washingtonmonthly--2020-07-07--Senate Republicans Can’t Distance Themselves From Trump

Trump ’ s failing campaign is threatening Republican control of the Senate .
Nevertheless , when asked whether the president has exhibited failed leadership in response to the coronavirus , Senator Joni Ernst defended him saying , “ I think that the president is stepping forward.
” Apparently that response helped her opponent , Theresa Greenfield , raise over $ 100,000 .
It ’ s worth noting that the most recent Des Moines Register poll showed Greenfield leading Ernst by three points .
In a state Trump won by nine points in 2016 , that same poll had Biden ahead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Iowa demonstrates the dilemma facing Republicans all over the country—even in traditionally red states : Do they stick with the president and go down with him , or do they hold him accountable and risk losing the support of the GOP base , which remains loyal to Trump .
At this point , they ’ re obviously picking the former .
But according to Gabriel Sherman , they ’ ve adopted a deadline on that .
Nervous Republicans worried about losing the Senate are now debating when to break from Trump .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s level of “ strong support ” dropping from 21 to 17 points since last week , a person briefed on the numbers said .
A source close to Iowa Republican Joni Ernst ’ s campaign said Ernst advisers are upset that a solid seat is now in play .
“ Joni ’ s campaign is pissed .
They should not be in a competitive race , ” the source said…A Republican strategist close to Mitch McConnell told me that Republicans have Labor Day penciled in as the deadline for Trump to have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he ’ s on his own .
If it ’ s true that they have adopted a deadline , it is hard to imagine why .
Do they really think that Trump can turn things around by Labor Day ?
As I ’ ve indicated before , that is downright delusional .
To emphasize the point , take a look at the latest news about what the president ’ s campaign is counting on .
First of all , as Mehdi Hasan writes , “ Donald Trump is the king of cancel culture.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ female voters was on full display in the president ’ s speeches over the weekend .
In a speech at the White House on Saturday evening and an address in front of Mount Rushmore on Friday night , Mr. Trump promoted a version of the “ American carnage ” vision for the country that he laid out during his inaugural address— updated to include an ominous depiction of the recent protests over racial justice .
In doing so , he signaled even more clearly that he would exploit race and cultural flash points @ @ @ @ @ @ @ white supporters in an effort to win re-election .
As he has done in the past , he resorted on Friday to exaggerated , apocalyptic language in broadly tarring the nationwide protests against entrenched racism and police brutality , saying that “ angry mobs ” sought to “ unleash a wave of violent crime in our cities ” and that those seeking to deface monuments want to “ end America.
” Mr. Trump followed up with his remarks on Saturday from the South Lawn of the White House , which sounded more like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ themes from the previous evening .
“ We will never allow an angry mob to tear down our statues , erase our history , indoctrinate our children or trample on our freedoms , ” Mr. Trump said , claiming that protesters — who have won broad public support , including from corporate America — were “ not interested in justice or healing.
” Mr. Trump cast himself as the heir to “ American heroes ” who defeated Nazis , fascists , communists and terrorists , all but drawing a direct line from such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had simply assumed that this kind of language was meant to fire up his base .
But apparently Trump and his campaign staff think that they can frighten white suburban women with that garbage .
I suppose that none of us should be surprised that this president thinks he can manipulate women like that .
But Sarah Longwell nailed it when she said : Apparently Ernst and the rest of the Republican majority in the Senate want to wait until Labor Day to see if this kind of strategy works .
If so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president .
They had their moment of truth at the impeachment trial .
But after a day of conspiracy theories about Joe Biden from Trump ’ s defense team , here ’ s the gleeful response from Ernst .
Instead of counting on the likes of Trump and Giuliani to bring down Joe Biden , Ernst could have listened to Representative Adam Schiff .
But they acquitted Donald Trump and , in the process , sealed their fate to his .
No artificial deadline on Labor Day is going to change that @

Trump’s failing campaign is threatening Republican control of the Senate. Nevertheless, when asked whether the president has exhibited failed leadership in response to the coronavirus, Senator Joni Ernst defended him saying, “I think that the president is stepping forward.”
Apparently that response helped her opponent, Theresa Greenfield, raise over $100,000. It’s worth noting that the most recent Des Moines Register poll showed Greenfield leading Ernst by three points. In a state Trump won by nine points in 2016, that same poll had Biden ahead by one point.
The Senate race in Iowa demonstrates the dilemma facing Republicans all over the country—even in traditionally red states: Do they stick with the president and go down with him, or do they hold him accountable and risk losing the support of the GOP base, which remains loyal to Trump. At this point, they’re obviously picking the former. But according to Gabriel Sherman, they’ve adopted a deadline on that.
Nervous Republicans worried about losing the Senate are now debating when to break from Trump. Trump campaign internal polls show Trump’s level of “strong support” dropping from 21 to 17 points since last week, a person briefed on the numbers said. A source close to Iowa Republican Joni Ernst’s campaign said Ernst advisers are upset that a solid seat is now in play. “Joni’s campaign is pissed. They should not be in a competitive race,” the source said…A Republican strategist close to Mitch McConnell told me that Republicans have Labor Day penciled in as the deadline for Trump to have turned things around. After that, he’s on his own.
If it’s true that they have adopted a deadline, it is hard to imagine why. Do they really think that Trump can turn things around by Labor Day? As I’ve indicated before, that is downright delusional. To emphasize the point, take a look at the latest news about what the president’s campaign is counting on.
Campaign officials have repeatedly said they expect a backlash against the progressive “cancel culture” movement to help the president’s standing with white suburban female voters, who they believe to be frightened by images of chaos in the city streets.
First of all, as Mehdi Hasan writes, “Donald Trump is the king of cancel culture.” But the plan to scare suburban female voters was on full display in the president’s speeches over the weekend.
In a speech at the White House on Saturday evening and an address in front of Mount Rushmore on Friday night, Mr. Trump promoted a version of the “American carnage” vision for the country that he laid out during his inaugural address— updated to include an ominous depiction of the recent protests over racial justice. In doing so, he signaled even more clearly that he would exploit race and cultural flash points to stoke fear among his base of white supporters in an effort to win re-election. As he has done in the past, he resorted on Friday to exaggerated, apocalyptic language in broadly tarring the nationwide protests against entrenched racism and police brutality, saying that “angry mobs” sought to “unleash a wave of violent crime in our cities” and that those seeking to deface monuments want to “end America.” Mr. Trump followed up with his remarks on Saturday from the South Lawn of the White House, which sounded more like a campaign rally, and repeated the themes from the previous evening. “We will never allow an angry mob to tear down our statues, erase our history, indoctrinate our children or trample on our freedoms,” Mr. Trump said, claiming that protesters — who have won broad public support, including from corporate America — were “not interested in justice or healing.” Mr. Trump cast himself as the heir to “American heroes” who defeated Nazis, fascists, communists and terrorists, all but drawing a direct line from such enemies to his domestic critics.
I had simply assumed that this kind of language was meant to fire up his base. But apparently Trump and his campaign staff think that they can frighten white suburban women with that garbage. I suppose that none of us should be surprised that this president thinks he can manipulate women like that. But Sarah Longwell nailed it when she said:
Trump’s campaign fundamentally misunderstands suburban women. They are not frightened. They are disgusted. Disgusted by Trump’s divisive behavior. They’re not looking for Trump to protect them from the chaos. They blame Trump for the chaos.
Apparently Ernst and the rest of the Republican majority in the Senate want to wait until Labor Day to see if this kind of strategy works. If so, they’ll go down with the president. They had their moment of truth at the impeachment trial. But after a day of conspiracy theories about Joe Biden from Trump’s defense team, here’s the gleeful response from Ernst.
Instead of counting on the likes of Trump and Giuliani to bring down Joe Biden, Ernst could have listened to Representative Adam Schiff.
But they acquitted Donald Trump and, in the process, sealed their fate to his. No artificial deadline on Labor Day is going to change that.


