Connect with us

Politics

Column: Is there room for a non-MAGA Republican in Trump's GOP? This purple patch of Oregon will tell

Published

on

Column: Is there room for a non-MAGA Republican in Trump's GOP? This purple patch of Oregon will tell

For nearly a decade, Donald Trump has ruled the Republican Party with a power that rivals the moon and tides.

Lori Chavez-DeRemer is trying to fight that gravitational pull.

Two years ago, the former mayor of Happy Valley, a Portland suburb, scratched out a narrow victory in a Democratic-leaning Oregon congressional district, one of just 16 Republicans nationwide who prevailed on turf where Trump lost to Joe Biden.

Her reelection contest, among the costliest and most competitive races in the country, is also one of roughly two dozen that will determine control of the House.

Advertisement

Columnist Mark Z. Barabak joins candidates for various offices as they hit the campaign trail in this momentous election year.

Beyond that, the race in this purple patch of a deep-blue state will address two broader questions.

How much, in these fractious and deeply polarized times, are voters willing to look past party labels? And what room is left in the Republican Party for someone pledging less than 100% fealty to Trump and rejecting his orthodoxy on issues such as green energy and election denial?

Advertisement

A vote for her, Chavez-DeRemer insists, is not affirmation of the MAGA agenda, nor should voters see it as support for the House Republican leadership firmly lodged under Trump’s thumb.

“What they should see is that I’m going to be thoughtful,” the congresswoman said after touring a union apprenticeship center in Tualatin, another upscale Portland suburb.

“Being a conservative voice, but also being … forward-thinking on how we can get things done,” she went on, “rather than get caught up in just the rhetoric or the talk or the identity politics.”

Her Democratic rival, state Rep. Janelle Bynum, is having none of that.

“My opponent supports President Trump,” she said in the first of two testy debates the pair held last week. (Chavez-DeRemer has, in fact, endorsed his return to the White House.)

Advertisement

“Rubber-stamps his agenda,” Bynum said. “Rubber-stamps his ideas.”

The Democrat’s wall-to-wall TV advertising is blunter still, showing Chavez-DeRemer with glowering images of the ex-president, his mini-me running mate, JD Vance, and scenes from the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

“Don’t believe MAGA extremists,” one spot ominously intones.

::

Oregon’s 5th Congressional District unfurls from the outskirts of Portland, rolling south and east through the forested Cascades, across table-flat farmland and high desert to the recreational mecca of Bend.

Advertisement

The registration is nearly evenly split among unaffiliated voters, who make up the largest chunk of the electorate, followed by Democrats and then Republicans.

For years, much of the region was represented by Kurt Schrader, one of the most conservative Democrats in Congress. He lost the 2022 primary to a left-wing opponent, Jamie McLeod-Skinner, who, in turn, lost the general election to Chavez-DeRemer.

Fearing a rematch, national Democrats spent millions of dollars in this year’s primary attacking McLeod-Skinner and promoting Bynum, whom they considered a stronger candidate. She has twice beaten Chavez-DeRemer in campaigns for the state Legislature — though, it should be noted, those contests were held in friendlier Democratic territory.

If Bynum wants to make this congressional race about Trump and national Republicans, Chavez-DeRemer is eager to focus on Democrats in Salem, the state capital. She blames one-party rule for surging crime and drug abuse, a growing homeless population and a housing affordability crisis that’s priced out more and more Oregonians.

Bynum, she asserted, has “almost a decade-long” record of failing to address those issues in the Legislature. Things would only get worse, Chavez-DeRemer said, if she went to Congress.

Advertisement

::

Chavez-DeRemer, 56, was born and raised in California’s Central Valley and graduated with a business degree from Fresno State University.

She and her husband, who met when she was 15, moved to Oregon more than two decades ago. Together, they founded a network of medical clinics and had twin daughters, now 30.

Chavez-DeRemer began her political career with election to the Happy Valley City Council in 2004 and served two terms as mayor, ending in 2018. It was a job, she tells audiences, where problem-solving was more important than partisanship, an approach she says she’s taken to Washington.

“This isn’t about one side or the other,” Chavez-DeRemer told a meeting of Clackamas County law enforcement officers, before they delivered their endorsement. “I’m willing to work with anybody.”

Advertisement

As a Latina, Chavez-DeRemer doesn’t look like most Republican members of Congress. Nor does she act or vote like them.

She was ranked the 29th most bipartisan House member in a survey done by Georgetown University; Chavez-DeRemer used that particular B-word or some variant a dozen times in an hourlong debate.

