Connect with us

Democrat Roy Cooper Declares Victory as Voters Dump GOP Gov. Pat McCrory – Race Too Close to Call

Published

on

Anti-LGBT Law HB2 Reportedly Cost State Billions

North Carolina first-term Republican Governor Pat McCrory appears to have lost his re-election bid over his anti-LGBT law HB2. Roy Cooper, the state’s Democratic attorney general who refused to defend HB2 in court, has declared victory, but the election has not been certified. Less than 4000 votes separate them.

Cooper is up about 4000 votes over McCrory. Recent polls were not in McCrory’s favor. 

The gubernatorial race in the Tar Heel State has been one of the most hotly contested of the election cycle, and it could be one with far-reaching impact.

Cooper and McCrory have sparred over several issues for the past few months, with Cooper slamming McCrory’s record on healthcare, economic issues, the environment, and of course, HB2.

HB2 voided LGBT nondiscrimination ordinances throughout the state. It attacks transgender citizens by revoking their right to use public restrooms based on gender identity. It also mandates that only state lawmakers can pass laws regulating employment discrimination, the use of public accommodations, and minimum wages – removing the right of self determination from every town and city across the state.

HB2

The full economic impact of HB2 is not yet known, but an estimate from the Williams Institute expects the state to lose almost $5 billion a year as long as HB2 is in effect. This does not include court costs for the legal battle surrounding the anti-LGBT bill which made international headlines.

As the state’s attorney general, it would generally be assumed it would be his job to defend the state’s actions when they are taken to court. But Cooper chose not to defend HB2, leaving McCrory to defend the law himself and seek outside legal help. This gives the state responsibility for paying lawyers instead of allowing Cooper to take their side in the suit.

McCrory didn’t take kindly to Cooper’s decision, and has continued to defend HB2 despite its growing unpopularity in the state. While neither campaign site even mentions the issue, it’s a deciding factor in the race.

A Public Policy report from May shows just 35% of the state in favor of the law.

NC Republicans are embarrassed by HB2, so much so that they tried to interfere when the Charlotte Observer hosted a forum about the issue which featured neither gubernatorial candidate. A letter to the NC Board of Elections the week of the forum called the discussion a campaign event, in spite of the forum featuring both people in favor of and people opposed to HB2.

Healthcare

North Carolina is one of 19 states that has not expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. Cooper not only slams the state on his website, he points to his past involvement in health care policy, including a lawsuit filed against Carolinas Healthcare System, the largest network in the state, for putting contract requirements in place to limit competition with other healthcare systems and push costs higher.

McCrory, on the other hand, privatized the state’s Medicaid system last year, contracting three companies to offer plans for people on Medicaid and allowing for 10 networks to work through regional plans. This handed a significant part of the state’s healthcare system to the free market.

Cooper’s position puts him at an advantage with issue voters, as Public Policy Polling showed that 72% of voters would back an expansion of Medicaid to cover the gap between the current program and the ACA.

Economy

One of McCory’s proudest talking points was that his economic plans have been good for the state. He has pointed to the state’s growing GDP and population as a sign that his economics have worked. Politifact rated his claim true, using only GDP as an economic indicator in April of 2016, before the economic impact of HB2 was entirely obvious.

However, according to NC Policy Watch, the GDP is not the only thing that matters. The labor market has not improved under McCrory and the state’s average weekly pay is about $80 less than the national average.

Cooper is against lowering only corporate taxes, and wants to focus on increasing income for people in the workforce. His campaign website says that under McCrory’s direction the state is “the butt of jokes for late night comedy” and calls this “self-sabotage.” 

Environment

Roy Cooper’s campaign focused heavily on environmental issues, touting his support for the Clean Smokestacks Act, which requires companies to cut down on emissions.

Meanwhile, McCrory attempted to create jobs by cutting back environmental regulations with HB74.

A defining difference between the two politicians came after a Duke Energy pipe malfunctioned, spilling thousands of tons of coal ash into the Dan River. McCrory attacked Cooper for fighting cleanup efforts, but there was no evidence of Cooper actually doing so. Cooper fired back by pointing out that a leading state scientist had already accused McCrory of lying to the public about the Duke Energy spill.

McCrory worked for Duke Energy for 29 years prior to his political career.

Voting Rights

Cooper’s campaign website highlights his plan to make voting more accessible to everyone. He opposes voter ID laws and wants to reinstate same-day registration.

McCrory has ink on his face after his administration’s voter ID laws were found by a court to be racially discriminatory. The Supreme Court split 4-4 on the issue, which let stand the lower court’s ruling and stopped the practice of requiring the type of ID that was needed from NC voters.  

These issues led to an apparent Cooper victory. Polls in the race have been tight for months, but Cooper had been the favorite for the last month of the race.

 

Images:
Pat McCrory via Wikimedia
Roy Cooper via Facebook

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

OPINION

‘Partisan Insurrectionist’: Calls Mount for Alito’s Ouster After ‘Stop the Steal’ Scandal

Published

on

A symbol of Donald Trump’s “Stop the Steal” movement, which culminated in his January 6, 2021 rally and the insurrection that followed, was flown over the home of Justice Samuel Alito just days before Joe Biden was sworn in as the 46th President of the United States, and as the U.S. Supreme Court was reviewing a 2020 election case. Now, calls are mounting for Justice Alito’s ouster.

