of early voting if a county desires.Raffensperger said Tuesday that safeguards are in place for a safe election and that in addition to every race being audited, officials will also randomly audit voting equipment.“Pulling out a piece of equipment, a random audit on Election Day, bring it to headquarters and then verify that it is recording the votes accurately, that it has not been hacked by any bad actors out there,” Raffensperger told reporters.Raffensperger, who was in Trump’s crosshairs following the 2020 election, re-certified the results after a statewide machine recount in December 2020 that confirmed that Biden beat Trump by just 11,779 votes out of nearly 5 million ballots cast in the Peach State.Legal fights continueMeanwhile, state judges are scrutinizing a number of new rules passed by the Trump-backed Republican majority on the State Election Board that Democrats warn could inject post-election “chaos” into Georgia.During a marathon court hearing Tuesday, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney suggested that a rule requiring ballots cast on Election Day be hand-counted by poll workers might have been passed too “late in the game” to remain in effect for this cycle. That rule will be under another state judge’s microscope Wednesday as part of cases brought against it by state and national Democrats and civil rights groups.McBurney is also still considering a separate rule passed by the board in August that requires local election officials to conduct a “reasonable inquiry” into election results before certifying them – a mandate that Democrats say could give county election officials broad authority to delay or decline altogether their certification of the results “in a hunt for purported election irregularities.”But McBurney sought to clear up any uncertainty around certification in a ruling this week in which he said that local election officials have “a mandatory fixed obligation to certify election results” in the days following the election – dealing a blow to a GOP election official who had asked him to rule that her duties around certification are “discretionary.”What voters are sayingIn line at an Atlanta-area precinct, two voters who identified as Democrats said they were casting ballots for Harris in an effort to avoid the kind of “chaos” they said surrounds Trump.“It is essential that we vote today simply because we want to prevent as much chaos as possible because Donald Trump has proved to be the most vicious, uneducated, racist individual that we have encountered,” said Fay Ainsworth.“Well, we’ve got a crazy person running to be president and a very competent young woman opposing him,” said Joseph Henry King Jr., 77.Kareem Rosshandler, 32, who identifies as an independent, said he was voting for Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein to send a message to Democrats over their support for Israel in its war with Hamas.“We’ve been calling for an arms embargo for the last year and they haven’t been responding, and all the protests and the placards won’t matter if we don’t deliver that message where it really counts, which is at the ballots.”“I mean, the Green Party wants to get rid of the Electoral College,” Rosshandler added. “And that I think is fantastic because right now we have a two-party system, and the only thing worse than that is a one-party system and we’re not that far from that.”

    A record number of early votes were cast in Georgia on Tuesday as residents headed to the polls in a critical battleground state that is grappling with the fallout from Hurricane Helene and controversial election administration changes that have spurred a flurry of lawsuits.

    More than 300,000 ballots were cast Tuesday, Gabe Sterling of the Georgia Secretary of State’s office said on X. “Spectacular turnout. We are running out of adjectives for this.”

    The previous first-day record was 136,000 in 2020, Sterling said.

    Related video above: Could AAPI voters help candidates win Georgia?

    The swing state is one of the most closely watched this election, with former President Donald Trump trying to reclaim it after losing there to President Joe Biden by a small margin four years ago, leading Trump and his allies to unsuccessfully push to overturn his defeat.

    Those efforts have loomed large this year as new changes to how the state conducts elections have been approved by Republican members of the State Election Board, leading Democrats and others to mount legal challenges, many of which have yet to be resolved even as Election Day nears.

    Despite the massive turnout on Tuesday, the process appeared to go smoother this year for some Atlanta-area voters who spoke with CNN.

    “Last time I voted, I voted in the city and the lines were out the door. They only had like, maybe like three people working,” said Corine Canada. “So people honestly just started leaving because it was like that. Yeah, like, ‘This is too long. I can’t sit here (and) wait, I have to go back to work.’ But here, no, it was easy.”

    Parts of the state are continuing to recover from Hurricane Helene, which hit the U.S. last month and wreaked havoc on several other states in the Southeast. Georgia election officials say absentee ballots went out by the U.S. Postal Service as scheduled and were not impacted by the storm.

    “So far, we have seen just over 250,000 voters request absentee ballots. Perhaps in the next week or so, we’ll see that rise up to 300,000 – and that we think will probably look like around 5-6% of all voters will be voting absentee this cycle,” Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, said on Tuesday.

    Experts say that some new state laws that tightened rules for absentee ballots and cracked down on the availability of drop boxes may make the option less appealing than early in-person voting.

    While many drop boxes were available 24/7 in 2020, this year there will be fewer of them, and they will be in election offices or early vote locations with hours that tend to mimic normal business hours.

    It’s also possible that the state could continue to see high numbers of early votes given that Georgia law now mandates two Saturdays of early voting and allows for two Sundays of early voting if a county desires.

    Raffensperger said Tuesday that safeguards are in place for a safe election and that in addition to every race being audited, officials will also randomly audit voting equipment.

    “Pulling out a piece of equipment, a random audit on Election Day, bring it to headquarters and then verify that it is recording the votes accurately, that it has not been hacked by any bad actors out there,” Raffensperger told reporters.

    Raffensperger, who was in Trump’s crosshairs following the 2020 election, re-certified the results after a statewide machine recount in December 2020 that confirmed that Biden beat Trump by just 11,779 votes out of nearly 5 million ballots cast in the Peach State.

    Meanwhile, state judges are scrutinizing a number of new rules passed by the Trump-backed Republican majority on the State Election Board that Democrats warn could inject post-election “chaos” into Georgia.

    During a marathon court hearing Tuesday, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney suggested that a rule requiring ballots cast on Election Day be hand-counted by poll workers might have been passed too “late in the game” to remain in effect for this cycle. That rule will be under another state judge’s microscope Wednesday as part of cases brought against it by state and national Democrats and civil rights groups.

    McBurney is also still considering a separate rule passed by the board in August that requires local election officials to conduct a “reasonable inquiry” into election results before certifying them – a mandate that Democrats say could give county election officials broad authority to delay or decline altogether their certification of the results “in a hunt for purported election irregularities.”

    But McBurney sought to clear up any uncertainty around certification in a ruling this week in which he said that local election officials have “a mandatory fixed obligation to certify election results” in the days following the election – dealing a blow to a GOP election official who had asked him to rule that her duties around certification are “discretionary.”

    What voters are saying

    In line at an Atlanta-area precinct, two voters who identified as Democrats said they were casting ballots for Harris in an effort to avoid the kind of “chaos” they said surrounds Trump.

    “It is essential that we vote today simply because we want to prevent as much chaos as possible because Donald Trump has proved to be the most vicious, uneducated, racist individual that we have encountered,” said Fay Ainsworth.

    “Well, we’ve got a crazy person running to be president and a very competent young woman opposing him,” said Joseph Henry King Jr., 77.

    Kareem Rosshandler, 32, who identifies as an independent, said he was voting for Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein to send a message to Democrats over their support for Israel in its war with Hamas.

    “We’ve been calling for an arms embargo for the last year and they haven’t been responding, and all the protests and the placards won’t matter if we don’t deliver that message where it really counts, which is at the ballots.”

    “I mean, the Green Party wants to get rid of the Electoral College,” Rosshandler added. “And that I think is fantastic because right now we have a two-party system, and the only thing worse than that is a one-party system and we’re not that far from that.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • 3 things we saw as Denver Elections gets in gear

    3 things we saw as Denver Elections gets in gear

    [ad_1]

    Denver Elections spokesperson Mikayla Ortega holds up a nonpartisan “VOTA” sign in the division’s Bannock Street headquarters. Oct. 8, 2024.

    Kevin J. Beaty/Denverite

    With less than a month to go until Election Day, the Denver Elections Division conducted its regular Logic and Accuracy Test — to ensure voting equipment is performing accurately — on Wednesday. 

    This is the second of three tests that the division is required by state law to conduct before each election. Not only is the test an insurance policy to make sure the equipment is working, but it’s also an opportunity for the election division to show the public how ballots are counted. 

    “It’s part of our Colorado model,” Paul López, the Clerk and Recorder for the City and County of Denver, said of the test.

    Denver Clerk and Recorder Paul López speaks to press during a test of ballot machines, ahead of the November presidential election, at Denver Elections’ Bannock Street headquarters. Oct. 8, 2024.
    Kevin J. Beaty/Denverite

    Denver Elections Office has ramped up security this election

    The threat of election misinformation and increased intimidation of election officials and poll workers has forced the Denver Elections Office to rethink their approach to security. 

    Unlike in many other counties and states around the country, Colorado election workers are paid employees — not volunteers. 

    “The amazing thing about our election workers is they come from both parties,” Lopez said. “And that spirit of country before party is best represented here.”

    In addition to posting security guards and police at voting service and polling centers “due to the rhetoric about the integrity of elections,” Denver will no longer livestream video of its ballot processing online. In an interview with CPR in 2023, López said that they decided to stop live streaming because election workers were receiving threats. 

    “If you look at the livestream, you actually see faces,” the clerks told CPR last year. “And there have been efforts to discourage — particularly Republicans — from being election judges.”

    More recently, the elections office also told CPR News that it has “strengthened” its relationship with federal, state, and local law enforcement and emergency management to respond to threats.”

    The added security comes after Denver Mayor Mike Johnston and López went head to head last year over funding for the upcoming election. The two were initially at odds when Johnston’s proposed budget last year did not include the City Clerk and Recorder’s request to increase security for voting offices and polling centers.

    So far this year, the Denver Elections Division has spent more than $200,000 on security — a significant increase from the 2022 election. 

    An interactive ballot for people with visual impairments at Denver Elections’ Bannock Street headquarters. Oct. 8, 2024.
    Kevin J. Beaty/Denverite

    A new strategy for reaching millennials — with tattoos and beer

    The elections office has shifted its marketing strategy this year. Instead of printing the usual colorful “Vote!” yard signs, this year the Denver Elections Office has simplified the color palette. The new signs — available free at Denver libraries, upcoming city town halls, or the Denver Elections Office — are simply black and white.

