Global “Digital Tension Controller Market” Forecast 2021-2027: Digital Tension Controllers are used for tension control on unwinders, rewinders and process phase. Tension control has an important role in the sectors of converting, paper and carton board, aluminum foil, textile, wire and cables. Market Analysis and Insights: Global Digital Tension Controller Market The global Digital Tension Controller market was valued at USD in 2020 and will reach USD million by the end of 2027, growing at a CAGR of % during 2022-2027. Global Digital Tension Controller Scope and Market Size The global Digital...
Start your day with National Memo Newsletter
Know first.
The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning
During the all-too-brief one-on-one contest between Nikki Haley and Donald Trump for the Republican presidential nomination, there was a good deal of analysis declaring it the last stand of the Reaganite vision for the GOP versus the MAGA takeover. That was the wishiest of wishful thinking — and not just because such large segments of the current Republican Party delight in Trump. It's also because the Reaganite wing has made such a poor showing for itself.
It's generous to call the desiccated exoskeleton of Reaganism a "wing" at all, and frankly, the use of the term "Reaganism" is not really accurate anyway. What people mean when they use the term is traditional Republicanism, which includes belief in free enterprise, smaller government, freer trade, respect for the Constitution, dedication to American world leadership and social conservatism, among other ideals. Republicans who continue to adhere to those principles embraced Haley as the last man (as it were) standing.
One reason there weren't more traditional Republicans was on display in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed. The world might look very different if traditional Republicans had been willing to stand firm for their values when they came under assault from an ignorant, cruel demagogue. So I was briefly optimistic when I saw that an honest-to-goodness Reaganite, John Lehman, who served as secretary of the Navy under Reagan, had weighed in. The headline was promising: "Reagan Would Never Vote for Trump." But after that bold beginning, the subhead was deflating: "He also didn't care much for Biden. Like me, he'd be looking for a strong third-party candidate to support."
Let's unpack that subhead. Reagan may not have "cared much" for Biden in the 1980s; most conservatives didn't. But we cannot say how Reagan would view the 2024 Biden; many former Republicans like me consider him the more conservative choice in the most important respects, i.e., respect for the rule of law and adherence to the Constitution. As Lehman itemizes in his piece, Trump's departure from conservative ideals — or just plain American ideals — are "horrifying," including his "naked admiration of our enemies," "praise for Hezbollah," contempt for allies, and incessant denigration of America as a "third world country" and a "laughingstock."
One might suppose that given all of that and so much more, Lehman would counsel that Trump's reelection would be a disaster and, accordingly, that he would vote for Biden. But no, Lehman makes a feeble accusation in the final paragraph that Biden has "turned his platform over to socialist Bernie Sanders" and accordingly, Lehman will vote for the No Labels candidate.
That's rubbish. Biden has done no such thing. Lehman, like so many who should know better, is failing to take responsibility for the decision we must all make. His longing for purity is overwhelming his judgment. If Trump is reelected, none of the things he worked for as Navy secretary is safe.
Anything that erodes the anti-Trump coalition makes it more likely that Trump will prevail. So those who vow to write in a non-Trump Republican, or who, like Lehman, will vote for the No Labels candidate, are increasing the chances that a man who promises to pardon the Jan. 6 insurrectionists, imprison his critics and become an ally of Russia, will be elected.
The No Labels candidacy is cotton candy. Though advertised as providing a "unity ticket" that will provide "common sense" solutions for America's problems, the reality is that No Labels has no chance of winning 270 electoral college votes. Last year, they predicted that they would achieve ballot access in 32 states by now. Instead, they have access in only 16 states. Oh, and No Labels might as well be called No Candidate. Like dominoes, one possible candidate after another has turned down their offer to run: Jon Huntsman, Joe Manchin, Larry Hogan, Kyrsten Sinema, Nikki Haley, Ken Buck, Brian Kemp and, just this week, Geoff Duncan.
As William Galston, a founder of No Labels who broke with the group last year, has explained, there are more moderate voters in the Democratic Party than in the GOP. Accordingly, No Labels will attract more Democrats than Republicans.