The “Stop the Steal” movement, created in 2016 by far-right activist Roger Stone, was put into action by Trump acolytes during the 2020 election cycle. It is based on the “Big Lie,” promoted by Donald Trump and the majority of his followers, the false claim that Joe Biden did not win the 2020 presidential election, that it was “stolen.”

A symbol of “Stop the Steal” is an upside down American flag, which is technically used only “as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property.” Trump’s MAGA followers co-opted the symbol, and it was widely seen during the violence of the January 6 insurrection.

It was also, as The New York Times reported in its bombshell story Thursday night, flown at “the residence of Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., in Alexandria, Va., according to photographs and interviews with neighbors.”

READ MORE: Will Trump Testify at Trial? ‘Absolutely’ Is Now a ‘No Decision’ Yet

A critical element of The Times’ report is the timing of Alito’s “Stop the Steal” flag.

“While the flag was up, the court was still contending with whether to hear a 2020 election case, with Justice Alito on the losing end of that decision,” the Times reported.

“In coming weeks,” The Times noted, “the justices will rule on two climactic cases involving the storming of the Capitol on Jan. 6, including whether Mr. Trump has immunity for his actions. Their decisions will shape how accountable he can be held for trying to overturn the last presidential election and his chances for re-election in the upcoming one.”

Justice Alito is taking no responsibility for the flag at his house.

“I had no involvement whatsoever in the flying of the flag,” Alito told The Times. “It was briefly placed by Mrs. Alito in response to a neighbor’s use of objectionable and personally insulting language on yard signs.”

The New York Times’ Michael Barbaro, who did not write the Alito article, commented: “Crucially, Alito doesn’t deny the flag was flying upside down, doesn’t deny its meaning, doesn’t express any disapproval for it and doesn’t disavow it.”

The Times also reports there are ethics and impartiality issues surrounding the use of the Stop the Steal flag.

READ MORE: ‘Ready to Start Another Insurrection’: Gaetz Support for Trump Echoes Proud Boys Order

“Judicial experts said in interviews that the flag was a clear violation of ethics rules, which seek to avoid even the appearance of bias, and could sow doubt about Justice Alito’s impartiality in cases related to the election and the Capitol riot.”

Legal and political experts, not to mention many ordinary Americans, are expressing great concern, with some even calling for Alito’s ouster, and some even using the word “impeachment.”

U.S. Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA), responding to the news, blasted both Justices Alito and Clarence Thomas.

“A judge is supposed to act in a way that enables all parties and lawyers appearing before the Court to believe they will be treated fairly,” Sen. Kaine wrote. “Alito and Thomas have brazenly destroyed this bedrock principle.”

Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a professor of history and a scholar of authoritarians and fascism, also pointed to both for Alito and Thomas, and called for their ouster.

“Clean up the Court,” she urged. “Thomas and Alito must go. They are far-right activists masquerading as impartial justices, that is why so many anti-democratic forces (Federalist, billionaires) have invested in them.”

Political scientist Norman Ornstein, the highly-respected emeritus scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, and a contributing editor for The Atlantic, responded to the Alito scandal.

“Sam Alito is a partisan insurrectionist. He has no business being on the Supreme Court,” he wrote Thursday night.

“It is time for a House member to introduce an impeachment resolution against Sam Alito,” Ornstein added an hour later. “He has openly and blatantly violated every standard we expect for any judge, not to mention the Supreme Court. And time for Dick Durbin to suck it up and hold hearings on this abuse of power,” he said, referring to the Democratic Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Richard Painter, a professor of law and a former chief White House ethics lawyer, cut to the chase, posting the U.S. Code requiring recusal:

” ‘Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.’
28 USC Section 455″

“Justice Alito should be impeached and removed!!” declared SiriusXM host and attorney Dean Obeidallah. “If a liberal justice flew a flag in support of coup attempt waged by a Democratic President, the House GOP would immediately impeach him! We need Senate Dems to hold hearings!”

Veteran journalist John Harwood, responding to the Alito article, remarked, “bitter fanatic on the court.”

Laurence Tribe, University Professor Emeritus at Harvard University, a constitutional law scholar who has argues three dozen times before the Supreme Court, commented: “More telling — and disqualifying — than the sheer antidemocratic sentiment this ‘Stop the Steal’ flag displayed is the hair-splitting sophistry of Justice Alito’s pathetic effort to shift blame from himself to his wife or someone else in his household.”

Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin, a conservative until 2020, also blasted Justice Alito. Watch the video of her remarks below or at this link.

RELATED: Justice Alito’s Secret Speech ‘Spiking the Ball’ on Revoking Abortion Seen as Worsening Court’s ‘Credibility Crisis’

Continue Reading

News

Will Trump Testify at Trial? ‘Absolutely’ Is Now a ‘No Decision’ Yet

Published

on

The State of New York’s prosecution of Donald Trump is nearing it end, as Judge Juan Merchan announced late Thursday afternoon final arguments could begin on Tuesday. But one question remains: Will the ex-president who is facing 34 felony charges in the election interference, falsification of business records, and hush money cover-up case, testify in his defense?