    “Voting is a matter of black and white,” said Mikayla Ortega, a spokesperson for the office. “It’s not about how your political affiliation leans.”

    The old signs were primarily in blue — which was not because of any political affiliation for the office, but could have been associated by some voters with the Democratic Party.

    The office also has a new demographic of voters they’re targeting: millennials. 

    “They’re voting much less than the generations before them, and so we really are trying to get them engaged or reach them more,” Ortega said.

    So, the elections office team has posted up at bars and local breweries, with staff handing out temporary tattoos and coasters with “let’s vote!” slogans on them.

    You don’t have to wait in line

    Denver is urging voters to take advantage of early voting. 

    “Folks should not have any qualms about voting, it is easy,” said López. “We have 45 drop boxes — secure, monitored 24-7, emptied out once to twice a day, depending on the dropbox.”

    Unlike many other states, Colorado offers early voting starting this Friday, Oct. 11.

    “Please don’t wait all the way up until the last minute to be able to vote in Colorado,” he said. “You have 22 days. Take advantage of it.”

    According to the election office, not only does early voting make their job easier, as they will be “tabulating over a million sheets of paper,” but the earlier the ballots are in, the more ballots they will be able to count by 7 p.m. on election night.  

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Poll finds steady support for Denver’s mayor but suggests new tax increases may face skepticism

    Poll finds steady support for Denver’s mayor but suggests new tax increases may face skepticism

    [ad_1]

    Denver Mayor Mike Johnston’s popularity is holding steady after 11 months in office, according to a new poll released Wednesday, but its findings suggest a sales tax increase he’s pitching for the November ballot could face some skepticism from voters.

    Johnston remains confident in his tax proposal, unveiled Monday. It would generate an estimated $100 million a year to expand on the city’s affordable housing work, including by preserving or building tens of thousands of units affordable to people now getting priced out of the city. His own internal polling suggests two-thirds of the city would support the tax increase, he said.

    Mayor Mike Johnston, joined by members of the City Council and community leaders, announces a new sales tax proposal to expand affordable housing in Denver on the steps of the City and County Building on July 8, 2024. (Photo by RJ Sangosti/The Denver Post)

    But the June survey of 409 registered Denver voters for the nonprofit Colorado Polling Institute found that a solid majority — 64% — believe the city’s taxes are already high. Among them, 35% said the city’s taxes were “way too high,” while 29% said they were “high but acceptable.”

    Still, it’s been rare for Denver voters to turn down tax increases, and a pollster noted that plenty of voters voiced moderate opinions on the question.

    Those responses were collected before Johnston announced his proposed 0.5% affordable housing sales tax. If the City Council gives its blessing in the weeks ahead, that new tax would share the November ballot with a new 0.34% sales tax being sought to shore up the finances of Denver Health, the city’s safety net hospital.

    If both pass, the city’s effective sales tax rate would increase from 8.81% to 9.65%, making Denver stand out along the Front Range.

    The bipartisan poll, conducted by Democratic polling organization Aspect Strategic and Republican firm New Bridge Strategy, was conducted via a mix of online and phone interviews between June 13 and 18. It has a margin of error of 4.85 percentage points.

    In good news for the mayor, the poll found 48% of voters viewed him favorably. That’s virtually flat compared to the 46% who viewed Johnston favorably in a Colorado Polling Institute poll in August, just his second month on the job.

    But the share viewing Johnston unfavorably climbed significantly, from 22% in August to 38% in June, according to the results.

    That’s due in part to rising familiarity as Johnston has been in the news, including as he’s spearheaded a new homeless strategy and responded to the migrant crisis. Just 11% of voters told pollsters they had no opinion or had never heard of the mayor in June, down from 32% in August.

    His favorability ratings in the new poll contrast with results from a Magellan Strategies survey of 1,595 Denver voters conducted in May. That poll found that 43% approved of his performance — while fully 50% disapproved. The margin of error was 2.45 percentage points.

    The survey was conducted for the council’s central office primarily to gauge support for a potential tightening of term limits. Its contract with Magellan was valued at up to $29,000, council spokesman Robert Austin said. The poll also found that the council’s approval rating was underwater, with approval at 36% and disapproval at 49%.

    Regardless of his own support levels, Johnston is banking that voters will approve his tax request in November.

    On the Colorado Polling Institute survey’s taxes question, Lori Weigel, of New Bridge Strategy, viewed the responses with some nuance. She noted that just about any voter is liable to say they pay too much in taxes, which is why the poll allowed respondents to grade the city’s tax burden by offering several options: way too high, high but acceptable, about right and lower than what one would expect.

    [ad_2]

    Joe Rubino

    Source link

  • Opinion: Sirota’s ranked-choice voting amendment pushed back on monied interests

    Opinion: Sirota’s ranked-choice voting amendment pushed back on monied interests

    [ad_1]

    Thank you, Rep. Emily Sirota for ensuring that Colorado voters and county clerks are not overwhelmed with massive election changes that moneyed interests hope to foist on us through the ballot box this November.

    Sirota’s amendment to Senate Bill 210, an election reform bill, will ensure the rollout of ranked-choice voting, should it pass by voter initiative, will be implemented thoughtfully. The amendment, which passed unanimously, would require a dozen Colorado municipalities of varying sizes and demographics to conduct ranked-choice voting before it goes statewide.

    The phase-in will allow cities to develop best practices before all jurisdictions are required to implement a complicated and wholesale change. Just as mail-in voting was phased in over several years, the Sirota amendment will give clerks time to develop policies, purchase software, train employees, and educate their constituents.

    It also gives voters the opportunity to see how ranked choice voting works and gives them a chance to repeal it after the new car smell fades and they see how confusing and unfair it is. This election, Alaska voters are looking to repeal the ranked-choice voting system they approved just four years ago. They would have saved themselves a lot of money and frustration if the system had been implemented in a dozen jurisdictions instead of going all in from the start.

    A ranked-choice voting system for Colorado is being sought by the wealthy former CEO of DaVita, a Denver-based kidney dialysis provider, Kent Thiry. His proposal, which has been approved for signature collection,  would impose an open primary and ranked-choice general elections on the state.

    Here’s how it would work: Anyone, regardless of party affiliation, could run in the primary with the top four contenders advancing to the general election. In the general, voters would be asked to rank candidates in order of preference.

    It’s a confusing system, so I’ll put names to an example. Let’s say that out of a gubernatorial primary former Sen. Cory Gardner, current Sen. Michael Bennet, former Rep. Ken Buck, and Denver Mayor Mike Johnston advance to the general.

    I vote in the general for Bennet, Johnston, Buck, and Gardner in that order. If nobody gets 50% of the statewide vote, the votes are retallied. Let’s say that in the first tally, Bennet gets the least number of votes and is eliminated. Johnston, my second choice will get my vote. If Johnston is eliminated in round two, Buck will get my vote and either he or Gardner will emerge from the final round.

    In some elections, after all the tallying is done the most popular candidate (the one most voters ranked first) will go home empty-handed. In the 2010 Oakland mayoral race, the candidate who received the most votes in round one ultimately lost the election after nine rounds of vote redistribution. How fair is that to candidates or voters?

    If you’re confused, imagine how much effort, time, and money the Secretary of State and county clerks will have to expend to educate voters. It is likely the complexity will persuade some voters to chuck their ballot. Then there will be less voter participation.

    Being confusing isn’t the only problem with ranked-choice voting. Let’s say you picked only Johnston and Bennet and neither of them made it to the third round; your ballot will be considered exhausted and tossed out. Only those who voted for Buck and Gardner in whatever order, will be counted in the final tally.

    This has happened. In Maine’s 2nd Congressional District, the candidate who got the most votes ultimately lost to the second-place candidate. The Maine Secretary of State threw out more than 14,000 exhausted ballots from people who did not vote for the top two candidates. Sound fair?

    Proponents of ranked-choice voting think that such a system will reduce the number of extremist candidates and help voters coalesce around a mainstream candidate. This is a solution looking for a problem that isn’t a problem.

    Colorado does not have a problem with extreme candidates or officeholders. I did not vote for either of the state’s U.S. senators, my congressman, my representatives in the Colorado General Assembly, the governor, the attorney general, the secretary of state or the treasurer. While they are wrong on most issues, not one of them is extreme. Not one. Fanatics do come along but the current system is self-correcting.

    Extreme Democrats like Reps. Elisabeth Epps and Tim Hernández face formidable primary opponents this year and extreme Republicans like Ron Hanks and Dave Williams are unlikely to win in their primaries. Congresswoman Lauren Boebert had to flee her home district because voters yearned for normalcy and were poised to turn her out in the primary or general.

    While we’re popping illusion balloons, the Sirota Amendment was not some sneaky last-minute ploy. County clerks and the Colorado Clerks Association approached Sirota with the concerns they have about implementing the Thiry proposal if it passed and she listened. Matt Crane, executive director clerks association, told me that organization “strongly support[s] the amendment and appreciate[s] Rep. Sirota’s willingness to include it in the bill.”

    [ad_2]

    Krista Kafer

    Source link

  • Disputed mail-in ballots in Democratic primary for N.J.’s 2nd District must be counted, judge rules

    Disputed mail-in ballots in Democratic primary for N.J.’s 2nd District must be counted, judge rules

    [ad_1]

    An Atlantic County Superior Court judged ruled Friday that 1,909 vote-by-mail ballots in Tuesday’s primary election must be counted despite having been opened too early by election officials. The outstanding ballots have delayed the resolution of the Democratic primary for U.S. House in the 2nd District. Unofficial results have Joseph Salerno leading Tim Alexander by 412 votes.

