Date: 2024-05-18 Page is: DBtxt003.php txt00025994 | |||||||||
|
US POLITICS
WINNING ELECTION ELEMENTS FOR DEMOCRATS IN 2024 BTC: Democrats suddenly STRIKE GOLD, seize on winning formula for 2024 Original article: Peter Burgess COMMENTARY Peter Burgess | |||||||||
|
Democrats suddenly STRIKE GOLD, seize on winning formula for 2024
Brian Tyler Cohen
2.42M subscribers
Nov 26, 2023
No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen
No Lie podcast episode 185: Democrats finally seize on a winning formula of putting abortion measures on state ballots ahead of 2024.
LISTEN TO FULL PODCAST EPISODE HERE:
Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/3uE8Awg
Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3SZvTee
Sources:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024...
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elec...
Subscribe for more and follow me here:
YouTube (español): https://www.youtube.com/@briantylerco...
Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/36UvEHs
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0066rKC...
Twitter: https://twitter.com/briantylercohen
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/briantylerc...
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/briantylercohen
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/briantylercohen
Newsletter: https://www.briantylercohen.com/sign-up/
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@briantylercohen
Suit by JB Clothiers: https://jbclothiers.com/btc
Explore the podcast
169 episodes
No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen
Brian Tyler Cohen
Podcasts
Transcript
0:00
Today we're going to talk about the Democrats finally seizing on a winning formula just in time for 2024 and I interview Congressman Jamie Raskin about the Trump disqualification case in Colorado, Speaker Johnson's Embrace of the Biden impeachment effort and how to best engage with hesitant Democrats ahead of 2024
I'm Brian Tyler Cohen and you're watching 'no lie'
We've got a pretty seismic update here with Democrats finally seizing on a winning formula heading into 2024
So up to now when abortion rights has been on the ballot Democrats have won
Just weeks ago in this off election cycle voters in Ohio voted to enshrine abortion rights into the state constitution in that state that's been trending away from Democrats for about a decade
On that same day voters in Virginia rejected Governor Glenn yonan's proposed 15 week abortion ban by stripping him of control of both chambers of the state legislature
Pennsylvania voters overwhelmingly elected a liberal state supreme court justice in a state that was largely uh predicated a race that was largely predicated on abortion
meaning anywhere the Democrats had abortion measures on the ballot they won
Now we look back to last election cycle
The midterms in 2022 voters in California Michigan and Vermont passed the state Constitutional Amendment guaranteeing the right to abortion
voters in Kentucky and Kansas rejected
1:12
amending their state constitutions to
1:14
include language opposing abortion
1:16
protections and voters in Montana
1:18
rejected a measure threatening medical
1:19
workers with criminal charges if they
1:21
didn't intervene in attempted abortions
1:23
all of which is to say in the nearly
1:25
dozen elections with abortion uh either
1:28
directly or indirectly on the valid
1:30
Democrats or the pro-choice contingent
1:32
have won all of them their Shak is
1:34
unbroken regardless of how otherwise
1:36
conservative a state is from Kentucky to
1:39
Ohio to Kansas voters are not here for
1:41
the gop's extremism on abortion rights
1:44
and so now pro-choice Advocates are
1:46
working to get abortion measures on the
1:47
ballot in a staggering nine more States
1:50
in 2024 which would obviously have major
1:53
up ballot implications for Democrats and
1:56
some of those states are ones in which
1:57
Democrats desperately need the help in
2:00
Missouri for example there are currently
2:02
as many as 11 different amendments
2:04
taking different approaches to expanding
2:05
abortion rights in the state with the
2:06
most promising being a constitutional
2:08
amendment to legalize abortion up to the
2:10
point of fetal viability if that makes
2:12
it on the ballot it'll coincide with one
2:13
of the Democrats only major pickup
2:15
opportunities in the US Senate where uh
2:17
Democrat Lucas C is taking on the least
2:20
popular Republican senator currently
2:21
running for reelection anywhere in the
2:23
country and that's Josh Holly there's
2:25
also an effort in Florida to amend the
2:26
St Constitution to ban abortion
2:28
restrictions up until fetal viability
2:30
and that's another state with a pickup
2:31
opportunity for Democrats as far as the
2:33
US Senate is concerned there's an effort
2:35
in Arizona where they're seeking to put
2:37
a constitutional amendment on the ballot
2:38
to create a right to abortion up until
2:40
fetal viability in that state Republican
2:42
Cary Lake will likely be facing off
2:44
against Ruben gyo in one of the
2:45
country's closest must-win Senate races
2:47
for Democrats moving over to Nevada
2:50
Advocates are seeking their own
2:51
constitutional amendment to protect
2:53
abortion rights up until fetal viability
2:54
and to restrict the ability of lawmakers
2:56
to undo those protections and Nevada's
2:59
yet another state with a close Senate
3:01
race coming up and the only state by the
3:03
way where Democrats lost their gooral
3:05
race in 2022 making it something of a
3:07
blinking red light for Democrats then we
3:09
go to New York where the measure on the
3:11
2024 ballot is already a sure thing but
3:14
that is a state where we expect new maps
3:16
to be put in place in time for 2024
3:18
because they're being redrawn meaning we
