DV Journal

A judge ruled Thursday that Lower Merion School Board President Kerry Sautner cannot be on the May 20 Democratic primary ballot.

Montgomery County Common Pleas Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio had ruled earlier that Sautner failed to fill out her financial disclosure form properly. Carluccio then gave Sautner and another board member 24 hours to correct their forms. But Sautner still did not sufficiently document her financial filing.

After Carluccio’s original ruling, a lawyer for Sautner filed a motion to reconsider, which Carluccio denied, saying her March 31 ruling stands.

Lower Merion voter Harshal Dear, a registered Democrat, had filed the challenges to the ballot access paperwork of both Sautner and School Board Member Anna Shurak. Shurak corrected her paperwork sufficiently within the 24-hour grace period.

Dear told DVJournal she had considered running herself, but as a federal employee, she is precluded from doing so by the Hatch Act. She was dismayed by the Lower Merion Democrats’ endorsement process and ultimately challenged four candidates over their documentation.

Dear met lawyer Christian Petrucci, who went over her paperwork and represented her pro bono to contest Sautner and Shurak’s campaign filings. Petrucci, secretary for the Lower Merion and Narberth GOP, brought in Philadelphia Republican election lawyer J. Matthew Wolfe as co-counsel.

“The judge was fair,” Dear said, after the ruling on Thursday. “She had given (her) enough time to amend the forms.”

“While (case law) permits a court to allow amendment, it does not require a court to do so and certainly does not require or suggest that any candidate should have multiple bites at the apple in providing the information that the legislature has deemed important for the public to have in elections. In effect, this is already the third try as the Candidate swapped out the inaccurate and incomplete form presented to the court for a different inaccurate and incomplete form when it finally filed it. As the Candidate clearly and admittedly failed to follow the Court’s order we really need to go no further,” Wolfe wrote in a brief.

Dear said, “I think it’s important for voters to know, the financial disclosure form is pretty important, so voters know who they’re voting for and what their positions are.”

Petrucci agreed the purpose of the documentation is to disclose any financial conflicts of interest that candidates might have. Sautner left part of hers blank and did not check the box to say “none,” he said, “Which is a blatant violation.”

The school board is in charge of “a third of a billion-dollar budget,” Petrucci added.

He quoted the Montgomery County solicitor, who said that statements of financial interest that are not made in bad faith are amendable “but not into perpetuity,” so candidates should not be allowed unlimited “bites at the apple.”

“In my view, this cannot be viewed as simply a clerical error. In Pennsylvania, candidates for public office are required to file these statements to promote transparency and prevent conflicts of interest. They help voters assess any potential biases or conflicts a candidate may have. In her discretion, Judge Carluccio allowed each candidate to amend the statement, which in her estimation was done in a manner which did not cure the defect in the disclosures,” said Petrucci.

Sautner, president and CEO of the nonprofit Eastern Penitentiary Historic Site, asked her new attorney to comment on her behalf.

That lawyer, Timothy Ford, told DV Journal, “We filed an appeal this morning so Kerry can continue her fight for students, teachers, and families in the Lower Merion School District. Kerry believes in the democratic process, and she believes that the residents of Lower Merion and Narberth deserve the opportunity to vote for the candidates of their choice. Kerry is committed to making sure that school district residents have the information they need to decide their votes for Lower Merion School Board. We’re confident that the appellate court will agree that Kerry met the law’s requirements.”

President Donald Trump’s whirlwind of “swift and unrelenting” action during his first 90 days in office appears to have congressional Democrats flummoxed.

During Trump’s address to a joint session of Congress Tuesday, some Democrats silently held up protest signs, a few — including Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon — made a scene of walking out in the middle, and cane-waving Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) was expelled when he refused repeated warnings to stop disrupting the event.

And Democrats made the decision not to stand up or applaud for the special guests Trump acknowledged in his remarks. That included a 13-year-old cancer survivor who was made an honorary Secret Service agent, the mother of Laken Riley who was murdered by an illegal immigrant, and Payton McNabb, a young woman who was seriously injured while playing volleyball against a biological male on the opposing women’s team.

“House and Senate Democratic leaders didn’t join the escort committee for the president. Dems turned their back on him when he entered the chamber and didn’t shake his hand,” reported CNN’s Manu Raju. “They didn’t applaud virtually anything. Several walked out in the middle of the speech.”

The refusal of Democrats to join them left many on both sides of the aisle in shock.

“The behavior of Democrats last night was completely disgraceful and demonstrated how severely out of touch they are with the American public. It was the most shameful moment in the history of presidential addresses in that beautiful chamber,” said White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt Wednesday morning.

Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) took his party to task in a post on X/Twitter.

“A sad cavalcade of self-ownership and unhinged petulance. It only makes Trump look more presidential and restrained. We’re becoming the metaphorical car alarms that nobody pays attention to—and it may not be the winning message,” Fetterman wrote.

