Tag: debate
Mass Shooting Move The Gun Debate

Will Michigan State Mass Shooting Move The Gun Debate? Maybe

And so some angry, mentally ill person decides to shoot random human beings for no particular reason. Although mass killings have become commonplace — the one at Michigan State University was the 67th this year, and we're only in February — something feels different this time.

It's not the number of victims, three dead in this case. The 2017 attack in Las Vegas massacred 60 and wounded over 400. Nor was it the nature of the victims. These were young people with a future but not elementary school kids, 20 of whom were mowed down in Newtown, Connecticut — 19 in Uvalde, Texas.

This one has political ramifications. It occurred in Michigan, a Midwest state that last November reelected its Democratic governor, Gretchen Whitmer, and turned control of both the state Senate and House to Democrats.

One must believe that right-wing threats of gun violence moved a lot of voters to change teams in Lansing. There was the unforgettable visual of creeps waving semi-automatics on the steps of the state Capitol over one of the governor's COVID policies. Then there were the head cases shooting off their guns in the woods as they plotted to kidnap Whitmer.

Especially chilling about the outrage at Michigan State was the alert sent by campus security to "run, hide or fight." The horror grew more intense with news that some of the college students had already survived the terror of the 2021 Oxford High School shooting in which four students died. In sum, there are 20-year-old kids who have sheltered in place for two separate mass school shootings.

The Michigan State killings took place on the five-year anniversary of the Parkland, Florida, massacre that left 17 students dead. As tearful commemorations were held, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis was campaigning as the most gun-loving Republican evidently vying to become the Republican candidate for president. He's pushing legislation to let Florida residents carry concealed firearms in public without a permit, never mind training.

The Michigan State gunman was arrested in 2019 for carrying a concealed weapon without a permit and had to forfeit the gun. DeSantis apparently doesn't want to inconvenience killers like him by requiring a permit.

Florida gun deaths have risen nearly 19% from 2015 to 2020. In 2020, 13.7 Floridians out of every 100,000 died from gun violence. By contrast, the number of gun deaths per 100,000 was only 5.3 in New York. Hawaii posted the lowest and best number, 3.4.

How many times have we heard that the vast majority of Americans, most Republicans included, want at least universal background checks for all purchases? They want red-flag laws to remove guns from those deemed to be a danger to themselves or others. And majorities want bans on certain weapons of war.

Say what you want about Donald Trump, he's showed a modicum of guts in entertaining some gun control measures after the Parkland tragedy. Sadly, he wimped out after the NRA bared a few teeth at him.

We've been here before: shocked calls for an even modest tightening of gun laws and Republicans killing almost all efforts to do so. No doubt letting demented 18-year-olds obtain weapons more deadly than those used in the Vietnam War somehow fits into DeSantis' cracked culture war campaign.

But it's increasingly hard to see how he or any other politician is going to overcome growing public dismay at the crazy gun violence now stoking fears among parents, students, grocery shoppers, concert attendees, and churchgoers — as well as drug gangs. More and more Americans know an innocent who has been shaken or killed by criminal or mentally ill gunmen.

Michigan may have been an early indicator of a voter rebellion.

Follow Froma Harrop on Twitter @FromaHarrop. She can be reached at fharrop@gmail.com. To find out more about Froma Harrop and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators webpage at www.creators.com.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Walker and Hannity

Hannity Hosts Fake 'Town Hall' For Walker After He Skips Debate

Fox News host Sean Hannity turned his prime-time show into a full-on campaign rally Monday night for Republican U.S. Senate nominee Herschel Walker, after the former football star had skipped an official debate Sunday night. Walker’s appearance with Hannity was hastily announced Sunday evening, as incumbent Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-GA) prepared to face Libertarian candidate Chase Oliver (and an empty lectern in place of Walker) on the debate stage in Atlanta.

The episode of Hannity was officially billed as a “town hall,” a label that the host used multiple times during the hour. But attendees in the audience never actually asked any questions of the candidate, instead simply delivering applause at various moments and engaging in call-and-response routines with Hannity or other speakers.

