CNN/ORC Poll shows last-minute love for Obamacare

September 13, 2019

Washington (CNN)Americans views of Obamacare tilt directly favorable, inning accordance with a brand-new CNN/ORC survey , marking the very first time more have actually preferred than opposed the law given that its passage in 2010. The shift comes at the exact same time more than 8-in-10 state the law is most likely to be rescinded and changed by inbound president Donald Trump.

Overall, 49% state they prefer the 2010 healthcare law, more officially called the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, while 47% oppose it. A primarily combined evaluation in general, that’s a sharp enhancement compared with previous ballot on the law.

More have actually opposed than preferred the law in every CNN/ORC survey on this concern from March 2010 previously. The shift in the law’s favor stems mainly from Democrats and independents, while views amongst Republicans have not moved much.

The total CNN/ORC survey results

Still, couple of feel the ACA has actually done much to assist them personally. Simply 22% state they or their households are much better off given that the law’s arrangements have actually entered into result, and more, 30%, state that they are even worse off now. About 3-in-10 state that the law hasn’t really assisted anybody in the United States, consisting of 58% of Republicans who feel that method.

The law unquestionably helped in reducing the share of uninsured Americans, with the uninsured rate reaching historical lows following the execution of some parts of the law, however Americans by and big do not see it as effective.

Almost 4-in-10 (37%) state they think about the law a failure, surpassing the 23% who state they see the law as a success. That’s an uptick considering that 2015, however almost all of the boost in understandings of the law as a success comes amongst Democrats, 46% of whom state so now, up from 19% in 2015.

The inbound Trump administration and the Republican Congress that will accompany it have actually called rescinding Obamacare a leading concern, and healthcare normally has actually increased in concern in the eyes of Americans. In the brand-new survey, 14% pointed out healthcare as the most crucial problem dealing with the nation, up greatly from the 3% who mentioned it last fall in a comparable concern about the most crucial problem in the governmental project.

Under

Still, one element of Trump’s divestment strategy appears to have appeal, 54% state they authorize of his strategy to contribute to the United States Treasury Trump hotel earnings made from foreign federal governments.

Considering the other Trump member of the family who have actually remained in the news recently, 59% state it is improper for Trump to have his child, Ivanka Trump, and son-in-law, Jared Kushner, operating in the White House. Kushner has actually been selected a senior consultant to the president and Ivanka Trump is anticipated to work there ultimately.

The Congress that will be dealing with the White House to enact Trump’s program, starts his time in workplace with a 20% approval ranking, that’s a bit listed below the 29% approval they held at the start of Barack Obama’s time in workplace, and about on-par with their standing in January 2013 ahead of Obama’s 2nd inauguration.

Of the 4 celebration leaders directing congressional caucuses in your home and Senate, House Speaker Paul Ryan has the greatest favorability ranking (46% view him positively) and is best-known. Democratic House Leader Nancy Pelosi follows with 35% favorability. The 2 Senate leaders are both less widely known and less favored, with 25% holding a beneficial viewpoint of brand-new Democratic leader Chuck Schumer and 20% beneficial towards Republican leader Mitch McConnell.

The CNN/ORC Poll was carried out by telephone January 12-15 amongst a random nationwide sample of 1,000 grownups. Outcomes for the complete sample have a margin of tasting mistake of plus or minus 3 portion points; it is greater for subgroups.

Jerome Powell: I won’t leave if Trump asks me to quit

September 9, 2019August 7, 2019

(CNN)Will Jerome Powell leave if President Donald Trump asks him? The Federal Reserve Chairman defiantly said “no” at a House Financial Services Committee hearing Wednesday.

“Of course, I would not do that,” replied Powell.

“I can’t hear you,” said Waters in response to which the hearing room erupted in laughter by Powell and members on both sides of the aisle.

“The answer would be, ‘No,'” Powell said.

Waters pressed further asking, “Do you believe the President doesn’t have the authority?”

He replied: “What I have said is the law gives me a four-year term and I fully intend to serve it.”