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-07--Is Trump Now Taking Advice From Tucker Carlson?

With even Fox News polls showing a sizable national lead for Biden over Trump in the upcoming election , the president has started to attack the network that has been one of his chief enablers .
But there is one host that he still loves : Tucker Carlson .
According to Gabriel Sherman , that ’ s who he goes to for advice .
Republicans that have spoken with Trump in recent days describe him as depressed and “ down in the dumps.
” “ People around him think his heart ’ s not in it , ” a Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Torn between the imperative to win suburban voters and his instincts to play to his base , Trump has complained to people that he ’ s in a political box with no obvious way out .
According to the Republican , Trump called Tucker Carlson late last week and said , “ what do I do ?
What do I do ?
” As we ’ ve seen , Trump seems to have taken Carlson ’ s advice to follow his racist instincts and jettison the advice of Jared Kushner .
But on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ went deep into the gutters of hate .
Carlson went after Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois simply because she ’ s landed on the list of women Biden is considering for his running mate .
Teeing off a response from Duckworth about the need to have a discussion about our founding fathers who owned slaves , he said the following .
Just to be clear , Duckworth wasn ’ t just elected by the people of Illinois to represent them in the U.S. Senate , she is a Purple Heart recipient who lost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Iraq .
The trust fund guy who sits behind a desk every night spewing hate is the one accusing Duckworth of hating America because she supports the idea of having a dialogue about this country ’ s original sin .
The Senator responded with this simple suggestion .
In case you think this is some new low for right wingers , I have two names for you : John Kerry and Max Cleland .
The war they fought in was Vietnam , but their Republican opponents had no problem questioning their courage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a bit more subtly than Carlson .
While not based on military service , Republicans also challenged the patriotism of this country ’ s first African American president .
So this is obviously part of the Republican playbook—especially when they ’ re feeling desperate .
Trump has already picked up on the theme .
“ We will never allow an angry mob to tear down our statues , erase our history , indoctrinate our children or trample on our freedoms , ” Mr. Trump said , claiming that protesters — who have won @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America — were “ not interested in justice or healing.
” Mr. Trump cast himself as the heir to “ American heroes ” who defeated Nazis , fascists , communists and terrorists , all but drawing a direct line from such enemies to his domestic critics .
The demands of the people Trump refers to as an “ angry mob ” are that we , as a nation , confront our racist history and the way it is currently playing out with incidents of police brutality .
But to the president , people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , fascists , communists , and terrorists .
Hillary Clinton took a lot of heat in 2016 for saying that those spreading that kind of hate are in a “ basket of deplorables.
” Here ’ s my message to Carlson , Trump and all their enablers .
Jon Favreau once said that “ Every election is a competition between two stories about America.
” What we ’ ve seen from Carlson and Trump is the story of America that they want to tell .
It is one where angry white men accuse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America .
Joe Biden has a different story of America .
Biden is absolutely right to suggest that this election is part of the struggle for the soul of America .
No one makes that more clear than Trump ’ s deplorable advisor , Tucker Carlson .

