#

If you’re a working dad in the Granite State–you’re in the right place!

According to a new analysis from WalletHub.com, New Hampshire ranks #10 on the list of best states for working fathers.  The website compared the 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia across 20 key indicators of friendliness toward working fathers. Among their findings: New Hampshire has the lowest percentage of kids who live in poverty (with a dad in the house) in the U.S.

“Back in 1960, 75 percent of American families relied on a single income, that of the dad, who spent much of his week at work while mom stayed home with the kids,” according to WalletHub. “Today, two-thirds of family households depend on two incomes.”

“In fact, nearly 93 percent of dads with kids younger than 18 are employed, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics”

These numbers reflect the broader trend of low unemployment in New Hampshire. The state’s 2.6 percent unemployment rate is tied for second-lowest in the U.S., and its median income–$70, 936–ranks seventh in the nation.

The net result could be good news for incumbent governor Chris Sununu, a Republican governor hoping to win re-election in a purple state.

Use the map below to see how N.H. compares with other states when it comes to working dads.

The Boston Globe has a fascinating story about trying to get an answer to the question: Why can’t Levi Sanders get the endorsement of his own dad? After all, Sen. Bernie Sanders has been criss-crossing the country to back candidates who share his socialist views (though without great success), why not do the same for his son in the 9-way race for New Hampshire’s First Congressional District?

Sen. Sanders has issued a simple, and not particularly satisfying, statement: “Levi has spent his life in service to low income and working families, and I am very proud of all that he has done. In our family, however, we do not believe in dynastic politics. Levi is running his own campaign in his own way.”

For his part, Levi has been reluctant to discuss the matter. His campaign declined comment fo NHJournal.com, and he’s largely dodged the question across the board. From the Globe:

“You know I’m not Bernie’s son. I’m the son of Larry David’s fourth cousin,” he quipped in a brief conversation, referring to the distant blood tie between the comedian and the senator. He initially agreed to a more extensive interview on Tuesday night but then canceled the interview and has not responded to numerous messages left with him and his campaign associates.

Levi is certainly following in his father’s far-Left footprints. Go to his SandersForCongress.com website, and you’ll find his support for socialized medicine (“Medicare For All”), a $15 minimum wage and free college tuition for all.  But the closest you’ll come to seeing his dad’s support is this somewhat odd photo:

That’s Levi on the right, walking toward the camera as his father walks away.  Odd.

Then again, it may not matter all that much. In a recent poll of potential 2020 presidential candidates, only 13 percent of New Hampshire Democrats back Bernie, putting him behind Sen. Liz Warren (26 percent) and former VP Joe Biden (20 percent). Sen. Sanders may not hold much sway, not even in a state he won in the 2016 Democratic primary.

And while Levi Sanders may be outspoken on his socialist-leaning policies, he’s been relatively quiet on politics–declining to say if he’d vote to make Nancy Pelosi speaker, and equivocating on the question of impeaching President Trump. Perhaps he believes going too far Left isn’t a smart move in this swing district.

So does that mean Sen. Sanders refusing to endorse his son because doesn’t want his endorsement? Stay tuned….

It’s no secret that U. S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) isn’t a fan of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos. She opposed DeVos’s nomination and has repeatedly criticized her since.

But this week the criticism veered into a new area: Guns.

During Secretary DeVos’s appearance before an Appropriations Subcommittee, Sen. Shaheen asked her about school safety and guns.  After reading a letter from a high school student in Dover, Shaheen went on to claim that “since 2009, the US has had 57 times more school shootings than the rest of the G7 countries combined. That’s 288 school shootings in the U.S.”

“The question I have for you, Secretary DeVos, is–what are these countries doing that we’re not doing? Do they have fewer mentally ill people? Do they arm their teachers? Or do they have more sensible gun laws?

Secretary DeVos suggested to the committee that the new Federal Commission of School Safety established at the behest of President Trump will not look at the issue of guns and gun violence–which, if true, would appear to be a glaring omission. However, Sen. Shaheen’s claim of 288 school shootings in the U. S. since 2009 also bears scrutiny.

According to researchers at Northeastern University, schools are actually safer than they were in the 90s, and school shootings are not more common.

“Since 1996, there have been 16 multiple victim shootings in schools, or incidents involving 4 or more victims and at least 2 deaths by firearms, excluding the assailant,” the report shows.  Now, Sen. Shaheen did not use the phrase “mass shootings,” which is what most people think of when they hear “school shootings,” so perhaps she simply meant all shootings at K-12 schools.

