Friday, June 28, 2019

Kamala Harris Just Taught a Debate Clinic. You’re Welcome.

Kamala Harris Just Taught a Debate Clinic. You’re Welcome.(Bloomberg Opinion) -- It’s a fool’s game to predict how voters will react to nomination debate performances – or, for that matter, how the media will construct the story of any debate. So I won’t play that game.What I will say is that Senator Kamala Harris of California put on a clinic Thursday night in how to do these events. From early on in the second Democratic presidential debate until her final statement, she earned her place in the upper tier of candidates who have ever participated in these events. Again, that doesn’t guarantee anything; Barack Obama won a nomination despite never really mastering that particular format, while several candidates who were good at debates never went anywhere. But yes, Harris is good at it.The centerpiece is the clip you’ll be seeing, in which Harris took on Joe Biden on the issue of, of all things, busing – a policy question that’s been out of the news for decades. It was in some ways a fascinating moment in U.S. political history, in which questions of race and ethnicity, generational change, education, political efficacy, and more all came together. But as to executing a plan, Harris pulled it off about as well as anyone could have. (And we know that it was a planned attack, because Harris’s media folks had material ready to go once it happened.)The thing is that when Harris interrupted to gain control of the floor in order to launch her attack, it was already (at least) the second time that she had effectively shushed the other candidates. It was a messy night, with lots of cross-talk and interruptions, but Harris was repeatedly effective at seizing moments when she wanted to.Of course, that wouldn’t help if she didn’t know what to do once people focused on her. But her answers were consistently solid. She’s excellent at shifting from anecdotes to policy, excellent at feeling her way to time limits – and excellent at exceeding the time limit without (in my view at least) seeming pushy or obnoxious. And her closing statement, in which she promised to prosecute the case against Donald Trump, was a strong way of labeling what she had been doing all night, and arguing that her particular skills are the right ones for the general election.Again: All of this is essentially theater criticism. We’ll just have to wait and see whether it will play well with Democratic party actors, with the media, and directly or indirectly with rank-and-file Democratic voters. What we do know is that Harris doesn’t need any immediate polling surge to at least stay in the conversation for the next few months, and she has quite a bit of support from party actors already – suggesting that if she does surge, she’ll be in good position to take advantage of it.It’s worth mentioning that all Harris would have to do is win the support of some of the undecided members of the California U.S. House delegation to move into first place in the endorsement race, at least according to the FiveThirtyEight accounting.As far as the rest of the night? I thought Pete Buttigieg probably did what his supporters were hoping for. Joe Biden had some solid moments, but all that’s going to matter for him is how people are going to read his exchange with Harris, so we’ll have to wait on that as well. I didn’t see anyone else who entered with a plausible chance and who really helped himself or herself. In particular, it’s hard to believe that anyone who wasn’t already in the Bernie Sanders camp was persuaded by his performance, which is the exact same thing he’s been doing since the 2016 primaries.It will also be interesting whether the candidates who did well during the Wednesday night debate wind up overshadowed by Harris (and Biden) on Thursday, or if they can retain some of the attention they earned.There’s going to be one more round very similar to these debates at the end of July. After that, there’s a two-month break, and then a September debate with a much more difficult threshold for earning an invitation. We’re about to go through a series of second-quarter fundraising disclosures, which not only count as evidence of how the candidates are doing but also generates helpful attention going forward from those who do well. So as far as the horse race is concerned, these debates won’t keep anyone in the headlines for long anyway. But for those of us who appreciate political skills, it was impressive to see Harris at work. To contact the author of this story: Jonathan Bernstein at jbernstein62@bloomberg.netTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Philip Gray at philipgray@bloomberg.netThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Jonathan Bernstein is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering politics and policy. He taught political science at the University of Texas at San Antonio and DePauw University and wrote A Plain Blog About Politics.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinion©2019 Bloomberg L.P.




from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/2Xae5N1

Palestinians protest on Gaza-Israel fence after truce

Palestinians protest on Gaza-Israel fence after truceThousands of Palestinians protested along the volatile Gaza-Israel frontier on Friday, hours after Israel and the territory's Hamas rulers confirmed an agreement to honor a past cease-fire. The unofficial truce, mediated by Egypt, Qatar and the United Nations, emphasizes calm in exchange for Israeli measures to improve living conditions in the blockaded Palestinian enclave. Gaza's health ministry said 19 of them were wounded by live fire.




from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/2ZXPr3T

U.S. House passes Senate border aid bill, sends to Trump for signature

U.S. House passes Senate border aid bill, sends to Trump for signatureThe U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday approved a Senate-passed bill providing $4.6 billion to address a surge of migrants at the U.S. border with Mexico, sending it to President Donald Trump for his signature after Democrats abandoned efforts to add additional migrant protections. Both the White House and the Senate opposed the changes House Democratic leaders had proposed, and a number of moderate Democrats also favored passing the Senate bill without changes. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the top Democrat in Congress, said shortly before the vote that her colleagues were giving up their fight for now.




from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/2NhoTJx

Senate backs massive defense bill, targets China, sets Iran vote

Senate backs massive defense bill, targets China, sets Iran voteThe U.S. Senate on Thursday passed a $750-billion defense policy bill with provisions that target China on issues from technology transfers to the sale of synthetic opioids, pushing to counter growing Chinese influence around the world. Among other provisions, the Senate NDAA requires detailed reporting from the Department of Defense to prevent transfers of sensitive technology to China or Russia, as well as reports on access to the Arctic.