With even Fox News polls showing a sizable national lead for Biden over Trump in the upcoming election, the president has started to attack the network that has been one of his chief enablers. But there is one host that he still loves: Tucker Carlson. According to Gabriel Sherman, that’s who he goes to for advice.
Republicans that have spoken with Trump in recent days describe him as depressed and “down in the dumps.” “People around him think his heart’s not in it,” a Republican close to the White House said. Torn between the imperative to win suburban voters and his instincts to play to his base, Trump has complained to people that he’s in a political box with no obvious way out. According to the Republican, Trump called Tucker Carlson late last week and said, “what do I do? What do I do?”
As we’ve seen, Trump seems to have taken Carlson’s advice to follow his racist instincts and jettison the advice of Jared Kushner. But on Monday night, the Fox News host went deep into the gutters of hate. Carlson went after Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois simply because she’s landed on the list of women Biden is considering for his running mate. Teeing off a response from Duckworth about the need to have a discussion about our founding fathers who owned slaves, he said the following.
You’re not supposed to criticize Tammy Duckworth in any way because she once served in the military…When Duckworth does speak in public, you’re reminded what a deeply silly and unimpressive person she is…But in the face of all of this, the conclusion can’t be avoided. These people actually hate America. There’s no longer a question about that.
Just to be clear, Duckworth wasn’t just elected by the people of Illinois to represent them in the U.S. Senate, she is a Purple Heart recipient who lost both her legs while serving her country in Iraq. The trust fund guy who sits behind a desk every night spewing hate is the one accusing Duckworth of hating America because she supports the idea of having a dialogue about this country’s original sin. The Senator responded with this simple suggestion.
In case you think this is some new low for right wingers, I have two names for you: John Kerry and Max Cleland. The war they fought in was Vietnam, but their Republican opponents had no problem questioning their courage and patriotism. They just did it a bit more subtly than Carlson. While not based on military service, Republicans also challenged the patriotism of this country’s first African American president. So this is obviously part of the Republican playbook—especially when they’re feeling desperate. Trump has already picked up on the theme.
“We will never allow an angry mob to tear down our statues, erase our history, indoctrinate our children or trample on our freedoms,” Mr. Trump said, claiming that protesters — who have won broad public support, including from corporate America — were “not interested in justice or healing.” Mr. Trump cast himself as the heir to “American heroes” who defeated Nazis, fascists, communists and terrorists, all but drawing a direct line from such enemies to his domestic critics.
The demands of the people Trump refers to as an “angry mob” are that we, as a nation, confront our racist history and the way it is currently playing out with incidents of police brutality. But to the president, people making those demand are comparable to Nazis, fascists, communists, and terrorists.
Hillary Clinton took a lot of heat in 2016 for saying that those spreading that kind of hate are in a “basket of deplorables.” Here’s my message to Carlson, Trump and all their enablers.
Jon Favreau once said that “Every election is a competition between two stories about America.” What we’ve seen from Carlson and Trump is the story of America that they want to tell. It is one where angry white men accuse anyone who challenges their privilege of hating America. Joe Biden has a different story of America.
American history is no fairy tale. It’s been a constant push and pull between two parts of our character: the idea that all men and women—all people—are created equal and the racism that has torn us apart.
Biden is absolutely right to suggest that this election is part of the struggle for the soul of America. No one makes that more clear than Trump’s deplorable advisor, Tucker Carlson.


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-07--What Will the GOP Look Like Without Trump?

At Roll Call , Stu Rothenberg revisits the 1996 campaign when congressional Republicans deliberately adopted a late strategy premised on the idea that Bob Dole was going to lose .
It ’ s a reminder that Dole actually finished much better than the polls had predicted .
But it ’ s also something the House and Senate Republicans might want to attempt again in 2020 .
The popular vote finished with Bill Clinton winning by 8.5 percent which , even taking into account Ross Perot ’ s late entry into the race , was far closer than the polls had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two-day rolling average showed Clinton leading by 19 points , 57 percent to 38 percent .
A July 25-28 three-day rolling average found Clinton ahead by 18 points , 57 percent to 39 percent .
Labor Day didn ’ t fundamentally change the shape of the race , which included businessman Ross Perot running again as an independent .
A Sept. 10-12 CNN/USA Today/Gallup tracking poll of likely voters showed Clinton leading with 55 percent , followed by Dole ( 32 percent ) and Perot ( 6 percent ) .
Throughout the fall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then lost them , but the Republican challenger never changed the contest ’ s trajectory .
For example , on Oct. 14-15 , the race allegedly “ closed ” to 9 points , 48 percent to 39 percent , with Perot at 5 percent .
But just a few days later , Oct. 18-19 , Clinton was back up by 19 points , 54 percent to 35 percent , with Perot at 6 percent .
The actual tally was Clinton ( 49 percent ) , Dole ( 41 percent ) , and Perot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mid-October poll was not too far off .
Yet , precisely because Dole was generally measuring about 20 points behind , his Republican colleagues who were sharing a ballot column with him decided to campaign as a check against Clinton ’ s second term power .
Weeks before the 1996 general election , operatives at the Republican National Committee and National Republican Congressional Committee urged GOP campaigns to adopt a last-minute , new strategy .
As New York Times reporter Adam Clymer wrote , they urged “ their party ’ s Congressional candidates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ press voters to maintain a Republican majority and deny a re-elected ( Bill ) Clinton a ‘ blank check.
’ ” “ If Clinton is re-elected , heaven forbid , the last thing the American people want is for him to have a blank check in the form of a liberal Democrat Congress , ” RNC Chairman Haley Barbour said in the article .
To the dismay of Dole campaign strategists ( who understood the new message amounted to an admission that their candidate had no chance ) , Republican operatives did embrace @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , even investing what one longtime operative now calls “ a lot of money pushing that message in the mail.
” As Rothenberg points out , it won ’ t be easy to repeat this strategy for several reasons .
The most important impediment is that Trump is an incumbent president and has far more power over the party apparatus than Dole ever enjoyed .
But almost as important is the fact that Trump is far more popular with the Republican base than Dole was , and he ’ s also almost immeasurably @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Congress .
For example , a recent YouGov survey found that 87 percent of Republicans approve of Trump ’ s job performance , while only 63 percent gave good marks to Mitch McConnell .
Among all voters , the difference was almost as stark , with McConnell getting the thumbs up from only 26 percent compared to Trump ’ s 40 percent .
Gallup polling tells much the same story , with the latest congressional approval survey showing a brutal 25 percent to 71 percent approve/disapprove result .
That makes their finding that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rating look good by comparison .
For these reasons , it ’ s highly doubtful that we ’ ll see the Republicans openly adopting a strategy based on blocking Joe Biden ’ s power once he assumes the presidency .
But it also raises the interesting question : What will remain of the Republican Party once Trump leaves the scene ?
Three of the last four congressional preference polls show the Democrats at or above 50 percent , leading anywhere from 8 to 13 points .
Meanwhile , a lot of the McCain/Romney @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden .
Suburban Republicans are becoming as rare as rural Democrats .
The congressional Republicans ’ theory is that “ between one-third and one-half of Trump voters have little allegiance to the Republican Party ” and “ like him because they don ’ t see him as a Republican.
” How many of them will be sticking with the GOP when someone else has taken up the banner ?
On the one hand , with Trump on the sidelines ( or possibly in a New York State prison ) , he ’ d @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of moderate Republicans .
On the other hand , how many Republican voters will be left if Trump ’ s hordes splinter after he ’ s gone ?
If Trump falls further behind in the polls , we may see some candidates create some real distance from him , but not at the direction of the NRSC and NRCC .
We also shouldn ’ t trust that he ’ ll really lose by twenty points even if the polls predict that outcome .
But when the dust all settles , assuming Trump doesn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there is going to very little of the GOP left to pick up the pieces .

