palmerreport--2020-02-08--Donald Trump just fired up his bulldozer and it’s about to get particularly ugly

Donald Trump managed to figure out a way to destroy American values and America itself simultaneously .
It frustrates me to tell you that as you read this , government contractors are literally blowing up a cherished national monument in Arizona to make way for Trump ’ s racist border wall .
To add further insult to injury , American taxpayers—not Mexico , as promised—are footing the bill for this costly abomination .
Currently , the National Park Service ’ s information page for Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument paints a beautiful , serene picture .
Its inviting text reads @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The sights and sounds of Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument , an International Biosphere Reserve , reveal a thriving community of plants and animals .
Human stories echo throughout this desert preserve , chronicling thousands of years of desert living .
A scenic drive , wilderness hike or a night of camping will expose you to a living desert that thrives.
” Tragically , these engaging words about a cherished American treasure may need to change after Trump ’ s wrecking crew finishes its environmental hit job .
Thanks to exceptional yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we know that Trump is blasting his way through a mountain on protected lands at Organ Pipe Cactus .
Not surprisingly , the demolition appears to be proceeding without meaningful environmental monitoring and after breaking a promise to respect ancient burial sites .
Blasting started only a week ago , yet the effects are already alarming .
For example , workers have drained water from a rare desert aquifer so that they can mix concrete that would be needed to support the wall .
They have also uprooted countless saguaro cacti while bulldozing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If the wall gets built , even more environmental damage would occur .
Quitobaquito Springs , a spiritual place that is the only naturally occurring source of fresh water in the area , would be threatened , and the bright lights that would shine on the wall at night would irreversibly end the migration of rare desert animal species .
Trump ’ s brazen assault on our country and what it stands for proves that his psychopathy—untreated and unchecked—knows no bounds .
Trumpism is a dangerous , amoral plague that will continue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lingers .
It must be demolished at the ballot box this November .

Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support Palmer Report's 2024 efforts by donating now.
-----
-----
Donald Trump managed to figure out a way to destroy American values and America itself simultaneously. It frustrates me to tell you that as you read this, government contractors are literally blowing up a cherished national monument in Arizona to make way for Trump’s racist border wall. To add further insult to injury, American taxpayers—not Mexico, as promised—are footing the bill for this costly abomination.
Currently, the National Park Service’s information page for Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument paints a beautiful, serene picture. Its inviting text reads: “Look closely. Look again. The sights and sounds of Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, an International Biosphere Reserve, reveal a thriving community of plants and animals. Human stories echo throughout this desert preserve, chronicling thousands of years of desert living. A scenic drive, wilderness hike or a night of camping will expose you to a living desert that thrives.”
Tragically, these engaging words about a cherished American treasure may need to change after Trump’s wrecking crew finishes its environmental hit job. Thanks to exceptional yet disturbing reporting from The Intercept yesterday, we know that Trump is blasting his way through a mountain on protected lands at Organ Pipe Cactus. Not surprisingly, the demolition appears to be proceeding without meaningful environmental monitoring and after breaking a promise to respect ancient burial sites.
Blasting started only a week ago, yet the effects are already alarming. For example, workers have drained water from a rare desert aquifer so that they can mix concrete that would be needed to support the wall. They have also uprooted countless saguaro cacti while bulldozing a wide path for their construction vehicles. If the wall gets built, even more environmental damage would occur. Quitobaquito Springs, a spiritual place that is the only naturally occurring source of fresh water in the area, would be threatened, and the bright lights that would shine on the wall at night would irreversibly end the migration of rare desert animal species.
Trump’s brazen assault on our country and what it stands for proves that his psychopathy—untreated and unchecked—knows no bounds. Trumpism is a dangerous, amoral plague that will continue sickening America for as long as it lingers. It must be demolished at the ballot box this November.
Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support our 2024 efforts by donating now or sign up for our free mailing list.


palmerreport--2020-02-08--Pete Buttigieg’s big moment has finally arrived

I still stand by my premise that Iowa and New Hampshire tell us very little about how the more diverse states are going to vote in any given primary race .
Forty years of history shows that I ’ m correct about this .
The national polls tell us far more about who ’ s likely to dominate on Super Tuesday , and the diverse state of South Carolina is the first true hint at what we ’ re looking at .
That said , Pete Buttigieg ’ s shocking victory ( or near-victory ) in Iowa has given him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what he ’ d do with it .
If last night ’ s debate was any indication , Pete Buttigieg is seizing his moment .
The debate questions were largely set up to pit the other candidates against him , which generally happens whenever the media perceives one candidate as having momentum .
But Pete was too smart to take the bait .
When he was asked an absurd loaded question about whether Joe Biden was a liability because Donald Trump made up a fake scandal about Biden ’ s son , Pete @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pointed out that it was a fake scandal .
A lesser candidate , or a less smart candidate , would have walked right into that trap by offering an answer that was aimed at casting at least some doubt on Biden ’ s viability .
But real leaders don ’ t use fake scandals to sabotage their opponents , and Buttigieg just wasn ’ t going to do it .
Pete Buttigieg is still facing severe hurdles .
He ’ s a close second in the polls in New Hampshire , and considering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he just might win New Hampshire too .
But no Democratic candidate gets anywhere near the nomination without the support of black voters , and Pete ’ s poll numbers in South Carolina are dreadful .
His answer about race last night was probably his weakest answer of the night .
But for the most part he ’ s seizing the moment .
We ’ ll see where it leads him .

Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support Palmer Report's 2024 efforts by donating now.
-----
-----
I still stand by my premise that Iowa and New Hampshire tell us very little about how the more diverse states are going to vote in any given primary race. Forty years of history shows that I’m correct about this. The national polls tell us far more about who’s likely to dominate on Super Tuesday, and the diverse state of South Carolina is the first true hint at what we’re looking at. That said, Pete Buttigieg’s shocking victory (or near-victory) in Iowa has given him his big moment. The question was what he’d do with it.
If last night’s debate was any indication, Pete Buttigieg is seizing his moment. The debate questions were largely set up to pit the other candidates against him, which generally happens whenever the media perceives one candidate as having momentum. But Pete was too smart to take the bait. When he was asked an absurd loaded question about whether Joe Biden was a liability because Donald Trump made up a fake scandal about Biden’s son, Pete immediately responded “no” and then pointed out that it was a fake scandal.
A lesser candidate, or a less smart candidate, would have walked right into that trap by offering an answer that was aimed at casting at least some doubt on Biden’s viability. But real leaders don’t use fake scandals to sabotage their opponents, and Buttigieg just wasn’t going to do it.
Pete Buttigieg is still facing severe hurdles. He’s a close second in the polls in New Hampshire, and considering how he outperformed his polls in Iowa, he just might win New Hampshire too. But no Democratic candidate gets anywhere near the nomination without the support of black voters, and Pete’s poll numbers in South Carolina are dreadful. His answer about race last night was probably his weakest answer of the night. But for the most part he’s seizing the moment. We’ll see where it leads him.
Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support our 2024 efforts by donating now or sign up for our free mailing list.


palmerreport--2020-02-08--The Emoluments battle against Donald Trump isn’t over

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia rejected a lawsuit from three Democrat congresspeople alleging that Donald Trump has been unconstitutionally receiving emoluments from foreign governments through their patronage of his hotel in DC .
This sounds bad , but rest assured , there ’ s a way around this roadblock—and Democrats would be smart to try again .
The Court ruled that the three congresspeople lacked something called standing , which in essence means they have no grounds to bring the lawsuit .
To get a little more technical , one has standing in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Constitution , and it requires a person to have a concrete , particularized injury that is both traceable to the defendant and that will be redressed by a favorable legal outcome .
With that out of the way , it ’ s a little easier to see how these congresspeople as individuals , mind you , not as representatives of the House , lacked particularized injury .
How are these congresspeople any more affected by Trump ’ s alleged violations of the Emoluments Clause than any other American ?
They aren ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ panel hinted that the House or Senate might be able to sue , given that they have colorable arguments for particularized injury .
Think something along the lines of this : “ We , the House , represent the People , and Trump ’ s violations affect our ability to govern the Republic free of foreign influence.
” We can throw out the possibility that the Senate might decide to file suit against Trump for alleged violations of the Emoluments Clause for obvious reasons , but the Democratic House sure can sue .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ chance here .
And the Democrats should sue .
Actually , I ’ ll go further : the Democrats must sue .
After the Republican Senate , save for Senator Mitt Romney , sort of , decided that short-term profits and self-serving was more important that the integrity of the most powerful and consequential entity of any sort to ever exist in human history , the Democrats have limited avenues to get Trump where it hurts .
The courts are one of the last bastions for them , and the Democrats would have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Now that they don ’ t have their best hammering away at the impeachment inquiry , the House should pursue this with everything it has .

Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support Palmer Report's 2024 efforts by donating now.
-----
-----
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia rejected a lawsuit from three Democrat congresspeople alleging that Donald Trump has been unconstitutionally receiving emoluments from foreign governments through their patronage of his hotel in DC. This sounds bad, but rest assured, there’s a way around this roadblock—and Democrats would be smart to try again.
The Court ruled that the three congresspeople lacked something called standing, which in essence means they have no grounds to bring the lawsuit. To get a little more technical, one has standing in a federal court per Article III of the Constitution, and it requires a person to have a concrete, particularized injury that is both traceable to the defendant and that will be redressed by a favorable legal outcome.
With that out of the way, it’s a little easier to see how these congresspeople as individuals, mind you, not as representatives of the House, lacked particularized injury. How are these congresspeople any more affected by Trump’s alleged violations of the Emoluments Clause than any other American? They aren’t. But Congress is.
The three-judge panel hinted that the House or Senate might be able to sue, given that they have colorable arguments for particularized injury. Think something along the lines of this: “We, the House, represent the People, and Trump’s violations affect our ability to govern the Republic free of foreign influence.” We can throw out the possibility that the Senate might decide to file suit against Trump for alleged violations of the Emoluments Clause for obvious reasons, but the Democratic House sure can sue. I think the House has a good chance here.
And the Democrats should sue. Actually, I’ll go further: the Democrats must sue. After the Republican Senate, save for Senator Mitt Romney, sort of, decided that short-term profits and self-serving was more important that the integrity of the most powerful and consequential entity of any sort to ever exist in human history, the Democrats have limited avenues to get Trump where it hurts. The courts are one of the last bastions for them, and the Democrats would have a good argument in this particular suit. Now that they don’t have their best hammering away at the impeachment inquiry, the House should pursue this with everything it has.
Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support our 2024 efforts by donating now or sign up for our free mailing list.


palmerreport--2020-02-08--Nancy Pelosi just took a blowtorch to Donald Trump

It ’ s taken Donald Trump just a few days to start carrying out the world ’ s most ineffective revenge tour , ousting impeachment witnesses like Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman and U.S .
Ambassador Gordon Sondland from his administration .
Their only supposed crime ?
Daring to testify about Trump ’ s crimes when they were called to do so .
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi isn ’ t having it .
After Trump ousted Vindman from the National Security Council and had him escorted out of the White House , Pelosi issued this statement : Lieutenant Colonel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ patriot : on the battlefield when he earned a Purple Heart , and in the House trial when he spoke truth to power .
His brave testimony showed America that right still matters .
President Trump is impeached forever .
The shameful firing of Colonel Vindman was a clear and brazen act of retaliation that showcases the President ’ s fear of the truth .
The President ’ s vindictiveness is precisely what led Republican Senators to be accomplices to his cover-up .
The firing of this patriotic soldier is a sad and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
History will remember Lieutenant Colonel Vindman as an American hero .
She ’ s right , of course .
To be clear , Colonel Vindman hasn ’ t been fired from the U.S. military .
He ’ s simply been ousted from his assignment at the White House .
He ’ s still a military officer , still active , and he ’ ll be reassigned to a new ( possibly demeaning ) post .
The best way to deliver justice for Colonel Vindman is to oust Donald Trump in November , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Vindman to the kind of post where he can put his immense talents to use .

Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support Palmer Report's 2024 efforts by donating now.
-----
-----
It’s taken Donald Trump just a few days to start carrying out the world’s most ineffective revenge tour, ousting impeachment witnesses like Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman and U.S. Ambassador Gordon Sondland from his administration. Their only supposed crime? Daring to testify about Trump’s crimes when they were called to do so.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi isn’t having it. After Trump ousted Vindman from the National Security Council and had him escorted out of the White House, Pelosi issued this statement:
Lieutenant Colonel Vindman has proven to be an American patriot: on the battlefield when he earned a Purple Heart, and in the House trial when he spoke truth to power. His brave testimony showed America that right still matters. President Trump is impeached forever. The shameful firing of Colonel Vindman was a clear and brazen act of retaliation that showcases the President’s fear of the truth. The President’s vindictiveness is precisely what led Republican Senators to be accomplices to his cover-up. The firing of this patriotic soldier is a sad and shameless loss for America’s security. History will remember Lieutenant Colonel Vindman as an American hero.
She’s right, of course. To be clear, Colonel Vindman hasn’t been fired from the U.S. military. He’s simply been ousted from his assignment at the White House. He’s still a military officer, still active, and he’ll be reassigned to a new (possibly demeaning) post. The best way to deliver justice for Colonel Vindman is to oust Donald Trump in November, so that the next administration can restore Vindman to the kind of post where he can put his immense talents to use.
Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support our 2024 efforts by donating now or sign up for our free mailing list.


palmerreport--2020-02-08--That didn’t take long

That didn’t take long

When Republican Senator Mitt Romney voted to convict and remove Donald Trump from office this week , he wasn ’ t just doing the right thing .
He was betting his political career on the premise that by the time he ’ s up for Senate reelection five years from now , he ’ ll have been proven right about Trump .
The thing is , it didn ’ t even take five days .
Even as Mitt Romney was spelling out all the obvious reasons why Donald Trump needed to be removed from office , some of his fellow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ argument that the punishment simply didn ’ t fit the crime .
Susan Collins in particular made the argument that Trump had learned his lesson and wouldn ’ t keep doing corrupt and evil things .
But yesterday , Donald Trump decided to oust Colonel Vindman and his brother from the White House , while also firing U.S .
Ambassador Gordon Sondland .
Their only sin , of course , was to dutifully testify in the House impeachment hearings .
As far as evil plots go , this one was pretty lame .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump one bit more powerful .
It won ’ t help him any in the 2020 election .
And if anything , it could backfire and motivate more people within his administration to come forward .
But it was nonetheless a highly criminal , and cartoonishly villainous , development .
It took just a few days for Mitt Romney to be fully vindicated for his vote to remove Donald Trump , and for other Republican Senators to be exposed as complicit for protecting him .
That sure didn ’ t take long .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ are helping him .
But he still deserves to be ousted for them .
Looks like the voters will just have to take care of that themselves in November .

Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support Palmer Report's 2024 efforts by donating now.
-----
-----
When Republican Senator Mitt Romney voted to convict and remove Donald Trump from office this week, he wasn’t just doing the right thing. He was betting his political career on the premise that by the time he’s up for Senate reelection five years from now, he’ll have been proven right about Trump. The thing is, it didn’t even take five days.
Even as Mitt Romney was spelling out all the obvious reasons why Donald Trump needed to be removed from office, some of his fellow Republican Senators were trying to make the argument that the punishment simply didn’t fit the crime. Susan Collins in particular made the argument that Trump had learned his lesson and wouldn’t keep doing corrupt and evil things.
But yesterday, Donald Trump decided to oust Colonel Vindman and his brother from the White House, while also firing U.S. Ambassador Gordon Sondland. Their only sin, of course, was to dutifully testify in the House impeachment hearings. As far as evil plots go, this one was pretty lame. Ousting these people won’t make Trump one bit more powerful. It won’t help him any in the 2020 election. And if anything, it could backfire and motivate more people within his administration to come forward. But it was nonetheless a highly criminal, and cartoonishly villainous, development.
It took just a few days for Mitt Romney to be fully vindicated for his vote to remove Donald Trump, and for other Republican Senators to be exposed as complicit for protecting him. That sure didn’t take long. None of Trump’s petty antics are helping him. But he still deserves to be ousted for them. Looks like the voters will just have to take care of that themselves in November.
Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support our 2024 efforts by donating now or sign up for our free mailing list.


palmerreport--2020-02-08--Amy Klobuchar emerges as dark horse

Amy Klobuchar emerges as dark horse

Good thing Amy Klobuchar didn ’ t listen to anyone who told her that her campaign wasn ’ t going anywhere .
People have been saying that just about from the start .
She was widely seen as an also-ran candidate when she first entered the race .
Affable and respected , sure , but not a contender .
But something happened along the way : she just kept failing to fail .
Amy Klobuchar has quietly put in one solid debate performance after another .
She ’ s never been anywhere near the top of the polls , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like Kamala Harris , Beto O ’ Rourke , and Julian Castro , all of whom were generally expected to be in some form of contention .
If Friday night ’ s Democratic primary debate wasn ’ t quite her coming out party , it certainly raised the profile of her candidacy .
Because she ’ s managed to survive this long , the shrinking field now works in her advantage .
All these people who have been dropping out have had some support , and it ’ s got to shift somewhere @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up running into the brick wall known as Super Tuesday , and very few candidacies end up being strong enough to smash through it .
But the longer Amy Klobuchar keeps putting in strong performances , keeps finding a way to remain in the race and on the debate stage , and keeps failing to fail , the better her odds get .

Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support Palmer Report's 2024 efforts by donating now.
-----
-----
Good thing Amy Klobuchar didn’t listen to anyone who told her that her campaign wasn’t going anywhere. People have been saying that just about from the start. She was widely seen as an also-ran candidate when she first entered the race. Affable and respected, sure, but not a contender. But something happened along the way: she just kept failing to fail.
Amy Klobuchar has quietly put in one solid debate performance after another. She’s never been anywhere near the top of the polls, but she’s managed to outlast candidates like Kamala Harris, Beto O’Rourke, and Julian Castro, all of whom were generally expected to be in some form of contention.
If Friday night’s Democratic primary debate wasn’t quite her coming out party, it certainly raised the profile of her candidacy. Because she’s managed to survive this long, the shrinking field now works in her advantage. All these people who have been dropping out have had some support, and it’s got to shift somewhere.
Of course all presidential candidacies end up running into the brick wall known as Super Tuesday, and very few candidacies end up being strong enough to smash through it. But the longer Amy Klobuchar keeps putting in strong performances, keeps finding a way to remain in the race and on the debate stage, and keeps failing to fail, the better her odds get.
Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support our 2024 efforts by donating now or sign up for our free mailing list.


palmerreport--2020-02-08--Something has gone very wrong with Donald Trump’s face

The orange hue of Donald Trump ’ s face has always been so conspicuous , his critics have taken to calling him Orange Hitler , and he ’ s gone so far as to repeatedly blame energy efficient bulbs for it .
The surreal part has always been the white rings around his eyes .
We ’ ve always just assumed that he uses some kind of cheap and ineffective spray tan-like product .
But today , something went bizarrely wrong , even by Trump ’ s standards .
White House photographer William Moon , who runs a Twitter account @ @ @ @ @ @ @ alarming photo of Donald Trump this evening : Wait , what ?
This photograph can ’ t be real , can it ?
Apparently it is ; Vox and other publications have vouched for the authenticity of the account .
Hours after posting the photo , by which time the photo had gone viral , Moon added this explanation : “ Today , @ realDonaldTrump was dancing with the sunset and strong winds when he walked to the Oval Office from the Marine One on the South Lawn.
” Here ’ s the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s face is not a meaningful issue .
This guy is doing real harm to the country ; who cares if he ’ s also a weirdo who paints his face orange ?
But this new photo suggests that Trump is falling to pieces .
He ’ s not able to keep up his own physical appearance , and his remaining babysitters aren ’ t getting it done either .
If he ’ s this far gone when it comes to this kind of thing… it ’ s just disconcerting .

Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support Palmer Report's 2024 efforts by donating now.
-----
-----
The orange hue of Donald Trump’s face has always been so conspicuous, his critics have taken to calling him Orange Hitler, and he’s gone so far as to repeatedly blame energy efficient bulbs for it. The surreal part has always been the white rings around his eyes. We’ve always just assumed that he uses some kind of cheap and ineffective spray tan-like product. But today, something went bizarrely wrong, even by Trump’s standards.
White House photographer William Moon, who runs a Twitter account called White House Photos, posted this alarming photo of Donald Trump this evening:
@realDonaldTrump returns to the White House from Charlotte, North Carolina. Photo by William Moon at the South Lawn of the White House on February 7, 2020 pic.twitter.com/n1a1Z93LrJ — White House Photos (@photowhitehouse) February 7, 2020
Wait, what? This photograph can’t be real, can it? Apparently it is; Vox and other publications have vouched for the authenticity of the account. Hours after posting the photo, by which time the photo had gone viral, Moon added this explanation: “Today, @realDonaldTrump was dancing with the sunset and strong winds when he walked to the Oval Office from the Marine One on the South Lawn.”
Here’s the thing. The color of Donald Trump’s face is not a meaningful issue. This guy is doing real harm to the country; who cares if he’s also a weirdo who paints his face orange? But this new photo suggests that Trump is falling to pieces. He’s not able to keep up his own physical appearance, and his remaining babysitters aren’t getting it done either. If he’s this far gone when it comes to this kind of thing… it’s just disconcerting.
Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support our 2024 efforts by donating now or sign up for our free mailing list.


palmerreport--2020-02-08--The most important moments from tonight’s Democratic debate

.
@ joebiden is right : “ It ’ s a woman ’ s right to do that .
Period.
@ @ @ @ @ body .
Plain and simple .
# DemDebate pic.twitter.com/bWM3dQSWUv

.@joebiden is right: “It’s a woman’s right to do that. Period.”
Freedom is for 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 body. Plain and simple. #DemDebate pic.twitter.com/bWM3dQSWUv
— NARAL (@NARAL) February 8, 2020


palmerreport--2020-02-08--Tonight’s Democratic debate: the biggest winners and losers

After some very close and very screwy results in the Iowa caucus this week , the top seven Democratic presidential candidates took the stage and faced something of a new alignment .
So how did they each fare ?
Here ’ s a look at the winners , the losers , and more : Winner : Pete Buttigieg .
The first half of tonight ’ s debate went far better for him than the second half .
But the reality was that he had a target on his back tonight as a result of his win ( or near-win ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to pull off some of the most impactful moments of the night .
His big moment : shooting down the moderator ’ s absurd question about Joe Biden being a liability as a candidate just because Donald Trump made up a fake Biden scandal .
Winner : Joe Biden .
The Iowa caucus represented a voting demographic and a voting format that couldn ’ t be much further removed from Biden ’ s strengths , so it wasn ’ t surprising that he finished poorly there .
He ’ s still leading the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ competitive in New Hampshire , and he ’ s set to dominate in South Carolina .
But the media is painting him as being on the ropes , so he had to passionately come out swinging tonight – and he did .
This was Biden ’ s best debate performance , and it was ( just barely ) enough to keep the “ sky is falling ” headlines at bay for his campaign .
Winner : Amy Klobuchar .
Her campaign has never gotten as much attention as the flashier candidacies in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another solid debate performance .
She ’ s been consistently strong on the debate stage .
Now that the field is thinning , will she finally get her due ?
Wildcard : Tom Steyer .
We ’ ve all thought of Steyer as a pointless also-ran candidate who wasn ’ t going to get anywhere .
He did very poorly in Iowa .
But he ’ s now polling in a distant second in South Carolina .
If these numbers are accurate , then it could point to Steyer having a decent showing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the race for awhile .
We ’ re guessing the moderators gave Steyer so much airtime tonight because of his strong South Carolina poll numbers , but we ’ d rather have heard more from Elizabeth Warren , who is polling much higher than Steyer nationally .
Loser : The moderators .
Several of these questions were misrepresentations of the candidates ’ positions on the issues .
At best , the moderators didn ’ t fully do their homework .
At worst , they were trying to drum up ratings by asking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for ABC tonight .
Loser : Elizabeth Warren .
She ’ s won several of these debates , and she ’ s never lost any of them – until tonight .
Her answers were all strong as usual .
The trouble was that she didn ’ t have nearly the impact tonight that she usually has .
Fault the moderators for not giving her as much airtime as her poll numbers warrant .
But she needed to make an impact tonight after being a non-factor in Iowa , and it didn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He seemed to take the position that if the next administration criminally prosecutes Donald Trump , it ’ ll turn the United States into a banana republic .
But when the moderator asked if that meant Trump should get a pass for his crimes , Yang seemed to realize he ’ d backed himself into a corner .
In any case , his candidacy will likely be over soon , despite the strong passion of his fairly narrow support base .

Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support Palmer Report's 2024 efforts by donating now.
-----
-----
After some very close and very screwy results in the Iowa caucus this week, the top seven Democratic presidential candidates took the stage and faced something of a new alignment. So how did they each fare? Here’s a look at the winners, the losers, and more:
Winner: Pete Buttigieg. The first half of tonight’s debate went far better for him than the second half. But the reality was that he had a target on his back tonight as a result of his win (or near-win) in Iowa, and he still managed to pull off some of the most impactful moments of the night. His big moment: shooting down the moderator’s absurd question about Joe Biden being a liability as a candidate just because Donald Trump made up a fake Biden scandal.
Winner: Joe Biden. The Iowa caucus represented a voting demographic and a voting format that couldn’t be much further removed from Biden’s strengths, so it wasn’t surprising that he finished poorly there. He’s still leading the national polling averages, he’s competitive in New Hampshire, and he’s set to dominate in South Carolina. But the media is painting him as being on the ropes, so he had to passionately come out swinging tonight – and he did. This was Biden’s best debate performance, and it was (just barely) enough to keep the “sky is falling” headlines at bay for his campaign.
Winner: Amy Klobuchar. Her campaign has never gotten as much attention as the flashier candidacies in the race, yet she turned in yet another solid debate performance. She’s been consistently strong on the debate stage. Now that the field is thinning, will she finally get her due?
Wildcard: Tom Steyer. We’ve all thought of Steyer as a pointless also-ran candidate who wasn’t going to get anywhere. He did very poorly in Iowa. But he’s now polling in a distant second in South Carolina. If these numbers are accurate, then it could point to Steyer having a decent showing on Super Tuesday, thus keeping him in the race for awhile. We’re guessing the moderators gave Steyer so much airtime tonight because of his strong South Carolina poll numbers, but we’d rather have heard more from Elizabeth Warren, who is polling much higher than Steyer nationally.
Loser: The moderators. Several of these questions were misrepresentations of the candidates’ positions on the issues. At best, the moderators didn’t fully do their homework. At worst, they were trying to drum up ratings by asking dishonest questions. Not a good look for ABC tonight.
Loser: Elizabeth Warren. She’s won several of these debates, and she’s never lost any of them – until tonight. Her answers were all strong as usual. The trouble was that she didn’t have nearly the impact tonight that she usually has. Fault the moderators for not giving her as much airtime as her poll numbers warrant. But she needed to make an impact tonight after being a non-factor in Iowa, and it didn’t happen.
Loser: Andrew Yang. He seemed to take the position that if the next administration criminally prosecutes Donald Trump, it’ll turn the United States into a banana republic. But when the moderator asked if that meant Trump should get a pass for his crimes, Yang seemed to realize he’d backed himself into a corner. In any case, his candidacy will likely be over soon, despite the strong passion of his fairly narrow support base.
Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support our 2024 efforts by donating now or sign up for our free mailing list.