Read more: http://edition.cnn.com/

House Dem asks IRS for 6 years of Trump’s tax returns, setting up showdown with White House

May 5, 2019April 25, 2019

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal, D-Mass., arrives for a Democratic Caucus meeting at the Capitol in Washington, on April 2, 2019. Rep. Neal, whose committee has jurisdiction over all tax issues, has formally requested President Donald Trump’s tax returns from the Internal Revenue Service for the past 6 years. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

“Weaponizing our nation’s tax code by targeting political foes sets a dangerous precedent and weakens Americans’ privacy rights, As you know, by law all Americans have a fundamental right to the privacy of the personal information found in their tax returns,” Brady said in the letter. “This particular request is an abuse of the tax-writing committees’ statutory authority, and violates the intent and safeguards of Section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code as Congress intended.”

That provision of tax law generally prohibits the disclosure of personal tax information.

Brady added that while “transparency in our government is enormously important,” the “privacy and freedom” of all taxpayers is paramount — and that Congress should pass new disclosure laws if it sees a problem. Violating the privacy rights of one taxpayer, Brady asserted, “begins the process of eroding and threatening the privacy rights of all taxpayers.”

A spokesperson for Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, told Fox News that the “ability of the chairman to request such information is intended to inform the legislative process, which is how it’s been used in the past, not to engage in a politically-motivated fishing expedition.”

Congress “passed section 6103 of the tax code to prevent that kind of abuse of power and to protect every taxpayer’s privacy,” the spokesperson continued. “Those seeking an individual’s personal tax returns to exact political damage would be opening the door to future abuses of power and would poison the public trust in the ability of the IRS to keep personal information private. That’s an outcome every taxpayer and their elected representatives should want to avoid.”

Neal specifically demanded the federal income tax returns from eight entities, including Trump National Golf Club-Bedminster, as well as statements specifying whether the returns were ever under audit. Neal also demanded all administrative files, including affidavits, related to each return.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden, D-Ore., followed up with a statement backing up his counterpart in the House.

“The law is crystal clear—the Treasury Department must provide tax returns to the Ways & Means and Finance Committees when the chairman requests them. I expect the Treasury Department to comply in a timely manner,” Wyden said. “Chairman Grassley should make the same request so Senate Finance Committee members are also able to access them.”

Fox News’ Mike Emanuel, Chad Pergram and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Gregg Re is an editor and attorney based in Los Angeles. Follow him on Twitter @gregg_re.

Chicago police want to talk to Jussie Smollett, but they don’t know when that’ll happen

May 5, 2019March 20, 2019

Chicago (CNN)Chicago detectives want to speak to actor Jussie Smollett — but it’s not clear when, or if, that will happen.

Two brothers, who were arrested and released in connection with the attack, met with police and prosecutors at a Chicago courthouse on Tuesday, Chicago police spokesman Tom Ahern said. The county’s top prosecutor, Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx, has recused herself from the investigation, according to a spokeswoman from her office.

“Out of an abundance of caution, the decision to recuse herself was made to address potential questions of impartiality based upon familiarity with potential witnesses in the case,” said the spokeswoman, Tandra Simonton.

The men — who attorney Gloria Schmidt identified as Olabinjo Osundairo and Abimbola Osundairo — were arrested February 13 but released without charges Friday after Chicago police cited the discovery of “new evidence.” The two are no longer suspects at this time, Chicago police have said.

In a joint statement issued to CNN affiliate WBBM, the men said: “We are not racist. We are not homophobic, and we are not anti-Trump. We were born and raised in Chicago and are American citizens.”

On Monday, Anne Kavanaugh with Media Pros 24/7, a firm representing Smollett, released a statement saying in part, “Smollett’s attorneys will keep an active dialogue going with Chicago police on his behalf.”

Smollett charged with providing false information to law enforcement in 2007 misdemeanor case

More than a decade ago, Smollett pleaded no contest to providing false information to law enforcement in a 2007 misdemeanor case, according to Frank Mateljan, a spokesman for the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office.

The case stems from a DUI stop in which Smollett gave police the wrong name.

Smollett also pleaded no contest to driving with a blood alcohol level over the legal limit and driving without a valid driver license.

He was sentenced to two years of probation and paid a fine, according to Mateljan.

