Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

For their part, Third Way representatives bristle at the idea they are doing the bidding of Wall Street power brokers.

The philosophy set out by Third Way will be part of that conversation.

Third Way raises just over a third of its $9.3 million annual budget from undisclosed corporations. The remainder, the bulk of its funding, is donated by individuals, almost all of whom are members of Third Way’s board of trustees.

Both Vogelstein and Heller were major financial backers of Obama, and all three contributed heavily to Senate Democrats.

“We’re not remotely aligned with what Wall Street wants,” said Jonathan Cowan, the group’s president and cofounder.

“It goes back to what Bill Clinton said, which is ‘You can’t love the job and hate the job creators,’ ” said Matt Bennett, Third Way’s vice president for public affairs and one of its cofounders. “Vilification of industry isn’t helping Democrats.”

They insist on deficit reduction and entitlement cuts as conditions for key tax hikes on the wealthy.

Third Way’s insistence on linking tax hikes to a grand bargain — which has been impossible to obtain in the Obama era — has a direct bearing on the wallets of the group’s wealthy funders.

“If the Democratic Party stands only for raising taxes on the wealthy, not for actually making entitlement reforms and other spending cuts,’’ he said, “then the other half of the equation will never happen.”

Bennett said it should not be characterized as a donation from Goldman Sachs, but as a personal contribution from Heller that was made through the Goldman charity.

Though Third Way does not report details of its contributions, some of its donors do so through private foundations.

Third Way’s 2012 tax filing. Peck Madigan, which did not respond to e-mailed questions, lobbies for several Wall Street-tied clients, including MasterCard, Deutsche Bank, and the International Swaps and Derivatives Association.

"In order to make sure this is a successful decree, we got to make sure that this something we can implement, something we can afford," Knowles said.

"Their vote to do so creates an unnecessary delay in the essential work to bring constitutional policing to the city and marks an unfortunate outcome for concerned community members and Ferguson police officers."

The Ferguson City Council has attempted to unilaterally amend the negotiated agreement,"

"This is not going away. We have to pay," Patricia Cowan, 54, told council members. "We need to think about where we’re at, and we need to move forward."

"My fear is that with your vote that Ferguson will cease to exist," said Susan Ankenbrand, 73, who has lived in the city for 41 years. "I would rather lose our city by fighting in court than losing it to DOJ’s crushing demands."

The tentative agreement reached last month calls for Ferguson to pay the cost of a Justice Department monitor for at least three years and purchase software and hire staff to maintain data on arrests, traffic stops and use-of-force incidents. It calls for a revision in the police department's training with an emphasis "toward de-escalation and avoiding force — particularly deadly force — except where necessary."

"since time immemorial"

“We reject this argument out of hand as an affront to democracy," said Sherilyn Ifill, president of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. "All public institutions, including police departments, must operate in accordance with the U.S. Constitution."

A glimmer of hope for Biden emerged toward the end of the survey: “If Donald Trump is found guilty and convicted this year of a felony — with Donald Trump as the Republican candidate and Joe Biden as the Democratic candidate — for whom would you vote?”In this hypothetical circumstance, Biden pulls ahead of Trump, 45-43.

when asked, “How willing would you be to vote for Donald Trump if he is convicted of a crime?” 53 percent of registered voters surveyed said they would be “unwilling” to do so; 46 percent said “very unwilling”; and 7 percent said “somewhat unwilling.”

Bloomberg-Morning Consult asked respondents whether they would be unwilling to vote for Trump if he were “sentenced to prison”: 55 percent said unwilling, 48 percent very unwilling and 7 percent said somewhat unwilling.

YouGov found that 45 percent of respondents were either unaware of or uncertain that Trump had “been charged with falsifying business records to conceal hush money payments to Stormy Daniels, a porn star” and that Trump “had been found liable for sexually assaulting and defaming writer E. Jean Carroll.”

The most recent NBC News poll, conducted at the end of January, has Trump favored over Biden by a substantial 47 percent to 42 percent.

In the RealClearPolitics compilation of polls that add Robert Kennedy Jr., Cornel West and Jill Stein to the mix, Trump’s lead over Biden more than doubles, to 4.8 points, 41.6 to 36.8 percent. Kennedy gets 13 percent, and West and Stein each get 2.1 percent.

Along with the threat posed by third-party candidates, two major crises — immigration and the Israeli assault on Hamas in Gaza — have become significant liabilities for the Biden campaign.

The Dec. 10-14 New York Times/Siena poll found that young voters, aged 18 to 29, favored Trump over Biden 49-43. These voters said they trusted Trump over Biden “to do a better job on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict” 49-30. In the 2020 election, Biden beat Trump among 18-to-29-year-old voters by 24 points, 60-36, according to exit polls, by far his biggest margin in all age groups.

“To win in 2024, Biden will need to convince voters that he is still the proud moderate they voted for in 2020,” Cowan wrote by email. “He has a lot of evidence on his side, but he still has a lot of convincing to do.”

Biden’s showing “middle- and working-class voters that he understands their values and takes seriously their concerns around crime, immigration and the economy — which, as polling makes clear, are often dramatically different and far more mainstream and centrist than those of college-educated elites who staff much of Washington — is the only way to win.”

While bitterly criticized by many liberals, the Supreme Court decision last year to ban affirmative action in public and private colleges will in fact reduce the salience of an issue that has historically worked to build support for Republicans.