She is also the rare GOP lawmaker with strong support from organized labor. Several of the unions that backed her Democratic opponent two years ago endorsed Chavez-DeRemer this time.

Touring the plumbers and steamfitters apprentice program, she talked up the importance of organized labor, extolled the job-creating potential of green energy and mentioned her father was a proud member of the Teamsters. “We are union strong in Oregon,” Chavez-DeRemer said. “That’s important.”

As she entered one training area, where apprentices learn to install sinks and toilets, she paused and took a deep breath of air redolent with the scent of PVC glue and primer. “I love that smell,” she said with a broad smile.

Advertisement

“Smells like money,” said James King, the union’s assistant business manager.

Chavez-DeRemer turned on her heels and gave him a high-five.

::

The congresswoman doesn’t run from Trump. She supports his election in November, she says, because she believes the policies of the Biden administration have failed the country and she considers the former president a strong leader.

But Chavez-DeRemer doesn’t talk about him, either — unless someone brings him up first. “I’ve never even met President Trump,” she says.

Advertisement

In one debate, a viewer-submitted question asked whether Chavez-DeRemer believes Biden legitimately won the 2020 presidential race. “Yes, I do believe that,” she said crisply and without hesitation.

Endorsing the former president without embracing him is not the only fine line that Chavez-DeRemer is walking in a district almost certain to back Kamala Harris. She’s also attempting a tricky balance on the abortion issue.

Though Chavez-DeRemer praised the Supreme Court ruling that overturned Roe vs. Wade and previously indicated support for a ban starting at six weeks — before some women know they are pregnant — she said she would oppose any efforts to outlaw the procedure nationwide.

Most Oregonians favor legalized abortion, she noted, as do most Americans. “I will protect their access,” she promised.

In the end, the contest is likely to come down to trust — a word her opponent used in their second debate even more times than Chavez-DeRemer invoked bipartisanship.

Advertisement

“My opponent cannot be trusted,” Bynum said, whether the question dealt with taxes, housing, inflation or her willingness to break with Trump and fellow Republicans to work, as she constantly pledges, with Democrats.

Janelle Bynum, the Democrat running to represent Oregon's 5th congressional district.

Janelle Bynum, the Democratic candidate running to represent Oregon’s 5th Congressional District.

(Jenny Kane / Associated Press)

Chavez-DeRemer insists, repeatedly, that her pursuit of compromise is not calculated or a function of being a Republican running in a purple district, which leaves her no choice. It reflects, she said, her true self.

“Oh, I have lots of choices,” she said as she left the peace officers union headquarters. “And my choice is to work hard and work with my colleagues across the aisle.”

Advertisement

Voters will take her word, or not, and that will decide not just Chavez-DeRemer’s future, but how much of a shrinking middle ground still exists.

Politics

Commentary: Unhappy with the choices for California governor? Get real

Published

on

Commentary: Unhappy with the choices for California governor? Get real

California has tried all manner of design in choosing its governor.

Democrat Gray Davis, to name a recent example, had an extensive background in government and politics and a bland demeanor that suggested his first name was also a fitting adjective.

Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger, by contrast, was a novice candidate who ran for governor on a whim. His super-sized action hero persona dazzled Californians like the pyrotechnics in one of his Hollywood blockbusters.

In the end, however, their political fates were the same. Both left office humbled, burdened with lousy poll numbers and facing a well of deep voter discontent.

Advertisement

(Schwarzenegger, at least, departed on his own terms. He chased Davis from the Capitol in an extraordinary recall and won reelection before his approval ratings tanked during his second term.)

There are roughly a dozen major candidates for California governor in 2026 and, taken together, they lack even a small fraction of Schwarzenegger’s celebrity wattage.

Nor do any have the extensive Sacramento experience of Davis, who was a gubernatorial chief of staff under Jerry Brown before serving in the Legislature, then winning election as state controller and lieutenant governor.

That’s not, however, to disparage those running.

The contestants include a former Los Angeles mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa; three candidates who’ve won statewide office, former Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra, schools Supt. Tony Thurmond and former Controller Betty Yee; two others who gained national recognition during their time in Congress, Katie Porter and Eric Swalwell; and Riverside County’s elected sheriff, Chad Bianco.

Advertisement

The large field offers an ample buffet from which to choose.