To be clear, this was simply a campaign rally for Walker, organized and promoted by Hannity and Fox News, and featuring special guests such as Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham and Tim Scott from neighboring South Carolina. (Hannity closed out the program by promoting another supposed “town hall” episode of his show scheduled for Wednesday, featuring Pennsylvania GOP Senate nominee Mehmet Oz — another candidate whose campaign Hannity was instrumental in boosting — as well as Republican gubernatorial candidate Doug Mastriano, a favorite of far-right media.)

Walker’s appearance with Hannity followed his participation in another debate that took place Friday, which is likely to be the only televised face-off between the two major-party candidates in the Peach State. During that debate, when Warnock made comments about Walker’s documented history of violence, including when he had threatened a “shoot-out with police,” Walker responded by producing an honorary “prop” police badge from his jacket pocket as alleged proof of his close relationship with Georgia law enforcement.

Walker appeared on Hannity on Monday after he didn’t attend Sunday’s debate hosted by the Atlanta Press Club. Hannity opened the pseudo-“town hall” with Walker by declaring that Sunday’s debate was an attempted “ambush,” citing an article in the right-wing Washington Free Beacon that attacked some of the organization’s members who had donated to Democratic candidates in 2020. (The debate moderator was radio host Scott Slade, who has been a fixture of Georgia political news for more than 50 years.)

Dismissing other media coverage, Hannity further declared that “in Friday night's debate, Herschel Walker proved them all wrong and he won that debate,” followed by a clips reel of Walker speaking on stage. (Walker has actually been widely lampooned for his stunt involving the prop badge, a moment that Hannity’s team did not include in the clips reel.)

Of course, Hannity’s protests of alleged press bias for Democrats really ought to ring alarm bells for anyone who has observed both Hannity and Fox News in general.

Hannity is a longtime political operative who practically recruited Walker into the Georgia Senate race, and he has repeatedly used his show to promote other Republican candidates in the midterm elections. In addition, the rest of Fox News also helped pick the Republican Senate candidates while burying negative stories about Walker in its running coverage.

The pseudo-“town hall” was also marked by Hannity feeding Walker talking points for their discussion. Following Hannity’s lengthy opening monologue, the host finally brought the candidate onto the show around 10 minutes into the program, then proceeded to recount a conversation the two supposedly had about Walker’s dedication to public service. (Walker didn’t remember it.)

SEAN HANNITY (HOST): So, I told you before you ran, I said, this is going to get ugly, they’re going to attack you, they’re going to smear you, they’re going to slander you. And do you remember what you said to me?

HERSCHEL WALKER: No.

HANNITY: You said to me, “Sean, I have fought my whole life, and they can do whatever they want. But I’m going to go and be the — I'm going to go be a public servant for the people of Georgia.”

The campaign rally atmosphere continued midway through the program, when Graham and Scott joined the stage, urging viewers to help elect a Republican Senate majority.

“If we want to help Georgians and all of America, let's start winning the majority right here in Georgia,” said Scott.

Graham also repeatedly asked viewers to go to Walker’s campaign site and donate money. “TeamHerschel.com, folks,” he said. “Help this man.” (Graham’s plea for contributions from Fox’s audience is nothing new; he was notorious for begging for donations to his own campaign during appearances on Fox in 2020.)

During this entire programming block that lasted nearly 15 minutes, Walker began speaking for himself only at around the six-and-a-half minute mark, after lengthy partisan jeremiads from the other men.

Hannity later revved up Walker, and the crowd, by asking a series of simple, loaded questions toward the end of the block, essentially directing the candidate to accept the policy agenda being handed to him live on-air.

SEAN HANNITY (HOST): If you're elected, you're promising the people of Georgia — I want to make sure I'm right — lower taxes, controlled borders, re-fund the police, get rid of this —

HERSCHEL WALKER: Energy independence.

HANNITY: — idiotic no-bail laws.

WALKER: Yes.

HANNITY: You will support energy independence.

WALKER: Yes.

