Opinion: Marjorie Taylor Greene fails to clarify
Marjorie Taylor Greene's explanation on her party's losses falls short While she claims unfulfilled promises are to blame, the truth is that Republicans are suffering due to their success in fulfilling Trump's promise to overturn Roe v Wade This has had a negative impact on their electoral performance
Editors Note: Sign up to receive this weekly column as a newsletter. We are reviewing the most powerful and intelligent opinion pieces of the week from CNN and other sources.
Following the Republicans' defeat in crucial races in Kentucky, Ohio, and Virginia last week, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene provided her analysis of her party's challenges. Speaking to CNN's Manu Raju, the Georgia representative expressed that there are several issues at hand. She stated, "Republicans are weak, failing to fulfill the promises they make to their constituents."
Republicans currently face a problem that is completely contrary to what the above statement suggests. During his presidential campaign in 2016, Donald Trump made a commitment to appoint Supreme Court justices who would ultimately reverse the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which granted the constitutional right to abortion.
True to his promise, Trump nominated three highly conservative individuals who significantly contributed to the overturning of Roe in June 2022, despite the fact that Mexico did not end up paying for the wall.
The Supreme Court's decision proved highly unpopular among Republicans, with approximately two-thirds of Americans disapproving of the action. This sentiment was evident even in traditionally conservative states, as demonstrated by Ohio voters passing a constitutional amendment safeguarding abortion rights. While it remains uncertain whether this disconnect will lead to a loss of votes for Trump in 2024, it is undoubtedly detrimental to the Republican Party as a whole. A case in point is Virginia, where Governor Youngkin attempted to address the Republicans' abortion issue head-on, claiming to have presented a reasonable stance on the matter that would secure Republican control in both legislative houses. However, Virginians did not view the rollback of existing protections and the introduction of a new ban as reasonable. As a result, Democrats emerged victorious in the House of Delegates and expanded their majority in the State Senate, befittingly reflecting the consequences of the Republicans' stance.
Bill Bramhall/Tribune Content Agency
Bedingfield exuded confidence, firmly believing that Democrats would emerge victorious in the 2024 elections, despite recent polls indicating Biden's trailing behind Trump in five out of six swing states. "In 2024, Democrats will secure a victory by presenting the election as a choice rather than solely focusing on Biden's performance in office. They will retain the White House and achieve triumphs nationwide by forcing Republicans to defend their most extreme agenda priorities."
Historian Julian Zelizer raised concerns about whether voters would support Biden solely based on alignment with his stance on issues like abortion. Furthermore, he noted, "even if Biden can gain support from voters passionate about protecting abortion rights, polling data also suggests that key constituencies, including Black and Latino voters, have significant doubts about him. Additionally, a number of Muslim and Arab voters in critical states like Michigan have expressed their disappointment over Biden's strong support for Israel in its conflict with Hamas, although the long-term impact remains uncertain."
Clay Jones
Republican Lanhee Chen remained unperturbed by the defeats his party suffered. "Do not attempt to predict what may happen next November based on the results of Tuesday night's elections. Odd-year elections tend to be quite peculiar," Chen advised. He explained that the electorate differs during presidential election years and the key issues in races tend to vary.
"Furthermore, the significant elections on Tuesday night did not take place in the states that will likely determine the outcome of the 2024 presidential elections, or even control of Congress. Since there is a lack of reliable election data from voters in states like Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Arizona, we should be cautious about drawing conclusions from results in states like Kentucky and Mississippi, or even Ohio where abortion was directly involved, for what it may mean for the swing states that will ultimately decide the winner of the White House next year."
Mary Ziegler, a law professor at the University of California, Davis specializing in the anti-abortion movement, contends that the recent defeats are not the resounding victory for abortion rights that Democrats might perceive them to be. While Republicans may struggle to appeal to voters, it does not mean that the GOP and the anti-abortion movement are unsure about their next steps – they have a clear direction.
A presidential transition plan called Project 2025, endorsed and developed by over 70 conservative and pro-life organizations under The Heritage Foundation, delves into an abortion policy mainly focused on the operations of the Department of Justice if President Trump secures a second term. This plan aims to impede the enforcement of the federal Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, which, if successful, would facilitate protesters in obstructing and intimidating patients entering clinics.
More importantly,
Debaters
, Project 2025 asserts that regardless of public opinion, there currently exists an unofficial nationwide prohibition on abortion. Advocates point to the Comstock Act, a law from the 19th century aimed at curbing immoral activities, which conservatives contend classifies the mailing or reception of materials specifically intended, designed, or modified for abortion as a federal offense.
While Trump, the frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination, spent the week involved in a civil fraud case against his company and rallying his supporters in Florida, his opponents engaged in a more typical election tradition: a debate in Miami.