    Judge Michael J. Blee’s order argues that state laws for mail-in ballots were designed to leave as much room as possible to ensure that votes be counted, ABC News reported.



    “It is well settled in the state of New Jersey that election laws should be construed liberally,” Blee said.

    The status of the mail-in ballots came into question because it was discovered that the Atlantic County Board of Elections had opened them prematurely in early May, well before the legally required window of within five days of an election. The purpose of opening them had been to put timestamps on the outer and inner envelopes of the ballots, but the machines used for this processes sliced open both ballots.

    Democrats in Atlantic County argued that it was a mistake and said none of the actual ballots were removed from their envelopes. Republican officials questioned whether the ballots had been opened to speed up the vote count. GOP leaders were not requesting the votes be abandoned, but instead sought an investigation and a requirement to inform the voters whose ballots were affected. The number of outstanding ballots is slightly higher than what initially had been reported — at least 1,100 Democratic ballots and 700 Republican ballots.

    Blee was assigned to resolve the matter to break a 2-2 deadlock among Republicans and Democrats on the county Board of Elections.

    “Admittedly what happened this election was sloppy,” Blee said. “It was an inadvertent error. It was an inexcusable error.”


    RELATED: Results of the Democratic and Republican primaries for Senate in New Jersey | Republican primary results in N.J.’s 1st District U.S. House seat | Results for Democratic and Republican in N.J.’s 3rd District U.S. House race


    Salerno, a businessman and attorney, leads Alexander, a civil rights attorney, in a race with four candidates who ran to challenge Republican Jeff Van Drew, a former Democrat who switched parties in 2019. Earlier this week, the Press of Atlantic City reported Alexander had tallied more mail-in ballots by about eight percentage points. If the only outstanding votes left are the ballots that were opened too early, their inclusion likely still leaves Alexander shy of Salerno. Alexander was the Democratic nominee in 2022 and lost to Van Drew in the general election.

    Election officials have not indicated how soon a winner will be declared in the Democratic primary now that Blee’s ruling will allow the ballots to be counted.

    The irregularity is a possible signal of the scrutiny that will be exercised around mail-in ballots nationwide for the general election in November.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Tanenbaum

    Source link

  • Lawsuit to block Trump from Colorado 2024 ballot survives more legal challenges | CNN Politics

    Lawsuit to block Trump from Colorado 2024 ballot survives more legal challenges | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A judge has rejected three more attempts by former President Donald Trump and the Colorado GOP to shut down a lawsuit seeking to block him from the 2024 presidential ballot in the state based on the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban.”

    The flurry of rulings late Friday from Colorado District Judge Sarah Wallace are a blow to Trump, who faces candidacy challenges in multiple states stemming from his role in the January 6, 2021, insurrection. He still has a pending motion to throw out the Colorado lawsuit, but the case now appears on track for an unprecedented trial this month.

    A post-Civil War provision of the 14th Amendment says US officials who take an oath to uphold the Constitution are disqualified from future office if they “engaged in insurrection” or have “given aid or comfort” to insurrectionists. But the Constitution does not spell out how to enforce the ban, and it has been applied only twice since the 1800s.

    A liberal watchdog group called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed the Colorado case on behalf of six Republican and unaffiliated voters. The judge is scheduled to preside over a trial beginning October 30 to decide a series of novel legal questions about how the 14th Amendment could apply to Trump.

    In a 24-page ruling, Wallace rejected many of Trump’s arguments that the case was procedurally flawed and should be shut down. She said the key question of whether Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold has the power to block Trump from the ballot based on the 14th Amendment “is a pivotal issue and one best reserved for trial.”

    Wallace also swatted away arguments from the Colorado GOP that state law gives the party, not election officials, ultimate say on which candidates appear on the ballot.

    “If the Party, without any oversight, can choose its preferred candidate, then it could theoretically nominate anyone regardless of their age, citizenship, residency,” she wrote. “Such an interpretation is absurd; the Constitution and its requirements for eligibility are not suggestions, left to the political parties to determine at their sole discretion.”

    Wallace also cited a 2012 opinion from Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, when he was a Denver-based appeals judge, which said states have the power to “exclude from the ballot candidates who are constitutionally prohibited from assuming office.” She cited this while rejecting Trump’s claim that Colorado’s ballot access laws don’t give state officials any authority to disqualify him based on federal constitutional considerations.

    Trump already lost an earlier bid to throw out the case on free-speech grounds.

    The current GOP front-runner, Trump denies wrongdoing regarding January 6 and has pleaded not guilty to state and federal charges stemming from his attempts to overturn the 2020 election. His campaign has said these lawsuits are pushing an “absurd conspiracy theory” and the challengers are “stretching the law beyond recognition.”

    In a statement on Saturday, the Trump campaign criticized Wallace and her rulings, saying she “got it wrong.”

    “She is going against the clear weight of legal authority. We are confident the rule of law will prevail, and this decision will be reversed – whether at the Colorado Supreme Court, or at the U.S. Supreme Court,” a Trump campaign spokesperson said. “To keep the leading candidate for President of the United States off the ballot is simply wrong and un-American.”

    The 14th Amendment challenges in Colorado and other key states face an uphill climb, with many legal hurdles to clear before Trump would be disqualified from running for the presidency. Trump is sure to appeal any decision to strip him from the ballot, which means the Supreme Court and its conservative supermajority might get the final say.

    In recent months, a growing and politically diverse array of legal scholars have thrown their support behind the idea that Trump is disqualified under the “insurrectionist ban.” The bipartisan House committee that investigated the January 6 attack recommended last year that Trump be barred from holding future office under the 14th Amendment.

    The Colorado challengers recently revealed in a court filing that they want to depose Trump before trial. Trump opposes this request, and the judge hasn’t issued a ruling.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Rhode Island and Utah hold special election primaries for House seats | CNN Politics

    Rhode Island and Utah hold special election primaries for House seats | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Rhode Island and Utah voters are choosing party nominees for US House seats on Tuesday with the two states each holding a special primary election.

    In Rhode Island, a crowded Democratic field will be narrowed down to one in the race to succeed Democrat David Cicilline in the state’s 1st Congressional District. Cicilline resigned in May to lead the Rhode Island Foundation.

    In Utah, Republicans will decide their nominee in the state’s 2nd Congressional District, which GOP Rep. Chris Stewart is expected to vacate on September 15. Stewart announced in June that he would be departing Congress, citing his wife’s health concerns.

    Both seats are not expected to change party hands in November, given the partisan leans of each district, so the outcome of Tuesday’s primaries will be critical to determining who their next members of Congress will be.

    Rhode Island’s general election is set for November 7, while the general election in Utah will take place on November 21.

    Rhode Island

    Rhode Island’s 1st District covers the eastern part of the state, including East and North Providence, Pawtucket and Portsmouth. Eleven Democrats are vying for the chance to succeed Cicilline.

    The district is a Democratic stronghold – Cicilline won a seventh term by 28 points last fall, and President Joe Biden would have carried the district by a similar margin in 2020 under its present lines. A Republican hasn’t held the seat since 1995.

    Former state Rep. Aaron Regunberg has raised the most funds of the Democrats currently in the race, bringing in $630,000 through August 16. Former White House official Gabe Amo and Lt. Gov. Sabina Matos trailed with $604,000 and $579,000, respectively.

    Regunberg is running on a progressive platform, focused on issues such as fighting climate change and housing insecurity. He has the backing of multiple prominent progressives, including Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin, and the endorsement of the campaign arm of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. He has faced criticism over support he’s received from a super PAC primarily funded by his father-in-law. After an unsuccessful bid for Rhode Island lieutenant governor in 2018, he earned a law degree from Harvard and worked as a judicial law clerk.

    Amo, the son of Ghanaian and Liberian immigrants, has worked in both the Obama and Biden administrations. He has received endorsements from high-profile Democrats such as former Rep. Patrick Kennedy, who represented the 1st District for eight terms before Cicilline, and former White House chief of staff Ron Klain. He also has the backing of the campaign arm of the Congressional Black Caucus and Democrats Serve, which supports candidates with public service backgrounds.

    Amo, a former deputy director of the Office of Intergovernmental Affairs, has made preventing gun violence a top priority, noting that during his White House tenure, he “was often the first call to a mayor following a mass shooting.”

    Matos, who emigrated to the US from the Dominican Republic at the age of 20, could make history as the first Afro-Latina in Congress. She has the backing of the campaign arm of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and EMILY’s List, which backs Democratic women who support abortion rights.

    Matos’ campaign endured controversy this summer following allegations her campaign had submitted falsified nominating signatures. Hundreds of signatures were thrown out, but her campaign submitted enough valid signatures to make the ballot. The incident is being investigated by the state attorney general. Matos has blamed an outside vendor for submitting the alleged false signatures.

    In another controversy leading up to the primary, businessman Don Carlson, who had loaned his campaign $600,000, ended his bid a little over a week ago following allegations of an inappropriate interaction he had with a college student in 2019. While his name remains on the ballot, the state Board of Elections ordered local boards to post a notice that he’d withdrawn, Chris Hunter, a spokesman for the state board told CNN. Carlson has endorsed state Sen. Sandra Cano, a Colombian immigrant who has made education a top priority in her campaign and has labor support.

    Marine veteran Gerry Leonard Jr., who had the endorsement of the state GOP, will win the party nomination, CNN projected Tuesday evening.

    Utah’s 2nd District covers the western portion of the state, stretching from the Salt Lake City area to St. George. Republicans are heavily favored to hold the seat – Stewart won a sixth term last fall by 26 points, while former President Donald Trump would have carried it under its current lines by 17 points in 2020.

    Three Republicans are looking to succeed Stewart: Former Utah GOP Chairman Bruce Hough, former Stewart aide Celeste Maloy and former state Rep. Becky Edwards.

    Maloy, who has Stewart’s backing, earned her spot on the ballot by winning a nominating convention in July, while Hough and Edwards qualified by collecting sufficient signatures.