He’s not the only Democrat denouncing his party’s behavior.

“I agree with him.  It feeds the narrative that the place is filled with unserious dopes,” said Democratic political consultant TJ Rooney.

Dan Turrentine, a longtime Democrat and co-host of the popular Morning Meeting on the 2Way platform said, “It was embarrassing to be a Democrat last night.”

“It was a disgrace that they would not show some humanity for the child, for the man who got into West Point, which is just an amazing accomplishment,” Turrentine said. Like many Democrats, the day after, he worries his party is veering farther from the views of average Americans.

“I think the bottom line is our leadership has no clothes,” Turrentine said. “We need to get our head screwed back on. Hopefully, last night was the bottom of the barrel, and we will start the march back.”

Asked about Fetterman’s criticism, Mark Nevins, a Democratic consultant, told DVJournal, “There was nothing substantive about last night. Not the president, not the cheering Republicans, not the booing Democrats. It was just swamp noise. In the real world outside of Washington, D.C., real people are getting hammered with the increased cost of just about everything and Trump’s agenda is going to make it all even worse. Unless we’re talking about that, we’re wasting time and energy.”

Muhlenberg College political science Professor Christopher Borick said, “I think Fetterman’s analysis has validity. Some of the actions by Democrats in attendance certainly didn’t help their standing. I think the best strategy in that particular setting would have been to remain silent and keep the focus on the president’s behaviors that included name-calling and belittling others in a setting where unification of the country is usually the focus. The Democrats may have played into Trump’s hands.”

Jeff Jubelirer, vice president of Bellevue Communications, agreed.

“The Democrats played into Trump’s hands,” he said. “There’s nothing more satisfying to him than a fight, and he got it. The problem was he had, and has, the bully pulpit, and he’s every bit the bully.

“It’s time to come up with a different approach,” said Jubelirer. “Bringing fired federal workers to the speech who, other than being a government employee, did nothing to deserve their fate? Better move, Democrats. Anyone with a heart can empathize with them…most importantly, the so-called ‘middle America’ folks who aren’t already completely burrowed inside the Trump GOP or Democratic camps. Their stories, as told in first person, are much more impactful than wearing pink, shouting out, or merely holding up signs in protest.”

“I respectfully disagree with Sen. Fetterman’s post,” said Chester County Democratic Chair Charlotte Valyo. “There are several ways to respond to President Trump’s speech, and we can disagree on the best method. But we would all agree that the sad spectacle we saw from the president and his Republican sycophants was more a MAGA rally speech, with all his whining and lying, and less like an honest discussion with the nation about where we are headed. The speech was disrespectful, divisive, and hate-filled. It was unworthy of a presidential speech.”

However, the American people liked the speech, according to some polls taken immediately afterward.

A CBS poll found 76 percent of Americans approved of the speech. And a CNN poll showed 69 percent of Americans had a positive reaction.

Rep. Dan Meuser (R-Pa.) said, “President Trump reaffirmed his commitment to the renewal of the American Dream and made clear that ‘Promises Made, Promises Kept’ is not just a slogan—it’s a reality.”

Freshman Sen. Dave McCormick (R-Pa.) said on X, “Honored to attend my first Joint Session Address by President Trump. His speech made clear he is making huge progress every day on delivering for Americans on securing the border, fixing the economy, and restoring U.S. dominance on the world stage.”

A new documentary series will give viewers a chance to peek behind the curtains of the epicenter of some of the nation’s fiercest political wars: Bucks County.

The first two episodes of “Bucks County, USA” by Barry Levinson and Robert May recently debuted at the Sundance Film Festival in Utah.

Levinson is the Academy Award-winning director best known for “Rain Man,” “The Natural,” and “Good Morning, Vietnam.”

Doylestown Township residents Paul Martino and his daughter Vanessa, 15, are two of the documentary’s subjects. They spoke to DVJournal about their experiences.

Asked how she got involved in the documentary, Vanessa said “Mr. May, the producer, was interviewing my friend, Evi. And Evi told him about me.”

Sundance was “mostly fun,” she said. They met a lot of famous people at TheWrap party.

“It’s the biggest party at Sundance,” said Martino. TheWrap founder, Susan Waxman, was “super nice” to Vanessa and Evi and they were in a photo shoot for that publication.

The Martinos are Republicans, while Vanessa’s best friend Evi Casey, and her family, are Democrats. Vanessa and Evi, who remain friends despite their political differences, are reoccurring narrators, though much of the action centers on the adults, Martino said.

Martino, a venture capitalist, gained notoriety when he funded the Back to School PAC, which helped candidates who were pro-parents’ rights gain seats on school boards across the state in 2021. At that time, Martino noted that 64 percent of the candidates the PAC backed won.