Police looking into whether Smollett paid the brothers

Two law enforcement sources with knowledge of the investigation told CNN that Chicago Police believe Smollett paid the brothers to orchestrate an assault on him that he reported late last month.

Smollett denies playing a role in his attack, according to a statement from his attorneys.

The sources told CNN the two men are now cooperating fully with law enforcement and that there are records that show the two brothers purchased the rope found around Smollett’s neck at a hardware store in Chicago.

Smollett’s attorneys, Todd S. Pugh and Victor P. Henderson, issued a statement to CNN Saturday night saying Smollett was angry about these latest developments.

“As a victim of a hate crime who has cooperated with the police investigation, Jussie Smollett is angered and devastated by recent reports that the perpetrators are individuals he is familiar with,” the statement read. “He has now been further victimized by claims attributed to these alleged perpetrators that Jussie played a role in his own attack. Nothing is further from the truth and anyone claiming otherwise is lying.”

Smollett identifies as gay and since 2015 has played the gay character of Jamal on the Fox TV drama “Empire.”

Letter addressed to Smollett before alleged attack included the word ‘MAGA”

Seven days before the alleged attack, a letter containing white powder was sent to the Chicago set of “Empire,” Chicago police have said. Authorities determined the powder to be aspirin, according to Chicago police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi.

The image of the letter and envelope, shared with CNN by a person close to Smollett, includes a message apparently cut from magazine clippings, and a stick figure drawing. Smollett told ABC News the drawing was of a “stick figure hanging from a tree which had a gun pointing towards it.” The letter, addressed to Smollett, includes the word “MAGA” on the outside of the envelope in place of the return address.

What happened

According to to Guglielmi, the actor told detectives he was attacked by two men near the lower entrance of a Loews hotel in Chicago. Police were told the two men yelled “‘Empire’ fa***t” and “‘Empire’ n***er'” while striking him.

In a supplemental interview with authorities, Smollett confirmed media reports that one of the attackers also shouted, “This is MAGA country,” a reference to President Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” campaign slogan.

The day after the incident, police released surveillance images that showed two silhouetted individuals walking down a sidewalk, and police said they were wanted for questioning.

Police on Friday said the men were being viewed as “potential suspects” then. But by Friday night they had been released, Guglielmi said.

One of the men has appeared on “Empire,” Guglielmi said. A police source also told CNN on Friday night that the men had a previous affiliation with Smollett, but did not provide additional details.

Smollett has expressed frustration about not being believed

Smollett gave his first detailed account last week of what he says was a hate crime against him, and the aftermath, in the interview with ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

“It feels like if I had said it was a Muslim or a Mexican or someone black I feel like the doubters would have supported me a lot much more,” Smollett said. “And that says a lot about the place where we are as a country right now.”

Smollett stated that one of the attackers shouted “this is MAGA country” before punching him in the face. But he refuted reports that said he told police the attackers wore “Make America Great Again” hats.

“I never said that,” he told ABC’s Robin Roberts. “I didn’t need to add anything like that. They called me a f****t, they called me a n****r. There’s no which way you cut it. I don’t need some MAGA hat as the cherry on some racist sundae.”

Read more: http://edition.cnn.com/

Beto O’Rourke: ‘What’s happening now is part of a larger threat to us all’

March 15, 2019February 17, 2019

(CNN)Outgoing Democratic Rep. Beto O’Rourke issued a pointed warning about what he sees as the threat President Donald Trump poses to American democracy, writing that “what’s happening now is part of a larger threat to us all.”

“(Perhaps) the President calculates that by adding to the blizzard of bizarre behavior over the last two years and shutting down the government at Christmas, while his own party still controls each branch of it, the institutions that we need for our democracy to function (and to ensure no man is above the law) will be overwhelmed,” he wrote.

“But my concern for the country goes beyond the immediate pain and dysfunction that this shutdown will cause. Beyond even ensuring that this President is held accountable. What’s happening now is part of a larger threat to us all,” the statement read.

O’Rourke went on to list the things that Trump has done since taking office in 2017 that he sees as antithetical to American ideals, including the travel ban and the administration’s child separation policy.