Ooops. Here’s their data on all school shootings where there was even a single fatality:

Notice that, since 2009, the number of fatal shootings rarely exceeds single digits. That would put the number since 2009 closer to 80, not 288.

Sen. Shaheen appears to be relying on a report from CNN which the network admits is based on their own count of media reports of shootings and not on actual police data. CNN also acknowledges their numbers  include, not just K-12 schools, but  colleges and vocational schools. Many of the incidents are  gang violence, domestic violence, robberies in school parking lots and accidents.

CNN didn’t reveal their raw data, but a previous CNN analysis of school shootings in 2018 included a student shot with a BB gun. Of the 23 school shootings on CNN’s list for 2018, only two meet the criteria of a mass shooting.

Every school shooting is an outrage, of course, and Sen. Shaheen’s questions about how the Department of Education intends to address the issue are certainly legitimate. But including bogus, poorly-sourced and debunked data in the conversation doesn’t advance legitimate debate.

Watch the exchange between Sen. Shaheen and Secretary DeVos here:

Politico is reporting that Deval Patrick is “inching closer toward deciding on a 2020 presidential run.”

Quoting the former Massachusetts governor’s longtime political advisor John Walsh, Politico is feeding a narrative they’ve nursed for a nearly a year now–that Barack Obama and his political team want Patrick to pick up the presidential mantle.

Today, Politico reports that Patrick “is really thinking about running but hasn’t decided yet,” according to Walsh.  Last August, Politico ran a story entitled: “Obama’s Inner Circle Is Urging Deval Patrick to Run.”

According to the August piece, “Barack Obama is nudging him to run” and Patrick is “ObamaWorld’s clear and away 2020 favorite.”  At the time, Patrick was more circumspect, saying  “it’s way, way too soon to be making plans for 2020.” Fascinatingly, he gave the interview from his post-governor gig at Bain Capital, the (evil) venture capital firm founded by another former Massachusetts governor, Mitt Romney.

Some big-dollar Democratic donors who play beltway politics are reportedly pushing Patrick, too.  And Patrick advisors like David Axelrod say Deval has early state advantages due to his experience campaigning in small-town central and western Massachusetts (helps in Iowa) and the eight years as governor of New Hampshire’s southern neighbor.

However, as NHJournal has reported, early polling has Patrick in single digits in the Granite State (despite eight years of coverage in the area’s biggest TV market), and when Sen. Liz Warren’s name is added, Patrick’s support drops to 4 percent.

Do polls six months before the midterms really matter? Of course not. But it does show that, for the moment, Washington, DC politicos and publications are more excited about the Patrick run that New Hampshire’s Democrats are.

Democratic State Sen. Lou D’Allesandro (author of the new book Lion Of The New Hampshire Senate) tells NHJournal: “I don’t think Patrick would capture the attention of NH Democrats.  He didn’t spend a lot of time here and I don’t believe he has been back since he left office.  As you know, the Bernie followers are very active.  It remains to be seen as to what the field will look like.”

UPDATE: Longtime Democratic activist and media personality Jim Braude tells NHJournal that Patrick would be a strong candidate in the Granite State. “Deval Patrick is maybe the best campaigner I’ve ever seen,” says Braude, who along with his broadcasting partner Margery Eagan hosted Gov. Patrick’s monthly “Ask The Governor” radio program during his eight years in office.

“Speechifying and one-on-one, he’s tailor made for Iowa and New Hampshire. Throw in the fact that he’s a liberal who business types can relate to and you’ve got a candidate,” Braude says.

Even before he took the stage at St. Anselm College for the “Politics and Eggs” breakfast event, former Attorney General Eric Holder was sparking controversy on the issue of President Trump and racism.  In a pre-speech interview for Fox News, Holder said that while he wouldn’t call the current president a racist, Trump is using “race as a wedge issue.”

“The president and other members of his administration have tried to use race as a wedge issue to divide the American people, and it is something that I think is reprehensible,” Holder said. “It is inconsistent with who we say we are as a people and it is not what we expect from somebody who is supposed to be the leader of the entire nation.”

During his speech, Holder was asked about the lack of trust between police and communities of color, and he addressed the race issue again–recounting the discomfort he felt when he was pulled over by a police officer in DC’s Georgetown community.