But when Martino’s wife, Aarati, ran in 2023, the zeitgeist in the county had changed. She lost, along with others on the Republican slate, leading to the Central Bucks Board shifting back to Democratic control.

The two teenagers, now sophomores, met at a party the summer before seventh grade and became friends. Asked if their political differences interfered with their friendship, Vanessa said no.

“We’ve always been friends, and like no matter that we think differently about politics, we’re always going to remain friends,” said Vanessa. “It’s a stupid thing to be divided over.”

Asked if their parents get along, Vanessa said, “Well, my mom and her dad respect each other. But my dad and Evi’s mom seem to hate each other.”

Martino said Evi’s mother writes for “the progressive rag in town,” and she “writes the nastiest things about me.” But when they see each other in person, “We’re always polite.”

“But she literally called me an ‘a**hole’ in the movie…She really did.

“The big theme of the movie, Robert May, who made the film, is trying to get each side to understand that the other side are actually people and there’s a lot of filming that goes on that’s not political in each other’s houses. There’s a scene with me and Vanessa and the kids playing board games tother. And there’s a scene with (former school board president) Karen Smith, on the Democratic side, tending to her goats on her farm. So, the whole theme of this movie is about understanding the humanity of the people that you disagree with.

“And I’ve said this all along,” said Martino. “I’ve never not understood that. I think we, on the right, have always understood that. We disagree with Democrat policies. But the Democrats think we’re bad people. And it’s nice that this is maybe waking them up to we’re actually people and you can have a discussion with us and our kids can be friends and it’s not that big of a deal, guys.”

So far, two episodes of the documentary have been completed, and more will be filmed this spring, said Martino. “My guess is the earliest you will see it is in the fall.”

“When they first started filming us, it was kind of weird having a camera in your face and a dude on the edge of the seat asking questions,” said Vanessa. “But you slowly get more used to it.” Her brother, Zachary, 14, and their pet rabbit also make appearances in the film.

Vanessa’s favorite class is Spanish. She plays the piano and the cello and enjoys jazz. After getting a glimpse of Hollywood and the film industry, she’s not sure she wants to have a career there, although she enjoyed making a documentary for her social studies class last year.

“It seems really competitive, and you have to know people to really be in it. So, I don’t know. Maybe,” said Vanessa.

Most of the documentary series is more about the adults, though, said Martino.

“Vanessa and Evi are the literary device,” he said. “They’re the narrators. In a way, it’s through their eyes, through their friendship.”

The entire process of Aarati Martino deciding to run for office and her campaign are part of the film, he said. The film crew spent a lot of time with the families.

“Vanessa made Christmas presents for them,” said Martino. “That’s how often they were at our house.”

(For an alternative point of view, see “Counterpoint: GOP Disarray is a Positive for Democrats”)

As this historic 2024 political year comes to a close, many Democrats are crying in their eggnog. Not only did we fail to win back the House of Representatives. This prospect seemed likely in January, but we lost the Senate and frustratingly lost the White House again — and the popular vote. Three issues add to our tears as we enter 2025 in the political wilderness.

We are leaderless. During a presidential transition, there is one president — and that appears to be President-elect Donald Trump. From meeting with world leaders in France to his team negotiating to end wars and driving economic news, Trump is controlling and dominating news cycles. Conversely, Joe Biden is largely MIA, as is Kamala Harris, who reportedly is debating whether to run again for president in 2028, for governor of California in 2026, or exit politics.

Meanwhile, congressional leaders Sen. Chuck Schumer and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries remain invisible, taking the temperature of colleagues and privately planning for next year.  Then there are governors thinking about 2028, who want no public role in the party’s soul searching.

Democrats also have message and message-delivery problems. Whether reflecting on “WOKE” issues, debating if we are economically too liberal or too moderate, or unsure how to address chaos foreign (Israel and Ukraine) and domestic (immigration and public safety), Democrats are uncertain of their message.

Equally concerning, in this last election cycle, Democrats were largely unable to engage with popular podcasts and influencers, many of whom knew their audiences were uncomfortable with Democratic positions. There was no hesitation in hosting Trump, who consistently engaged with them for the last four years.  Audiences saw him as authentically sharing their values, a cornerstone of voter intensity and engagement.

Democrats need to solve their new media problems of today and figure out the next influential platforms for tomorrow.

Finally, Democrats lack an agenda. I spend most of every day consuming, analyzing and discussing politics. I have no idea what Biden or Harris wanted to do if they won. What were the motivating principles, other than defeating Trump, that made them want to get out of bed every day?  Democrats offer few, if any, bold ideas that inspire the majority of voters, let alone the party faithful.

While the glass appears half empty, I am optimistic. In defeat, the party can consider new voices, examine how to expand its coalition, seek a new message, and propose a fresh agenda.