“If there were ever a man to exploit this precarious moment for our country and our form of government, it’s Trump,” he wrote, adding that America is “at risk of losing those things that make us special, unique, exceptional…”

In the first CNN/Des Moines Register/Mediacom poll, 11% of likely caucusgoers in Iowa — a key 2020 state — ranked O’Rourke as their first choice.

Last month, he told supporters that he and his wife “will think about what we can do next to contribute to the best of our ability to this community” when reporters asked him about a 2020 run. Before the midterms, O’Rourke said he would not run for president.

“Running for Senate, I was 100% focused on our campaign, winning that race, and then serving the next six years in the United States Senate. That was 100% of our focus,” O’Rourke said in November. “Now that that is no longer possible, you know, we’re thinking through a number of things. Amy and I made a decision not to rule anything out.”

On Saturday, O’Rourke again emphasized the importance of the larger community at hand, calling on Americans to “put country over party.”

“Prove that our system of government — whatever its problems — is still the best thing under the sun. It’s action vs. distraction. One will save our democracy, the other will lead to its end,” O’Rourke wrote.

Read more: http://edition.cnn.com/

Fact-checking Trump, AOC climate claims

March 15, 2019February 1, 2019

(CNN)The political conversation around climate change is often framed by two extreme narratives: climate change is either a farce that doesn’t exist, or it’s poised to kill us all quite soon. Over the past few days President Donald Trump and New York Democratic congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have provided the public with perfect examples of both sides.

Both statements gave ammo to the other side. Environmentalists lambasted Trump while some journalists on the right mocked Ocasio-Cortez’s 12-year timeline. With a topic as politically divisive as climate change, imprecise language and factually incorrect statements not only provide easy targets for the other side but also hinder conversations focused on building a consensus around real solutions.

Below is an analysis and the broader context of these two claims.

Trump’s claim

Trump is peddling the same rhetoric that climate skeptics used for years, pointing to cold winter weather as proof that climate change does not exist. (Remember when Senator Jim Inhofe brought a snowball to the Senate floor?)

Here, Trump is conflating weather and climate, something he’s done many times before (here, here and here, for example). Weather refers to daily variations in temperature, precipitation, etc. and climate is the long-term average of these conditions over a given area.

While portions of the US might be mired in a deep-freeze, many other parts of the planet are seeing record-breaking heat waves (like Australia at the moment). When you average these out over the planet, the hotter temps are tipping the scale, which is why the hottest 5 years on record for our planet have all occurred since 2014.

“People also tend to confuse what is happening where they live as an indication of what is happening globally,” says Marshall Shepherd, Director of the Atmospheric Sciences Program at the University of Georgia and a former president of the American Meteorological Society. “It is ‘Not Where You Live Warming,’ it is Global Warming,” Shepherd told CNN.

In the US, public opinion is shifting away from Trump’s view. Growing majorities of Americans now say that climate change is real and man-made, according to surveys published this week from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication and George Mason University. More than seven in 10 Americans (73%) say global warming is happening — up 10 percentage points from early 2015 — according to the Yale surveys. And 62% now say warming is mostly human-caused.

Similarly, about 8 in 10 Americans, including two thirds of Republicans, believe climate change is causing extreme weather, according to a Monmouth University poll from November 2018.

Ocasio-Cortez’s claim

With her 12-year timeline, it’s possible that Ocasio-Cortez is referencing a major global report from last October by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the United Nation’s scientific authority on climate change.

The year 2030 came up prominently in that report, marking the first year that the planet is likely to warm by 1.5 degrees Celsius (the report provided a range of between 2030 and 2052). This temperature was set as an idealistic goal during the 2015 Paris Climate Accord. It is widely seen among climate scientists as a marker, beyond which long-term, irreversible change begins to occur, but does not signify the end of the world.

“Every extra bit of warming matters, especially since warming of 1.5°C or higher increases the risk associated with long-lasting or irreversible changes, such as the loss of some ecosystems,” according to Hans-Otto Pörtner, a Co-Chair of the IPCC.

In order to keep warming within the 1.5 degree range and limit the effects—which get considerably worse as warming approaches and passes 2 degrees—the report states that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) must decline by 45% by 2030 and be essentially zero by 2050. A popular narrative that resulted from the report was that we only have 12 years to avoid the dire consequences of climate change.

