And for those who missed it, here’s my #longread pre-election profile of Gretchen Whitmer, which includes a close look at her political profile and how it plays in Michigan.
She wants to "minimize" federal funding, which she says means federal control. UM among top recipients of such $$$, which underwrites its world-class research.
The whole Bannon interview is worth watching if you want a sense of where she's coming from, what she wants to do. rumble.com/v11hpzl-the-ca…
If you've heard of Epstein, it's because she was the Trump/MAGA Republican who ran for Congress against Haley Stevens back in 2018. Epstein didn't win, but she did make some news.
I've said previously who you think "won" a debate usually says more about which candidate you support than how that candidate performed. I still think that. I'm not even sure how you define "win." Most truthful? Most articulate? Most engaging? ... #MIGov
But after the last #MIGov debate, I noticed conservatives flooding twitter with declarations that Dixon won -- I guess because she had some good lines and looked like she belonged on the stage. Not how I saw it. ...
So in case that happens again, following #MIGov debate 2, I'd just like to note that Whitmer -- to my eyes and ears -- was sharper, seemed more engaged, and had a lot more to say about what she's actually done and what she wants to keep doing ...
I would imagine Kevin Brady saying that repeal of the Rx provisions would be a "top priority" for Republicans is in the script of an advertisement Democrats are crafting this very minute.
"Top Republican Healthcare Message" seems to be a set of broad principles that don't make especially clear the actual GOP position on health care -- i.e., their opposition to the Rx pricing system Dems just enacted.
The policy platform that appeared online briefly this week, before GOP leaders took it back down, was a little more specific on this point. huffpost.com/entry/kevin-mc…
Which, by the way, is an intellectually coherent view that plenty of serious people have.
There is an honest and important debate to be had over tradeoffs between regulation and innovation -- how real those tradeoffs are, how new policies affect them, etc.
As @Robillard notes, seniors turn out more reliably in midterms and in recent elections they’ve skewed Republican — although Ds kept margin close in 2018, helping them to their big sweep that year. (2/x) huffpost.com/entry/democrat…
You can see this playing out in Arizona, where Sen. Mark Kelly (D) is focusing on Rx prices, Social Security and opponent Blake Masters (R) is trying to downplay/walk back past support for Social Security privatization.
Apparently removal of an extra “the” in the text of the original somehow triggered a set of changes in the display, and effect was to compress a bunch of spaces between words.
Anyway there’s never been any real ambiguity over meaning of the amendment, which got what appears to be a record number of signatures and has a good chance of passing — but only if the state Supreme Court acts.