Who are the candidates we should watch for?  I don’t know, and that’s a good thing. Professionals should not have the answers readily available, which has been part of the problem for the last 10 years. Winning candidates understand their community, its people and their issues, and offer clear and bold solutions.

In 2013, the Republican National Committee spent millions of dollars on an autopsy of Mitt Romney’s failed presidential campaign, culminating in a set of solutions to win in 2016.  Many GOP candidates for president embraced most or all of that report. However, one candidate did not.  He went in the opposite direction, proposing to aggressively stop illegal immigration, redo free-trade deals, and end the Forever Wars of Afghanistan and Iraq. The Republican establishment and its traditional media allies were aghast at these ideas, believing they would lead to a generation of failure. That candidate’s name was Donald Trump.

(For an opposing viewpoint, see: “Point: Democrats Have an Opportunity to Rebuild”)

As Democrats look to 2025, several factors provide them with a sense of hope and optimism for regaining and maintaining political power. The landscape of American politics can be unpredictable, but the current climate offers promising avenues for Democrats to explore as they prepare for coming elections.

One of the most significant advantages for Democrats is the current disarray within the Republican Party. Donald Trump continues to loom large, and as long as he remains the dominant figure, the GOP faces challenges that could hinder their effectiveness. Trump’s leadership style and mercurial decisions have already led to fractures within the party, as evidenced by recent conflicts over critical issues such as federal spending and debt. The internal strife is palpable, with members of Congress publicly threatening one another and factions forming around various ideological lines. This discord creates a political environment for Democrats to capitalize on, as voters may become disillusioned with the GOP’s inability to present a united front.

Moreover, the impending spectacle of public feuds, such as the inevitable clash between Trump and Elon Musk, can detract from the Republicans’ focus on governance. As these high-profile egos engage in personal attacks and power struggles, the general public may lose sight of the substantive issues that matter most to them. This distraction could provide an opportunity for Democrats to present a cohesive and positive vision for the future, contrasting the chaos of the Republican Party with their agenda.

In addition to the weaknesses of their political opponents, Democrats have a strategic advantage with their leadership. The impending election of a new chairperson for the Democratic National Committee is crucial in consolidating party unity and direction. This new leader will not only fill a void but also serve as a rallying point for various factions within the party, especially as potential presidential aspirants begin to vie for attention in early primaries. With effective leadership, Democrats can maintain a united front and present a clear and compelling narrative to voters.

Hakeem Jeffries, the House minority leader, is a prime example of the leadership Democrats can rely on. His ability to unite the caucus while navigating complex political challenges has been commendable. Jeffries’ savvy political acumen positions him as a key figure who can leverage the Republican discord to the Democrats’ advantage.

Additionally, the rising star of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez within the party signals a bright future for progressive voices that resonate with younger voters, who are increasingly becoming a significant voting bloc. Her ascendance to a leadership track reflects a broader acceptance of diverse perspectives within the Democratic Party, enabling them to appeal to a broader range of constituents.

The political map for Democrats may be challenging, but it is also an opportunity for growth. The party has faced setbacks in recent elections, particularly in statehouses and congressional seats. With a renewed focus on grassroots organizing and mobilization, Democrats can work to reclaim lost ground. They have the potential to build a robust infrastructure that engages voters at the local level, addressing issues that matter most to them. This approach can resonate with individuals who feel neglected by the current political discourse.

As Democrats gear up for the 2025 elections, they have several reasons to be hopeful. The internal conflicts within the Republican Party, strong leadership emerging from within their ranks, and a commitment to grassroots engagement provide a solid foundation for their efforts. By emphasizing what they can do differently and uniting around a shared vision, Democrats have the potential to inspire voters and regain confidence in their ability to govern effectively. With the right strategy, the party can turn challenges into opportunities, paving the way for a more prosperous political future.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

While Republicans may have garnered most statewide offices and a U.S. Senate seat, former President Donald Trump’s coattails did not reach far enough to flip the state House of Representatives.

With the final votes tallied for all the House races, the Democrats retained their one-person majority for 2025.

The state Senate remains firmly in Republican control, so for any bills to pass into law, they must be something that both parties can agree upon, a recipe for moderation.

Republicans fought hard to take two local seats but were unsuccessful.

Democrats retained the Philadelphia seat held by Rep. Kevin Boyle, who is stepping down, and the Bucks County seat held by Rep. Brian Munroe (D-Warminster).  Lawyer Sean Dougherty, a Democrat, bested Republican Aizaz Gill to keep that northeast Philadelphia spot in the Democratic column.

Rep. Frank Burns, a Democrat in Cambria County, which was slow to count its ballots, held onto his seat, despite voters in his district supporting Trump by 30 percent in 2020, according to Spotlight PA.