At Roll Call, Stu Rothenberg revisits the 1996 campaign when congressional Republicans deliberately adopted a late strategy premised on the idea that Bob Dole was going to lose. It’s a reminder that Dole actually finished much better than the polls had predicted. But it’s also something the House and Senate Republicans might want to attempt again in 2020.
The popular vote finished with Bill Clinton winning by 8.5 percent which, even taking into account Ross Perot’s late entry into the race, was far closer than the polls had predicted.
Gallup’s June 18-19 two-day rolling average showed Clinton leading by 19 points, 57 percent to 38 percent. A July 25-28 three-day rolling average found Clinton ahead by 18 points, 57 percent to 39 percent. Labor Day didn’t fundamentally change the shape of the race, which included businessman Ross Perot running again as an independent. A Sept. 10-12 CNN/USA Today/Gallup tracking poll of likely voters showed Clinton leading with 55 percent, followed by Dole (32 percent) and Perot (6 percent). Throughout the fall, Dole gained a few points and then lost them, but the Republican challenger never changed the contest’s trajectory. For example, on Oct. 14-15, the race allegedly “closed” to 9 points, 48 percent to 39 percent, with Perot at 5 percent. But just a few days later, Oct. 18-19, Clinton was back up by 19 points, 54 percent to 35 percent, with Perot at 6 percent.
The actual tally was Clinton (49 percent), Dole (41 percent), and Perot (8 percent), so the mid-October poll was not too far off. Yet, precisely because Dole was generally measuring about 20 points behind, his Republican colleagues who were sharing a ballot column with him decided to campaign as a check against Clinton’s second term power.
Weeks before the 1996 general election, operatives at the Republican National Committee and National Republican Congressional Committee urged GOP campaigns to adopt a last-minute, new strategy. As New York Times reporter Adam Clymer wrote, they urged “their party’s Congressional candidates to cut loose from Bob Dole and press voters to maintain a Republican majority and deny a re-elected (Bill) Clinton a ‘blank check.’” “If Clinton is re-elected, heaven forbid, the last thing the American people want is for him to have a blank check in the form of a liberal Democrat Congress,” RNC Chairman Haley Barbour said in the article. To the dismay of Dole campaign strategists (who understood the new message amounted to an admission that their candidate had no chance), Republican operatives did embrace that “no blank check” message, even investing what one longtime operative now calls “a lot of money pushing that message in the mail.”
As Rothenberg points out, it won’t be easy to repeat this strategy for several reasons. The most important impediment is that Trump is an incumbent president and has far more power over the party apparatus than Dole ever enjoyed. But almost as important is the fact that Trump is far more popular with the Republican base than Dole was, and he’s also almost immeasurably more popular than the party leaders in Congress. For example, a recent YouGov survey found that 87 percent of Republicans approve of Trump’s job performance, while only 63 percent gave good marks to Mitch McConnell. Among all voters, the difference was almost as stark, with McConnell getting the thumbs up from only 26 percent compared to Trump’s 40 percent.
Gallup polling tells much the same story, with the latest congressional approval survey showing a brutal 25 percent to 71 percent approve/disapprove result. That makes their finding that Trump currently has a 38 percent approval rating look good by comparison.
For these reasons, it’s highly doubtful that we’ll see the Republicans openly adopting a strategy based on blocking Joe Biden’s power once he assumes the presidency. But it also raises the interesting question:What will remain of the Republican Party once Trump leaves the scene? Three of the last four congressional preference polls show the Democrats at or above 50 percent, leading anywhere from 8 to 13 points. Meanwhile, a lot of the McCain/Romney base has already crossed over to support Biden. Suburban Republicans are becoming as rare as rural Democrats. The congressional Republicans’ theory is that “between one-third and one-half of Trump voters have little allegiance to the Republican Party” and “like him because they don’t see him as a Republican.” How many of them will be sticking with the GOP when someone else has taken up the banner?
On the one hand, with Trump on the sidelines (or possibly in a New York State prison), he’d be less able to destroy the careers of moderate Republicans. On the other hand, how many Republican voters will be left if Trump’s hordes splinter after he’s gone?
If Trump falls further behind in the polls, we may see some candidates create some real distance from him, but not at the direction of the NRSC and NRCC. We also shouldn’t trust that he’ll really lose by twenty points even if the polls predict that outcome. But when the dust all settles, assuming Trump doesn’t pull off another miracle, there is going to very little of the GOP left to pick up the pieces.


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-08--Why Women Can’t Succeed in the Republican Party