Taking center stage was former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley, whose strong performances in debates have boosted her campaign. In response to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis dismissing Haley's polite correspondence with a Chinese official as a "love letter," and Vivek Ramaswamy using gendered insults by referring to her (and possibly DeSantis) as "Dick Cheney in three-inch heels," journalist Ana Marie Cox expressed her disagreement but also showed support by saying, "I bristled in solidarity." Later on, Haley mentioned that her heels are actually five inches and could be considered as a weapon, which is her unique way to challenge traditional perceptions of attire for men.
Haley's face turned a deep shade of purple as Ramaswamy accused her of being a hypocrite for wanting to take action against TikTok, despite her own daughter having an account. "You're nothing but scum," she whispered, seething with a quiet rage typically associated with horror movie heroines. I had never felt closer to cheering for someone at a Republican debate.
Regarding the topic of abortion, Haley continued her pragmatic approach, highlighting that a federal ban on abortions after 15 weeks, which is the objective of many pro-life advocacy groups, would have a slim chance of passing unless there was a significant shift in the composition of the US Senate, according to Patrick T. Brown.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis was determined to establish his dominance over Florida, despite the nearby presence of Donald Trump, the Republican frontrunner in Hialeah, Florida. Setting out to prove his hold on the state, DeSantis appeared unperturbed, confidently commanding the stage throughout the night.
Video Ad Feedback
SE Cupp: The Republican candidates who need to drop out immediately
03:44
- Source:
CNN
SE Cupp: The Republicans who need to drop out immediately
For more:
Todd Graham: The debate underdog who surprised us all
Bill Bramhall/Tribune Content Agency
Israel-Hamas
Tuesday marked the one-month anniversary of a terror attack launched by Hamas in southern Israel, which sparked an ongoing conflict in Gaza.
According to Mary Ellen OConnell, an international law expert at the University of Notre Dame, the massive and brutal attacks carried out by Hamas on October 7 violated the most fundamental principles of international law. She argues that these principles also apply to Israel's right to respond, and the best way to honor them is through an immediate ceasefire by all parties, rather than an Israeli ground offensive in Gaza. However, it is difficult to fully adhere to the protections that civilians are entitled to under international law during anti-terror wars, as evidenced by Israel's bombing of densely populated areas in Gaza.
If there is any uncertainty regarding the civilian status of individuals, it is presumed that they are indeed civilians. Withholding essential supplies such as food, water, medicine, and other necessities from the civilian population is absolutely prohibited.
Hamas militants are aware that their actions are endangering innocent lives and share an equal responsibility with Israel to cease the use of force. Releasing hostages is an undeniable obligation for them. The immense toll on civilians in this conflict necessitates an immediate cessation of all hostilities, as dictated by the principle of humanity.
John Spencer, the head of urban warfare studies at the Modern War Institute (MWI) at West Point, contends that Israel is abiding by the laws of war and striving to reduce civilian casualties, based on his observations. Sign up for our complimentary weekly newsletter.
Don't miss out on the CNN Opinions newsletter - sign up now! Also, stay updated with us on Twitter and Facebook.
Pursuing a terrorist organization undoubtedly leads to a horrific warzone. The horrifying images in Gaza resemble the scenes witnessed during American and allied campaigns against Al Qaeda, ISIS, and other terror groups. This is the consequence of uprooting a sadistic terror organization embedded in an urban area. Tragically, successful campaigns led or supported by the US in cities like Mosul and Raqqa resulted in extensive damage worth billions of dollars, as well as the loss of countless civilian lives and the displacement of hundreds of thousands. This is the harsh reality of defeating terrorism.
For more:
Peter Bergen: Whats Irans real plan in its proxy battle against Israel?
Hani Almadhoun: Do Palestinian lives matter to the world?
Suzanne Nossel: Why college presidents seem flummoxed
Frida Ghitis: What drives Bidens wholehearted support of Israel?
Walt Handlesman/Tribune Content Agency
Trump on the stand
The media frenzy surrounding Donald Trump and Ivanka Trump's court appearance in Manhattan last week was substantial. However, as highlighted by Elliot Williams, the allegations in this particular case are not as sensational as the ones in which the former president is currently involved. These court proceedings are unrelated to the four criminal cases in which Trump faces a total of 91 felony charges and vehemently denies any wrongdoing.
On the contrary, the ongoing trial, initiated by New York State Attorney General Letitia James, focuses on a straightforward issue of corporate law. The central question revolves around whether a real estate entity purposely inflated property values in appraisals to obtain advantageous loan and tax treatment. Despite the dramatic antics displayed by Trump and two of his sons during their testimony, the case is relatively uncontroversial and, some might argue, rather dull.