Democrats unsuccessfully targeted Rep. Craig Williams (R-Chester/Delaware), flooding the airwaves with negative commercials.

“The state House races showed the power of incumbency and the gerrymandering that created those seats,” said longtime Republican strategist Charlie Gerow, CEO of Quantum Communications. “Not a single incumbent lost. Even the Trump sweep wasn’t able to overcome that.”

Even though the Democrats have only a one-person majority, they can control the agenda and block Republican bills. They’ve also shown a willingness to take long breaks when one of their members drops out, causing their majority to vanish.

Spokespeople for the Democratic and Republican House campaign organizations did not respond to requests for comment on Friday.

(This op-ed first appeared in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)

Elections are always followed by another tradition: finger-pointing season. I’ve spent my entire life in politics right here in western Pennsylvania, which became the looking glass for the entire nation as people tried to figure out what has happened to turn the two parties into battle camps.

Allow me to offer a few things I’ve learned.

Lessons for Republicans

It’s not all about TV. We need to compete with the Democrats in terms of field work. Knocking on doors and asking someone to vote for a candidate remains the most effective way of persuading voters.

Go beyond polling. An era of endless polling has left us with the misimpression that elections are only about reading peoples’ minds. In truth, elections are also about changing peoples’ minds. True, polls tell us what issues resonate with voters, but we need to identify the unarticulated and unfulfilled aspirations of voters. This is a lesson taught in 1991 by the late Harris Wofford who was appointed senator to succeed John Heinz. Wofford’s advisors – chief among them, James Carville – realized that health care for the middle class was increasingly a point of anxiety. Polls had shown that the number one issue identified by voters was jobs – but this will always be the case, just as a sufficient supply of oxygen would trump jobs if you put it on a choice of polling questions. Wofford and Carville recognized that it was the unrealized concerns that mattered. When that case was put to voters in a persuasive way, it allowed Wofford to overcome a political juggernaut known as Dick Thornburgh.

Achievement still matters. Stacy Garrity took the reins at Treasury and immediately laid out a series of goals: return more abandoned property than anyone else, reform how state pensions invest, expand the college savings program. Treasury might be the dullest important job among the statewide, but Stacy showed that a well-articulated record of accomplishment can be an unassailable fortress against political anger ginned up by an opponent. She ended Tuesday night with more votes than any other candidate on the ballot, including Donald Trump, and became the highest vote-getter in modern history, surpassing even Gov. Josh Shapiro. That’s how future stars are made.

Tamp down the anger. Watching television should not induce post-traumatic stress disorder. Bring some joy to the thing. A good lesson here is an ad produced by Pittsburgh’s own ColdSpark media, on behalf of state House candidate Michael Perich. Going up against a well-entrenched and much-liked incumbent, the Perich camp produced “Wrong Way Matzie,” which employed an animated picture of the incumbent flying the wrong way, interspersed with old movie clips and bright music that broke through the angry clutter of other ads and entertained people as well. Perich came within a hair’s breadth of winning and Perich, even in defeat, doesn’t look like just another angry politician. In short: Happy warriors win friends.

Lessons for Democrats

Un-fringe yourselves. Party activists on both sides have traditionally tended to the extremes. This was first noted in 1984 by political scientist Emmett Buell Jr. who saw that candidates for party delegate in New Hampshire weren’t exactly middle-roaders. That has accelerated in both parties, but it is nowhere as vivid as in the exotic assortment of wailers, cause-finders and all-around scolds that now steers the party of JFK and Truman. This has been made all the uglier by the emergence of a brand of antisemitism that hinges on the notion that Israel is an imposition on the Middle East rather than a refuge for persecuted Jews who practice democracy. Here in Allegheny County, the largest city is run by a cadre of leftists incapable of balancing the books, and the county council is a haven for loud extremists, some of them so supportive of the poor that they would make more of them by taxing the middle-class into poverty. Nationally, the Democrats have chosen to politicize things that should not be political and taken the tar brush to people who are religious or just out of step with the current fashion. Think about this: the Catholic vote used to be reliably Democratic. This year, the only Catholic on the national ballot was JD Vance.

Take off the robes and mortarboard. Class in this nation was once defined by income. Today, class is just as readily identified by educational attainment. A conservative university professor is a museum-quality find. This correlation between university degree and liberal politics is not a result of one causing the other. It is a result of one group taking over academia and turning it into a place where dissent is strongly encouraged, but only so long as it conforms with the liberal orthodoxies of the academy. I have news for them: a boilermaker, welder or truck-driver will soon be the only middle-class wage-earner able to send their child to college without amassing debt. Self-aggrandizing piety is pretty much the only luxury still available to the overburdened university student. Democrats need more than universities to promote their message and that means not just listening to non-college voters. It means taking them seriously.