“I was a federal prosecutor. But to this guy, police officer, who was black, I was a potential something,” Holder said. “We need to look at the issue of unconscious bias.”  Holder also claimed that “we [the Obama administration] did a lot to increase trust between the police and these communities,” a claim many would dispute.  According to a Gallup poll, trust in the police fell to a 22-year low in 2015–six years into the Obama presidency–and fell to just 30 percent among black Americans.  In June of last year, trust in the police had returned to its 25-year average.

Holder’s speech focused largely on his work as chairman of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, an effort to overturn what he describes as Republican gerrymandering. Holder insists that, as he told the Daily Show’s Trevor Noah, he is not pushing “Democratic redistricting,” but instead wants a level playing field.

“I wouldn’t have signed up for this if it was an attempt to gerrymander for Democrats,” Holder told the talk host, and he reiterated that message at St. Anselm. “This is a partisan attempt at good government,” Holder said.

But it was in the area of race relations that Holder created the most heat, suggesting that President Trump was in part responsible for Roseanne Barr’s racist tweet about his former Obama administration colleague, Valerie Jarrett:

“This president has given license to people to say and do things that might not have occurred in the immediate past in our country. And, I think that we are going to be dealing with that long after the Trump presidency, trying to get a handle on those kinds of issues, the kind of things that Roseanne said.”

The Politics and Eggs breakfast is a must-stop event on the New Hampshire #FITN speaking circuit. Former Democratic candidate Martin O’Malley made an appearance earlier this year, as have potential candidates Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) and conservative commentator Bill Kristol. Holder did little to discourage discussion of a possible 2020 presidential bid in his speech and has repeatedly hinted at a possible run.

A fascinating survey of Dartmouth College students finds that campus Democrats are far less comfortable with diversity than their independent and Republican counterparts, at least when it comes to ideology.

In a survey conducted by the The Dartmouth (“America’s Oldest College Newspaper”), an astonishing 82 percent of Democrat students said they would be less likely to date someone with differing political views, and 55 percent admitted they would be less likely to have politically-diverse friends.  Among GOP students, those percentages were 55 and 12 percent, respectively.

This bias impacts Dartmouth’s academics as well, with 38 percent of Democratic students saying they’re less willing to take a class taught by a Republican professor.  However, research shows liberal students are in little danger of suffering such an ideological indignity.

A recent study of 98 Dartmouth faculty members in areas like economics, history, journalism, law and psychology found that just 3 were registered Republicans.

One of the authors of that study, Professor Mitchell Langbert of Brooklyn College tells NHJournal that ideological discrimination is rampant on elite college campuses, and that conservatives who want to go into academia should focus on STEM programs: “Science, Technology, Engineering and Math, fields where ideology isn’t as significant.” Professor Langbert says. “And keep your opinions to yourself.”

That atmosphere of self-censorship is certainly strong at Dartmouth, where the campus paper’s survey also found that 81 percent of students–and a whopping 91 percent of Republican ones– agreed with the statement: “The climate on Dartmouth’s campus prevents some people from saying things they believe because others might find them offensive.”

And Dartmouth College can’t be accused of not putting its money where its mouth is. The college has donated nearly $43,000 to candidates in the 2018 cycle thus far. The amount that’s gone to Republicans?

Zero.

The “Politics and Eggs” breakfast at the New Hampshire Institute of Politics is one of the compulsory events in Granite State politics for anyone considering a presidential run.  Conservative journalist and national leader of the #NeverTrump movement, Bill Kristol, will be making an appearance–and firing up the 2020 rumor mill–on Wednesday, May 23rd.

NHJournal’s Michael Graham caught up with Kristol at one of his Harvard Yard haunts on the eve of his speech for a quick Q&A:

MG: My first question for you is this: Is Bill Kristol coming to “Politics and Eggs” to formally announce his candidacy in the 2020 presidential race?

BK:  It’s tempting, it’s tempting. But then I’d be laughed out of New Hampshire and I’d be slipping back across the border to Massachusetts in about 12 minutes. So I think I won’t do that.

I’m just talking about my analysis of the political situation. It’s always great to be in New Hampshire because people here are so interested in national politics, and they follow it much more closely than almost any other state because they’re so conscious of their “First in the Nation” primary. And I do think the fact that independents can vote in either primary–and so many New Hampshire voters are independents–means they tend to follow both parties. In some states the Republicans follow Republican stories, and the Democrats have the Democratic stories. In New Hampshire, everyone follows everything.