    Edwards and Hough, boosted by significant self-funding, both outraised Maloy through August 16.

    Edwards raised $679,000 – $300,000 of which she loaned to her campaign – while Hough raised nearly $539,000, including $334,000 of his own money. Maloy had brought in $307,000 through August 16.

    Maloy, who worked as a counsel in Stewart’s Washington office, has faced questions over her eligibility for the special election primary ballot over voter registration issues. She was marked inactive in the state’s voter database because she did not cast a ballot in 2020 and 2022, according to The Salt Lake Tribune, after she relocated to Virginia to work for Stewart. But the state GOP submitted her name for the ballot, noting that no objections to her candidacy were filed before the convention.

    On the campaign trail, Maloy said she’s been focusing on government overreach. She has proposed defunding federal agencies to eliminate “anything they’re doing that Congress hasn’t authorized.”

    Voters are “worried that these executive branch agencies have too much power, they’re not checked and they’re too involved in our lives,” Maloy told CNN affiliate KUTV in an interview. “And I happen to agree.”

    Maloy’s campaign has received financial support from VIEW PAC, which is dedicated to recruiting and electing Republican women to Congress.

    Hough – the father of professional dancers Julianne and Derek Hough, who rose to fame on “Dancing with the Stars” – is focusing on debt reduction and deficit control, citing his family as one of the reasons why he’s running.

    “With 22 grandkids, 10 kids and a $32 trillion (US) debt, I’m very anxious about their future and about the future of all Americans and all Utahns,” Hough told ABC4 in a video posted in June. “It’s time that we actually do something about it.”

    Hough, who until recently had been Utah’s Republican national committeeman, has positioned himself as the candidate most supportive of Trump.

    Edwards, meanwhile, challenged GOP Sen. Mike Lee in a primary last year as a moderate opposed to Trump and took 30% of the vote. On the trail, she has touted her experience as a state lawmaker, focusing on priorities such as health care, education and fiscal responsibility.

    Edwards, who backed Biden in 2020, expressed “regret” for that support at a debate in June, saying she had been “extremely disappointed” with his administration, The Salt Lake Tribune reported.

    The winner of Tuesday’s GOP primary will face Democratic state Sen. Kathleen Riebe in November. Riebe won her party’s nomination at a June convention.

    This story has been updated with a CNN projection.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • DeSantis on Trump’s 2020 claims: ‘Of course he lost’ | CNN Politics

    DeSantis on Trump’s 2020 claims: ‘Of course he lost’ | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said “of course” Donald Trump lost the 2020 election, his the most direct comments on the matter in the nearly three years since the former president’s defeat.

    “Of course he lost,” DeSantis told NBC News in an interview that aired Sunday. “Joe Biden’s the president.”

    The remarks follow DeSantis’ comments on Friday in which he told reporters in Decorah, Iowa, that “theories” put out by the former president and his associates following the 2020 election were “unsubstantiated” and “did not prove to be true.”

    DeSantis had previously avoided such forceful pronouncements about Trump’s defeat. He was among the first to suggest that state legislatures could change election results in certain states, earning public praise from Trump’s inner circle at the time. In the years after, though, DeSantis has largely ducked questions about the veracity of the election results.

    Yet DeSantis continues to argue it was not a “perfect election” – citing actions taken by states to ease voting access during the pandemic – and went on to criticize Trump for funding mail-in ballots through the CARES Act, the $2.2 trillion economic stimulus bill passed in 2020 in response to the coronavirus crisis.

    “But here’s the issue that I think is important for Republican voters to think about: Why did we have all those mail votes? Because of Trump turned the government over to (Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases). They embraced lockdowns. They did the CARES Act, which funded mail-in ballots across the country,” DeSantis told NBC.

    Unmentioned by DeSantis is that he once praised the CARES Act when it was signed, saying it provided “critical resources” in the fight against Covid-19.

    “We thank President Trump for this much-needed support and look forward to our continued work to defeat Covid-19 and emerge stronger than before,” DeSantis said at the time.

    Nor did DeSantis note that he, too, took unilateral action as governor to let local election offices process mail-in ballots earlier than state law allows to address concerns about adequate staffing and a surge in voting remotely due to the coronavirus. Elsewhere, Republican state legislatures blocked Democratic requests to take similar measures in states like Pennsylvania, where the prolonged counting of ballots became fodder for election conspiracies.

    Voting by mail is incredibly popular in Florida, including by voters from his party. Nearly 2.8 million Floridians voted by mail in 2022 – when DeSantis was reelected by a historically wide margin – including more than 1 million registered Republicans.

    As he often does when faced with questions about the 2020 election, DeSantis in his interview with NBC motioned toward the future and how the 2024 election must be a “referendum on Joe Biden’s policies” and “failures” rather than relitigating the past.

    He argued Republicans will lose if they focus on “January 6, 2021, or what document was left by the toilet at Mar-a-Lago.” However, as Trump stares down three criminal indictments related to the alleged mishandling of classified documents, hush money payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels and efforts to overturn the 2020 election, these issues have taken center stage, all while Trump maintains an overwhelming lead.

    On Friday in Waverly, Iowa, DeSantis made the case for “healing divisions” and moving beyond Trump’s legal woes.

    “We got to look forward. We got to start healing divisions in this country,” DeSantis told reporters. “All of this stuff that’s going on, I think it’s just exacerbating the divisions. And so sometimes there’s a larger picture that you have to look at, and I will be looking at that larger picture wanting to move forward for the sake of the country.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The anti-abortion movement is fractured over what it wants from its first post-Roe GOP presidential nominee | CNN Politics

    The anti-abortion movement is fractured over what it wants from its first post-Roe GOP presidential nominee | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Bernie Hayes has spent most Mondays since the overturning of Roe v. Wade meeting with friends outside of an Iowa Planned Parenthood trying to stop abortions one at a time. He huddles monthly with other like-minded activists plotting more wholesale paths to halting the procedure.

    Lately, Hayes, an elder at Noelridge Park Church in Cedar Rapids, has observed more dissent among anti-abortion allies who once worked in harmony. Some see the fall of Roe as a one-time chance to ban abortion entirely while others are worried about the political consequences of pushing too hard too quickly.

    “Sadly, it becomes divisive to the point where we just get fractured,” Hayes said. “I can only imagine what the division looks like on a national scale.”

    Those divisions are spilling out into the 2024 Republican presidential primary, as leading anti-abortion organizations are offering candidates conflicting guidance on an issue that has galvanized the political right for half a century. Recent polling shows Republican voters aren’t providing candidates much more clarity.

    Lynda Bell, the president of Florida Right to Life, bristled at the suggestion that Republican candidates must back a federal abortion ban.

    “There’s nothing in the Constitution that talks about abortion and this issue should be decided by the states,” she said.

    But other leaders of anti-abortion groups want GOP candidates to be unflinching in their support for more hardline policies.

    “Anyone in the pro-life movement is looking very carefully at the current candidates that are running for president, and those who are not advocating strongly on this issue are going to be the ones that are not going to get the confidence and get the vote of the pro-life movement,” said Maggie DeWitte, the executive director of the Iowa anti-abortion group Pulse Life Advocates.

    Candidates are cautiously navigating the unclear expectations of conservative voters as they search for their first presidential nominee in a post-Roe America. Former President Donald Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, the two highest-polling candidates for the GOP nomination, have routinely dodged questions on the trail about whether they would sign a national abortion ban and at how many weeks into a pregnancy they would support such federal legislation.

    Meanwhile, candidates who have expressed more defined views on the topic – like former Vice President Mike Pence, a backer of a federal ban, and former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who said the federal government “should not be involved” in the abortion debate – have yet to gain traction with Republican voters.

    Whoever is the GOP nominee will face an electorate that has so far handed anti-abortion advocates a series of stinging defeats since the Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson last summer. In the immediate aftermath of the court’s ruling, Kansans voted overwhelmingly to keep abortion legal in the state. In November, Michiganders at the ballot box enshrined abortion access in the state constitution. This week in Wisconsin, liberal justice Janet Protasiewicz started her term on the state Supreme Court after winning a spring race, during which she campaigned on protecting abortion access.

    The enthusiasm displayed by abortion-rights activists in the past 12 months will be tested again on Tuesday when Ohioans will decide whether to raise the threshold for passing a constitutional amendment, a referendum that would have significant implications for a fall ballot question ensure “every individual has a right to make and carry out one’s reproductive decisions.”

    “We need to start winning hearts and minds,” Hayes said. “I don’t think we can worry about a federal ban until you can do that.”

    Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, a national anti-abortion group, has clashed with the GOP contenders for the nomination as the organization enforces its own red line for presidential candidates: a 15-week federal ban.

    When Trump’s campaign suggested in April that abortion should be decided at the state level, Marjorie Dannenfelser, the organization’s president, called it “a morally indefensible position for a self-proclaimed pro-life presidential candidate to hold.” It was a stunning break between one of the country’s most influential anti-abortion groups and the president who nominated the three Supreme Court justices that helped secure the movement’s watershed victory. Trump and Dannenfelser later met to clear the air, though Trump has still evaded outlining his views on the issue.

    Dannenfelser similarly said it was “not acceptable” when another candidate, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, stated “it’s not realistic” to expect a gridlocked Congress to find consensus on federal abortion legislation.

    And, in a blistering rebuke this week, Dannenfelser questioned DeSantis’ leadership after he once again declined to back a federal abortion.

    “A pro-life president has a duty to protect the lives of all Americans,” she said. “He should be the National Defender of Life.”

    DeSantis dismissed the criticism during a campaign stop in New Hampshire, where he noticeably drops references to his state’s new abortion law – which bans most abortions after six weeks – from his stump speech.

    “Different groups, you know, are gonna have different agendas, but I can tell you this: Nobody running has actually delivered pro-life protections,” DeSantis said. “I have done that.”