The Gender Gap runs both ways. The press has long focused on the leftward political drift of women and suggested that this means there’s something wrong with the Republicans. A bit of introspection would help here. Men voted overwhelmingly for Donald Trump, much as they have for other Republicans. That’s a gender gap, too. And it’s not going to be solved by explaining away differences of opinion with terms like “toxic masculinity” or, my favorite, “mansplaining,” which has come to mean any unwelcome opinion from a male. Figure out why men aren’t voting for your party. I’d venture to say that it’s because, increasingly, they don’t feel welcome.

I close in noting that every election carries its own, sometimes unique, lessons. There is one that stands out this year: when it comes to the people, the system works. Now, it’s up to the people they elevated to make things work as well.

(This article first appeared in Broad & Liberty.)

A Potemkin news site less than a year old is promoting nearly a dozen Democrats running for the Pennsylvania General Assembly using paid social media posts apparently designed to give the viewer the impression the message came from an authoritative news source rather than a partisan political committee.

Additionally, a recent report from Columbia Journalism Review (CJR) constructed a rugged argument that the online-only “news” site, the Morning Mirror, was connected to a national political action committee, Forward Majority, that backs state-level Democrats across many states.

Morning Mirror began running the Instagram and Facebook ads for the Democrats on May 23, the day of the Pennsylvania primary, using generic positive messages with uncontroversial, feel-good political positions. For example, a message will say a candidate is “working to lower costs for Pennsylvania families,” or the candidate has a “campaign priority for Pennsylvania: good-paying jobs.”

(Recent examples of Morning Mirror ads for down-ballot Democrat candidates.)

Yet a check of the Morning Mirror’s homepage clearly shows the site does not strive to create original news content in any meaningful sense. On Sept. 12 this year, the most recent “stories” posted on the site’s homepage all dated back to August, meaning no contemporary content had  been created in two weeks. Although fall was beginning, the site’s “lifestyle” section was inviting readers to “Celebrate Spring at the 2024 National Cherry Blossom Festival in Washington, DC.”

As CJR has reported, the web URL themorningmirror.com was first purchased in March of this year, and Facebook and Instagram accounts for the site were created about the same time. The Morning Mirror had published a total of 119 articles by August 20 this year, also according to CJR. As of this publishing, its Facebook page has fifteen followers.

The content on the site also does not contain author bylines or author email addresses, two key indicators that can be helpful in sorting real news sites from fake.

According to a Broad + Liberty analysis of the Meta ad library which archives ads purchased on Facebook and Instagram, Morning Mirror has spent somewhere between $57,000 to $70,000 on the Pennsylvania ads, creating between 3.1 to 3.6 million viewer impressions across those two social media platforms. (The Meta ad archive produces ranges of money spent and impressions, so exact figures are not available.)

The candidates receiving the boost include:

Jim Wertz (Senate District 49, Erie)

Elizabeth Moro (House District 160, Delaware/Chester)

Hadley Haas (HD 44, Allegheny)

Anna Thomas (HD 137, Northampton)

Eleanor Breslin (HD 143, Bucks)

Anand Patel (HD 18, Bucks)

Sara Agerton (HD 88, Cumberland)

Anna Payne (HD 142, Bucks)

Nicole Ruscitto (SD 37, Allegheny)

Rep. James Haddock (HD 118, Lackawanna)

Rep. Brian Munroe (HD 144, Bucks)

Four of the eleven candidates are running for seats in Bucks County, widely considered the most “purple” county in the commonwealth.

Late Tuesday, the Morning Mirror launched its first negative ads of the season against eight Republicans. Unlike the ads boosting Democrats, the language is slightly more targeted by referencing policy votes.

For example, one of the new ads said, “Sen. Devlin Robinson voted to send taxpayer dollars to private schools.” Robinson is the incumbent in Allegheny County’s SD 37, in which he’s being challenged by Ruscitto.

The Morning Mirror is putting far less money into the negative posts, however, with most of them only receiving about a $100 budget to reach about 1,000-5,000 people per post.

The Republicans being targeted by the negative ads are all incumbents, and match up to the same districts as the Democrats that the Morning Mirror has been promoting for months. They include:

Sen. Devlin Robinson (SD 37, Allegheny)

Rep. Craig Williams (HD 160, Delaware/Chester)

Rep. Shelby Labs (HD 143, Bucks)

Rep. Joe Emrick. (HD 137, Northampton)

Rep. Sheryl Delozier (HD 88, Cumberland)

Sen. Dan Laughlin (SD 49, Erie)

Rep. Valerie Gaydos (HD 44, Allegheny)

Rep. K.C. Tomlinson (HD 18, Bucks)

In its brief existence of less than eight months, the Morning Mirror has spent over $172,000 on Facebook and Instagram ads spanning Pennsylvania, Florida, Michigan, and Wisconsin, all swing states.