The report certainly does not say that the world will end in 12 years, but it does warn that if there has not been a major shift in human’s reliance on fossil fuels for energy, land, and industrial systems by that time, we may begin living in a world that is more hostile to our current way of life — with higher sea levels, hotter heat waves and more extreme disasters.

Says Shepherd, “When the extreme rhetoric dominates the headlines or social media space, the real science gets lost. Trust me, climate change is bad enough as it is, it doesn’t need to be inaccurately inflated…”

To that point, if we’re ever going to make progress on as complicated an issue as climate change, it’s essential to strip away the hyperbole on both sides and focus on the facts.

Read more: http://edition.cnn.com/

Mueller should insist on an in-person interview with Trump

January 20, 2019January 20, 2019

(CNN)President Donald Trump is plainly fretted. He pretends that details district attorneys supplied in current filings in the Michael Cohen and Paul Manafort cases “ absolutely clears ” him. In truth, federal district attorneys in the Southern District of New York have detailed a persuading case that Trump directed Cohen to make prohibited project payments to hide his supposed affairs.

Not so quickly. This is not a witch hunt, and Special Counsel Robert Mueller is far from completed. Even if he has actually currently collected adequate proof to compose his report about Russian collusion and possible blockage of justice, he should not send his group house up until somebody in his workplace interviews Trump. And he should not do it through composed concerns sent to Trump’s attorneys, however rather deal with to deal with and in a setting where Trump need to inform the fact or face prosecution when he leaves workplace.

An individual interview would enable district attorneys on Mueller’s group to challenge Trump with the proof they have actually collected. While Trump regularly has actually rejected that he conspired with Russia or blocked justice, those public declarations do not subject him to prosecution if they are lies. Depending on an interview with the unique counsel’s workplace would.

It’s not simply the threat of a so-called “perjury trap.” The advantage of an individual interview is that district attorneys do not need to accept the very first scripted response. They can penetrate– ask “what took place next” and “why did you do (or not do) that?” In other words, they can determine truthfulness in genuine time.

The unique counsel’s examination has actually been efficient even without the President’s total cooperation. Mueller’s group has actually protected indictments and guilty pleas , spoke with many witnesses and, no doubt, read stacks of documentary proof. Mueller appears to have actually done his finest to meet his required to “guarantee a comprehensive and complete examination of the Russia federal government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 governmental election.”

But he can’t give up now. On Friday, we gained from the President’s legal representative that the unique counsel’s workplace informed Manafort that district attorneys think the President understood about the critical Trump Tower conference in 2016. Obviously, Trump previous has rejected understanding it, personally and through surrogates. Still, Trump requires to be challenged on this problem on the record, in a setting where district attorneys can ask follow-up concerns and evaluate his reliability personally. An individual interview is much better to get the fact than the “take house test” with composed concerns where his legal group can filter his actions.

Aside from collusion, Trump requires to be questioned about his choices and intentions that might indicate blockage of justice. The composed concerns provided to his legal representatives were apparently minimal to the “collusion” part of the examination and did not touch on possible blockage of justice and witness tampering.

The possibility that the President of the United States blocked justice is genuine, and it must be examined completely. That can’t take place without challenging the President himself. Mueller, or among his leading deputies, requires to ask Trump the difficult concerns and get the answer. Trump requires to be continued the who, what, when and why, in a setting where any incorrect responses would subject him to a possible felony conviction when he leaves workplace.

Of course, it’s not that Mueller hasn’t requested an interview .

But Trump has actually declined. If the rejection is Trump’s concept or his legal representatives, it’s tough to inform. Trump has actually stated he wished to speak with Mueller, however Trump can be filled with bluster. Trump’s attorneys have excellent legal factors to challenge such an interview, which’s exactly why there ought to be one.

Join us on Twitter and Facebook

The unique counsel’s workplace has subpoena power . The capability to impose a subpoena would depend on the Justice Department standing behind it. We can not anticipate whether Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker or Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein would enable that to take place. Even if they did, it stays uncertain whether Trump would be forced to appear prior to a grand jury.