HANNITY: And you will support reading, writing, math, history, science —

WALKER: Yes.

HANNITY: And get rid of the woke agenda.

WALKER: Yes. And our military — I want to continue to say I will support —

GRAHAM: Amen.

WALKER: — our military because our military is our strength.

SCOTT: Amen.

WALKER: And we have to continue to support our military.

An analysis by Media Matters found that Walker himself only spoke for roughly 8 minutes — in what was supposedly a “town hall” with the candidate. Hannity, by contrast, had 19 minutes of speaking time. Another way of looking at this is that Walker’s speaking time was still less than the combined total for the other two major guests, Graham and Scott, who collectively spoke for 9 minutes. (All times were rounded to the nearest minute.)

By comparison, in the hourlong debate that Walker skipped Sunday night, a count by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution found that Warnock and Oliver dominated the speaking time, distantly followed by the moderators.

Hannity’s TV episode with Walker, by contrast, perfectly illustrates a propaganda display that featured a candidate for public office only as a supporting character on the show.

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters.

Trump’s ‘Nasty Woman’ Comment Becomes Rallying Cry For Female Voters

Trump’s ‘Nasty Woman’ Comment Becomes Rallying Cry For Female Voters

Donald Trump just couldn’t help himself. At the third and final presidential debate in Las Vegas Wednesday night, after calling Hillary Clinton a liar, a thief and a criminal, he buckled under a crack she made about his character. Discussing her plan for changing the ceiling on taxable income for Social Security, she noted that even Trump would only have to pay an incremental increase under her plan, “assuming he can’t figure out a way to get out of it.”

“Such a nasty woman,” Trump interjected.

And with that, every smart woman who’s sought to make her way in the world summoned a memory.

Maybe it was a schoolyard memory of a boy she bested in an argument. Maybe a memory of a coworker telling her some guy at the workplace had said that about her after she made a forceful defense of an idea. Maybe some random guy on the street who felt rejected after she ignored his order to smile on command.

Note that Trump didn’t simply say, “that’s unfair,” or maybe, “that’s nasty.” It was important to label Hillary Clinton, the person, in a gendered way. His opponent is not merely “nasty,” she is “a nasty woman,” something far more horrifying.

Because, in his estimation, women are always supposed to be nice to Trump. It’s their duty, and his right to expect. Grab ‘em by the pussy, and expect them to be nice. Walk in on them in their dressing rooms, and expect them to be nice. Tell a radio shock jock it’s okay to call your daughter “a great piece of ass,” and expect her to be nice. It’s his birthright, after all, to have all women, everywhere, be nice to him, regardless of what he says or does to them. Surely, all of the women in his life are nice to hime—but they all report to him, in one way or another.

I’ve been called nasty simply for arguing politics with a man at a party. Nasty for trying to keep a know-nothing at a workplace from doing something that would have harmed the company. Nasty for challenging brogressives on their support of a neo-libertarian. But I digress….

Yet if Trump can turn even a question about the Supreme Court to an answer about how he felt treated by an individual justice (Ruth Bader Ginsburg said mean things about me!), why can’t I make this debate all about me?

I’ve been grabbed by the pussy, rated on my appearance, walked in on while dressing, had my rights abridged by the law, my former status as a menstruator mocked, and my intelligence insulted when I was deemed—physical flaws notwithstanding—too hot to be smart. And you know what? So have a lot of other women; women who vote.

The more Trump makes this election all about himself, the more women of America will choose to make it about themselves. And in that event, Trump clearly loses. Not that he’ll necessarily accept the outcome.

Adele M. Stan is AlterNet’s senior Washington editor, and a weekly columnist for The American Prospect. Follow her on Twitter @addiestan.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

Photo: Republican U.S. presidential nominee Donald Trumpspeaks as Democratic U.S. presidential nominee Hillary Clinton listens during their third and final 2016 presidential campaign debate at UNLV in Las Vegas, Nevada, U.S., October 19, 2016. REUTERS/Mark Ralston

Donald Trump’s Scorched Earth Tactics Have No Upside

Donald Trump’s Scorched Earth Tactics Have No Upside

By James Oliphant and Chris Kahn

(Reuters) – Republican Donald Trump had one last chance at a nationally televised debate to reach out to the undecided voters he badly needs to keep his presidential campaign viable.