The Pennsylvania Department of State declined to say whether the Morning Mirror’s activities might violate the commonwealth’s campaign finance laws.

“The Department of State operates on a complaint-driven process. The Department does not offer interpretations of the campaign finance reporting law,” DOS spokeswoman Amy Gulli said.

All of the ads say the Morning Mirror is owned by Star Spangled Media, a business entity registered in New York. Star Spangled Media has not answered requests for comment from several media organizations including Axios, and CJR.

In 2022, Axios outed Star Spangled Media as the engine driving a “massive network of social media communities in political battleground states that can activate ahead of elections and policy fights[.]”

The CJR hypothesis that Morning Mirror is really an extension of Forward Majority makes sense. According to Forward Majority’s website, it “has been leading the [Democrats’] fight back to power in state legislatures, mobilizing more than $50M and helping to flip 65 seats and 2 chambers,” since it was founded in 2017.

CJR also pointed out that while Morning Mirror articles may not contain explicit bylines, there is author metadata for most articles, and that “the three initial posts made to the Morning Mirror were authored by someone named David Cohen.” Forward Majority’s website, meanwhile, lists someone named David Cohen as a co-founder and co-CEO of the PAC. Whether the two references are for the same David Cohen is not clear at this time.

Requests for comment from Broad + Liberty sent to the Morning Mirror’s one locatable email address, and also to Forward Majority were not returned. Additionally, emailed requests for comment to all eleven of the candidates receiving the advertising support did not respond.

UPDATE: This article originally stated that the Morning Mirror was not running negative paid posts against any candidate. That changed just as this article was going to publication early Wednesday morning when the publication purchased the eight ads against Republicans. The article has been updated to reflect that new information.

Democratic politicians have always run on being the pro-choice party. But at this point, it has turned into an actual obsession for them. It’s their only platform in Pennsylvania.

At the Democratic National Convention, there was a tent set up to perform abortions. It’s a very morbid activity to have at a political convention.  They pretend that every single elected position has control of abortion laws. It’s ridiculous at this point.

Harris’ campaign bus slogan is “Reproductive Freedom,” which means abortion. During the 2023 election for Bucks County commissioner, the Democrats claimed the Republican candidates were going to ban abortion. Commissioners have nothing to do with abortion laws, but Democrats count on voters being uninformed about what elected officials do and what they can control.

First, let me say I am pro-choice, and I voted for Democrats for 20 years. The Democratic Party has changed. I do believe that women should be able to make their own decisions about having children, but I also know enough to realize it’s 2024, and women have so many options to prevent pregnancy.

Access to contraception has changed tremendously over the years. It’s a different world young women are living in now versus the world many middle-aged women grew up in, and it shows. I find it embarrassing for those older women because they are showing their age. I am even more embarrassed for older men who claim to be “the only pro-choice candidate” while never having to deal with the risk of getting pregnant or knowing the difference between Plan B and the abortion pill.

Birth control pills are free for many people with health insurance. Birth control pills can be available over the counter, too. Anyone at any age can go to Amazon and order a plan B pill to prevent pregnancy. (Many people over 40 will have to Google what that means.)

More than 60 percent of actual abortions are done with an abortion pill. Medication abortion accounted for 63 percent of all U.S. abortions in 2023—an increase from 53 percent in 2020. These pills can be obtained over telehealth. Abortion pill ads are streamed to young women. It’s very easy for anyone to Google “Plan B” or abortion pill and access the information quickly. It’s a very different world for women today. Thirty years ago, women didn’t have any of these options.

States always had their abortion laws. Voters in states vote for the state-level politicians they want to represent them. That’s why abortion laws differ by state. They always have, even before Roe was overturned.

Since the Dobbs decision that overturned Roe, it’s now a state’s decision. Specifically, in Pennsylvania, Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) stated in one of his many TikTok videos, “As long as I am the governor, abortion is safe in Pennsylvania.”

He understands the law. So when I see the Democrat running for Congress in Bucks County or Sen. Bob Casey Jr. claiming Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Bucks) or Dave McCormick (the Republican running for Senate) will ban abortion nationwide, it’s a bald-faced lie.

America has record-breaking inflation. Our country is involved in wars, antisemitism is at an all-time high,  illegal immigration is out of control, and Democrats’ main concern is lying to their voters about abortion. I find it insulting that Democrats tell women they need politicians to help them not have babies like we are too stupid to figure it out on our own.   It’s also insulting because Democrats pretend like they want to protect women, yet allow males to play girls’ sports and use girls’ bathrooms.

When voters go to the poll this November and every November after, don’t let Democrats scare you into thinking you need them to prevent women from having babies. Women are smart and know how to protect themselves. We need leaders who can bring down the cost of items and protect national security, not abortion panderers.