The rap on this particular batch of hopefuls is they’re a collective bore, which, honestly, seems a greater concern to those writing and spitballing about the race than a reflection of some great upwelling of citizens clamoring for bread and circuses.

In scores of conversations with voters over the past year, the sentiment that came through, above all, was a sense of practicality and pragmatism. (And, this being a blue bastion, no small amount of horror, fear and loathing directed at the vengeful and belligerent Trump administration.)

It’s never been more challenging and expensive to live in California, a place of great bounty that often exacts in dollars and stress what it offers in opportunity and wondrous beauty.

With a governor seemingly more focused on his personal agenda, a 2028 bid for president, than the people who put him in office, many said they’d like to replace Gavin Newsom with someone who will prioritize California and their needs above his own.

Advertisement

That means a focus on matters such as traffic, crime, fire prevention, housing and homelessness. In other words, pedestrian stuff that doesn’t light up social media or earn an invitation to hold forth on one of the Beltway chat shows.

“Why does it take so long to do simple things?” asked one of those voters, the Bay Area’s Michael Duncan, as he lamented his pothole-ridden, 120-mile round-trip commute between Fairfield and an environmental analyst job in Livermore.

The answer is not a simple one.

Politics are messy, like any human endeavor. Governing is a long and laborious process, requiring study, deliberation and the weighing of competing forces. Frankly, it can be rather dull.

Certainly the humdrum of legislation or bureaucratic rule-marking is nothing like the gossipy speculation about who may or may not bid to lead California as its 41st governor.

Advertisement

Why else was so much coverage devoted to whether Sen. Alex Padilla would jump into the gubernatorial race — he chose not to — and the possible impact his entry would have on the contest, as opposed to, say, his thinking on CEQA or FMAP?

(The former is California’s much-contested Environmental Quality Act; the latter is the formula that determines federal reimbursement for Medi-Cal, the state’s healthcare program for low-income residents.)

Just between us, political reporters tend to be like children in front of a toy shop window. Their bedroom may be cluttered with all manner of diversion and playthings, but what they really want is that shiny, as-yet unattained object — Rick Caruso! — beckoning from behind glass.

Soon enough, once a candidate has entered the race, boredom sets in and the speculation and desire for someone fresh and different starts anew. (Will Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta change his mind and run for governor?)

For their part, many voters always seem to be searching for some idealized candidate who exists only in their imagination.

Advertisement

Someone strong, but not dug in. Willing to compromise, but never caving to the other side. Someone with the virginal purity of a political outsider and the intrinsic capability of an insider who’s spent decades cutting deals and keeping the government wheels spinning.

They look over their choices and ask, in the words of an old song, is that all there is? (Spoiler alert: There are no white knights out there.)

Donald Trump was, foremost, a celebrity before his burst into politics. First as a denizen of New York’s tabloid culture and then as the star of TV’s faux-boardroom drama, “The Apprentice.”

His pizzazz was a large measure of his appeal, along with his manufactured image as a shrewd businessman with a kingly touch and infallible judgment.

His freewheeling political rallies and frothy social media presence were, and continue to be, a source of great glee to his fans and followers.

Advertisement

His performance as president has been altogether different, and far less amusing.

If the candidates for California governor fail to light up a room, that’s not such a bad thing. Fix the roads. Make housing more affordable. Help keep the place from burning to the ground.

Leave the fun and games to the professionals.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Kamala Harris blasts Trump administration’s capture of Venezuela’s Maduro as ‘unlawful and unwise’

Published

on

Kamala Harris blasts Trump administration’s capture of Venezuela’s Maduro as ‘unlawful and unwise’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Former Vice President Kamala Harris on Saturday evening condemned the Trump administration’s capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro and his wife, calling the operation both “unlawful” and “unwise.”

In a lengthy post on X, Harris acknowledged that Maduro is a “brutal” and “illegitimate” dictator but said that President Donald Trump’s actions in Venezuela “do not make America safer, stronger, or more affordable.”

“Donald Trump’s actions in Venezuela do not make America safer, stronger, or more affordable,” Harris wrote. “That Maduro is a brutal, illegitimate dictator does not change the fact that this action was both unlawful and unwise. We’ve seen this movie before.

“Wars for regime change or oil that are sold as strength but turn into chaos, and American families pay the price.”

Advertisement

SEE PICS: VENEZUELANS WORLDWIDE CELEBRATE AS EXILES REACT TO MADURO’S CAPTURE

Vice President Kamala Harris had strong words for the Trump administration’s capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro. (Montinique Monroe/Getty Images)

Harris made the remarks hours after the Trump administration confirmed that Maduro and his wife were captured and transported out of Venezuela as part of “Operation Absolute Resolve.”