palmerreport--2020-02-08--Donald Trump’s Saturday Night Massacre is underway tonight, but it isn’t what you think it is

So far this evening Donald Trump has fired Alexander Vindman , Yevgeny Vindman , and Gordon Sondland – three people who each played a role in helping to get Trump impeached for his crimes .
That means this is something of a Saturday Night Massacre , even though it ’ s a Friday .
But this isn ’ t what it looks like on the surface – and in fact it has nothing to do with Richard Nixon ’ s original Saturday Night Massacre at all .
When Nixon ’ s Saturday Night Massacre took place , it was when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the surface .
It was before the early stages of the impeachment process forced Nixon to resign .
The “ massacre ” was all about Nixon trying to prevent Watergate from taking his presidency down .
The massacre was incredibly corrupt , disturbing , and unfortunate – but it was an attempt on Nixon ’ s part at winning his battle to survive Watergate .
What we ’ re seeing tonight from Donald Trump is nothing more than petty revenge after the fact .
Nixon was trying to save himself with his Saturday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consolidate his power with his Night of the Long Knives .
Trump is attempting neither .
He already survived impeachment , in the sense that he wasn ’ t removed .
Now he ’ s retaliating against some people who probably couldn ’ t have hurt him any further even if he ’ d left them in place .
Instead , by firing them in punitive and illegal fashion , he ’ s potentially making things worse for himself .
The upshot is that Donald Trump gains nothing from these firings , other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t magically make Trump more powerful .
If anything , this kind of thing tends to motivate even more people in an administration to speak up .
Nor will Trump gain a single 2020 vote with these antics .
Instead , this could end up costing him the votes of his least enthusiastic supporters outside of his base .
What we ’ re seeing from Trump tonight is nothing but weakness , stupidity , and evidence that he ’ s not focused on winning in 2020 .

Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support Palmer Report's 2024 efforts by donating now.
-----
-----
So far this evening Donald Trump has fired Alexander Vindman, Yevgeny Vindman, and Gordon Sondland – three people who each played a role in helping to get Trump impeached for his crimes. That means this is something of a Saturday Night Massacre, even though it’s a Friday. But this isn’t what it looks like on the surface – and in fact it has nothing to do with Richard Nixon’s original Saturday Night Massacre at all.
When Nixon’s Saturday Night Massacre took place, it was when the Watergate scandal was still coming to the surface. It was before the early stages of the impeachment process forced Nixon to resign. The “massacre” was all about Nixon trying to prevent Watergate from taking his presidency down. The massacre was incredibly corrupt, disturbing, and unfortunate – but it was an attempt on Nixon’s part at winning his battle to survive Watergate.
What we’re seeing tonight from Donald Trump is nothing more than petty revenge after the fact. Nixon was trying to save himself with his Saturday Night Massacre. Hitler was trying to consolidate his power with his Night of the Long Knives. Trump is attempting neither. He already survived impeachment, in the sense that he wasn’t removed. Now he’s retaliating against some people who probably couldn’t have hurt him any further even if he’d left them in place. Instead, by firing them in punitive and illegal fashion, he’s potentially making things worse for himself.
The upshot is that Donald Trump gains nothing from these firings, other than getting revenge. These antics won’t magically make Trump more powerful. If anything, this kind of thing tends to motivate even more people in an administration to speak up. Nor will Trump gain a single 2020 vote with these antics. Instead, this could end up costing him the votes of his least enthusiastic supporters outside of his base. What we’re seeing from Trump tonight is nothing but weakness, stupidity, and evidence that he’s not focused on winning in 2020.
Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support our 2024 efforts by donating now or sign up for our free mailing list.


palmerreport--2020-02-08--Wait, now Gordon Sondland too?

Wait, now Gordon Sondland too?

Earlier today Donald Trump fired Lieutenant Colonel Alex Vindman and his twin brother from the National Security Council , and had them escorted from the White House , as punishment for Alex ’ s testimony in the House impeachment hearings .
Trump is clearly focused on petty revenge instead of winning – and now he ’ s just fired another person involved his impeachment .
Donald Trump has fired U.S .
Ambassador Gordon Sondland this evening , according to the New York Times .
Sondland helped Trump carry out his Ukraine extortion scheme .
When House impeachment hearings began , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to protect himself and Trump .
But then Sondland had a change of heart and decided to come clean about everything .
Gordon Sondland ’ s testimony – which spelled out Trump ’ s guilt in overwhelming fashion – was enough to help sway public opinion in favor of Trump ’ s impeachment and removal .
But in the end , every Republican Senator ( except Mitt Romney ) decided to acquit Trump anyway .
We ’ re not going to shed any tears for Gordon Sondland .
He ’ s a powerful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way into the Ambassador job and then did it very corruptly and very poorly .
At this point we doubt he even cares that he got fired .
We do award him points for coming clean in the end .
But Trump can ’ t really hurt Sondland .
We should be far more bothered by Trump ’ s firing of the Vindman twins , two honest patriots who were doing a great job for the country .

Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support Palmer Report's 2024 efforts by donating now.
-----
-----
Earlier today Donald Trump fired Lieutenant Colonel Alex Vindman and his twin brother from the National Security Council, and had them escorted from the White House, as punishment for Alex’s testimony in the House impeachment hearings. Trump is clearly focused on petty revenge instead of winning – and now he’s just fired another person involved his impeachment.
Donald Trump has fired U.S. Ambassador Gordon Sondland this evening, according to the New York Times. Sondland helped Trump carry out his Ukraine extortion scheme. When House impeachment hearings began, Sondland initially lied under oath to try to protect himself and Trump. But then Sondland had a change of heart and decided to come clean about everything.
Gordon Sondland’s testimony – which spelled out Trump’s guilt in overwhelming fashion – was enough to help sway public opinion in favor of Trump’s impeachment and removal. But in the end, every Republican Senator (except Mitt Romney) decided to acquit Trump anyway.
We’re not going to shed any tears for Gordon Sondland. He’s a powerful and independently wealthy man who bought his way into the Ambassador job and then did it very corruptly and very poorly. At this point we doubt he even cares that he got fired. We do award him points for coming clean in the end. But Trump can’t really hurt Sondland. We should be far more bothered by Trump’s firing of the Vindman twins, two honest patriots who were doing a great job for the country.
Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support our 2024 efforts by donating now or sign up for our free mailing list.


palmerreport--2020-02-09--Donald Trump’s stooge Ben Carson goes completely off the deep end

Just about since Ben Carson entered the political spotlight , we ’ ve known he ’ s a cock-eyed idiot .
Yes , he ’ s a world-renowned surgeon , but it seems like every single one of the cells in his brain is wired for surgery and none for political acumen or being a person .
Now he ’ s given us another taste of just how much of a semi-conscious buffoon he is .
But , what ’ s more , his behavior is symptomatic of something dangerous in the GOP writ large .
But first , some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Department of Housing and Urban Development , which makes complete sense given Carson ’ s extensive career in urban revival projects and civil rights .
No wait , my apologies ; he doesn ’ t know anything about his job .
And he ’ s a bigot .
How do I know these things ?
Well , for one , under Carson ’ s rule , HUD has turned away trans people from federally-funded shelters .
That ’ s not to mention Carson ’ s own transphobic comments .
Carson , a black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The most notable recent instance of this was a jab he took at Baltimore , saying of its black residents : “ When I was in Baltimore a couple of days ago , and just looking at a lot of the squalor there … And I saw so many young men sitting on porches , able-bodied young men … how can we get those young men employed in terms of cleaning up the neighborhoods… ?
” Carson saw some black people sitting on their porches and assumed , either given the time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that they must be unemployed — a thought so stupid and racist you ’ d be forgiven for thinking Trump came up with it .
Carson might be black on the outside , but he ’ s a dim-witted bigot like Trump on the inside , who yes , happens to be a pioneering neurosurgeon .
Fast forward to now .
From Politico : “ Housing Secretary Ben Carson appeared to stray from prepared remarks as he introduced Donald Trump on Friday , declaring that the president ‘ is not a racist.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ ‘ He ’ s a man who is deeply driven by a sense of kindness and compassion , ’ Carson began , looking down at his notes… ‘ When he bought Mar-a-Lago , he was the one who fought for Jews and blacks to be included in the clubs that were trying to exclude them .
You know , people say he ’ s a racist , he is not a racist.
’ ” A few thoughts : ( 1 ) Trump is a galloping racist ; ( 2 ) Trump famously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ best ; and ( 3 ) If he did “ fight ” for Jews and blacks to be included in clubs , it was exclusively because he wanted their money .
Carson ’ s comments defending Trump are symptomatic not just of his own stupidity , but something more frightening : the eagerness of Republicans to protect Trump .
We saw it in the impeachment “ trial , ” and of course we saw it plenty before then .

Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support Palmer Report's 2024 efforts by donating now.
-----
-----
Just about since Ben Carson entered the political spotlight, we’ve known he’s a cock-eyed idiot. Yes, he’s a world-renowned surgeon, but it seems like every single one of the cells in his brain is wired for surgery and none for political acumen or being a person. Now he’s given us another taste of just how much of a semi-conscious buffoon he is. But, what’s more, his behavior is symptomatic of something dangerous in the GOP writ large.
But first, some background.
Carson is Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, which makes complete sense given Carson’s extensive career in urban revival projects and civil rights. No wait, my apologies; he doesn’t know anything about his job. And he’s a bigot. How do I know these things? Well, for one, under Carson’s rule, HUD has turned away trans people from federally-funded shelters. That’s not to mention Carson’s own transphobic comments.
Carson, a black man, has also shafted black people. The most notable recent instance of this was a jab he took at Baltimore, saying of its black residents: “When I was in Baltimore a couple of days ago, and just looking at a lot of the squalor there … And I saw so many young men sitting on porches, able-bodied young men … how can we get those young men employed in terms of cleaning up the neighborhoods…?”
Carson saw some black people sitting on their porches and assumed, either given the time of day or because of their appearances, that they must be unemployed — a thought so stupid and racist you’d be forgiven for thinking Trump came up with it. Carson might be black on the outside, but he’s a dim-witted bigot like Trump on the inside, who yes, happens to be a pioneering neurosurgeon.
Fast forward to now. From Politico: “Housing Secretary Ben Carson appeared to stray from prepared remarks as he introduced Donald Trump on Friday, declaring that the president ‘is not a racist.’”
But it gets richer. “‘He’s a man who is deeply driven by a sense of kindness and compassion,’ Carson began, looking down at his notes… ‘When he bought Mar-a-Lago, he was the one who fought for Jews and blacks to be included in the clubs that were trying to exclude them. You know, people say he’s a racist, he is not a racist.’”
A few thoughts: (1) Trump is a galloping racist; (2) Trump famously treats his employees like second-class citizens at best; and (3) If he did “fight” for Jews and blacks to be included in clubs, it was exclusively because he wanted their money. Carson’s comments defending Trump are symptomatic not just of his own stupidity, but something more frightening: the eagerness of Republicans to protect Trump. We saw it in the impeachment “trial,” and of course we saw it plenty before then.
Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support our 2024 efforts by donating now or sign up for our free mailing list.


palmerreport--2020-02-10--Mitt Romney’s vote is tearing the Republican Party apart – and it’s a beautiful thing

When Republican Senator Mitt Romney voted to convict and remove Donald Trump , he was absolutely doing the right thing .
And he deserves the benefit of the doubt that he was doing it for the right reasons , even though it ’ ll probably end up doing more to help his own political career than harm it .
But regardless of how pure Romney ’ s motives may have been , the reality is that his vote is now ripping the Republican Party apart – and that ’ s a good thing for America .
Two news stories today @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s vote is being viewed by different factions of the Republican Party .
NBC News talked to a bunch of Republican voters in Romney ’ s home state of Utah , and found that he ’ s actually gaining respect and support back home for his impeachment vote .
At the same time , conservative CPAC conference chairman and Trump ally Matt Schlapp is saying that he ’ s concerned that Mitt Romney ’ s “ physical safety ” would be at risk if Romney were to attend CPAC right now .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ all the internal squabbling within the left right now , can anyone imagine the leader of a liberal political conference saying that some Democratic Senator ’ s physical safety could be in danger if he/she attends ?
So we ’ ve got some rank and file Republican voters out there quietly choosing Mitt Romney over Donald Trump , even as Trump ’ s GOP allies are loudly choosing Trump over Romney .
At a time when the Republican Party is corrupt beyond repair from top to bottom , it needs to bottom out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so it can either be rebuilt by honest people , or be replaced by a new political party .
Trump ’ s criminal behavior – and Romney ’ s necessary response to it – could be setting off a chain reaction that ’ ll finish the party off .

Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support Palmer Report's 2024 efforts by donating now.
-----
-----
When Republican Senator Mitt Romney voted to convict and remove Donald Trump, he was absolutely doing the right thing. And he deserves the benefit of the doubt that he was doing it for the right reasons, even though it’ll probably end up doing more to help his own political career than harm it. But regardless of how pure Romney’s motives may have been, the reality is that his vote is now ripping the Republican Party apart – and that’s a good thing for America.
Two news stories today show the contrast in how Mitt Romney’s vote is being viewed by different factions of the Republican Party. NBC News talked to a bunch of Republican voters in Romney’s home state of Utah, and found that he’s actually gaining respect and support back home for his impeachment vote.
At the same time, conservative CPAC conference chairman and Trump ally Matt Schlapp is saying that he’s concerned that Mitt Romney’s “physical safety” would be at risk if Romney were to attend CPAC right now. To put this in perspective, for all the internal squabbling within the left right now, can anyone imagine the leader of a liberal political conference saying that some Democratic Senator’s physical safety could be in danger if he/she attends?
So we’ve got some rank and file Republican voters out there quietly choosing Mitt Romney over Donald Trump, even as Trump’s GOP allies are loudly choosing Trump over Romney. At a time when the Republican Party is corrupt beyond repair from top to bottom, it needs to bottom out completely and suffer a total exodus, so it can either be rebuilt by honest people, or be replaced by a new political party. Trump’s criminal behavior – and Romney’s necessary response to it – could be setting off a chain reaction that’ll finish the party off.
Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support our 2024 efforts by donating now or sign up for our free mailing list.


palmerreport--2020-02-10--Donald Trump just got slam dunked at the Oscars

On Sunday , the 92nd Academy Awards took place .
The first half hour saw the non-hosts , Steve Martin and Chris Rock , making fun of various attendees at the show .
The only political statement at the beginning was Brad Pitt .
Pitt won Best Supporting Actor for “ Once Upon A Time In Hollywood.
” He started by stating : “ They told me I only have 45 seconds up here , which is 45 seconds more than the Senate gave John Bolton this week .
I ’ m thinking maybe Quentin does a movie about it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do the right thing.
” Sad but true .
John Bolton played games by stating he would testify before the Senate in the impeachment trial of Donald J. Trump , IMPOTUS the Third , knowing full well the fix was in .
Mitch “ the Con ” McConnell was in on it , with no chance that witnesses would be called .
It turns out , though , that Bolton was not being honorable in any way throughout the process .
Last week , House Manager Adam Schiff revealed that despite a request @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he had refused .
Schiff told Rachel Maddow on her show : After they voted to be the first impeachment trial in history without witnesses , we did approach John Bolton ’ s counsel , asked if Mr. Bolton would be willing to submit an affidavit under oath describing what he observed in terms of the president ’ s Ukraine misconduct , and he refused .
For whatever reason , he apparently was willing to testify before the Senate , but apart from that , seems intent on saving it for his book @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for that .
We will surely see IMPOTUS the Third tweeting out later on Sunday or on Monday about how Hollywood attacked him unfairly , but Pitt was not acting when he made that comment .

Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support Palmer Report's 2024 efforts by donating now.
-----
-----
On Sunday, the 92nd Academy Awards took place. The first half hour saw the non-hosts, Steve Martin and Chris Rock, making fun of various attendees at the show. The only political statement at the beginning was Brad Pitt. Pitt won Best Supporting Actor for “Once Upon A Time In Hollywood.” He started by stating: “They told me I only have 45 seconds up here, which is 45 seconds more than the Senate gave John Bolton this week. I’m thinking maybe Quentin does a movie about it and in the end, the adults do the right thing.”
Sad but true. John Bolton played games by stating he would testify before the Senate in the impeachment trial of Donald J. Trump, IMPOTUS the Third, knowing full well the fix was in. Mitch “the Con” McConnell was in on it, with no chance that witnesses would be called. It turns out, though, that Bolton was not being honorable in any way throughout the process. Last week, House Manager Adam Schiff revealed that despite a request for Bolton to submit an affidavit, he had refused. Schiff told Rachel Maddow on her show:
After they voted to be the first impeachment trial in history without witnesses, we did approach John Bolton’s counsel, asked if Mr. Bolton would be willing to submit an affidavit under oath describing what he observed in terms of the president’s Ukraine misconduct, and he refused. For whatever reason, he apparently was willing to testify before the Senate, but apart from that, seems intent on saving it for his book. He’ll have to answer for that.
We will surely see IMPOTUS the Third tweeting out later on Sunday or on Monday about how Hollywood attacked him unfairly, but Pitt was not acting when he made that comment.
Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support our 2024 efforts by donating now or sign up for our free mailing list.