In 2018 , Democrats set a record with 356 women running for House seats .
After the election , the number of women Democrats serving in that body rose from 64 to 89 .
Meanwhile , the number of women Republicans serving in the House plummeted from 23 to 13 .
Recently the Center for American Women in Politics announced the number of women running for House seats in 2020 .
While still not on par with Democrats , Republicans set a historic record with 224 women running , an 86 percent increase over 2018 .
As of Tuesday , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , with 141 still in the running .
Eleven Republican women are running as incumbents , with 20 vying for open seats and 110 seeking to challenge an incumbent .
Of course , the odds are stacked against that last group .
The dilemma some of these candidates face is whether to be loyal to the man at the top of the ticket .
[ M ] any of the women who have won GOP primaries have a difficult road ahead , especially when they ’ ve had to profess support for President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may face suburban voters not so hot on the President in a general election .
Only one of the 12 women on the highest level of the NRCC ’ s Young Guns list — Texas ’ Beth Van Duyne — is in a seat trending toward Republicans , according to ratings from Inside Elections with Nathan L. Gonzales , who ’ s a CNN contributor .
Three of the 12 women are running in Solid Democratic districts .
Conway , the executive director of VIEW PAC , worries that touting women running in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ narrative that GOP women are falling short if they don ’ t win this fall .
“ That ’ s setting us up to fail , ” she said… Mary Miller in Illinois ’ 15th District and Lauren Boebert , who upset five-term incumbent Scott Tipton in Colorado ’ s 3rd District on Tuesday , are the only new women who have won GOP nominations in solid Republican seats so far .
Lauren Boebert is the latest Republican candidate who has expressed support for QAnon and related conspiracy theories , so in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Democrat Diane Mitsch Bush actually has a shot at the race .
According to Politico , things look even worse for Republican women in the Senate .
Senate Republicans could lose nearly half of the women currently in their caucus come November after recently making painstaking gains — the latest potential blow to the party in the Trump era .
Out of nine Senate GOP women serving , four face highly competitive races this year in Arizona , Maine , Georgia and Iowa… The four GOP women with difficult races include veteran @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is expected to take on Maine state House speaker Sara Gideon , as well as conservative freshman Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa who faces businesswoman Theresa Greenfield .
Meanwhile , McSally is in a tough race against Mark Kelly , a former astronaut married to former Rep. Gabby Giffords ( D-Ariz. ) , and Loeffler faces an intraparty challenge from GOP Rep. Doug Collins and a fight against Democrat Raphael Warnock .
It ’ s pretty clear that 2020 will not be the “ year of the woman ” for Republicans , even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there is some truth to the old saying from Tip O ’ Neill about all politics being local , having a president like Donald Trump at the top of the ticket has turned the gender gap into a chasm .
In his surprise 2016 victory over Hillary Clinton , the first woman nominated for president by either of the two major parties , Trump won 52 % of votes cast by men but only 41 % of those cast by women .
That gender gap of 11 percentage points tied the biggest recorded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been tracked in U.S. presidential elections .
Trump entered office with an approval rating of 50 % among men and 38 % among women — another substantial gap , and one that has remained in the double digits during his presidency .
A large gender gap drove the outcome of the 2018 U.S. midterm election , when Democrats captured control of the House of Representatives .
Some early national polling taken in April , right as Joseph Biden became the presumptive Democratic nominee , indicated Trump could suffer a record-setting gap among female @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 19 percentage points in the general election .
Susan , a former GOP state legislator from Wisconsin , explains her view of the Republican Party and their representatives in Congress .
When we talk about women voters , the conversation is often limited to issues like reproductive choice and equal pay .
It is true that women have tended to support Democrats because of those issues .
But I think Susan is on to something when she talks about her concern for the lack of morals in the Republican Party these days .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to “ grab p*ssy ” became a president who separated children from their parents and put them in cages .
Throughout all of that , he has lied almost 20,000 times since taking office while Republicans in Congress simply enabled him .
A party that is only interested in the power of dominance and has no moral compass will never be one where women prevail .

In 2018, Democrats set a record with 356 women running for House seats. After the election, the number of women Democrats serving in that body rose from 64 to 89. Meanwhile, the number of women Republicans serving in the House plummeted from 23 to 13.
Recently the Center for American Women in Politics announced the number of women running for House seats in 2020. While still not on par with Democrats, Republicans set a historic record with 224 women running, an 86 percent increase over 2018. As of Tuesday, 86 of those women lost their primary, with 141 still in the running. Eleven Republican women are running as incumbents, with 20 vying for open seats and 110 seeking to challenge an incumbent. Of course, the odds are stacked against that last group.
The dilemma some of these candidates face is whether to be loyal to the man at the top of the ticket.
[M]any of the women who have won GOP primaries have a difficult road ahead, especially when they’ve had to profess support for President Donald Trump to win the nomination but may face suburban voters not so hot on the President in a general election. Only one of the 12 women on the highest level of the NRCC’s Young Guns list — Texas’ Beth Van Duyne — is in a seat trending toward Republicans, according to ratings from Inside Elections with Nathan L. Gonzales, who’s a CNN contributor. Three of the 12 women are running in Solid Democratic districts. Conway, the executive director of VIEW PAC, worries that touting women running in unwinnable races will only contribute to the narrative that GOP women are falling short if they don’t win this fall. “That’s setting us up to fail,” she said… Mary Miller in Illinois’ 15th District and Lauren Boebert, who upset five-term incumbent Scott Tipton in Colorado’s 3rd District on Tuesday, are the only new women who have won GOP nominations in solid Republican seats so far.
Lauren Boebert is the latest Republican candidate who has expressed support for QAnon and related conspiracy theories, so in a district rated R+6 by Cook Political Report, Democrat Diane Mitsch Bush actually has a shot at the race.
According to Politico, things look even worse for Republican women in the Senate.
Senate Republicans could lose nearly half of the women currently in their caucus come November after recently making painstaking gains — the latest potential blow to the party in the Trump era. Out of nine Senate GOP women serving, four face highly competitive races this year in Arizona, Maine, Georgia and Iowa… The four GOP women with difficult races include veteran centrists like Sen. Susan Collins, who is expected to take on Maine state House speaker Sara Gideon, as well as conservative freshman Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa who faces businesswoman Theresa Greenfield. Meanwhile, McSally is in a tough race against Mark Kelly, a former astronaut married to former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-Ariz.), and Loeffler faces an intraparty challenge from GOP Rep. Doug Collins and a fight against Democrat Raphael Warnock.
It’s pretty clear that 2020 will not be the “year of the woman” for Republicans, even with a record number running. While there is some truth to the old saying from Tip O’Neill about all politics being local, having a president like Donald Trump at the top of the ticket has turned the gender gap into a chasm.
In his surprise 2016 victory over Hillary Clinton, the first woman nominated for president by either of the two major parties, Trump won 52% of votes cast by men but only 41% of those cast by women. That gender gap of 11 percentage points tied the biggest recorded in the four decades it’s been tracked in U.S. presidential elections. Trump entered office with an approval rating of 50% among men and 38% among women — another substantial gap, and one that has remained in the double digits during his presidency. A large gender gap drove the outcome of the 2018 U.S. midterm election, when Democrats captured control of the House of Representatives. Some early national polling taken in April, right as Joseph Biden became the presumptive Democratic nominee, indicated Trump could suffer a record-setting gap among female voters in the range of 14 to 19 percentage points in the general election.
Susan, a former GOP state legislator from Wisconsin, explains her view of the Republican Party and their representatives in Congress.
When we talk about women voters, the conversation is often limited to issues like reproductive choice and equal pay. It is true that women have tended to support Democrats because of those issues. But I think Susan is on to something when she talks about her concern for the lack of morals in the Republican Party these days. A man who brags about being able to “grab p*ssy” became a president who separated children from their parents and put them in cages. Throughout all of that, he has lied almost 20,000 times since taking office while Republicans in Congress simply enabled him. A party that is only interested in the power of dominance and has no moral compass will never be one where women prevail.