3:20
could see a swing of as many as six
3:22
House Seats for Democrats but that is
3:24
only possible if people turn out add in
3:26
Maryland's Colorado efforts in Nebraska
3:28
and South Dakota and Democrats seem to
3:30
have finally seized on a winning formula
3:32
ahead of 2024 because for as much Doom
3:35
forecasting as we're seeing from the
3:36
media
the truth is that when abortion rights are on the ballot Democrats win
yes even with Biden as president old age and all because despite the polls despite the punditry despite the media coverage WRIT large Americans are able to recognize that there is one party out there seeking to strip away your rights and another party looking to protect them and that's what's important
We know that the choice here is binary and while people may be able to recognize that Democrats are not perfect that these elections don't happen in a vacuum ... they are a choice between two parties and one party is currently trying to strip you of your bodily autonomy and people tend to remember that when they're casting their ballots
So as long as Republicans want to continue plowing ahead with their extremist policies, Democrats should make sure that this question is put in front of every voter in as many states as possible and luckily they're not only doing that in 2024 but they're doing it in states where the stakes could not be higher
Next up is my interview with Congressman Jamie Rasin
So let's go into the the latest uh court
4:32
case this Colorado case a Colorado judge
4:34
has issued two rulings in the 14th
4:36
Amendment case regarding Trump being
4:37
disqualified from the ballot that Trump
4:39
did incite an Insurrection and also that
4:41
the ban doesn't apply to presidents so I
4:44
want to take on the second part first do
4:46
you agree with judge Wallace's ruling
4:48
that the language about banning officers
4:49
of the United States doesn't apply to a
4:52
president of the United States I totally
4:54
do not uh agree with that um you know
4:58
you would have to believe that the
4:59
framers of the 14th Amendment
5:02
specifically banned people from becoming
5:05
electors for president and vice
5:08
president that is being in electoral
5:10
college but not Banning the president
5:12
himself or herself um it just makes no
5:15
sense the president is the person who as
5:18
we saw on January 6 2021 poses the most
5:22
danger if he decides to overthrow the
5:24
Constitutional order and seize the
5:26
presidency so um there's no textual
5:30
exclusion for the president the language
5:33
is written in as comprehensive a way as
5:36
possible um and it seems clear to me
5:39
that the framers the 14th Amendment uh
5:42
wanted to sweep in the president along
5:45
with members of Congress members of The
5:47
Electoral College um you know and any
5:51
other civil or military office it just
5:53
seems sweeping and comprehensive and
5:55
there would be no logic for saying that
5:58
it shouldn't apply of the president when
6:00
the president is potentially the most
6:02
dangerous actor and has the resources at
6:05
his disposal as the commander-in-chief
6:07
of the Armed Forces in times of
6:09
insurrection and um in times of War so
6:14
um I don't agree with that
I I do think that judge Wallace um uh did reason properly when it came to Trump having uh actually participated in Insurrection and that's just an airtight and detailed comprehensive part of the opinion and she herself says that
you know it might sound Preposterous to say that it shouldn't cover the president but that was her reading and it's all based on the idea that the president takes an
6:45
oath to uphold and defend the
6:48
Constitution whereas other people take
6:50
an oath to support the Constitution in
6:53
section three says that um nobody shall
6:58
hold an office this um who has um
7:02
previously taken oath um to support the
7:06
Constitution and so that's a very thin
7:09
read to hang it on obviously swearing to
7:12
uphold and defend the Constitution is
7:14
swearing to support the Constitution
7:16
right well can you talk about why
7:18
section three of the 14th amendment was
7:20
put in place originally because I think
7:22
the the history here is especially
7:24
important yeah I mean the history is
7:25
revealing um this is right after the
7:28
Civil War it's during the construction
7:30
period there were
7:32
Confederates um all over the South
7:35
former Confederates who were planning a
7:38
restoration of their power um and uh
7:42
wanted to get back into office and
7:45
originally that the legisl of history is
7:47
fascinating because originally the house
7:50
uh wrote a section three that was far
7:52
more sweeping and it said that anybody
7:55
who participated in Insurrection shall
7:58
not be allowed to hold office or vote
8:01
again at all and when it got over the
8:04
Senate they said that is way too broad
8:07
we want to zero in on the bullseye core
8:10
of people who really pose the greatest
8:12
danger to The Republic and so um they
8:16
said we're not going to make it about
8:18
suffrage and franchise we'll make it
8:20
about uh holding office and it will um
8:24
only be those people who actually held
8:26
office before uh swore an oath and
8:29
violated The Oath by engaging in
8:30
insurrectional Rebellion so you can see
8:32
how it got dramastically drastically
8:34
whittel down but Donald Trump is right
8:36
there in the center of the bullseye
8:38
Court to watch the full interview with
8:39
Jamie Rasin click the thumbnail right
8:41
here on the screen or check out the
8:42
interviews playlist on my YouTube
8:43
channel you can also click the link on
8:45
the screen for the audio version of this
8:46
episode and finally to see more of my
8:48
content the Subscribe button is on the
8:50
screen as
8:53
well
| |||||||||