    South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott seized on the fissure between DeSantis and the leading abortion group, writing in a social media post that, “Republicans should not be retreating on life.” He added, “We need a national 15-week limit to stop blue states from pushing abortion on demand.”

    Scott, though, also struggled to define the federal role in the next frontier for the anti-abortion movement after he entered the presidential race in May.

    The anti-abortion movement is not totally aligned behind Dannenfelser. Carol Tobias, the president of the National Right to Life Committee, said she thought it was a mistake to have a political litmus test for Republican presidential candidates on abortion and argued doing so would only serve to splinter the party ahead of the general election. It “doesn’t help” for SBA Pro-Life America to set a 15-week national ban as its standard for GOP candidates, Tobias said, arguing that there were more realistic goals to work towards, like ensuring zero tax dollars are used to fund abortions

    “If we’re not going to get a national law on abortion through Congress, why focus on it?” Tobias told CNN.

    Republican voters appear similarly divided. A New York Times/Siena College national survey released this week found more Republicans favored some exceptions (33%) than a total ban (22%). Meanwhile, one-third said they believed abortion should be mostly or always legal.

    But among White evangelical Republican voters – whose influence is especially pronounced in the early nominating contests in Iowa and South Carolina – opposition is higher. More than three-fourths responded that abortion should be always or mostly illegal.

    Further complicating the calculus for the Republican field is that the GOP voters least likely to vote for Trump are among the most likely to support at least some protections for abortion. For those Republicans who said they are not open to voting for Trump, only 11% support a total ban while more than half said they want abortion to be legal in most situations.

    The clashing opinions underscore the political tightrope Republican candidates are walking after their party underperformed in the 2022 midterms in an election held just months after Roe v. Wade was overturned. Some Republicans – including Trump – have blamed it for the party’s losses, pointing to South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham’s failed attempt to push a federal ban through Congress last year as strategically unsound.

    “I thought, ‘What is Lindsey Graham doing?’” Bell said. “The Supreme Court just said it was a state decision. I was baffled.”

    But there are also fears within the anti-abortion movement that Republicans won’t act to preserve their chances at the ballot box.

    “Some say, ‘Let’s just ignore it,’” Hayes, the Cedar Rapids church elder, said. “For me the worst thing can happen is that it’s either very diluted or taken out of the platform all together. I hope we won’t go there. But if we’re going to talk about it, we need to do it in a smart way.”

    In Hayes’ state, Republicans that control Iowa’s government moved to ban most abortions in the state as early as six weeks into pregnancy. Gov. Kim Reynolds signed the measure into law at last month’s Family Leadership Summit, where most of the GOP field had assembled to speak directly to the state’s evangelical and Christian voters. Many Republican candidates heaped praise on Reynolds for signing the law, though most have not advocated for similar legislation at the federal level.

    Trump, who has notably not weighed in on Iowa’s law, did not attend the summit and has privately said he considers abortion a losing issue for Republicans. Publicly, he called Florida’s six-week abortion ban “too harsh,” testing conservatives who once celebrated Trump’s place in ending Roe.

    “I think many in the pro-life movement were disappointed to hear him talk about life not being a winning issue, and sort of attacking the heartbeat bill and some of the other legislation that’s coming down as being ‘too harsh,’” DeWitte said. “I think that really turned off people in the pro-life movement.”

    Joni Lupis, a pastor and president and director of March For Life New York, said she is wary of candidates who aren’t taking a stance on the issue or offering realistic answers.

    “Let’s be honest: The president can’t just declare no more abortion in the whole world,” Lupis said. “They can say they will but it doesn’t mean it’s going to happen. That’s politics and we’ll have to wait and see what they have to do. I like a person that says what they believe. If you believe something, you should stand behind and declare it.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • 21 Donald Trump election lies listed in his new indictment | CNN Politics

    21 Donald Trump election lies listed in his new indictment | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Special counsel Jack Smith said Tuesday that the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol was “fueled by lies” told by former President Donald Trump. The indictment of Trump on four new federal criminal charges, all related to the former president’s effort to overturn his defeat in the 2020 election, lays out some of those lies one by one.

    Even in listing 21 lies, the 45-page indictment does not come close to capturing the entirety of Trump’s massive catalogue of false claims about the election. But the list is illustrative nonetheless – highlighting the breadth of election-related topics Trump was dishonest about, the large number of states his election dishonesty spanned, and, critically, his willingness to persist in privately and publicly making dishonest assertions even after they had been debunked to him directly.

    Here is the list of 21.

    1. The lie that fraud changed the outcome of the 2020 election, that Trump “had actually won,” and that the election was “stolen.” (Pages 1 and 40-41 of the indictment)

    Trump’s claim of a stolen election whose winner was determined by massive fraud was (and continues to be) his overarching lie about the election. The indictment asserts that Trump knew as early as 2020 that his narrative was false – and had been told as such by numerous senior officials in his administration and allies outside the federal government – but persisted in deploying it anyway, including on January 6 itself.

    2. The lie that fake pro-Trump Electoral College electors in seven states were legitimate electors. (Pages 5 and 26)

    The indictment alleges that Trump and his alleged co-conspirators “organized” the phony slates of electors and then “caused” the slates to be transmitted to Vice President Mike Pence and other government officials to try to get them counted on January 6, the day Congress met to count the electoral votes.

    3. The lie that the Justice Department had identified significant concerns that may have affected the outcome of the election. (Pages 6 and 27)

    Attorney General William Barr and other top Justice Department officials had told Trump that his claims of major fraud had proved to be untrue. But the indictment alleges that Trump still sought to have the Justice Department “make knowingly false claims of election fraud to officials in the targeted states through a formal letter under the Acting Attorney General’s signature, thus giving the Defendant’s lies the backing of the federal government and attempting to improperly influence the targeted states to replace legitimate Biden electors with the Defendant’s.”

    4. The lie that Pence had the power to reject Biden’s electoral votes. (Pages 6, 32-38)

    Pence had repeatedly and correctly told Trump that he did not have the constitutional or legal right to send electoral votes back to the states as Trump wanted. The indictment notes that Trump nonetheless repeatedly declared that Pence could do so – first in private conversations and White House meetings, then in tweets on January 5 and January 6, then in Trump’s January 6 speech in Washington at a rally before the riot – in which Trump, angry at Pence, allegedly inserted the false claim into his prepared text even after advisors had managed to temporarily get it removed.

    5. The lie that “the Vice President and I are in total agreement that the Vice President has the power to act.” (Page 36)

    The indictment alleges that the day before the riot, Trump “approved and caused” his campaign to issue a false statement saying Pence agreed with him about having the power to reject electoral votes – even though Trump knew, from a one-on-one meeting with Pence hours prior, that Pence continued to firmly disagree.

    6. The lie that Georgia had thousands of ballots cast in the names of dead people. (Pages 8 and 16)

    The indictment notes that Georgia’s top elections official – Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger – a republican – explained to Trump in a phone call on January 2, 2021 that this claim was false, but that Trump repeated it in his January 6 rally speech anyway. Raffensperger said in the phone call and then in a January 6 letter to Congress that just two potential dead-voter cases had been discovered in the state; Raffensperger said in late 2021 that the total had been updated and stood at four.

    7. The lie that Pennsylvania had 205,000 more votes than voters. (Pages 8 and 20)

    The indictment notes that Trump’s acting attorney general Jeffrey Rosen and acting deputy attorney general Richard Donoghue had both told him that this claim was false, but he kept making it anyway – including in the January 6 rally speech.

    8. The lie that there had been a suspicious “dump” of votes in Detroit, Michigan. (Pages 9 and 17)

    The indictment notes that Barr, the attorney general, told Trump on December 1, 2020 that this was false – as CNN and others had noted, supposedly nefarious “dumps” Trump kept talking about were merely ballots being counted and added to the public totals as normal – but that Trump still repeated the false claim in public remarks the next day. And Barr wasn’t the only one to try to dissuade Trump from this claim. The indictment also notes that Michigan’s Republican Senate majority leader, Mike Shirkey, had told Trump in an Oval Office meeting on November 20, 2020 that Trump had lost the state “not because of fraud” but because Trump had “underperformed with certain voter populations.”

    9. The lie that Nevada had tens of thousands of double votes and other fraud. (Page 9)

    The indictment notes that Nevada’s top elections official – Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske, also a Republican – had publicly posted a “Facts vs. Myths” document explaining that Nevada judges had rejected such claims.

    10. The lie that more than 30,000 non-citizens had voted in Arizona. (Pages 9 and 11)

    The indictment notes that Trump put the number at “over 36,000” in his January 6 speech – even though, the indictment says, his own campaign manager “had explained to him that such claims were false” and Arizona House Speaker Rusty Bowers, a Republican who had supported Trump in the election, “had issued a public statement that there was no evidence of substantial fraud in Arizona.”

    11. The lie that voting machines in swing states had switched votes from Trump to Biden. (Page 9)

    This is a reference to false conspiracy theories about Dominion Voting Systems machines, which Trump kept repeating long after it was thoroughly debunked by his own administration’s election cybersecurity security arm and many others. The indictment says, “The Defendant’s Attorney General, Acting Attorney General, and Acting Deputy Attorney General all had explained to him that this was false, and numerous recounts and audits had confirmed the accuracy of voting machines.”

    12. The lie that Dominion machines had been involved in “massive election fraud.” (Page 12)

    The indictment notes that Trump, on Twitter, promoted a lawsuit filed by an alleged co-conspirator, whom CNN has identified as lawyer Sidney Powell, that alleged “massive election fraud” involving Dominion – even though, the indictment says, Trump privately acknowledged to advisors that the claims were “unsupported” and told them Powell sounded “crazy.”