palmerreport--2020-02-10--The New Hampshire primary takes an even stranger turn

Yesterday we tried to sort out the confusing and conflicting headlines we ’ ve been seeing about who ’ s really leading in the Democratic 2020 New Hampshire primary .
This all centers around the concept of an outlier poll .
Let ’ s say you do ten polls , and nine of them all say the same thing , while one of them says the opposite .
That one poll is the outlier , because its results are way off from the rest of the results .
Statistically , this means that there ’ s a small chance that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all the other polls are wrong .
There ’ s a far larger chance that the one outlier poll is wrong , and all the other polls are right .
This all seems pretty obvious , right ?
And if you want the most meaningful look at what ’ s going on , you ’ ll take all these polls and average them together , either with a straight-up average like RealClearPolitics uses , or a weighted average based on each poll ’ s past accuracy like FiveThirtyEight uses .
The trouble comes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a surprising result , and only reports that poll , for shock value .
If you ’ re a TV pundit and you see nine new polls all saying the same thing , and one poll saying the opposite , and you report that one poll while pretending the other nine don ’ t exist , then you ’ re basically lying to your audience , right ?
Or maybe you ’ re just that clueless about how numbers work .
Yet we see this from pundits all the time .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and absurd poll numbers stated as if they were fact , and then when the results end up being something different , the public presumes the polls can ’ t be trusted .
In reality , the polling averages usually tend to have been correct the entire time – but TV viewers never know it .
This brings us back to New Hampshire .
As of yesterday there was one poll , from the Boston Globe , which showed that Pete Buttigieg had taken the lead by one point .
But all the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this week show Bernie Sanders still in the lead .
Guess what ’ s happened now ?
Take a look at the latest numbers , screen capped from RealClearPolitics today : You can see that the Boston Globe poll has been updated again , and it now shows Bernie being back in the lead .
This isn ’ t surprising .
Not only do outlier polls tend to be wrong , they often tend to quickly correct themselves .
So now every poll says Bernie will win New Hampshire .
Could they be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re probably correct .
Any pundit who ran around yesterday touting the one poll showing Pete in the lead , while pretending the other polls didn ’ t exist , is looking pretty foolish right now .
We see this happen on a national scale as well .
Over the past forty years , we ’ ve only had one election ( in 2004 ) where the Democratic and Republican nominees both won Iowa and New Hampshire .
The two states simply don ’ t have diverse populations representative of the Super Tuesday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mistake to presume that the winner ( s ) of Iowa and New Hampshire are the new frontrunners , or that they ’ re even in contention .
Take a look at the latest results , again screen capped from RCP , in the national polling : Here you can clearly see that – despite his poor finish in Iowa – Joe Biden is still the frontrunner for the nomination .
The latest averages show that Biden is ahead of Bernie by five points nationally , and that Biden is ahead of Pete @ @ @ @ @ @ @ polls can change , and polls can be wrong to begin with .
But if these numbers are correct and don ’ t change , Biden will be the nominee .
If Biden ’ s national poll numbers finally drop from their months-long perch in the high twenties , or if someone surpasses him while his numbers remain the same , then he ’ ll be in trouble – and not until then .
Of course that doesn ’ t make for a ratings-friendly narrative , which is why the media is instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and that Pete is on the verge of being the frontrunner .
And because outlier polls always make for great ratings , some pundits are running with the one WSJ poll showing Bernie in the lead nationally , when every other new polls says it ’ s Biden .
Bernie isn ’ t ahead nationally , just like Pete isn ’ t ahead in New Hampshire .
Again , the polls aren ’ t the problem here .
Stick to the averages and you ’ re fine .
The problem is how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ misreports , the polls .

Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support Palmer Report's 2024 efforts by donating now.
-----
-----
Yesterday we tried to sort out the confusing and conflicting headlines we’ve been seeing about who’s really leading in the Democratic 2020 New Hampshire primary. This all centers around the concept of an outlier poll. Let’s say you do ten polls, and nine of them all say the same thing, while one of them says the opposite. That one poll is the outlier, because its results are way off from the rest of the results.
Statistically, this means that there’s a small chance that the one outlier poll is correct and all the other polls are wrong. There’s a far larger chance that the one outlier poll is wrong, and all the other polls are right. This all seems pretty obvious, right? And if you want the most meaningful look at what’s going on, you’ll take all these polls and average them together, either with a straight-up average like RealClearPolitics uses, or a weighted average based on each poll’s past accuracy like FiveThirtyEight uses.
The trouble comes when the media sees one outlier poll with a surprising result, and only reports that poll, for shock value. If you’re a TV pundit and you see nine new polls all saying the same thing, and one poll saying the opposite, and you report that one poll while pretending the other nine don’t exist, then you’re basically lying to your audience, right? Or maybe you’re just that clueless about how numbers work. Yet we see this from pundits all the time. So the public routinely hears the most suspicious and absurd poll numbers stated as if they were fact, and then when the results end up being something different, the public presumes the polls can’t be trusted. In reality, the polling averages usually tend to have been correct the entire time – but TV viewers never know it.
This brings us back to New Hampshire. As of yesterday there was one poll, from the Boston Globe, which showed that Pete Buttigieg had taken the lead by one point. But all the other new polls conducted in New Hampshire this week show Bernie Sanders still in the lead. Guess what’s happened now? Take a look at the latest numbers, screen capped from RealClearPolitics today:
You can see that the Boston Globe poll has been updated again, and it now shows Bernie being back in the lead. This isn’t surprising. Not only do outlier polls tend to be wrong, they often tend to quickly correct themselves. So now every poll says Bernie will win New Hampshire. Could they be wrong? Sure, but they’re probably correct. Any pundit who ran around yesterday touting the one poll showing Pete in the lead, while pretending the other polls didn’t exist, is looking pretty foolish right now. We see this happen on a national scale as well.
Over the past forty years, we’ve only had one election (in 2004) where the Democratic and Republican nominees both won Iowa and New Hampshire. The two states simply don’t have diverse populations representative of the Super Tuesday states. So it’s a mistake to presume that the winner(s) of Iowa and New Hampshire are the new frontrunners, or that they’re even in contention. Take a look at the latest results, again screen capped from RCP, in the national polling:
Here you can clearly see that – despite his poor finish in Iowa – Joe Biden is still the frontrunner for the nomination. The latest averages show that Biden is ahead of Bernie by five points nationally, and that Biden is ahead of Pete by twenty points nationally. Again, polls can change, and polls can be wrong to begin with. But if these numbers are correct and don’t change, Biden will be the nominee. If Biden’s national poll numbers finally drop from their months-long perch in the high twenties, or if someone surpasses him while his numbers remain the same, then he’ll be in trouble – and not until then.
Of course that doesn’t make for a ratings-friendly narrative, which is why the media is instead insisting that Biden is in deep trouble, and that Pete is on the verge of being the frontrunner. And because outlier polls always make for great ratings, some pundits are running with the one WSJ poll showing Bernie in the lead nationally, when every other new polls says it’s Biden. Bernie isn’t ahead nationally, just like Pete isn’t ahead in New Hampshire. Again, the polls aren’t the problem here. Stick to the averages and you’re fine. The problem is how the media reports, or more often misreports, the polls.
Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support our 2024 efforts by donating now or sign up for our free mailing list.


palmerreport--2020-02-10--The real reason Donald Trump’s new budget is such a disaster for him

New polling today confirmed that Donald Trump is in just about the exact same 2020 hole he was in before he was acquitted , meaning that acquittal didn ’ t help him one bit .
If you ’ re a regular Palmer Report reader , you knew this was coming .
It ’ s a reminder that Trump ’ s base alone isn ’ t nearly large enough to put him over the top in 2020 , and that he has to find a way to significantly expand his support if he wants any shot at reelection .
And yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trying to figure out how to win over the people who have never really loved or hated him , he ’ s releasing a new budget today that proposes to slash billions of dollars from the social safety net .
To be clear , this budget will not happen .
It ’ s merely a proposal , and it obviously won ’ t get through the Democratic House .
It ’ s just Trump ’ s attempted starting point for upcoming budget negotiations .
But it ’ s still an incredibly dumb thing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do it ?
Why does Donald Trump do anything ?
He ’ s a pretend billionaire who ’ s actually deeply in debt , and spent his entire time in office abusing his position to try to get his hands on as much cash as possible .
His new budget proposal is a disaster for everyone but certain corrupt wealthy people , so it ’ s a given that he released this proposal as a gift to the corrupt wealthy people whose money he ’ s been seeking .
In other words , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ either releasing a working class-friendly budget proposal that he could campaign on , or an unpopular budget proposal that the Democrats can use against him in the 2020 election .
He chose the latter , because he ’ s more focused on the short term grift than he is on winning .
Considering he ’ s been reduced to changing his state residency and putting his most profitable hotel lease up for sale just to try to salvage his financial situation , it ’ s probably not a surprise that he ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the end of the week .

Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support Palmer Report's 2024 efforts by donating now.
-----
-----
New polling today confirmed that Donald Trump is in just about the exact same 2020 hole he was in before he was acquitted, meaning that acquittal didn’t help him one bit. If you’re a regular Palmer Report reader, you knew this was coming. It’s a reminder that Trump’s base alone isn’t nearly large enough to put him over the top in 2020, and that he has to find a way to significantly expand his support if he wants any shot at reelection.
And yet, even as Trump should be desperately trying to figure out how to win over the people who have never really loved or hated him, he’s releasing a new budget today that proposes to slash billions of dollars from the social safety net. To be clear, this budget will not happen. It’s merely a proposal, and it obviously won’t get through the Democratic House. It’s just Trump’s attempted starting point for upcoming budget negotiations. But it’s still an incredibly dumb thing to announce. So why did he do it?
Why does Donald Trump do anything? He’s a pretend billionaire who’s actually deeply in debt, and spent his entire time in office abusing his position to try to get his hands on as much cash as possible. His new budget proposal is a disaster for everyone but certain corrupt wealthy people, so it’s a given that he released this proposal as a gift to the corrupt wealthy people whose money he’s been seeking.
In other words, Donald Trump faced the choice today of either releasing a working class-friendly budget proposal that he could campaign on, or an unpopular budget proposal that the Democrats can use against him in the 2020 election. He chose the latter, because he’s more focused on the short term grift than he is on winning. Considering he’s been reduced to changing his state residency and putting his most profitable hotel lease up for sale just to try to salvage his financial situation, it’s probably not a surprise that he’s just focused on trying to survive financially to the end of the week.
Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support our 2024 efforts by donating now or sign up for our free mailing list.


palmerreport--2020-02-10--It’s deja vu all over again

It’s deja vu all over again

Imagine that Richard Nixon had been impeached .
Imagine his Senate trial ended in acquittal .
Then imagine Nixon ordering his Plumbers to break in and bug the Democratic National Committee ’ s offices at the Watergate hotel all over again .
Now imagine Donald Trump .
Now that Donald Trump has been impeached for attempting to blackmail ( yes , “ blackmail , ” not “ bribe ” ) a foreign government into announcing an investigation ( not actually doing an investigation ) into a discredited conspiracy theory involving Vice President Joe Biden ’ s son and Burisma , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a disgraceful , sham trial , he ’ s going ahead and doing it anyway .
He ’ s once again promoting this most thoroughly debunked , idiotic conspiracy theory all over again .
Susan Collins to the contrary , Donald Trump has learned absolutely nothing .
But where on earth did anyone ever get the idea that he ever would ?
This is a man who , the day after the Mueller investigation was over , was on the phone with the Ukrainian President trying to yet again involve a foreign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the very same thing that triggered the Mueller probe in the first place .
Who remembers , in the run up to the 2018 midterm elections , the “ national emergency ” that caused Trump to send troops to America ’ s border with Mexico to stop the “ caravans of criminals ” from crossing on to American soil ?
The minute the election was over the troops were withdrawn and all talk of the “ national emergency ” evaporated .
It was Trump using fear and taxpayer money to influence the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Well now he ’ s doing it again , and by doing so , he and his enablers are registering their contempt for the intelligence of the American voter while using taxpayer dollars to continue this sham investigation into Joe Biden .
Welcome to the new Benghazi , and it will continue to absorb the feigned outrage of Republicans and the cynical attention of William Barr ’ s corrupt Department of Justice — which is once again receiving information from Rudy Giuliani who is even now in Ukraine — until the very second @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or someone else gets the Democratic nomination .
Then , and only then , it will be dropped like the proverbial hot potato and never investigated again .

Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support Palmer Report's 2024 efforts by donating now.
-----
-----
Imagine that Richard Nixon had been impeached. Imagine his Senate trial ended in acquittal. Then imagine Nixon ordering his Plumbers to break in and bug the Democratic National Committee’s offices at the Watergate hotel all over again. Now imagine Donald Trump.
Now that Donald Trump has been impeached for attempting to blackmail (yes, “blackmail,” not “bribe”) a foreign government into announcing an investigation (not actually doing an investigation) into a discredited conspiracy theory involving Vice President Joe Biden’s son and Burisma, now that he’s been acquitted in a disgraceful, sham trial, he’s going ahead and doing it anyway. He’s once again promoting this most thoroughly debunked, idiotic conspiracy theory all over again. Susan Collins to the contrary, Donald Trump has learned absolutely nothing.
But where on earth did anyone ever get the idea that he ever would? This is a man who, the day after the Mueller investigation was over, was on the phone with the Ukrainian President trying to yet again involve a foreign government in helping him win an election, the very same thing that triggered the Mueller probe in the first place.
Who remembers, in the run up to the 2018 midterm elections, the “national emergency” that caused Trump to send troops to America’s border with Mexico to stop the “caravans of criminals” from crossing on to American soil? The minute the election was over the troops were withdrawn and all talk of the “national emergency” evaporated. It was Trump using fear and taxpayer money to influence the election, and it largely failed.
Well now he’s doing it again, and by doing so, he and his enablers are registering their contempt for the intelligence of the American voter while using taxpayer dollars to continue this sham investigation into Joe Biden. Welcome to the new Benghazi, and it will continue to absorb the feigned outrage of Republicans and the cynical attention of William Barr’s corrupt Department of Justice — which is once again receiving information from Rudy Giuliani who is even now in Ukraine — until the very second Joe Biden drops out of the race, or someone else gets the Democratic nomination. Then, and only then, it will be dropped like the proverbial hot potato and never investigated again.
Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support our 2024 efforts by donating now or sign up for our free mailing list.


palmerreport--2020-02-10--Donald Trump’s “best week ever” just came crashing down on his head

We just finished suffering through a week where the media almost uniformly insisted that Donald Trump ’ s acquittal was somehow magically going to put him on a path to winning in November .
Not a single pundit could explain how this was specifically going to happen , of course .
Palmer Report pointed out that nothing was going to change , and acquittal would give us the same old Trump , with his same old antics , and his same old lousy approval rating .
Sure enough , a new Quinnipiac poll came out today which shows that every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a head to head matchup by anywhere from four to nine points .
This falls right in line with all the other recent polls which say the same thing .
Individual polls can be wrong , but the polling averages are usually proven accurate , and the averages say that Trump is in the same hole that he was in before he was acquitted .
In other words , just as Palmer Report predicted , nothing appears to have changed .
There is one caveat here , however .
Quinnipiac has also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the Democratic 2020 primary race has suddenly been completely upended in the wake of the Iowa caucus .
Nearly every Democratic candidate has jumped up or down several points – some of them by nearly double digits – since the last time this same Quinnipiac poll was conducted two weeks ago .
This poll is clearly , laughably , gibberish .
For one thing , candidates in a high profile race don ’ t see their numbers jump around this severely , this swiftly , unless they either rescue a baby from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ baby .
It ’ s painfully clear that Quinnipiac has changed its polling methodology over the past two weeks , which is how the polls get a bad name .
If you want further proof that this poll is illegitimate gibberish , all you have to do is look at the other new national polls , which show that Iowa didn ’ t have any impact on the Democratic primary race .
But of course a wacky outlier poll like this always gets lapped up by the media , because shock value keeps @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The trouble here is that if the new Quinnipiac primary poll is this laugh-out-loud illegitimate , can we really trust the new Quinnipiac general election poll ?
That ’ s certainly a concern .
But again , individual poll numbers are to be ignored .
Polling averages are to be taken seriously .
And the polling averages say that Donald Trump is in the same hole he ’ s always been in .
He ’ s not even currently in contention for 2020 , and he ’ ll have to find a way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wants another term .

Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support Palmer Report's 2024 efforts by donating now.
-----
-----
We just finished suffering through a week where the media almost uniformly insisted that Donald Trump’s acquittal was somehow magically going to put him on a path to winning in November. Not a single pundit could explain how this was specifically going to happen, of course. Palmer Report pointed out that nothing was going to change, and acquittal would give us the same old Trump, with his same old antics, and his same old lousy approval rating.
Sure enough, a new Quinnipiac poll came out today which shows that every major Democratic candidate is leading Donald Trump in a head to head matchup by anywhere from four to nine points. This falls right in line with all the other recent polls which say the same thing. Individual polls can be wrong, but the polling averages are usually proven accurate, and the averages say that Trump is in the same hole that he was in before he was acquitted. In other words, just as Palmer Report predicted, nothing appears to have changed.
There is one caveat here, however. Quinnipiac has also released a new poll today which claims that the Democratic 2020 primary race has suddenly been completely upended in the wake of the Iowa caucus. Nearly every Democratic candidate has jumped up or down several points – some of them by nearly double digits – since the last time this same Quinnipiac poll was conducted two weeks ago. This poll is clearly, laughably, gibberish. For one thing, candidates in a high profile race don’t see their numbers jump around this severely, this swiftly, unless they either rescue a baby from a burning building or they punch a baby. It’s painfully clear that Quinnipiac has changed its polling methodology over the past two weeks, which is how the polls get a bad name.
If you want further proof that this poll is illegitimate gibberish, all you have to do is look at the other new national polls, which show that Iowa didn’t have any impact on the Democratic primary race. But of course a wacky outlier poll like this always gets lapped up by the media, because shock value keeps people tuned in and delivers ratings.
The trouble here is that if the new Quinnipiac primary poll is this laugh-out-loud illegitimate, can we really trust the new Quinnipiac general election poll? That’s certainly a concern. But again, individual poll numbers are to be ignored. Polling averages are to be taken seriously. And the polling averages say that Donald Trump is in the same hole he’s always been in. He’s not even currently in contention for 2020, and he’ll have to find a way to significantly broaden his support if he wants another term.
Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support our 2024 efforts by donating now or sign up for our free mailing list.


palmerreport--2020-02-10--It’s not that difficult to figure out who’s going to be the Democratic nominee