However, the potential consequences are attention-grabbing, according to Williams. The judge has the power to revoke the Trump Organization's business operations in the state, which would be a catastrophic blow to Trump on all fronts. Williams stated that Trump's business empire preceded his presidential role, making the loss even more significant. Regardless of the bravado displayed during his campaign, this fact remains unchangeable. Furthermore, even the renowned Trump Tower located on Fifth Avenue, which served as the backdrop for his presidential announcement and houses his extravagant gold-filled triplex apartment, could be forcibly taken away from the former president's control.
Nick Anderson/Tribune Content Agency
Children
In "Masters of War," a song released in 1963 where Bob Dylan strongly criticized arms manufacturers and dealers, he expressed the profound fear of "bringing children into the world." Today, a new generation is haunted by this fear for different reasons.
Anna Lee, a senior at the College of the Holy Cross and an intern at CNN Opinion, expressed her thoughts on parenthood in the current state of the world. She shared her name preferences and desires for her future child, emphasizing how external factors such as rising temperatures and environmental concerns have influenced her decision. Anna believes that being a parent is an honorable privilege and responsibility, yet the worsening state of the world, particularly regarding climate change, has made her hesitant. She, like many individuals in Generation Z, is deeply concerned about climate change and its far-reaching consequences. The existing climate catastrophes, along with socio-economic and equality issues, contribute to her belief that bringing children into this uncertain future would be unjust and irreversible.
Covid lockdowns
"The Big Fail," a new book by Bethany McLean and Joe Nocera, offers a critical analysis of the policy decisions made by officials throughout the Covid-19 pandemic. An excerpt from the book, featured in New York Magazine, boldly declares: "The Covid Lockdowns: A Massive Experiment That Ended in Failure."
Dr. Kent Sepkowitz, an expert in infectious diseases, disagreed with that assessment. He stated that while the authors of the book raised valid concerns such as the disruption of students' education and the impact on businesses, it is crucial to consider the bigger picture. Sepkowitz emphasized that although there were delays in medical care for some individuals, necessary surgeries were still conducted as long as hospital beds were available. Furthermore, he highlighted that the most significant loss was experienced by young students who were deprived of the educational and social benefits of a physical classroom. However, in response to the question of whether the lockdown was worthwhile, Sepkowitz firmly supported its necessity.
The lockdown had significant negative consequences, but I believe there is a distinction to be made between the initial lockdown and the subsequent intermittent lockdowns as improvements in therapies, vaccines, and overall care were made. Some argue that these later lockdowns were not as effective. Personally, I consider the short-term benefits of the initial lockdown to be crucial in allowing the medical community to gain a stronger understanding of the situation. Working in healthcare in New York City, I witnessed the stark contrast between early 2020, when the city was overwhelmed by cases, and later in the year when effective therapies were identified, supplies and diagnostic testing improved (though still inadequate), and makeshift ICUs and emergency rooms were established.
Dont miss
Corey Mintz: DoorDash doesnt understand the definition of a tip
Paul Rieckhoff: For the Americans who gave it all, unite Election Day with Veterans Day
Jill Filipovic: Why American women of childbearing age now have another Supreme Court case to watch
Shannon Watts: The Supreme Court may make Americas gun violence problem worse
Jade McGlynn: Who a stalemate in Ukraine really benefits
Keith Magee: King Charles expresses regret for slavery and colonialism, but wheres his apology?
Sara Stewart: The moment Priscilla turned into a horror movie for me
ANDâ¦
People who need people who have fun
In this 2018 photo, Barbra Streisand attends CHANEL Dinner Celebrating Our Majestic Oceans, A Benefit For NRDC on in Malibu, California.
Barbra Streisand, in an interview with the BBC, expressed her regret about the lack of enjoyment she has experienced throughout her life, while promoting her memoir of nearly a thousand pages.
According to Holly Thomas, this iconic figure began her singing career by winning a talent competition at a gay bar in Greenwich Village. She has a fondness for enjoying pancakes in bed with her husband, James Brolin, and her basement is a unique collection of antique shops without cash registers, storing her precious treasures. If Barbra is not having a good time, then who else could be?
However, perhaps there is a valuable lesson for everyone in all of this. As noted by Thomas, both ourselves and the world around us feel more fragile than ever before. It is worth mentioning that the much-anticipated resurgence of the "Roaring 20s" has failed to materialize.
Besides concerns about war and the climate crisis, individuals nowadays face additional stressors related to work, mental health issues, and other factors. Coping with these challenges requires a considerable amount of resilience. However, finding a release for this stress, like people used to do in the 1920s, seems more difficult nowadays due to our heightened awareness of the negative repercussions of alcohol, cigarettes, and lack of sleep. Consequently, self-care has become the prevailing preoccupation of the 21st century. While no one disputes the advantages of staying hydrated and getting a restful eight hours of sleep, neither can provide the same exhilaration as a night dedicated to carefree dancing.