    13. The lie that “a substantial number of non-citizens, non-residents, and dead people had voted fraudulently in Arizona.” (Page 10)

    The indictment alleges that Trump and an alleged co-conspirator, whom CNN has identified as former Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, made these baseless claims on a November 22, 2020 phone call with Bowers; the indictment says Giuliani never provided evidence and eventually said, at a December 1, 2020 meeting with Bowers, “words to the effect of, ‘We don’t have the evidence, but we have lots of theories.”

    14. The lie that Fulton County, Georgia elections workers had engaged in “ballot stuffing.” (Pages 13 and 14)

    This is the long-debunked lie – which Trump has continued to repeat in 2023 – that a video had caught two elections workers in Atlanta breaking the law. The workers were simply doing their jobs, and, as the indictment notes, they were cleared of wrongdoing by state officials in 2020 – but Trump continued to make the claims even after Raffensperger and Justice Department officials directly and repeatedly told him they were unfounded.

    15. The lie that thousands of out-of-state voters cast ballots in Georgia. (Page 16)

    The indictment notes that Trump made this claim on his infamous January 2, 2021 call with Raffensperger, whose staff responded that the claim was inaccurate. An official in Raffensberger’s office explained to Trump that the voters in question had authentically moved back to Georgia and legitimately cast ballots.

    16. The lie that Raffensperger “was unwilling, or unable,” to address Trump’s claims about a “‘ballots under table’ scam, ballot destruction, out of state ‘voters’, dead voters, and more.” (Page 16)

    In fact, contrary to this Trump tweet the day after the call, Raffensperger and his staff had addressed and debunked all of these false Trump claims.

    17. The lie that there was substantial fraud in Wisconsin and that the state had tens of thousands of unlawful votes. (Page 21)

    False and false. But the indictment notes that Trump made the vague fraud claim in a tweet on December 21, 2020, after the state Supreme Court upheld Biden’s win, and repeated the more specific claim about tens of thousands of unlawful votes in the January 6 speech.

    18. The lie that Wisconsin had more votes counted than it had actual voters. (Page 21)

    This, like Trump’s similar claim about Pennsylvania, is not true. But the indictment alleges that Trump raised the claim in a December 27, 2020 conversation with acting attorney general Rosen and acting deputy attorney general Donoghue, who informed him that it was false.

    19. The lie that the election was “corrupt.” (Page 28)

    The indictment alleges that when acting attorney general Rosen told Trump on the December 27, 2020 call that the Justice Department couldn’t and wouldn’t change the outcome of the election, Trump responded, “Just say that the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican congressmen.” (Deputy attorney general Donoghue memorialized the reported Trump remark in his handwritten notes, which CNN reported on in 2021 and which were subsequently published by the House committee that investigated the Capitol riot.)

    20. The lie that Trump won every state by hundreds of thousands of votes. (Page 34)

    The indictment says that, at a January 4, 2021 meeting intended to convince Pence to unlawfully reject Biden’s electoral votes and send them back to swing-state legislatures, Pence took notes describing Trump as saying, “Bottom line-won every state by 100,000s of votes.” This was, obviously, false even if Trump was specifically talking about swing states won by Biden rather than every state in the nation.

    21. The lie that Pennsylvania “want[s] to recertify.” (Page 38)

    Trump made this false claim in his January 6 speech. In reality, some Republican state legislators in Pennsylvania had expressed a desire to at least delay the congressional affirmation of Biden’s victory – but the state’s Democratic governor and top elections official, who actually had election certification power in the state, had no desire to recertify Biden’s legitimate win.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Election officials reject calls to unilaterally block Trump from ballot using 14th Amendment but will defer to courts | CNN Politics

    Election officials reject calls to unilaterally block Trump from ballot using 14th Amendment but will defer to courts | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Election officials in key states have recently rejected calls to unilaterally remove former President Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot and are saying courts should decide whether he’s disqualified by the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban.”

    The secretaries of state who oversee elections in Michigan, Georgia, New Hampshire and Minnesota have recently said they don’t have the power on their own to invoke the 14th Amendment and block Trump from the presidential ballot.

    These officials, which include Democrats and Republicans, come from states comprising 45 electoral votes.

    Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, said Thursday in a Washington Post op-ed that this unilateral approach was “misguided” and “the courts” should decide.

    Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, said in a Wall Street Journal op-ed that this would “reinforce the grievances of those who see the system as rigged and corrupt.”

    A provision of the 14th Amendment, which was approved after the Civil War, says any American official who takes an oath to uphold the US Constitution is disqualified from holding future office if they “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” or have “given aid or comfort” to insurrectionists.

    However, the Constitution doesn’t spell out how to enforce this ban, and it has been applied only twice since the late 1800s, when it was used against former Confederates.

    Liberal advocacy groups and some leading conservative legal scholars believe this arcane provision applies to Trump because of his attempts to overturn the 2020 election and block the peaceful transfer of power and for inciting the attack on the US Capitol.

    Trump denies wrongdoing regarding the January 6, 2021, attack and says these candidacy challenges have “no legal basis.” He has pleaded not guilty to separate federal and state indictments that charged him with crimes stemming from his attempts to overturn the 2020 election.

    The left-leaning groups have filed major lawsuits in Minnesota and Colorado, asking courts to prohibit election officials from putting Trump’s name on the ballot. But some of these experts have also claimed the provision is “self-executing,” meaning that election officials involved in the ballot-printing process can simply disqualify Trump on their own.

    That more aggressive approach is now being rejected by election officials in key states.

    “Many states do not have a law on the books empowering the secretary of state to judge the eligibility of presidential candidates,” said Derek Muller, an election law expert who teaches at the Notre Dame Law School. “It’s no surprise that many secretaries would disclaim any such power.”

    The Democratic secretary of state in Minnesota and the GOP secretary of state in New Hampshire also said they won’t block Trump from the ballot without court intervention.

    “As long as he submits his declaration of candidacy and signs it under the penalty of perjury, pays the $1,000 filing fee, his name will appear on the presidential primary ballot,” New Hampshire Secretary of State David Scanlan told reporters Wednesday.

    Ron Fein, the legal director of Free Speech for People, which is one of the organizations behind the anti-Trump candidacy challenges, said his group will “continue to press this critical matter in the courts” so election officials will “carry out their duty to bar Trump from their state ballots.”

    “While some secretaries of state may claim that they do not have the authority to follow the constitutional mandate of Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, the bottom line remains that Donald Trump is disqualified from appearing on any state ballot based on his role of inciting, mobilizing, and facilitating the January 6th insurrection,” Fein said in a statement.

    This story has been updated with additional details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump loses first of several bids to toss suit seeking to block him from Colorado ballot | CNN Politics

    Trump loses first of several bids to toss suit seeking to block him from Colorado ballot | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump has lost the first of several attempts to throw out a lawsuit that seeks to block him from the 2024 presidential ballot in Colorado, based on the 14th Amendment’s prohibition against insurrectionists holding public office.

    Colorado District Judge Sarah Wallace this week rejected Trump’s bid to get the lawsuit dismissed on free-speech grounds.

    The former president still has several pending challenges against the case, which was initiated by a liberal government watchdog group.

    A trial to determine Trump’s eligibility is set for October 30, if the case reaches that stage. Colorado election officials say there’s a “hard deadline” to resolve the dispute before January 5, when the ballot printing process begins for the March 5 Republican primary.

    A post-Civil War provision of the 14th Amendment says American officials who take an oath to uphold the Constitution are disqualified from future office if they “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” or if they have “given aid or comfort” to insurrectionists. But the Constitution does not spell out how to enforce this ban, and it has been applied only twice since the late 1800s, when it was used against former Confederates.

    In a 22-page ruling, Wallace said she wasn’t swayed by Trump’s argument that the lawsuit seeks to improperly restrict his rights to participate in the political process.

    “The Court has no difficulty concluding that it is to the benefit of the general public that, regardless of political affiliation, only constitutionally qualified candidates are placed on the ballot,” Wallace wrote.

    She added that resolving the question of Trump’s eligibility is particularly important because he is seeking “the highest office in the country” and “the disqualification sought is based on allegations of insurrection against the very government over which the candidate seeks to preside.”

    Trump denies wrongdoing and says the candidacy challenges are meritless. The Trump campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the ruling.

    Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, filed the Colorado lawsuit on behalf of a group of Republican and unaffiliated voters in the state. This is one of three major challenges against Trump’s eligibility for the 2024 ballot – similar cases are pending in Minnesota and Michigan, where a different group filed lawsuits.

    CREW’s chief counsel Donald Sherman said in a statement that the group is “pleased with the Court’s well-reasoned and very detailed order, leading to a thorough decision, and look forward to presenting our clients’ case at trial.”

    The group sued Trump and Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, who oversees elections in the state. Griswold, a Democrat, previously told the judge that she doesn’t have a position on Trump’s eligibility and would comply with the judge’s final decision.

    However, Griswold has said in court filings that she “believes that Mr. Trump incited the insurrection” and therefore wants the judge to determine if the 14th Amendment’s insurrectionist ban can be applied through Colorado state law, because she has “sworn a solemn oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution and to effectuate its requirements.”

    In recent months, a growing and bipartisan array of constitutional scholars and former jurists have thrown their support behind the theory. But experts on both sides have also expressed concern that blocking Trump from the ballot could lead to a backlash and would deprive voters the chance to decide for themselves who should be president.

    Legal scholars are also split on how the 14th Amendment could be applied to Trump and how the ban would be implemented – whether by state officials, Congress or a court – given the existing ambiguities in the law. Many expect the Supreme Court will ultimately weigh in on the matter in some fashion, with the 2024 election approaching.

    This story has been updated with additional details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Abortion foes take aim at ballot initiatives in next phase of post-Dobbs political fights | CNN Politics

    Abortion foes take aim at ballot initiatives in next phase of post-Dobbs political fights | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    After a string of recent ballot-box victories for abortion rights groups, opponents of the procedure are redoubling their efforts – including, in some places, pushing to make it harder to use citizen-approved ballot measures to guarantee abortion access.