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-08--Can Anti-Trump Republican Groups Bring About a Biden Landslide?

According to Jonathan Martin , Republican leaders who don ’ t support Trump ’ s reelection have chosen one of three different paths .
• State publicly that they won ’ t vote for him and plan to vote for Biden ( Colin Powell and Carly Fiorina ) .
• State publicly that they won ’ t vote for him , but won ’ t vote for Biden ( Mitt Romney and John Bolton ) .
There ’ s one thing that all of those Republicans except Romney have in common : none of them currently hold elective office .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Martin heard about those who do .
“ I ’ ve had five conversations with senators who tell me they are really struggling with supporting Trump , ” said [ Democratic Senator Chris ] Coons , who declined to give names .
Indeed , one Republican senator , who is publicly supporting the president , said in an interview that he might prefer a Biden victory if the G.O.P .
managed to preserve its Senate majority .
This lawmaker , like a number of Republicans , is uneasy with Mr. Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of questions from reporters about the latest presidential eruption .
As former Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri , a moderate Democrat who was friends with a number of her former Republican colleagues , put it : “ It ’ s easier to count the ones who are definitely voting for Trump.
” That demonstrates the kind of political cowardice that has plagued Republicans ever since Trump was elected .
But in talking to GOP campaign consultants , Tim Miller explains the dilemma faced by those up for reelection in 2020 , like Senator @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] ather than addressing this by creating some strategic separation from Trump to solidify the historically conservative Dallas and Houston suburbs where Trump is bleeding out , Cornyn has become a Mr. Trump fan girl , echoing his virus denial and defending the attack on nonviolent protestors in Lafayette Square .
Why ?
According to one : “ You have 25 % of the state is rural and Trump gets like Saddam Hussein level numbers here .
87 % in 25 % of the state… Cornyn gets 69 .
And so Cornyn can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from because he could really put that in jeopardy.
” And thus the polarizing nature of Trump makes it impossible for Cornyn to make a move that helps him in the swingy suburbs without risking the floor falling out from under him in West Texas .
That is why I find the number of Republican groups forming to defeat Trump extremely significant .
The ranks include the Lincoln Project , Right Side PAC , 43 Alumni for Biden , and Republican Voters Against Trump .
The proliferation of these groups strikes me as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it deserves our attention .
Here is something Republican strategist John Weaver said about the goal of the Lincoln Project .
The fact that Republicans are hierarchical is an astute observation .
But that ’ s not the only reason why building a permission ramp is important .
As Andrew Levison wrote , conservatives have actually built a three-level ideological cocoon that these kinds of efforts could puncture .
The first level is a national media structure headlined by Fox News .
Behind that are local news sources such as Sinclair TV stations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is more likely to affect the third level , which Levison describes as the most significant .
Finally , and most importantly , it is the network of personal relationships between neighbors and friends that works to validate and confirm the broader messages .
Casual conversations with friends , Facebook messages and e-mails from relatives , and jokes passed among co-workers all reinforce the sense that Democrats are the “ other ” and lead people who once supported Democrats to mute their views , creating what sociologists call a “ spiral of silence.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican Party seem not just dominant but unanimous .
This last , most intimate level of influence is the most important because it validates and provides the “ proof ” that what the conservative national and local media are saying is actually right .
In this environment , political life ceases to be a debate or dialog between candidates or parties .
Instead people come to accept that you would have to be completely out of your mind to ever vote for a Democrat .
As an example of how to puncture that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the kind of video from Republican Voters Against Trump that might break through to some white evangelical Christians—even in Texas .
Notice how Tommy says that he reluctantly voted for Trump in 2016 because the “ at least he ’ s not Hillary Clinton ” rallying cry was strong in his part of the country .
That is a perfect example of how the “ spiral of silence ” works .
Now Tommy is part of building a permission structure to give others an option that he didn ’ t take advantage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a fact that there are some Trump supporters who will hang on until the bitter end .
But the reason a possible landslide for Biden is even being discussed is that there are Republicans out there who are beginning to see that “ dark path ” that Tommy says Trump ’ s reelection would take us down .
The seeds of doubt are being planted .