Please follow DVJournal on social media: X@DVJournal or Facebook.com/DelawareValleyJournal

Nearly 2,000 people filled the gym at Wissahickon High School in Ambler, Pa. on Monday to hear Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer make the case for presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris.

The audience’s energy and enthusiasm mirrored some Trump rallies.

And if vice presidents are supposed to be the president’s attack dogs, Shapiro bared his teeth for this potential audition to share the ticket with Harris.

In remarks greeted by cheers, applause and whistles, Shapiro fired broadsides at Trump while Whitmer lambasted Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio), the Republicans’ vice-presidential nominee.

Gretchen Whitmer (Credit: Harris for Pennsylvania)

“Vice President Harris has been battle-tested,” Shapiro said, touting her background as “a tough-as-nails prosecutor.”

“She is ready to be not just the standard-bearer of our party, but to be the 47th president of the United States. She’s not only ready. She’s damn ready. You know who else knows she’s ready? Donald Trump knows she’s ready.”

“He’s afraid to debate her now…He’s afraid to debate her because he can’t defend his record.”

“He’s got a record of failure,” Shapiro claimed.

“He packed the Supreme Court. He ended Roe v. Wade. Donald Trump did that,” Shapiro said.  “He did that when he had no earthly idea of how to be president. He didn’t know what he was doing and there were a whole lot of guardrails around Donald Trump when he was president.”

He told the crowd to “be extra scared” because the U.S. Supreme Court “just ruled that the rule of law doesn’t apply to Donald Trump,” a reference to a ruling defining the scope of presidential immunity.

“He is dangerous. He is destructive, and the guardrails are off.”

Shapiro also attacked the Heritage Foundation’s “Project 2025,” alleging it was “Trump’s Project 2025,” though Trump played no role in creating this conservative wish list compiled by a D.C. think tank.

“I’ve got a message to Donald Trump: Stop sh*t-talking America,” Shapiro added. “While he’s hugging the flag, he’s ripping away our freedoms. It’s not freedom to tell our children what books they’re allowed to read…It’s not freedom to tell women what they’re allowed what they’re do with their bodies.”

Whitmer turned her sights on Vance. “He’s made his values clear. He does not see women as equals. He does not want everyone to have a seat at the table. He’s scared of us because Democrats want everyone to have a seat at the table, even cat lovers and dog lovers alike.”

“He is efficient. In one sentence, he insulted women, Black people, and Jewish people,” said Whitmer.

The people who DVJournal spoke to were fans of both Harris and Shapiro.

Robert Arnold of Doylestown said Shapiro is “clearly thoughtful, intelligent, not reactionary.” He met Shapiro once, and “he was very pleasant and approachable. I agree with a lot of his policies.”

Ekins Park resident Roz Weiss called Harris “brilliant.”

“She’s got the energy we need,” said Weiss. “She’s a person that comes from the heart like Joe Biden. She cares about people. She’s got a lot of courage.”

“In America, we’re a tapestry of people,” added Weiss, who was one of the White women supporters on a two-hour Zoom call for Harris last week. “We’ve got to celebrate that not denigrate it.”

She believes Shapiro is “a man of integrity and honesty.”

Her daughter, Amy Martin, of Abington, said she supports the Democratic candidates because she has a transgender child and a 12-year-old daughter.

“I want her to be able to choose what to do with her body,” she said.

Oreland resident Paul Halpern said he “loves” Shapiro’s policies as a governor.

“He’s highly capable,” said Halpern. “He’s got a lot of government experience. He started at the bottom and worked his way up.”

As for Harris, “I think she’s battle-tested.”

“She’ll rip [Trump’s] liver out and serve it with a nice chianti during the debate,” Halpern said, quoting “Silence of the Lambs.” “I think she can win,” he added.

Former state Sen. Daylin Leach, who lives in Upper Merion, said he likes and admires Harris.

“She’s peaking at just the right time,” said Leach.  He also praised Shapiro as someone who is in politics to help people.

“He cares a lot about people,” said Leach. “He cares about his community.” And Shapiro listens to others’ perspectives. “He’s a rare person in politics.”

Darby Township Commissioner Racquel Holman said the rally was “great.”

“It was energizing,” said Holman. As for Shapiro, “I think he’d make a great running mate for Vice President Harris.”

Kush Desai, a Republican National Committee spokesman, dismissed the criticisms.

Harris, Shapiro, and Whitmer were beating “the dead horse that is Project 2025,” Desai said.

He cited Harris’ record of open borders, inflation, an anti-energy crusade, “capitulating to the far-left on Israel,” and “embracing defund the police radicals.”

Shapiro had his own message.

“I want a future where I can look the 47th president in the eye, and say, ‘Hello, Madame President.’”