    An anti-abortion coalition in Ohio, for instance, recently unleashed a $5 million ad buy targeting an effort to enshrine abortion rights in the state’s constitution through a ballot initiative – just as the initiative’s organizers won approval to collect signatures to put the question to voters in November. Meanwhile, legislators in Ohio and other states are weighing bills that would make it more difficult to pass citizen-initiated changes to state constitutions.

    The US Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade last year left abortion laws up to the states, and abortion rights groups quickly scored wins on ballot measures in six of them – including in the battleground state of Michigan, where voters protected abortion access, and in the Republican strongholds of Kansas, Kentucky and Montana, where voters defeated efforts to restrict abortions.

    “What we saw in the midterms last year was a wake-up call,” said Kelsey Pritchard, director of state public affairs for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America. She said helping local groups defeat abortion-related ballot measures is one of the top three priorities for the group’s state affairs team.

    Groups on both sides of the abortion divide have poured big sums into an upcoming state Supreme Court race in Wisconsin that has seen record spending and offers a key test of the potency of the abortion issue among voters in a battleground state. Whether a conservative or liberal candidate wins a swing seat Tuesday on the seven-member high court there could determine the fate of abortion rights in the state. A Wisconsin law, enacted in 1849, that bans nearly all abortions is being challenged in court and is likely to land before the state Supreme Court.

    More fights over ballot initiatives on abortion are stirring to life around the country. In addition to Ohio – where a state law banning abortion as early as six weeks into a pregnancy has been put on hold by a judge – abortion rights proponents have begun to push ballot proposals in South Dakota and Missouri. Most abortions are now illegal in those two states.

    And groups in at least more six states are considering citizen initiatives as a way to guarantee or expand access to abortions, said Marsha Donat, capacity building director at The Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, which helps progressive groups advance ballot measures.

    Ohio, however, looms as the next big abortion battleground on the 2023 calendar – with skirmishes already underway in the courts, the state legislature and on the airwaves.

    A state “fetal heartbeat” law that prohibits many abortions as early as six weeks into pregnancy took effect when the US Supreme Court struck down Roe with its decision last June in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. But the law has been put on hold by a judge in Cincinnati in a case that’s expected to end up before the state’s high court.

    Abortion rights supporters recently won approval to begin collecting signatures to put a measure on the November ballot that would guarantee Ohioans’ access to abortion. If approved by voters, state officials could not prohibit abortion until after fetal viability, the point at which doctors say the fetus can survive outside the womb.

    The initiative says that “every individual has a right to make and carry out one’s own reproductive decisions, including but not limited to decisions” on contraception, fertility treatment, continuing one’s own pregnancy, miscarriage care and abortion.

    It also would bar the state from interfering with an individual’s “voluntary exercise of this right” or that of a “person or entity that assists an individual exercising this right.”

    A conservative group called Protect Women Ohio immediately launched an ad campaign – putting $4 million on the air and $1 million into digital advertising – to cast the amendment as one that would strip parents of their authority to prevent a child from having an abortion or undergoing gender reassignment surgery, although the proposed constitutional amendment makes no mention of transgender care.

    Officials with Protect Women Ohio argue that the initiative’s language is broad enough to be interpreted as extending to gender reassignment surgery, an assertion initiative proponents say is false.

    In the campaign aimed at defeating the amendment, “we’ll make sure they have to own every last word of this radical initiative,” said Aaron Baer, the president of Center for Christian Virtue and a Protect Women Ohio board member, told CNN. “They chose this language for a reason, and we’re not going to let them off the hook.”

    Lauren Blauvelt – who chairs Ohioans for Reproductive Freedom, the group promoting the initiative – said the ad “is completely wrong” and called it an “unfortunate talking point from the other side.”

    “Our amendment … creates the fundamental right that an individual can make their own reproductive health care decisions” and does not touch on other topics, she said.

    But the ad campaign highlights the effort to link abortion to the transgender and parental rights issues currently animating conservative activists.

    Susan B. Anthony’s Pritchard said she believes that her side can win on the issue of limiting abortions but “we believe also that we broaden our coalition and broaden awareness of what these things actually do when we highlight the parental rights issue that is very real.”

    The initiative’s supporters need to collect more than 413,000 signatures from Ohioans by July 5 to qualify for the November ballot. Under current Ohio law, changes to the state’s constitution can be approved via ballot initiative by a simple majority of voters.

    A bill introduced by Republican state Rep. Brian Stewart would increase that threshold to 60% and would mandate that the signatures needed to put an amendment on the ballot come from all 88 counties in the state, instead of 44, as currently required.

    Ohio state Senate President Matt Huffman backs raising the threshold and also supports holding an August special election to change the ballot initiative rules. If successful, the higher threshold would be in effect before November’s election when voters could consider adding abortion rights to the state constitution.

    Neither Huffman nor Stewart responded to interview requests from CNN.

    Ohio lawmakers recently voted to end August special elections, citing their expense and low participation. But Huffman recently told reporters in Ohio that a special election – with a potential price tag of $20 million – would be worth the expense if it helped torpedo the abortion initiative.

    “If we save 30,000 lives as a result of spending $20 million, I think that’s a great thing,” he said, according to Cleveland.com.

    The Ballot Initiative Strategy Center is tracking 109 measures across 35 states that could affect initiatives put to voters in 2024. Some would increase the threshold for an initiative to pass. Others would increase the minimum number of signatures – or require that they come from a broader geographic area – before an initiative could qualify for the ballot in the first place, Donat said.

    Many of the bills that seek to make it more difficult to pass ballot initiatives do not specifically target abortion issues. But they come as progressive groups increasingly turn to the initiative process as a way to bypass Republican-controlled legislatures and put a raft of issues – from legalizing marijuana to expanding Medicaid eligibility and boosting the minimum wage – directly to voters.

    “Attacks, through state legislatures, on the ballot measure process have been pretty consistent and pretty aggressive for the last several (election) cycles,” said Kelly Hall, executive director of the Fairness Project, which has helped pass progressive measures in red states.

    Hall said the abortion issue, while not the sole focus of current efforts to curb ballot initiatives, has put “additional fuel on an already burning fire.”

    In Missouri, a state law banning most abortions – including in cases of rape and incest – took effect last year after Roe was overturned. A group called Missourians for Constitutional Freedom has filed petition language that proposes adding abortion protections to the state constitution via ballot initiative. In recent cycles, voters in Missouri have expanded Medicaid eligibility and legalized recreational marijuana use through such initiatives.

    This year, the state’s Republican-controlled legislature is weighing making it harder for those initiatives to succeed. In February, the state House voted to raise the bar for amending the state constitution from a simple majority to 60%. Voters would have to approve the higher threshold.

    “I believe the Missouri Constitution is a living document but not an ever-expanding document,” Republican state Rep. Mike Henderson, the measure’s sponsor, said during House floor debate. “And right now, it has become an ever-expanding document.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Widespread voting delays hinder tense Nigerian election as millions go to the polls | CNN

    Widespread voting delays hinder tense Nigerian election as millions go to the polls | CNN

    [ad_1]


    Abuja, Nigeria
    CNN
     — 

    Widespread delays overshadowed a crucial presidential election in Nigeria Saturday, as millions voted to elect their new leader. The hotly contested poll is being held simultaneously with elections for representatives for the country’s parliament.

    CNN confirmed reports from eyewitnesses of isolated violence at two polling stations in Lagos, with the military forced to intervene. CNN has reached out to INEC for comment.

    In chaotic scenes at a polling unit in Maraba, an Abuja suburb, a large crowd of voters struggled to cast their ballot, a CNN team witnessed. Those who did manage to cast a ballot did so in the full glare of those standing next to them, in contravention of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) guidelines which establish privacy for voters.

    “People are voting in exposed spaces, and everyone can see who they are voting for. There’s no privacy. I won’t be surprised if this polling unit is canceled,” Elias Ajunwa, one registered voter, said.

    Ajunwa expressed unease about the situation. “There’s the possibility of any hooligan carting away INEC materials because of how vulnerable the INEC officials and their materials are,” he added.

    About 93 million Nigerians in a country of 200 million people are registered to vote, according to electoral body INEC, but only 87 million are holders of a permanent voter card (PVC), a main requirement to cast a ballot. The election will be Africa’s largest democratic exercise.

    Nigeria's Labour Party's candidate Peter Obi casts his vote during the presidential elections in Agulu, Nigeria.

    The Chief Observer of European Union Observation Mission to Nigeria, Barry Andrews, told CNN it was premature to make any conclusions about widespread delays.

    “We’ve taken note of those reports and we will look across the country to see whether this a pattern or whether it has in any way hindered the exercise of people’s political rights to vote or caused frustration or caused people to turn away. For the moment, it’s premature to make any conclusions about it.”

    People were still waiting to cast their ballots despite polls being expected to close at 2:30 p.m. local time (8:30 a.m. ET). Voting did not start until after the scheduled opening time in some polling stations.

    One polling station in Lagos delayed opening as officials were still setting up after polls were meant to open, a CNN team witnessed. An official urged eager voters to be calm and “treat each other with love” as they continued to wait.

    The same issue dogged several other voting locations, including in northern Kano State and southern Bayelsa State, with no election officials in sight at 8:30 a.m. local time, according to Reuters. In previous elections, voters in some areas have complained that polling stations opened hours late or did not materialize at all.

    Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) officials set up voting materials at a polling station in Ojuelegba, Lagos, on February 25, 2023, before polls opened.

    All Progressives Congress (APC) presidential candidate Bola Tinubu and his wife Oluremi Tinubu arrive to vote at a polling station in Lagos on Saturday during Nigeria's presidential and general election.

    Ballots will be counted at polling places at the close of voting and transmitted electronically in real-time to INEC’s Result Viewing portal (IReV), a first of its kind in Nigeria, the commission tells CNN.

    “With the electronic transmission system (IREV), people will already know the winners before the official announcement is made,” adds Rotimi Oyekanmi, a spokesman for INEC’s chairperson.