MG: Which potential 2020 candidate best matches the mood of the Democratic electorate?

BK:  I think there are several moods going at once, which is why it’s complicated. There’s obviously a ‘We hate, loathe and despise Trump and we will reward the person who hates, loathes and despises him the most’ [mood].  There’s also a ‘Look, we’ve got a win’ [mood], with Democrats saying ‘We cannot afford to lose to this guy and, incidentally, we lost because we were out of touch with parts of middle America. Some of those concerns were legitimate, and some of those concerns are traditional Democratic concerns–stagnant wages and stuff like that–and so we need somebody who can speak to them.’

That leads you in two pretty different directions.

The conventional wisdom among Republicans in Washington is the Left has all the energy. Everything’s going Left. The empirical evidence so far in the primaries is a little mixed, I would say. Some moderates have won primaries. Some Lefties have won some primaries, and some have just been extremely close like the Nebraska [NE-2] primary. So I’m sort of open-minded about that debate on the Democratic side.

MG: What about Republicans?  Trump’s approval is back in the upper 80s, approaching 90 percent among Republicans. Of those Republicans who are dissatisfied–maybe they’re reluctant Trump supporters, whatever. Are they angry at Trump, or do the just want their party to go in a different direction?

BK:  I think Trump supporters–let’s just say it’s 80, 85 percent of the Republicans–are split into two categories: Half of them, some 40 percent of the Republican Party, are Trump loyalists. They believe in him. They are proud to have voted for Him. They hate his enemies and they like the fact that he’s shaking things up.  But about half of Trump supporters are reluctant Trump supporters. They voted for someone else in the primary–Bush or Cruz or Rubio.  They mostly voted for Trump in the general election because of Hillary and judges and so forth.

They support some of the things Trump has done, but they’re not Trump loyalists and I think they’re open to the following argument, one which you can’t really make now, you have to make it the day after the midterms:

It goes like this: ‘You voted for Trump. We’re not gonna criticize that. You support a lot of things he does. You think a lot of the criticisms of him are unfair. We’re not going to quarrel with that.  But–do you really want to do this for another four years?

It’s a little crazy. It’s a little chaotic. He comes with some downside risks. In foreign policy and and other things, maybe you could just like pocket the gains and get a more normal, so to speak,  Republican or Conservative.’

I think that message would have–could have– more appeal after Election Day this year. Right now it sounds like, ‘Well, you’re just anti-Trump. We’ve got to rally to Trump, we’ve got to defeat the Democrats.’  But I think November 7th [the day after the midterms], everything changes.  Because the question becomes not a retrospective question of were you right to vote for trump or his critics, or ‘what about Hillary?’ It becomes a prospective question. What do you want going forward?

MG: Last question: The Democratic ticket that you think Republicans should be the most afraid of in 2020?

BK: That’s a good question. These things are actually harder to predict.  I’m inclined to give the conventional answer, which I think is right, which is the more moderate the candidate Democrats nominate, the easier it is to win back some Republican voters and independents.  I guess I have the kind of conventional view that that’s the most dangerous thing for the Republicans.

But you know, sometimes history fools you.  Everyone thought Reagan would be easier to defeat than a more moderate Republican.  Take Elizabeth Warren. [Republicans think] That’d be great. We can demonize her. She’s scary. She’s left wing.

Well, I don’t know.  Maybe she could run a campaign that was pretty intelligent and get the best of both worlds: The Hillary Clinton appeal, first woman president; And some of the Sanders energy. Look, she’s a Harvard law professor. She’s not crazy.

It could be like Obama. [Independent voters saying] ‘She’s a little more liberal that I like, but she comes from modest origins.’ So I think [my fellow conservatives] may underrate Warren a little bit.

A new documentary airing on British TV reports that the future Mrs. Prince Harry has roots in New Hampshire–though it’s unlikely they’ll be touted by the Department of Tourism.

According to information uncovered by historical investigator–and Meghan Markle’s 8th cousin–Jeff Mudgett, Ms. Markle is related to Herman Webster Mudgett of Gilmanton, N.H.  Mudgett later changed his hame to Henry Howard Holmes, but he’s best known as “America’s First Serial Killer.”