Who ’ s winning the Democratic 2020 primary race ?
Who ’ s ahead ?
Who ’ s in trouble ?
Who ’ s got momentum ?
Most importantly , who ’ s the frontrunner ?
I ’ m going to make it all simple for you : the “ frontrunner ” is defined as whoever leads the national polling averages at any given time .
Not by who is ahead in one outlier poll .
Not by who wins Iowa or New Hampshire .
Not by who has the biggest rallies .
Not by who all your friends are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Don ’ t believe me ?
In the past forty years , we ’ ve only had one instance where the Democratic and Republican nominees have both won Iowa and New Hampshire ( 2004 ) .
The media only pretends those two states pick the nominee because it makes for a ratings-friendly narrative .
Not only that , the media loves to take the most absurd early-state poll result it can find and report it for shock value , while ignoring the other ten polls that all show the opposite .
You have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If you get your polls from TV , you ’ ll always be surprised by what ends up happening .
Imagine if ESPN only reported how many field goals each football team scored , but didn ’ t report the overall score , and just let viewers mistakenly assume that the team with the most field goals won the game .
That ’ s pretty much how the TV pundits report on the primary races .
Rally crowd size has NEVER been an indicator of voter turnout .
If so we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1912 , President Wendell Wilkie in 1940 , and so on .
The enthusiasm of your very biggest supporters does NOT correlate to the total number of supporters you have .
Some of you are pulling your hair out trying to figure out how I ’ m wrong , so you don ’ t have to accept that the media is jerking you around by pretending these first two states matter .
That ’ s fine .
But in such case you ’ ll always be surprised at who ends up being the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another way .
Bernie Sanders or Pete Buttigieg won Iowa .
Bernie or Pete will win New Hampshire .
One or both of them will then get labeled the “ frontrunner.
” But let ’ s say that Joe Biden then goes on to win Nevada and South Carolina ( he ’ s favored in both ) .
Suddenly Biden has won half of the first four states , and the media is talking about Biden ’ s “ miracle ” comeback , when he was in first place in the national polls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Clinton was the “ comeback kid ” in 1992 ?
He wasn ’ t behind to begin with .
Super Tuesday determines everything .
If one candidate dominates Super Tuesday in clear fashion , they ’ ll end up being the nominee .
By that time we ’ ll have seen every voting demographic weigh in , and the results will be an accurate sampling of the remaining states .
If two candidates dominate about equally on Super Tuesday , the two of them will then face a long primary battle where they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ There ’ s little evidence that winning Iowa or New Hampshire gives a candidate a Super Tuesday boost .
In this instance “ momentum ” is a myth .
Everyone is always shocked at how Super Tuesday goes , even though the national polling averages at that point nearly always nail it .
South Carolina does serve as a fairly strong indicator of how Super Tuesday will go .
Not due to “ momentum ” ( that ’ s not a real thing this early on ) but because the racial demographics of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ overall Super Tuesday populace .
Trump finished in nearly third in Iowa in 2016 .
Everyone said he was toast .
Then he dominated South Carolina , and sure enough , he cleaned up on Super Tuesday and never looked back .
Throughout all this , the national polling averages revealed Trump was the Republican frontrunner all along .
In 2016 , Hillary nearly lost Iowa , lost New Hampshire badly .
They said she was toast .
Then she dominated South Carolina , dominated Super Tuesday , won nomination by four million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national polling averages revealed Hillary was the Democratic frontrunner all along .
The only way you were surprised by either of these outcomes is if you allowed the media to steer your attention away from the national polling averages , in favor of localized red herrings .
“ But the polls were wrong in the 2016 general election !
” No they weren ’ t .
After Comey ’ s surprise last minute letter , Hillary ’ s dominant poll numbers fell off badly in those final eleven days .
The final polls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ error .
But you never hear any pundit acknowledge that the final post-Comey polling averages in 2016 were correct .
That fact is inconvenient to the prevailing media narrative that the polls were simply way off , and that Trump won because Hillary was firing blanks the whole time .
The political coverage you ’ re watching on your TV is infotainment .
The media ’ s prevailing narratives are crafted to keep you tuned in .
It ’ s not fake , but the truth is often stretched .
If you really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ MSNBC and CNN because you like the entertaining format , you ’ ll have to spend all day fact checking it yourself .
Otherwise you ’ re going to be almost constantly surprised at what ends up happening .
To recap : The national polling averages tell us who the Democratic primary frontrunner is , not Iowa and New Hampshire .
Early state “ momentum ” doesn ’ t really exist ; the first four states each come down to demographics , not momentum .
Polls can and do change , but the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Everything else is just noise .

Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support Palmer Report's 2024 efforts by donating now.
-----
-----
Who’s winning the Democratic 2020 primary race? Who’s ahead? Who’s in trouble? Who’s got momentum? Most importantly, who’s the frontrunner? I’m going to make it all simple for you: the “frontrunner” is defined as whoever leads the national polling averages at any given time. Not by who is ahead in one outlier poll. Not by who wins Iowa or New Hampshire. Not by who has the biggest rallies. Not by who all your friends are voting for. National polling averages. Don’t believe me?
In the past forty years, we’ve only had one instance where the Democratic and Republican nominees have both won Iowa and New Hampshire (2004). The media only pretends those two states pick the nominee because it makes for a ratings-friendly narrative.
Not only that, the media loves to take the most absurd early-state poll result it can find and report it for shock value, while ignoring the other ten polls that all show the opposite. You have to look at the polling averages only. If you get your polls from TV, you’ll always be surprised by what ends up happening. Imagine if ESPN only reported how many field goals each football team scored, but didn’t report the overall score, and just let viewers mistakenly assume that the team with the most field goals won the game. That’s pretty much how the TV pundits report on the primary races.
Rally crowd size has NEVER been an indicator of voter turnout. If so we’d have had President Eugene Debs in 1912, President Wendell Wilkie in 1940, and so on. The enthusiasm of your very biggest supporters does NOT correlate to the total number of supporters you have.
Some of you are pulling your hair out trying to figure out how I’m wrong, so you don’t have to accept that the media is jerking you around by pretending these first two states matter. That’s fine. But in such case you’ll always be surprised at who ends up being the nominee.
I’ll put it another way. Bernie Sanders or Pete Buttigieg won Iowa. Bernie or Pete will win New Hampshire. One or both of them will then get labeled the “frontrunner.” But let’s say that Joe Biden then goes on to win Nevada and South Carolina (he’s favored in both). Suddenly Biden has won half of the first four states, and the media is talking about Biden’s “miracle” comeback, when he was in first place in the national polls the entire time! Remember when Bill Clinton was the “comeback kid” in 1992? He wasn’t behind to begin with.
Super Tuesday determines everything. If one candidate dominates Super Tuesday in clear fashion, they’ll end up being the nominee. By that time we’ll have seen every voting demographic weigh in, and the results will be an accurate sampling of the remaining states. If two candidates dominate about equally on Super Tuesday, the two of them will then face a long primary battle where they try to eke out the nomination.
There’s little evidence that winning Iowa or New Hampshire gives a candidate a Super Tuesday boost. In this instance “momentum” is a myth. Everyone is always shocked at how Super Tuesday goes, even though the national polling averages at that point nearly always nail it. South Carolina does serve as a fairly strong indicator of how Super Tuesday will go. Not due to “momentum” (that’s not a real thing this early on) but because the racial demographics of South Carolina match up well with the overall Super Tuesday populace.
Trump finished in nearly third in Iowa in 2016. Everyone said he was toast. Then he dominated South Carolina, and sure enough, he cleaned up on Super Tuesday and never looked back. Throughout all this, the national polling averages revealed Trump was the Republican frontrunner all along. In 2016, Hillary nearly lost Iowa, lost New Hampshire badly. They said she was toast. Then she dominated South Carolina, dominated Super Tuesday, won nomination by four million votes. Throughout all this, the national polling averages revealed Hillary was the Democratic frontrunner all along. The only way you were surprised by either of these outcomes is if you allowed the media to steer your attention away from the national polling averages, in favor of localized red herrings.
“But the polls were wrong in the 2016 general election!” No they weren’t. After Comey’s surprise last minute letter, Hillary’s dominant poll numbers fell off badly in those final eleven days. The final polls were correct within the stated margin of error. But you never hear any pundit acknowledge that the final post-Comey polling averages in 2016 were correct. That fact is inconvenient to the prevailing media narrative that the polls were simply way off, and that Trump won because Hillary was firing blanks the whole time.
The political coverage you’re watching on your TV is infotainment. The media’s prevailing narratives are crafted to keep you tuned in. It’s not fake, but the truth is often stretched. If you really want to get your election coverage from MSNBC and CNN because you like the entertaining format, you’ll have to spend all day fact checking it yourself. Otherwise you’re going to be almost constantly surprised at what ends up happening.
To recap: The national polling averages tell us who the Democratic primary frontrunner is, not Iowa and New Hampshire. Early state “momentum” doesn’t really exist; the first four states each come down to demographics, not momentum. Polls can and do change, but the final polling averages are usually proven correct. Everything else is just noise.
Important note: Palmer Report has led the way in political analysis. Now we're gearing up to cover the 2024 election, up and down the ballot. Help support our 2024 efforts by donating now or sign up for our free mailing list.