According to Jonathan Martin, Republican leaders who don’t support Trump’s reelection have chosen one of three different paths.
State publicly that they won’t vote for him and plan to vote for Biden (Colin Powell and Carly Fiorina). State publicly that they won’t vote for him, but won’t vote for Biden (Mitt Romney and John Bolton). Stay silent (George W. Bush, Paul Ryan, and John Boehner).
There’s one thing that all of those Republicans except Romney have in common: none of them currently hold elective office. What is even more interesting is what Martin heard about those who do.
“I’ve had five conversations with senators who tell me they are really struggling with supporting Trump,” said [Democratic Senator Chris] Coons, who declined to give names. Indeed, one Republican senator, who is publicly supporting the president, said in an interview that he might prefer a Biden victory if the G.O.P. managed to preserve its Senate majority. This lawmaker, like a number of Republicans, is uneasy with Mr. Trump’s behavior and weary from the near-weekly barrage of questions from reporters about the latest presidential eruption. As former Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri, a moderate Democrat who was friends with a number of her former Republican colleagues, put it: “It’s easier to count the ones who are definitely voting for Trump.”
That demonstrates the kind of political cowardice that has plagued Republicans ever since Trump was elected. But in talking to GOP campaign consultants, Tim Miller explains the dilemma faced by those up for reelection in 2020, like Senator John Cornyn of Texas.
[R]ather than addressing this by creating some strategic separation from Trump to solidify the historically conservative Dallas and Houston suburbs where Trump is bleeding out, Cornyn has become a Mr. Trump fan girl, echoing his virus denial and defending the attack on nonviolent protestors in Lafayette Square. Why? According to one: “You have 25% of the state is rural and Trump gets like Saddam Hussein level numbers here. 87% in 25% of the state… Cornyn gets 69. And so Cornyn can’t find a place to break from because he could really put that in jeopardy.” And thus the polarizing nature of Trump makes it impossible for Cornyn to make a move that helps him in the swingy suburbs without risking the floor falling out from under him in West Texas.
That is why I find the number of Republican groups forming to defeat Trump extremely significant. The ranks include the Lincoln Project, Right Side PAC, 43 Alumni for Biden, and Republican Voters Against Trump. The proliferation of these groups strikes me as unprecedented in modern political history, so it deserves our attention. Here is something Republican strategist John Weaver said about the goal of the Lincoln Project.
“Republicans are hierarchical,” Weaver said. “So what’s not getting a lot of attention right now is the structure we are building — the permission ramp for Republicans so that they will have some comfort that they are not alone in doing the right thing.”
The fact that Republicans are hierarchical is an astute observation. But that’s not the only reason why building a permission ramp is important. As Andrew Levison wrote, conservatives have actually built a three-level ideological cocoon that these kinds of efforts could puncture. The first level is a national media structure headlined by Fox News. Behind that are local news sources such as Sinclair TV stations and talk radio. A permission ramp is more likely to affect the third level, which Levison describes as the most significant.
Finally, and most importantly, it is the network of personal relationships between neighbors and friends that works to validate and confirm the broader messages. Casual conversations with friends, Facebook messages and e-mails from relatives, and jokes passed among co-workers all reinforce the sense that Democrats are the “other” and lead people who once supported Democrats to mute their views, creating what sociologists call a “spiral of silence.” The result makes support for the Republican Party seem not just dominant but unanimous. This last, most intimate level of influence is the most important because it validates and provides the “proof” that what the conservative national and local media are saying is actually right. In this environment, political life ceases to be a debate or dialog between candidates or parties. Instead people come to accept that you would have to be completely out of your mind to ever vote for a Democrat.
As an example of how to puncture that “spiral of silence,” this is the kind of video from Republican Voters Against Trump that might break through to some white evangelical Christians—even in Texas.
Notice how Tommy says that he reluctantly voted for Trump in 2016 because the “at least he’s not Hillary Clinton” rallying cry was strong in his part of the country. That is a perfect example of how the “spiral of silence” works. Now Tommy is part of building a permission structure to give others an option that he didn’t take advantage of four years ago.
It is a fact that there are some Trump supporters who will hang on until the bitter end. But the reason a possible landslide for Biden is even being discussed is that there are Republicans out there who are beginning to see that “dark path” that Tommy says Trump’s reelection would take us down. The seeds of doubt are being planted.


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-08--Even a 10 Year Old Knows Better Than to Believe Trump

My ten year old son had two baseball practices last week .
It was the first time that he ’ d seen anyone his own age since March .
It was the furthest thing from normal , considering all the safety requirements that have been introduced to Little League , but it was psychologically beneficial .
He ’ s been asking with increasing frequency about school possibly resuming in August , and I can tell that he wants reassurance that it will .
His summer camp , which he absolutely loves , was canceled this summer .
He wants to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worries about the COVID-19 virus and he follows the news closely .
Yesterday , he saw President Trump saying on television that he ’ s going to get mad at any states or districts that don ’ t reopen schools for the fall .
It was a point Trump made on Twitter , too .
This had the effect of making him instantly change his mind about the advisability of opening schools .
The reason is simple .
My son has observed the president closely throughout this crisis , and he ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says is true and that nothing he predicts will come true .
He ’ s also decided that taking Trump ’ s advice on anything is a bad idea .
The man has pushed a dangerous anti-malarial drug onto the public and caused his supporters to poison themselves by ingesting disinfectants .
If Trump says it ’ s safe , the only assumption my son can make now is that it ’ s not safe .
No doubt , he ’ s influenced by his parents ’ feelings about the president , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he ’ s usually riffing off of things he ’ s seen or read , not regurgitating some rant he heard from his mother or father .
Trump lost his credibility with him on his own .
Based on the polls , this seems to have happened in more households than my own , and it hasn ’ t been restricted to people too young to vote .
People are looking around and noticing that other countries have knocked their infection rate way down .
Now they ’ re telling Americans that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America has become a giant prison , and it ’ s a blow to our self-esteem .
There ’ s no chance that my son will ever trust Trump to keep him safe or give him good advice or tell the truth .
He ’ s young , but he has enough experience already to know better .
It looks like the country increasingly feels the same way .