    To win, a candidate must garner a sufficient number of ballots to meet the 25% vote spread in 24 of Nigeria’s 36 states. In the absence of this, a second round run-off between the top two candidates will be held within 21 days.

    Eighteen candidates are on the ballot for Nigeria’s top, but three are leading the race for the popular vote, according to pre-election surveys.

    One of the key contenders is Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the candidate of term-limited President Muhammadu Buhari’s party, the All Progressives Congress (APC). Another is the main opposition leader and former vice president Atiku Abubakar, of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP). And third strong contender, Peter Obi, is running under the lesser known Labour Party, and altered early predictions of the presidential vote, which has typically been two-horse races between the ruling and opposition parties.

    Seventy-year-old Tinubu, 70, is a former governor of Nigeria’s wealthy Lagos State, who wields significant influence in the southwestern region where he is acclaimed as a political godfather and kingmaker.

    He boasts of aiding the election of Buhari to the presidency and declares it is now his turn to lead the country.

    Candidate of the opposition party PDP Abubakar, 76, is a former Nigerian vice president and a staunch capitalist who made his fortune investing in various sectors in the country.

    Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Peter Obi, and Atiku Abubakar

    Here’s what to know about Nigeria’s presidential election

    Abubakar’s presidential bid (his sixth attempt) had fueled concern that it might usurp an unofficial arrangement to rotate the presidency between Nigeria’s northern and southern regions, since he is from the same northern region as the outgoing leader, Buhari.

    Labor Party’s Obi is a two-time former governor of southeastern Anambra State and has been touted as a credible alternative to the two major candidates by his hordes of supporters, mostly young Nigerians who call themselves ‘Obidients.’

    Obi is also the only Christian among the leading candidates. His southeastern region has yet to produce a president or vice president since Nigeria returned to civil rule in 1999.

    Labour Party presidential candidate Peter Obi (C) talks to the media at outside a polling station in Amatutu in western Anambra State on Saturday.

    The ruling party’s Tinubu, from the religiously mixed southwestern part of the country, is a Muslim and also chose a Muslim running mate, despite the country’s unofficial tradition of mixed-faith presidential tickets.

    All top three candidates are confident they can turn Nigeria’s fortunes around if voted into power, as the country battles myriad economic and security problems that range from fuel and cash shortages to rising terror attacks, high inflation, and a plummeting local currency.

    One voter, Wandu, told CNN’s Larry Madowo in Lagos on Saturday that the most important issue is security: “We need someone that has a hold and an understanding of the security challenges that we have. The economy is in free fall. We need someone that has a fair understanding of what we need to be better.”

    A voter casts her ballot at a polling station in Amatutu in western Anambra State on Saturday.

    Nigeria’s security forces have mobilized personnel to ensure hitch-free electioneering across the country.

    The run-up to the polls has been fraught with violence that stemmed from protests against unpopular government policies and lethal attacks by armed criminal gangs.

    On Wednesday, a senatorial candidate for the Labour Party, was shot and burned in his campaign vehicle in the country’s southeastern Enugu State, police said.

    Electoral body INEC suspended the election in Enugu East Senatorial District following the death of the candidate, it tweeted on Saturday, adding that the election will now be held on March 11.

    Before the killing, violent protests had erupted across Nigerian states as citizens railed against the scarcity of gasoline in petrol outlets and a shortage of cash that followed a controversial currency redesign.

    INEC hasn’t been spared from the chaos; its facilities have been torched in parts of the country.

    Voting was canceled at more than 200 planned polling units across Nigeria and voters redirected to other poll locations, INEC said, due to security concerns.

    Ahead of the elections, national police ordered a restriction of non-essential vehicular and waterway movements from midnight on election day until 6 p.m., while the country’s immigration service has ordered the closure of Nigeria’s land borders from midnight Saturday until midnight Sunday.

    Weeks before polling day, the service had confiscated over 6000 voter cards from illegal migrants, whom it said had other national documents in their possession.

    A Department of State Services (DSS) official stands guard at a polling station in Amatutu in western Anambra State on Saturday.

    INEC spokesperson Oyekanmi nevertheless insists the poll results will be free and fair.

    “The experience Nigerians will have for the 2023 elections will be far better than previous elections and the integrity (of the polls) will be clear for everyone to see,”Oyekanmi told CNN days before the election.

    Final results are expected to be announced a few days after polling.

    Current President Buhari tweeted on Thursday: “There should be no riots or acts of violence after the announcement of the election results. All grievances, personal or institutional, should be channeled to the relevant Courts.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel elected to fourth consecutive term | CNN Politics

    RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel elected to fourth consecutive term | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Dana Point, California
    CNN
     — 

    Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel was elected to a fourth consecutive term Friday after winning the support of about two-thirds of the RNC members who gathered here for their winter meeting.

    McDaniel fended off a stronger-than-expected challenge from Harmeet Dhillon, an RNC committeewoman from California and an attorney who has represented former President Donald Trump.

    The vote was conducted by secret ballot and McDaniel needed a majority of the members casting ballots to win. After just one round of voting, the parliamentarian announced that McDaniel had received 111 of the 167 votes cast. Dhillon received 51 votes and four ballots were cast for MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, a 2020 election denier and ardent Trump backer.

    Dhillon had argued the party needed to “radically reshape” its leadership amid recriminations about Republicans’ lackluster showing in the midterm elections, which compounded disappointments over the results in the previous two cycles.

    After her win Friday, McDaniel invited Dhillon and Lindell onstage for a photo op, implicitly attempting to rebut criticism about the fractured nature of the party. “With us united and all of us going together, the Democrats are going to hear us in 2024,” McDaniel said.

    But moments later, Dhillon told reporters that GOP leaders would have to reckon with widespread distrust in the party among rank-and-file voters across the country – which she said was reflected in the support she garnered as she challenged McDaniel over the past two months.

    “The results were not what we or hundreds of thousands of supporters around the country were hoping for, and I think the party is going to have to deal with that fallout of being in a disconnect from the grassroots,” Dhillon told reporters outside the RNC’s general session at the Waldorf Astoria Monarch Beach resort.

    “The party is not united, but it’s our job to try and unite the party, and that’s going to mean changes at the RNC,” Dhillon added.

    Both McDaniel and Dhillon have ties to Trump. The former president backed McDaniel when she first ran for party chair in 2017. Dhillon’s law firm represented Trump in his dealings with the House select committee that investigated the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol. The RNC paid more than $1 million for the legal work.

    But Trump stayed neutral in the race for RNC chair, stating that McDaniel and Dhillon should “fight it out.” On Friday, he congratulated McDaniel on her “big WIN” in a post on his Truth Social platform.

    Trump’s likely rival in the 2024 contest for the White House, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, weighed in on the race in an interview that posted Thursday, telling Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, a conservative web show host, that it was time for “some new blood in the RNC.” But the GOP governor stopped short of offering a formal endorsement of Dhillon.

    The feud between McDaniel and Dhillon has underscored the fractious nature of the Republican Party at this moment. There are broad disagreements among RNC members about how to steer the party back into a position of strength before the 2024 presidential election, with Trump already an announced candidate. Dhillon, for example, has said the party must do more to encourage early voting to compete with Democrats after years in which Trump has undermined that method of casting ballots in his quest to sow doubt in election results.

    During a speech at the beginning of Friday’s meeting, McDaniel implicitly pushed back at criticisms of her leadership record as she argued that the party must be united headed into 2024. “We’re working overtime to learn the lessons of the midterms – what went right and what went wrong,” she said.

    McDaniel won public commitments from more than 100 RNC members to back her before Friday’s secret ballot election that unfolded among other votes on party business and resolutions. Dhillon’s allies had suggested that many members would switch to the California committeewoman when the secret voting began, but that dynamic did not pan out.

    The race for RNC chair had grown increasingly contentious over the past two months with Dhillon allies raising questions about the compensation and benefits that McDaniel earned as party chair, and McDaniel supporters pointing to the lucrative payments Dhillon’s law group has received for representing both Trump and the RNC. Both women assured members that they would look closely the RNC’s spending on consultants and outside vendors as the party charts the course forward into the next cycle.

    As the GOP wrestles with how much influence Trump should exert over the party’s leadership and machinery, Trump’s candidates for RNC co-chair and treasurer were defeated during the voting on leadership positions by RNC members Friday afternoon in Dana Point, California.

    Trump’s endorsed candidate for RNC co-chair, North Carolina Republican Chairman Michael Whatley, withdrew after trailing South Carolina GOP Chairman Drew McKissick, who won after several rounds of voting. Trump had recently endorsed Whatley after crediting him with “leading North Carolina to tremendous success in the recent election” and said he was “MAGA all the way.” Trump’s choice for RNC Treasurer, Joe Gruters – the chairman of the Republican Party of Florida who had backed McDaniel in her run for a fourth consecutive term – also lost on Friday. Vicki Drummond of Alabama was reelected to a term as treasurer.

    RNC members also approved a resolution opposing “all forms of antisemitism, antisemitic statements and any antisemitic elements that seek to infiltrate the Republican Party.” The resolution explicitly condemned White supremacist Nick Fuentes and rapper Kanye West – who have well-publicized antisemitic views and dined with Trump in November at his Mar-a-Lago estate – by name.

    The resolution approved by a voice vote Friday said that the Republican National Committee “formally condemns, denounces, censures and opposes Kanye West, also known as Ye, Nicholas ‘Nick’ Fuentes, Congresswomen Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, Cori Bush and all others promoting their antisemitism beliefs.” It added that the Republican National Committee “affirms antisemitism has no place in our political party, American politics, or any political discourse.”

    Trump acknowledged that the dinner occurred in a post on Truth Social after the controversy erupted, stating that West had unexpectedly showed up with three of his friends “whom I knew nothing about” and described the dinner as “quick and uneventful.”

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link