And possibly Jack the Ripper.America’s first serial killer, and distant relative of Meghan Markle, Herman Mudgett of Gilmanton, NH

Mudgett was born to a rich Gilmanton family in May 1861. He taught school there for a short time before leaving town. He would eventually study medicine at the University of Michigan, change his name to Holmes and make his way to Chicago.  And then…

A con man, opportunist and evil genius, the crowning achievement of his dark deeds was the construction of a building later dubbed the Murder Castle: a hotel on Chicago’s south side that he engineered to be a factory of death, complete with a gas chamber, dissection room, trap doors and a basement furnace to destroy any trace of his sinister work.

The History Channel series American Ripper posits the theory that at one point Mudgett traveled to London and became–you guessed it–Jack the Ripper.

Markle’s eighth cousin, Jeff Mudgett,  is the source of this theory. “We did a study with the FBI and CIA and Scotland Yard regarding handwriting analysis,” It turns out [Mudgett] was Jack the Ripper. This means Meghan is related to Jack the Ripper.”

“I don’t think the Queen knows. I am not proud he is my ancestor. Meghan won’t be either,” Mudgett said.

It’s unlikely the folks of Gilmanton are going to be thrilled, either.

Former–and possibly future–Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has already become an issue in New Hampshire’s midterm elections. And not in a good way.

As reported at NHJournal, of the nine Democrats seeking their party’s nomination in the First Congressional District primary, the number who have committed to supporting Pelosi for speaker is…zero.  As it turns out, they may be on to something.

A new Morning Consult/Politico poll finds that both among Democrats nationally and voters in the liberal Northeast, Rep. Pelosi (D-CA) is surprisingly unpopular. When asked “In thinking about the 2018 midterm elections in Congress, would an endorsement from each of the following make you more or less likely to vote for a candidate?” an astonishing 49 percent of Hillary Clinton supporters said an endorsement from Pelosi would made them less likely to support a candidate. Only 38 percent said it would make them more likely.

More locally, 58 percent of registered voters in the deep-blue Northeast would be less likely to support Pelosi-backed candidates.

Morning Consult also reports another disturbing trend for Democrats:  Trump voters are more motivated to vote in the November midterms than Hillary Clinton voters, 68 to 58 percent.  More broadly, they report 84% of Republicans describe themselves as motivated, while 80 percent of Democrats say the same.

One glimmer of good news for Democrats in New Hampshire and beyond:

The poll also shows Democrats leading on the generic congressional ballot by 5 percentage points, 43 percent to 38 percent. That is slightly closer than Democrats’ 7-point lead in last week’s poll, 42 percent to 35 percent.

When Jennifer Horn showed up at the New Hampshire Republican convention on Saturday planning to push for a party platform change on gay marriage, she was hoping her fellow Republicans would agree to stop excluding people from the process.

Instead, the Granite State GOP excluded her.

Rather than allow the former state party chairwoman to make the case for marriage equality, opponents organized a challenge of her credentials, questioning her right to even participate in the convention before voting to remove her from the event.

“I wasn’t there to blow up the meeting. I was expecting an honest, respectful debate about these important issues,” Horn to NHJournal. “And I was expecting sincere disagreement. I know some people feel free strongly about it.”

“What I was not expecting was a political maneuver to shut down all debate. That was disappointing.”

Horn is a co-chair of the New Hampshire Log Cabin Republicans, an organization that promotes issues important to gay Republicans and encourages party outreach to the LGBT community. Her proposal was to end the platform’s language offering support for marriage only “between one man and one woman” and for “traditional families.”

“Over the years, I’ve developed serious concerns over where our party is on these issues,” Horn said. “We are losing an entire generation of voters over this. After Romney’s loss, one of my children asked me ‘Mom, why would anyone my age vote for Republicans when you all hate gay people?’ In the long run our party can’t survive, and I am still a strong supporter of my Republican Party.”

This is the third convention in a row that an effort has been made to get the New Hampshire GOP to change the state party platform on the issue of gay marriage.

Convention delegate and state Sen. Dan Innis, R-New Castle, who is openly gay, told TV station WMUR: “Whether it is this proposal or any important proposal, it is unfortunate when we have a convention where we do not have an opportunity to consider changes to the platform and updating our positions.”

According to a Pew Research poll from 2017, 74 percent of millennials support same-sex marriage. About half of all evangelical millennials support it, too.