In addition to being Trump’s ideological opposite, the French president is a beacon for progressives hoping to find their way back to the halls of power across the democratic world.

Europe’s most dynamic political leader, Emmanuel Macron, pays a state visit to Washington this week. The French president has struck up a surprisingly cordial relationship with President Donald Trump, especially when you consider that Macron has emerged as the West’s most formidable opponent of the kind of populist nationalism Trump channels here.

Speaking last week to the European Parliament, Macron warned of a “European civil war” and urged the European Union to defend liberal democracy against a surging tide of illiberal nationalism. “Faced with the authoritarianism that surrounds us everywhere, the answer is not authoritarian democracy, but the authority of democracy,” he declared.

The JFK-style antithesis was a reminder that U.S. presidents used to give stirring speeches like this in Europe. But that’s not happening today because Trump identifies more with the other side—with right-wing nativists and neo-nationalists who want to keep immigrants out; raise barriers to global commerce; weaken or leave the EU to protect “national sovereignty;” and, especially in Eastern European countries like Hungary and Poland, undermine internal checks on strongman rule.

In effect, Macron has stepped audaciously into the vacuum created by Trump’s abdication of America’s historic role as keeper of the liberal democratic flame. Although some have anointed Germany’s Angela Merkel the new “leader of the free world,” she’s been preoccupied with shoring up a weak coalition government and stanching defections from her conservative base to the far-right Alternative for Germany party.

In addition to being Trump’s ideological opposite, Macron can be viewed as something of a beacon for progressives hoping to find their way back to the halls of power across the democratic world. As a progressive, young outsider who rode a wave of voter revolt against the governing establishment, Macron managed to capture the populist’s insurgent spirit without embracing their reactionary demands. That, in a nutshell, is the task facing other progressive parties as they struggle to expand their popular appeal.

Continue reading at POLITICO.

Happy International Women’s Day! Around the world, people are celebrating the power, value, and achievement of women, while bringing attention to many gender based inequalities that continue to pervade society today. In honor of this day, we revisit a 2012 op-ed from PPI Director of Domestic & Social Policy Anne Kim, “Elect More Women to End Gridlock.”

In her piece for The Hill, Kim argues that many female politicians are more likely to approach policy in a bipartisan manner than are their male colleagues from the same state. Kim backs up this point with studies suggesting that women tend more toward personality traits of “agreeableness” and cooperation on average than do men.

In spite of this valuable bipartisanship in public policy discussions, women still face barriers to holding political office. Kim explains that the United States still has a long way to go before reaching a congressional gender balance anywhere near equal, or even on par with many other countries globally. Additionally, many aspects of modern campaigning — including pressure to constantly fundraise, little privacy, and time away from family — tend to be particularly meaningful deterrents for women considering a run for office. Before women are adequately represented in U.S. political representation, Americans must grapple with these factors. In the past few years, a wave of powerful female candidates has become a key part of the American electoral landscape. Last year in Virginia alone, 11 of 15 House of Delegates seats flipped from Republicans to Democrats also flipped from a man to a woman. Hundreds of women are in the running for American congressional seats this year, a number on track to break records once official filings are finalized. In the context of the upcoming 2018 elections, Kim’s 2012 call for hope still rings true: “if enough women make it to Congress this November, they may indeed prove to be the better bridge builders and compromise brokers Washington desperately needs.”

Last week, Republicans played elves to President Trump’s Santa, cobbling together an atrocious package of tax giveaways that will mostly help wealthy Americans while piling at least $1 trillion on the national debt. So much for GOP claims to be the party of working people and fiscal responsibility.

Now Trump and the Republican National Committee are trying to rally their party behind the odious figure of Roy Moore, who is running in next week’s special U.S. Senate election in Alabama. To put it mildly, this poses difficult ethical questions for the nation’s governing party: Is there any limit to what party solidarity can justify? Is Trump’s addiction to winning at any price now the Republican Party’s animating political principle?

Moore is a religious extremist ousted not once but twice from the Alabama Supreme Court for refusing to abide by one of the U.S. Constitution’s core principles: the separation of church and state. That alone should disqualify him from running for local dog catcher, let alone the Senate. So much for the GOP’s professed reverence for constitutional government.

Continue reading at The New York Daily News.

Democrats—who’d had little to celebrate since Donald Trump’s shocking election a year ago—are exulting in last week’s sweeping victories in Virginia and New Jersey, the first signs that the party can spin Trump’s abysmal public approval ratings into electoral gold.

Yet there’s also a danger of over-interpreting these odd-year election results. New Jersey is a deep blue state, and a combination of demographic change and political pragmatism in Virginia has made Democrats ascendant once again in the Old Dominion. More fundamentally, however, the party can’t engineer a political comeback solely on the strength of an anti-Trump message.

That’s because Democrats’ core dilemma – their lack of competitiveness across America’s broad midsection – is structural. It started before Trump burst onto the political scene and reflects deep cultural and economic changes that have left rural and working class voters feeling forgotten and left behind.

Continue reading at The Daily Beast.