Abigail SpanbergerDonald TrumpelectionsFeaturedNew JerseyPoliticsTransgenderVirginia

Pro-Family Nonprofit Reveals Key to Winning Elections

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—Republicans must keep their focus on “Democrats’ gender extremism” to beat the odds in the upcoming off-year and midterm elections, according to the conservative nonprofit which influenced the Trump campaign on pro-family issues.

American Principles Project penned a memo, obtained by The Daily Signal, laying out the conservative playbook for leveraging Democrats’ biggest weakness: “gender radicalism.”

The memo says that Republicans have a chance at winning elections in blue states New Jersey and Virginia in November because Democrats won’t back down in their support for unpopular transgender ideology. The same strategy will serve Republicans wins in 2026 midterms, according to APP.

“Looking beyond this November, Democrats also face a similar conundrum in 2026,” the memo says. “While in theory they should be significantly favored to win back one or both chambers of Congress, their stubborn adherence to far-left positions on gender issues has made them politically vulnerable. If Republicans hope to overcome past trends, they cannot afford to abandon the Trump campaign’s winning strategy.”

APP’s president, Terry Schilling, played a role in influencing President Donald Trump to make opposition to radical gender ideology a tenet of his 2024 campaign. Schilling showed Trump polling proving that pro-family policy is popular with voters.

“He’s more aware of what Dems are doing to our kids than most politicians I’ve met,” Schilling reflected.

Emphasizing common sense stances on family issues helped Trump win the election, and Republican candidates must continue to take advantage of opportunities to hold Democrats’ feet to the fire on transgenderism, APP urges.

The nonprofit highlighted opportunities to slam Democrat gubernatorial candidates Abigail Spanberger of Virginia and Mikie Sherill of New Jersey for their pro-transgender records “including allowing men in women’s sports, males in female private spaces, and taxpayer funding of sex changes.”

“When pressed on the campaign trail, both have refused to back down from these positions,” the memo says.

That strategy is working. APP commissioned polling of 2,600 Virginia voters which found that messages about Democrats’ support for mandatory insurance coverage of sex changes and males in female
private spaces boosted Republicans’ vote share by 6.9 points and 5.7 points, respectively.

In a panel of 2,800 New Jersey voters, messages about Democrats’ support for sex
changes for minors and banning talk therapy to alleviate gender dysphoria moved voters to
Republicans by 8.2 and 5.6 points, respectively.

“Given how close the polling is in both races, these issues have the very real potential to deliver victory for the GOP—in an election history says Republicans ought to have no chance of winning,” the memo says.

American Principles Project plans to play a role in applying this strategy to upcoming elections.

“This year, we will once again be working to elect pro-family champions through a planned
super PAC spend of $1.4 million in Virginia and $1 million in New Jersey,” the memo says.

The think tank also plans to invest even more in next year’s midterms to help pro-family leaders in close Senate, gubernatorial, and House races.

“In many of these races, Democrats will likely be running candidates with far-left records on gender issues—including Sen. Jon Ossoff in Georgia, former Governor Roy Cooper in North Carolina, and Rep. Haley Stevens in Michigan, to name just a few,” the memo says. “By ensuring swing voters are aware of these candidates’ radical positions, we also aim to tip the balance in what are expected to be tight races.”



Source link

Related Posts

On April 12, 2021, a Knoxville police officer shot and killed an African American male student in a bathroom at Austin-East High School. The incident caused social unrest, and community members began demanding transparency about the shooting, including the release of the officer’s body camera video. On the evening of April 19, 2021, the Defendant and a group of protestors entered the Knoxville City-County Building during a Knox County Commission meeting. The Defendant activated the siren on a bullhorn and spoke through the bullhorn to demand release of the video. Uniformed police officers quickly escorted her and six other individuals out of the building and arrested them for disrupting the meeting. The court upheld defendants’ conviction for “disrupting a lawful meeting,” defined as “with the intent to prevent [a] gathering, … substantially obstruct[ing] or interfere[ing] with the meeting, procession, or gathering by physical action or verbal utterance.” Taken in the light most favorable to the State, the evidence shows that the Defendant posted on Facebook the day before the meeting and the day of the meeting that the protestors were going to “shut down” the meeting. During the meeting, the Defendant used a bullhorn to activate a siren for approximately twenty seconds. Witnesses at trial described the siren as “loud,” “high-pitched,” and “alarming.” Commissioner Jay called for “Officers,” and the Defendant stated through the bullhorn, “Knox County Commission, your meeting is over.” Commissioner Jay tried to bring the meeting back into order by banging his gavel, but the Defendant continued speaking through the bullhorn. Even when officers grabbed her and began escorting her out of the Large Assembly Room, she continued to disrupt the meeting by yelling for the officers to take their hands off her and by repeatedly calling them “murderers.” Commissioner Jay called a ten-minute recess during the incident, telling the jury that it was “virtually impossible” to continue the meeting during the Defendant’s disruption. The Defendant herself testified that the purpose of attending the meeting was to disrupt the Commission’s agenda and to force the Commission to prioritize its discussion on the school shooting. Although the duration of the disruption was about ninety seconds, the jury was able to view multiple videos of the incident and concluded that the Defendant substantially obstructed or interfered with the meeting. The evidence is sufficient to support the Defendant’s conviction. Defendant also claimed the statute was “unconstitutionally vague as applied to her because the statute does not state that it includes government meetings,” but the appellate court concluded that she had waived the argument by not raising it adequately below. Sean F. McDermott, Molly T. Martin, and Franklin Ammons, Assistant District Attorneys General, represent the state.

From State v. Every, decided by the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals…

1 of 94