The former vice president also accused the administration of being motivated by oil interests rather than efforts to combat drug trafficking or promote democracy.

“The American people do not want this, and they are tired of being lied to. This is not about drugs or democracy. It is about oil and Donald Trump’s desire to play the regional strongman,” Harris said. “If he cared about either, he wouldn’t pardon a convicted drug trafficker or sideline Venezuela’s legitimate opposition while pursuing deals with Maduro’s cronies.”

Advertisement

SECOND FRONT: HOW A SOCIALIST CELL IN THE US MOBILIZED PRO-MADURO FOOT SOLDIERS WITHIN 12 HOURS

President Donald Trump shared a photo of captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro aboard the USS Iwo Jima after Saturday’s strikes on Venezuela. (Donald Trump via Truth Social)

Harris, who has been rumored as a potential Democratic contender in the 2028 presidential race, additionally accused the president of endangering U.S. troops and destabilizing the region.

“The President is putting troops at risk, spending billions, destabilizing a region, and offering no legal authority, no exit plan, and no benefit at home,” she said. “America needs leadership whose priorities are lowering costs for working families, enforcing the rule of law, strengthening alliances, and — most importantly — putting the American people first.”

MADURO’S FALL SPARKS SUSPICION OF BETRAYAL INSIDE VENEZUELA’S RULING ELITE

Advertisement

CIA Director John Ratcliffe, left, President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio watch U.S. military operations in Venezuela from Mar-a-Lago in Florida early Saturday. (Donald Trump via Truth Social)

Maduro and his wife arrived at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn late Saturday after being transported by helicopter from the DEA in Manhattan after being processed.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Earlier in the day, Trump said that the U.S. government will “run” Venezuela “until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition.”

Harris’ office did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

Advertisement

Fox News Digital’s Jasmine Baehr contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Politics

On the ground in Venezuela: Shock, fear and defiance

Published

on

On the ground in Venezuela: Shock, fear and defiance

It was about 2 a.m. Saturday Caracas time when the detonations began, lighting up the sullen sky like a post-New Year’s fireworks display.

“¡Ya comenzó!” was the recurrent phrase in homes, telephone conversations and social media chats as the latest iteration of U.S. “shock and awe” rocked the Venezuelan capital. “It has begun!”

Then the question: “¿Maduro?”

The great uncertainty was the whereabouts of President Nicolás Maduro, who has been under Trump administration threat for months.

The scenes of revelry from a joyous Venezuelan diaspora celebrating from Miami to Madrid were not repeated here. Fear of the unknown kept most at home.

Advertisement

Hours would pass before news reports from outside Venezuela confirmed that U.S. forces had captured Maduro and placed him on a U.S. ship to face criminal charges in federal court in New York.

Venezuelans had watched the unfolding spectacle from their homes, using social media to exchange images of explosions and the sounds of bombardment. This moment, it was clear, was ushering in a new era of uncertainly for Venezuela, a nation reeling from a decade of economic, political and social unrest.

Government supporters display posters of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, right, and former President Hugo Chávez in downtown Caracas on Saturday.

(Matias Delacroix / Associated Press)

Advertisement

The ultimate result was an imponderable. But that this was a transformative moment — for good or bad — seemed indisputable.

By daybreak, an uneasy calm overtook the city of more than 3 million. The explosions and the drone of U.S. aircraft ceased. Blackouts cut electricity to parts of the capital.

Pro-government youths wielding automatic rifles set up roadblocks or sped through the streets on motorcycles, a warning to those who might celebrate Maduro’s downfall.

Shops, gas stations and other businesses were mostly closed. There was little traffic.

“When I heard the explosions, I grabbed my rosary and began to pray,” said Carolina Méndez, 50, who was among the few who ventured out Saturday, seeking medicines at a pharmacy, though no personnel had arrived to attend to clients waiting on line. “I’m very scared now. That’s why I came to buy what I need.”

Advertisement

A sense of alarm was ubiquitous.

People stand around cars and a motorbike at a crowded gas pump.

Motorcycles and cars line up for gas Saturday in Caracas. Most of the population stayed indoors, reluctant to leave their homes except for gas and food.

