5 things you didn’t hear from Kevin Cramer at the NDGOP Convention – and that Cramer doesn’t want you to know

(BISMARCK, ND) – Kevin Cramer showed his true colors today, proving that he puts partisan politics before what’s best for North Dakota families. From refusing to stand up for North Dakota’s farmers and ranchers to getting rich off his political career, there’s a lot you didn’t hear from Kevin Cramer in his speech at the 2018 NDGOP Convention. Here’s a short rundown:
  1. CRAMER REFUSES TO STAND UP FOR NORTH DAKOTA ON TARIFFS
Kevin Cramer talked a lot about how President Trump is standing up for North Dakota – but he failed to mention his support for the president’s tariffs that would devastate North Dakota’s agricultural economy. Instead, Cowardly Kevin Cramer has decided to put the president and his political party before North Dakota. He even went so far as to delete a tweet where he initially said he opposed them – cowering in fear of the president and refusing to stand up for North Dakota farmers and ranchers.
  1. CROOKED CRAMER WILL CONTINUE TO GET RICH OFF OF HIS POLITICAL CAREER
Heidi got involved in public service to make a difference for North Dakota – Kevin Cramer went into politics to get rich. He’ll do everything he can to hide it, but Cramer has made a killing off his political career. Since he was elected to Congress, his net worth has almost doubled – and let’s not forget he and his family have pocketed more than $350,000 from his campaign committee.
  1. CRAMER IS A TOTAL HYPROCRYITE ON THE NATIONAL DEFICIT
Kevin Cramer claims to be a fiscal conservative, but reality couldn’t be further from the truth. Cramer voted for a tax bill that will add $1.5 trillion to the national deficit – and some estimates say it’s even more. He continued to lie and say the tax bill will pay for itself. And most recently, Cramer actually got a hearty laugh when asked about adding trillions to the national debt.
  1. CRAMER HID HIS DESIRE TO MAKE DEVASTATING CUTS TO SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE
After voting to add at least $1.5 trillion to the deficit, giving tax cuts to billionaires, Kevin Cramer is all the sudden really, really concerned about spending. Or at least he’d like you to think so. But really, Cramer is using his fake concern for the debt as an excuse to swing an ax at programs like Social Security and Medicare.
  1. CRAMER HAS NO RESPECT FOR THE FREE PRESS               
It wasn’t too long ago that Kevin Cramer attacked the First Amendment – calling for investigations into TV networks for alleged media bias. He was roundly criticized by the North Dakota press – including editorials from the Grand Forks Herald and the Williston Herald.

What’s strange is that Cramer called for investigations into TV stations but has continually criticizedRobert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in our election – even when reports show that hostile foreign actors like Russia targeted North Dakota’s voter rolls. Once again, it’s a classic example of Cramer putting partisanship before what’s right for North Dakota.

BONUS: Kevin Cramer highlighted that Congress lifting the crude oil export ban – an effort Heidi led in the Senate and helped make a reality. Here’s an example from the New York Times praising Heidi’s work across the aisle with Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK):

For months, Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, and Senator Heidi Heitkamp, Democrat of North Dakota, formed a quiet, persistent alliance as they sought to convince their colleagues that it was time to end a more than 40-year ban on crude oil exports.

They turned the Senate floor into a symposium on the history of Nixon-era oil price controls. They offered up lectures on modern-day energy economics. They stressed the potential for using crude oil exports to increase American soft power — by limiting the reliance of American allies on oil-producing rivals like Iran and Russia.

And they also regularly drew the anger of liberal senators who warned that lifting the ban would harm the environment and potentially raise energy costs in the United States.

In the end, it seems, their efforts were an exemplar in soft-power legislating.