A face-off would have considerable constitutional ramifications, however it’s worth the threat. President Bill Clinton willingly consented to affirm prior to a grand jury after Ken Starr provided a subpoena, which was ultimately withdrawn . Mueller requires to be ready to release a subpoena.

Mueller has actually done a lot to discover the unlawful conduct that happened in the past, throughout and after the 2016 governmental project. Trump fans might state he’s done excessive. Americans must not sit by and let Trump shut down this examination till he concurs to be personally spoken with. That’s a required action in a “ comprehensive and complete ” examination concentrated on discovering the reality.

Read more: http://edition.cnn.com/

Keeping moderates and progressives happy – Trending Stuff

January 18, 2019

(CNN)Democrats were jubilant Thursday as Nancy Pelosi reclaimed the speaker’s gavel and the House of Representatives opened the 116th Congress. But you have to wonder how long the kumbaya can last in the Democratic conference, as divisions over style and tactics have already become apparent.

Can Pelosi keep her conference from fracturing the way the Republicans’ did after winning a House majority in 2010?

From 2011 through the conclusion of the 115th Congress this week, the majority GOP conference functioned at times like a European-style parliament, with essentially two conservative parties forming a coalition government that frequently split and embarrassed the leadership. Former House Speakers John Boehner and Paul Ryan may have been in charge, but regular fracturing prevented the ruling party from getting the 218 votes it needed to pass, say, a farm bill, raise the debt limit or fund the Department of Homeland Security.

The smaller of the two coalition partners — the Tea Party, or House Freedom Caucus, as it became known — had about 40 members, not enough to do anything on its own but enough to keep the Republican Party from achieving 218 votes if it so chose.

Pelosi will face similar pressures, except she’s got a three-way split with about 95 progressives on one flank and 90 “New Democrats” on the other, according to one analysis. Already, some of the new progressives are unhappy with the rules package Pelosi put forward, and many of the New Democrats have no interest in the “Medicare for all” plan championed by the progressives.

The Republicans and Freedom Caucus members were united on most votes but not all; the same will be true for these Democratic factions. The question is whether the differences of opinion will boil over the way they did for Republicans, driving the party’s elected leadership crazy.

A major issue Pelosi will have to deal with is whether to impeach President Donald Trump. A number of Democrats want to impeach, even as Pelosi has tried to tamp down such talk. On the day of her swearing-in, Rep. Brad Sherman of California re-introduced articles of impeachment against Trump (he and Reps. Al Green of Texas and Steve Cohen of Tennessee first introduced them in 2017), inserting the topic into the news on a day Pelosi would rather be focused on other things.

More than 6.5 million people have signed a petition to impeach, and the leader of the petition drive — billionaire liberal Democrat Tom Steyer — is planning a run for president. Numerous polls from various news organizations last year — including this network’s exit poll from the midterm elections — showed a vast majority of Democrats wanted Trump impeached.

Well, Democrats won the House and the bloodthirsty partisans aren’t just going to forget about what drove them to donate and knock on doors in 2018. This will be a major headache for Pelosi, who has the political acumen to understand that a hyperpartisan impeachment proceeding could easily backfire and cost her party dearly in 2020.

Join us on Twitter and Facebook

Whether Pelosi can hold her conference together will have more of an effect on 2020’s presidential campaign than on policymaking, anyway. With Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and his 53-seat majority in the Senate standing ready to block whatever shots the House puts up, the challenge for Pelosi is running an agenda that could be packaged and sold by the Democratic nominee for president.

If she can’t control her progressive flank over the next two years, the fractured result could be that voters in middle America come to the same conclusion they did in 2016: The national Democratic Party is just too extreme to be entrusted with the presidency.

Kasich’s message to Trump on possible 2020 primary challenge: ‘Be careful what you wish for’

January 16, 2019

(CNN)Ohio Gov. John Kasich suggested he may run against President Donald Trump in the 2020 Republican primary after Trump said he hoped Kasich would do so.

Kasich ran for president in 2016 and lost to Trump in the primary. When the governor dropped out of the presidential race, he did not endorse Trump. Kasich has remained an outspoken critic of the President.

Fox News’ Harris Faulkner said in an interview with Trump that aired Thursday: “I’m going to bring up John Kasich and I’m going to bring up Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake because they say they may run against you in 2020 — “

“I hope so,” Trump responded before Faulkner finished her sentence.