(Andrea Hernandez Briceno / For The Times)

“People are buying bottled water, milk and eggs,” said Luz Pérez, a guard at one of the few open shops, not far from La Carlota airport, one of the sites targeted by U.S. strikes. “I heard the explosions. It was very scary. But the owner decided to open anyway to help people.”

Customers were being allowed to enter three at a time. Most didn’t want to speak. Their priority was to stock up on basics and get home safely.

Advertisement

Rumors circulated rapidly that U.S. forces had whisked away Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.

There was no immediate official confirmation here of the detention of Maduro and Flores, both wanted in the United States for drug-trafficking charges — allegations that Maduro has denounced as U.S. propaganda. But then images of an apparently captive Maduro, blindfolded, in a sweatsuit soon circulated on social media.

There was no official estimate of Venezuelan casualties in the U.S. raid.

Rumors circulated indicating that a number of top Maduro aides had been killed, among them Diosdado Cabello, the security minister who is a staunch Maduro ally. Cabello is often the face of the government.

But Cabello soon appeared on official TV denouncing “the terrorist attack against our people,” adding: “Let no one facilitate the moves of the enemy invader.”

Advertisement

Although Trump, in his Saturday news conference, confidently predicted that the United States would “run” Venezuela, apparently during some undefined transitional period, it’s not clear how that will be accomplished.

A key question is whether the military — long a Maduro ally — will remain loyal now that he is in U.S. custody. There was no public indication Saturday of mass defections from the Venezuelan armed forces. Nor was it clear that Maduro’s government infrastructure had lost control of the country. Official media reported declarations of loyalty from pro-government politicians and citizens from throughout Venezuela.

A billboard with an image of President Nicolas Maduro and spray-painted graffiti.

A billboard with an image of President Nicolas Maduro stands next to La Carlota military base in Caracas, Venezuela, on Saturday. The graffiti reads, “Fraud, fraud.”

(Andrea Hernandez Briceno / For The Times)

In his comments, Trump spoke of a limited U.S. troop presence in Venezuela, focused mostly on protecting the oil infrastructure that his administration says was stolen from the United States — a characterization widely rejected here, even among Maduro’s critics. But Trump offered few details on sending in U.S. personnel to facilitate what could be a tumultuous transition.

Advertisement

Meantime, Venezuelan Vice President Delcy Rodríguez surfaced on official television and demanded the immediate release of Maduro and his wife, according to the official Telesur broadcast outlet. Her comments seemed to be the first official acknowledgment that Maduro had been taken.

“There is one president of this country, and his name is Nicolás Maduro,” the vice president said in an address from Miraflores Palace, from where Maduro and his wife had been seized hours earlier.

During an emergency meeting of the National Defense Council, Telesur reported, Rodríguez labeled the couple’s detention an “illegal kidnapping.”

The Trump administration, the vice president charged, meant to “capture our energy, mineral and [other] natural resources.”

Her defiant words came after Trump, in his news conference, said that Rodríguez had been sworn in as the country’s interim president and had evinced a willingness to cooperate with Washington.

Advertisement

“She’s essentially willing to do what we think is necessary to make Venezuela great again,” Trump said.

Pro-government armed civilians patrol in La Guaira, Venezuela

Pro-government armed civilians patrol in La Guaira, Venezuela, on Saturday after President Trump announced that President Nicolás Maduro had been captured and flown out of the country.

(Matias Delacroix / Associated Press)

Somewhat surprisingly, Trump also seemed to rule out a role in an interim government for Marina Corina Machado, the Venezuelan Nobel Peace Prize laureate and longtime anti-Maduro activist.

“She’s a very nice woman, but doesn’t have respect within the country,” Trump said of Machado.

Advertisement

Machado is indeed a controversial figure within the fractured Venezuelan opposition. Some object to her open calls for U.S. intervention, preferring a democratic change in government.

Nonetheless, her stand-in candidate, Edmundo González, did win the presidency in national balloting last year, according to opposition activists and others, who say Maduro stole the election.

“Venezuelans, the moment of liberty has arrived!” Machado wrote in a letter released on X. “We have fought for years. … What was meant to happen is happening.”

Not everyone agreed.

“They want our oil and they say it’s theirs,” said Roberto, 65, a taxi driver who declined to give his last name for security reasons. “Venezuelans don’t agree. Yes, I think people will go out and defend their homeland.”

Advertisement

Special correspondent Mogollón reported from Caracas and staff writer McDonnell from Boston. Contributing was special correspondent Cecilia Sánchez Vidal in Mexico City.

Continue Reading

Trending