No Labels claims that it is only interested in fielding a ticket that can win outright and has no desire to serve as a spoiler. But polling shows that even a nationally known figure like Haley would only claim 9% of the vote in a four-way race that also contained Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Their projections also presume that a No Labels candidate would carry states that Biden won by double-digit margins in 2020.
No Labels is playing a dangerous game. Some believe it has forfeited the benefit of the doubt and is a full-fledged stalking horse for Trump. It wouldn't be so dangerous were it not for feckless lightweights like John Lehman.
Margie Lied: Debunking That 'Migrant Crime Wave' Canard
Marjorie Taylor Greene
Georgia’s main contribution to the degradation of competent government, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, just put Speaker Mike Johnson on notice with a motion to vacate the chair, the process that some Freedom Caucus Republicans used to oust former Speaker Kevin McCarthy last fall. It’s filed, but she hasn’t yet activated it to force a floor vote. That was probably a smart move on her part since she’d definitely lose if she tried to derail the two-week recess the House is ready to set off on.
Watch her try to justify her action to reporters:
“I filed the motion to vacate today,” she said, “but it's more of a warning and a pink slip.” (Note to Marge: A pink slip is not a warning.) “I respect our conference,” she continued.
“I do not wish to inflict pain on our conference and to throw the throw the House in chaos, but this is basically a warning, and it's time for us to go through the process take our time and find a new speaker of the House that will stand with Republicans and our Republican majority instead of standing with the Democrats.”
In other words: It's time to oust him, but I'm not doing it yet, but it's time, but I don't want to cause chaos. Sure, Marge, sure. Greene went on to say that she’d move forward with it if Johnson puts Ukraine aid on the floor.
This is reminiscent of what then-Freedom Caucus member Mark Meadows did to former Republican Speaker John Boehner in 2015. Meadows filed a motion to vacate but didn’t activate it. The move from Meadows and his fellow maniacs ultimately contributed to Boehner’s resignation. That probably won’t be the result Greene gets this time around, but it complicates Johnson’s precarious hold on his conference, particularly since his margin on votes is now so slim.
At the moment, Greene doesn’t seem to have any takers. Several of the members who voted to oust McCarthy aren’t on board this time around, not yet anyway. Tennessee Rep. Tim Burchett told CNN, “Marjorie is my friend, but honestly, if the Republicans do that, they know they'll be handed it over to [Democratic leader] Hakeem Jeffries, and that's the bottom line.”
Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina, one of the eight who voted to boot McCarthy, is also a no as is the ringleader of that previous fight, Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida. At least one of those eight—Rep. Ralph Norman of South Carolina is playing coy. “We’ll see,” he told reporters.
Johnson has essentially no votes to lose on a motion to vacate—a situation made even more dire by the just-announced early retirement of Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-WI), as soon as next month. Johnson’s also in a singularly weak position in the conference right now, and that showed in Friday’s government funding vote. Not only did Johnson have to rely on Democrats again to pass it, but also the majority of Republicans voted against it, 112 to 101. That’s hardly a vote of confidence from his conference.
The uncertainty for Johnson, and the fact that it’s not out of the realm of possibility that Jeffries could win a majority if another speaker vote comes up, Democrats are in a good position to extract some concessions from him, and that’s just what they’re preparing to do. That concession: the Senate’s supplemental funding bill to aid Ukraine.
“I think Speaker Johnson should demonstrate a willingness to govern in a way that is helpful to the plight of democracy and our allies across the world,” said Rep. Abigail Spanberger, a Virginia Democrat, told Politico, saying she’d vote to table the motion to vacate.
“It's not a question of saving Mike Johnson,” Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland said. “I’ll make a common cause and an alliance with anybody in Congress who will try to save the Ukrainian people at this point.”
Through all 15 of the votes it took to elect McCarthy speaker last year, Democrats held firm behind Jeffries. They did it again during the arduous process this past fall, when Republicans couldn’t figure out how to replace McCarthy. Now that the Republican majority is next to nonexistent—depending on absences and no votes on any given day—Johnson’s survival as speaker is Democrats’ hands.