Kasich and Flake have both been mentioned as possible primary challengers to Trump in 2020. Neither has ruled out a run when asked, and both will be out of elected office when the presidential campaigns get into gear.

It remains to be seen whether there’s an appetite among Republican voters for a intra-party challenge to the President.

CNN’s latest polling, released on Tuesday, shows Trump’s approval rating at 39% among all voters, but he remains very popular with Republicans: Eighty-four percent of them approve of the job he is doing.

Kasich managed to win only his home state of Ohio when he ran against Trump in 2016. He racked up 161 delegates, compared with Trump’s 1,447.

Flake, meanwhile, decided to retire from the Senate rather than face a primary challenge this year from Trump-backed candidates in Arizona.

Read more: http://edition.cnn.com/

The border wall GoFundMe page sums up the Trump presidency – Trending Stuff

January 15, 2019

(CNN)During his campaign for president, Donald Trump had a common refrain — he was going to build a wall, and Mexico was going to pay for it. Since taking office, he has reiterated this same sentiment many, many times.

The very idea of a border wall between the United States and Mexico is a foolish endeavor, designed to gin up anti-immigrant fear and resentment.

Mind you, I’m a bleeding-heart liberal whose patriotic heart grows fourfold when I think about the sacrifices my immigrant ancestors made to come to this country, sacrifices others are making today only to be turned away at the border. And not because they’re breaking the rules, but because President Donald Trump changed the rules that previously allowed certain groups of migrants to seek asylum at the US border. (A court has since blocked some of his efforts.)

And while a lot of Trump supporters want a wall because they blame immigrants for their economic hardships, the fact is immigrants don’t “steal jobs.” They actually boost economies through spending and paying taxes. Plus immigrants generally take on jobs that citizen workers don’t want to fill.

But the other fact a wall ignores is that most undocumented immigrants do not cross the southern border. Rather, they overstay their visas after arriving at American airports.

So, instead of building a pointless wall, we could spend money on the things that are actually hurting all Americans — opioid addiction, stagnating wages, crumbling roads, failing public schools and lack of access to affordable health care.

Even if you think it’s a good idea because you’ve bought into generations of anti-immigrant scapegoating, wasn’t Mexico going to pay for it? Wasn’t that Trump’s promise? “Mexico will pay for the wall!” Trump tweeted on September 1, 2016.

But Trump broke that promise when he realized that he had not been elected emperor of the universe and couldn’t force a foreign government to pay for much of anything, let alone a wasteful wall. So, he tried to get the United States taxpayers to foot the bill. And even with his own party in control of both houses of Congress for two years, he has to yet to get the money he wants to build the wall.

Which means now Trump supporters are pouring donations into a viral GoFundMe campaign that aims to raise at least $1 billion of the $5 billion price tag Trump has set. As of this writing, they have only raised a little over $7 million — far short of their goal.

But this is hardly Trump’s first deception of his base.

Trump promised tax policies that would help his largely white working-class base — and while some less affluent people received modest benefits, the law gave the biggest breaks to big businesses and the super rich. Worse yet, by 2025, the bottom 20% of Americans will actually see their taxes increase under the plan.

Join us on Twitter and Facebook

Meanwhile, his trade wars, including with China, have driven up the cost of raw materials and arguably led to layoffs, including 14,000 GM workers just before Christmas. Trump’s trade policies have also harmed rural farmers, because China, for a period of time, halted its buying of soybeans and more from US farmers. To mitigate this, Trump has given farmers $9.5 billion in subsidies, but that’s less than the amount he originally promised and less than farmers say they’ve lost because of Trump’s trade war.

And Trump’s various rollbacks of environmental health and safety have had little to no effect on expanding industry — but are expected to pollute air and water, especially in communities where Trump voters live. Trump’s deregulation of the coal industry alone, centered in rural America, is expected to lead to as many as 1,400 more heart and lung disease deaths per year.

Trump campaigned on fearmongering and empty promises. And that’s how he’s governing as president. When will his voters realize they’re the ones, over and over again, paying the price?

Read more: http://edition.cnn.com/