Just over one month ago Trump was asked that question. He quickly responded, “Yeah I would testify, absolutely.”

Trump appeared resolved.

READ MORE: Ex-Florida GOP Chair’s Efforts to Recruit 3-Way Partners for Anti-LGBTQ Wife Revealed: Report

“I’m testifying. I tell the truth. I mean, all I can do is tell the truth. And the truth is that there is no case,” he said, as NBC News reported.

NBC added last week that Trump “told Newsmax two weeks ago that he would testify ‘if necessary,’ and on Tuesday he said in an interview with Spectrum News 1 Wisconsin that he would ‘probably’ take the stand, adding that he ‘would like to.'”

But when Judge Merchan asked Todd Blanche, Trump’s attorney, on Thursday, the answer was very different.

“That’s another decision that we need to think through,” he said, according to the Associated Press.

But Politico’s Erica Orden reported, “Blanche says Trump hasn’t made a final decision about whether to testify.”

Last week, as the question of Trump’s testifying loomed large, U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) insisted he would not.

“It’s over. Donald Trump has a right to not testify. Yet he PROMISED he would. Now it’s clear he won’t. The jury can’t consider this. But you can. He is chickenshit and you should conclude he’s guilty as hell.”

On Wednesday, attorney George Conway addressed the topic, saying, “If he doesn’t testify, it’s because he’s scared.”

He also said, “in a million years, I would never tell him to testify. I would tell him not to testify.”

Watch the video above or at this link.

READ MORE: Trump Wails His Judge Was Appointed by ‘Democrat Politicians’ – That’s False

 

Continue Reading

News

Ex-Florida GOP Chair’s Efforts to Recruit 3-Way Partners for Anti-LGBTQ Wife Revealed: Report

Published

on

A stunning police report reveals how Christian Ziegler, the now-ousted Florida Republican Party chair, would head out to bars to scope out and recruit women as possible three-way sex partners for himself and his stridently anti-LGBTQ wife, Moms for Liberty co-founder Bridget Ziegler.

The disgraced Florida power couple’s ménage à trois sex scandal made national headlines after an accusation of rape against Christian Ziegler came from one of their three-way sexual partners, an allegation he denied. After an investigation no charges were filed.

Christian Ziegler lost his high-paying job as the Florida GOP chairman, but his wife Bridget has refused to resign from her elected position on a school board, as well as from her position on the state board that now oversees the Walt Disney World special district. Bridget Ziegler, who is seen as an architect of Governor Ron DeSantis’ “Don’t Say Gay” law, reportedly is best friends with Florida First Lady Casey DeSantis, and was appointed to the special district role by the Florida GOP governor.

The Sarasota Police Dept. report, according to the Florida Trident, “recounts how Christian Ziegler went ‘on the prowl’ in bars for women to bring home to Bridget, a Sarasota County School Board member who has backed a number of anti-LGBTQ measures at both the state and local level, for threesome encounters. While at the bars, Christian would surreptitiously photograph prospective women and text the photos to Bridget for approval, according to the report.”

READ MORE: ‘Mouths of Sauron’: Critics Blast ‘Mobster Tactic’ of Trump Surrogates ‘Violating’ Gag Order

Some of the details are salacious.

“There were numerous text messages between Bridget and Christian where they are on the prowl for a female and Bridget is directing him to numerous different bars in search of a female that they are both interested in,” the report reads, according to The Trident. “During these conversations Christian is secretly taking photographs of women in the bars and sending them to Bridget asking her if she wants this one or that one. Bridget is telling him to pretend to take pictures of his beer, so they don’t see him taking pictures of them. She tells him ‘Don’t come home until your dick is wet.’”

The Zieglers are in court trying to block the release of the text messages and other media, alleging in a lawsuit against the Sarasota Police Dept. and the State Attorney’s Office that “release of those records would cause ‘great humiliation and harm to their individual reputations’ if released and therefore should be destroyed.”

“The suit specifically addresses the contents of Christian Ziegler’s cell phone, his social media accounts, web browsing history, and the video he made of the sexual encounter with the alleged rape victim,” the Trident reports.

Meanwhile, despite her own actions and after months of laying low, Bridget Ziegler is back on her anti-LGBTQ crusade.

“At last week’s school board meeting, Ziegler introduced a highly contentious resolution to ignore protections for LGBTQ students afforded by a new federal Title IX rule,” the Trident also reports. “The resolution, which followed a DeSantis legal challenge to Title IX at the state level, claims the new rule would cause ‘disastrous impacts to girls and women’s safety in restrooms, locker rooms, and sports.’ It passed by a 4-1 vote despite the fact it could lead to a federal investigation, expensive litigation, and the loss to the school district of roughly $50 million in federal funds.”

READ MORE: Trump Appears to Violate Gag Order After Judge Threatened ‘Incarceration’

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.