He passed on the opportunity. Instead, he chose on Wednesday to stay with the strategy he has employed during recent weeks: Pump up his hard-core supporters and hope that’s enough to win.

He suggested he might not accept the election result if his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton wins on Nov. 8, called her a “nasty woman,” and repeated hard-line conservative positions on issues such as abortion and immigration.

While that kind of rhetoric was catnip to his passionate, anti-establishment base, it is unlikely to have appealed to independent voters and women who have yet to choose a candidate.

“When you’re trailing in the polls, you don’t need a headline the next morning saying that you’re not going to accept the election results,” said Ford O’Connell, a Republican strategist who supports Trump.

With less than three weeks left in the race, Trump is behind Clinton in most battleground states and is underperforming in almost every demographic voter group compared to the Republican nominee, Mitt Romney, four years ago. Party strategists had said before the debate that he needed to use the event to draw in voters beyond his hard-core supporters.

Trump didn’t listen or perhaps didn’t care.

STRATEGY MAY BACKFIRE

His debate was a continuation of his apparent strategy to ensure his most fervent supporters show up on Election Day, while betting that his attacks on Clinton’s character and truthfulness will discourage voting by already skeptical young and liberal Democrats.

But experts who study voter behavior warned that his attacks on Clinton may backfire, saying he may instead awaken Democratic voters who have so far been uninspired by Clinton.

“The risk he faces by engaging in a scorched-earth policy is that he activates people rather than turning them off,” said Michael McDonald, who runs the U.S. Election Project at the University of Florida.

McDonald, who tracks early voting returns and absentee ballot requests, said he is seeing larger than expected surges of support for Clinton in southeastern states such as Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida.

The Reuters/Ipsos States of the Nation project, which uses a massive online opinion poll to project election outcomes in all 50 states, estimates that Clinton has a 95 percent chance of winning the election by about 118 votes in the Electoral College if it were held today.

It is against this backdrop that Trump has apparently decided to double down on energizing his base rather than broadening it. But the poll results cast doubt on the wisdom of that strategy.

If Trump’s core white, male, working class supporters vote at high rates, as expected, that likely won’t be enough to win. Trump, for example, already does well with white men who are at retirement age. Nine out of 10 of them are already expected to vote, according to the polling results, so, there is little room to squeeze out more votes.

RIGGED ELECTION

Voting rights activists have accused Trump of trying to suppress voter turnout by claiming, without evidence, that the election has been rigged against him. He has also said his supporters need to monitor polling stations to ensure a fair vote, which the activists decry as an act of intimidation.

Should Trump’s comments succeed in discouraging some Democratic voters from turning out, that may also not be enough to help him secure the White House. He still loses under what could be considered a dream scenario for the Republican nominee: white men show up in greater numbers than expected, while turnout among racial minorities is lower than expected.

In this scenario, the States of the Nation project estimates that Trump would win the battleground states of Ohio and North Carolina, and he would have a shot at winning Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Colorado. Even then, Clinton would still have an 82 percent chance of winning the election.

There’s yet another risk to Trump’s strategy. By claiming the election is rigged, he could be unintentionally signaling to his supporters that voting no longer matters.

Michael Sopko, 63, a mortgage broker from Denver and a Trump backer, said before the debate that he sees his vote as pointless.

“They have already been corrupted,” he said of voting machines, speaking ahead of a Trump rally in Colorado Springs. “I think the results are already cast.”

(Reporting by James Oliphant, Chris Kahn, and Emily Stephenson, editing by Paul Thomasch and Ross Colvin)

Photo: Republican U.S. presidential nominee Donald Trump speaks during the third and final debate with Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton (not pictured) at UNLV in Las Vegas, Nevada, U.S., October 19, 2016. REUTERS/Rick Wilking