from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/320fvgv

In Surprise Census Decision, Supreme Court Finally Calls BS on the Trump Administration

In Surprise Census Decision, Supreme Court Finally Calls BS on the Trump AdministrationWin McNamee/GettyThe Trump administration’s plan to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census—which it estimated would decrease Hispanic participation in the census by five percent—has been temporarily shelved by the Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision.The reason? The administration lied.“Reasoned decisionmaking under the Administrative Procedure Act calls for an explanation for agency action,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote in the opinion for the Court. “What was provided here was more of a distraction.”That is music to the ears of Trump’s critics. Finally, there is a limit to how much this administration can lie and get away with it.Notably, the case was not a complete victory for opponents of the question. The Court held that a citizenship question is constitutional, and that Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, who is responsible for the census, was within his authority to set aside the dire warnings from the Census Bureau that the question would depress participation. Wilbur Ross Lied to Congress About the GOP’s Plot to Rig the Census. This Should Be a National Scandal.But it is a major victory nonetheless, for two reasons.First, the citizenship question is unlikely to be on the 2020 census. The Court’s decision kicks the case back to the district court to continue investigations into the real reasons for the question—including deposing Secretary Ross himself. That will take a while. In addition to the material already in the record—including numerous emails and memos clearly showing that Secretary Ross misrepresented the timeline and rationale for the question—still more material was recently unearthed on the hard drives of a deceased Republican operative, Thomas Hofeller, suggesting that citizenship data could be used to draw election districts to advantage “non-Hispanic whites.”Evaluating all that information will take a long time.Moreover, the ACLU and the New York Immigration Coalition had asked the district court to sanction government officials for lying in their statements to the court. That investigation, too, will now proceed.It’s unclear exactly how long it takes to print 350 million census forms: at first the government said they’d have to start in June, then later they said October. The Census Bureau has said that they intend to start printing the forms next week. (The president said shortly after the court’s decision that he has asked lawyers to delay the census.) In any case, it is highly likely that this dispute will not be resolved in time for the citizenship question to be added.The consequences are huge. Had the question been included, it would have intimidated some Hispanics from filling out the census for fear the information would be used by law enforcement for deportation.That undercounting, in turn, would lead to fewer Democratic-leaning congressional districts; to under-apportioning money for areas with uncounted residents; and even to decreasing the electoral college representation of Hispanic-heavy states like Texas, California, and New York. It would make presidential elections like 2016—where Trump won the most electoral votes despite losing the popular vote—more likely.And the data, we now know, would have been used to redraw congressional districts based on their number of citizens, rather than their total population, thus weakening the representation of areas with large numbers of immigrants and people of color.All that is on hold for now, and probably off the table for 2020.The second reason today’s decision is a victory has to do with the Court’s reasoning: that, in Roberts’s words, “we are presented…with an explanation for agency action that is incongruent with what the record reveals about the agency’s priorities and decisionmaking process.”“Incongruent” is legalese for “lied.” The Trump administration said one thing, but the evidence showed another. Specifically, wrote Roberts, “that evidence showed that the Secretary was determined to reinstate a citizenship question from the time he entered office…and adopted the Voting Rights Act rationale late in the process.”This “reveal[s] a significant mismatch between the decision the Secretary made and the rationale he provided.”“This is a victory for the rule of law,” said Dale Ho, the ACLU lawyer who argued the case at the Supreme Court.  “You can’t have government accountability unless government agencies are open and honest about their reasons for taking the actions they take.”Revealed: Memo Shows Trump Officials Trying to Rig Elections for WhitesThere was good reason to doubt that Roberts, in particular, would decide the case this way. Just last year, he took the Trump administration at its word that the so-called “Travel Ban,” which began, obviously, as a ban against Muslims entering the United States, was in fact a religion-neutral travel ban put in place for national-security reasons.There, too, the government came up with a bunch of evidence supporting their decision. There, too, they asked the Court to ignore the mountain of evidence that the rationale was pretext. But there, Roberts went along with it. And indeed, in today’s decision, Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh note that the Court seems to be contradicting itself. Sometimes it takes the government at its word, sometimes it says that word is pretext. Admittedly, they have a point.But, Roberts seemed to say, there is a limit to how much BS the Court will take. When there are email chains, memos, and meeting notes that directly contradict what government officials are saying, then at the very least, courts will fully inquire into the administrative record.Or, in his more delicate words:“Agencies [must] offer genuine justifications for important decisions, reasons that can be scrutinized by courts and the interested public. Accepting contrived reasons would defeat the purpose of the enterprise. If judicial review is to be more than an empty ritual, it must demand something better than the explanation offered for the action taken in this case.”At last, truth has had its day in court.John Roberts Isn’t the Conservative You Thought He WasRead more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.




from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/2FCdA8z

Trump arrives in Japan for G-20. What to expect from meetings with China's Xi Jinping, Russia's Putin

Trump arrives in Japan for G-20. What to expect from meetings with China's Xi Jinping, Russia's PutinTrump expects to tackle the trade war with China, tensions with Iran and stalled talks with North Korea during the G-20 summit.




from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/2J90DUw

How did voters react to the first night of Democratic presidential debates?

How did voters react to the first night of Democratic presidential debates?Maslansky and Partners president Lee Carter shares voter dials from the debate.




from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/2ITn6G7