My ten year old son had two baseball practices last week. It was the first time that he’d seen anyone his own age since March. It was the furthest thing from normal, considering all the safety requirements that have been introduced to Little League, but it was psychologically beneficial.
He’s been asking with increasing frequency about school possibly resuming in August, and I can tell that he wants reassurance that it will. His summer camp, which he absolutely loves, was canceled this summer. He wants to see his friends.
But he also worries about the COVID-19 virus and he follows the news closely. Yesterday, he saw President Trump saying on television that he’s going to get mad at any states or districts that don’t reopen schools for the fall. It was a point Trump made on Twitter, too.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1280853299600789505?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1280853299600789505%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fus-news%2Flive%2F2020%2Fjul%2F08%2Fthree-million-coronavirus-cases-donald-trump-mary-mexico-joe-biden-live-updates
This had the effect of making him instantly change his mind about the advisability of opening schools. The reason is simple. My son has observed the president closely throughout this crisis, and he’s come to the conclusion that nothing he says is true and that nothing he predicts will come true. He’s also decided that taking Trump’s advice on anything is a bad idea. The man has pushed a dangerous anti-malarial drug onto the public and caused his supporters to poison themselves by ingesting disinfectants.
If Trump says it’s safe, the only assumption my son can make now is that it’s not safe.
No doubt, he’s influenced by his parents’ feelings about the president, but when I listen to my son talk, he’s usually riffing off of things he’s seen or read, not regurgitating some rant he heard from his mother or father. Trump lost his credibility with him on his own.
Based on the polls, this seems to have happened in more households than my own, and it hasn’t been restricted to people too young to vote. People are looking around and noticing that other countries have knocked their infection rate way down. Now they’re telling Americans that we can’t visit them. America has become a giant prison, and it’s a blow to our self-esteem.
There’s no chance that my son will ever trust Trump to keep him safe or give him good advice or tell the truth. He’s young, but he has enough experience already to know better. It looks like the country increasingly feels the same way.


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-09--Georgia and Texas Are the New Battleground States for 2020

One of the most endearing memories about Tim Russert ’ s election coverage was his use of the small low-tech white board to make predictions .
Most often it included two states that always showed up as the battlegrounds in presidential elections : Ohio and Florida .
When the New York Times released their latest poll of the 2020 race , one of the bombshells was that Biden had a significant lead over Trump in six battleground states .
That included Florida , along with Michigan , Wisconsin , Pennsylvania , Arizona , and North Carolina .
David Wasserman explained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ list .
Ohio is demographically similar to Michigan , Wisconsin and Pennsylvania : It has an aging , large blue-collar white population , a modest Black population and a relatively low Latino share .
But Ohio voted for Trump by 7 to 8 points more than the three other states .
If Biden is competitive in Ohio come November , he ’ ll have already won Michigan , Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — and almost certainly the presidency — rendering Ohio irrelevant .
The idea of Ohio being irrelevant in a presidential race would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same thing as declaring that the state is now red .
Instead , as Wasserman suggests , if Ohio is competitive , Biden will have already won .
It is worth noting , however , that if polling by the NYT is both accurate and predictive of what will happen in November , Biden has a lead of somewhere between six and 11 points in the states identified as battlegrounds .
That calls into question the whole idea of whether or not they ’ re really battlegrounds .
Bill Barrow explains why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Many Southern electorates are getting younger , less white and more urban , and thus less likely to embrace President Donald Trump ’ s white identity politics .
Southern Democrats are pairing a demographically diverse slate of candidates for state and congressional offices with presumptive presidential nominee Joe Biden , a 77-year-old white man they believe can appeal to what remains perhaps the nation ’ s most culturally conservative region… Decades of economic development have coaxed new residents to the area .
That includes white people from other parts of the country , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Migration north during the lynching and segregation era , and a growing Latino population… “ North Carolina , Georgia , Texas – these are becoming real two-party states , ” said Republican pollster Brent Buchanan , whose firm , Cygnal , aides GOP campaigns across the country .
Biden ’ s campaign manager , Jen O ’ Malley Dillon , talks eagerly of “ an expanded map ” that puts North Carolina and Florida in the same toss-up category as the Great Lakes states that sent Trump to the White House .
Georgia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be tighter than they ’ ve been in decades .
Dillon might actually be understating things a bit .
According to the NYT poll , Biden leads Trump by double digits in those Great Lakes states .
A recent Fox News poll has Biden up by two points in Georgia and one in Texas .
A Republican campaign consultant who Tim Miller spoke to said that “ I ’ ve got Trump down in Texas.
” That ’ s why Texas and Georgia are the true battlegrounds—or toss-ups .
All of this was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican Party , but his presidency has accelerated the pace of a realignment that would have otherwise taken several more election cycles to complete .
That could be the silver lining to an extremely dark and stormy four years .

One of the most endearing memories about Tim Russert’s election coverage was his use of the small low-tech white board to make predictions. Most often it included two states that always showed up as the battlegrounds in presidential elections: Ohio and Florida. When the New York Times released their latest poll of the 2020 race, one of the bombshells was that Biden had a significant lead over Trump in six battleground states. That included Florida, along with Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Arizona, and North Carolina. David Wasserman explained why Ohio is no longer on the list.
Ohio is demographically similar to Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania: It has an aging, large blue-collar white population, a modest Black population and a relatively low Latino share. But Ohio voted for Trump by 7 to 8 points more than the three other states. If Biden is competitive in Ohio come November, he’ll have already won Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — and almost certainly the presidency — rendering Ohio irrelevant.
The idea of Ohio being irrelevant in a presidential race would have shocked Russert. That is not the same thing as declaring that the state is now red. Instead, as Wasserman suggests, if Ohio is competitive, Biden will have already won.
It is worth noting, however, that if polling by the NYT is both accurate and predictive of what will happen in November, Biden has a lead of somewhere between six and 11 points in the states identified as battlegrounds. That calls into question the whole idea of whether or not they’re really battlegrounds. Bill Barrow explains why the south is the new battleground.
Many Southern electorates are getting younger, less white and more urban, and thus less likely to embrace President Donald Trump’s white identity politics. Southern Democrats are pairing a demographically diverse slate of candidates for state and congressional offices with presumptive presidential nominee Joe Biden, a 77-year-old white man they believe can appeal to what remains perhaps the nation’s most culturally conservative region… Decades of economic development have coaxed new residents to the area. That includes white people from other parts of the country, Black families returning generations after the Great Migration north during the lynching and segregation era, and a growing Latino population… “North Carolina, Georgia, Texas – these are becoming real two-party states,” said Republican pollster Brent Buchanan, whose firm, Cygnal, aides GOP campaigns across the country. Biden’s campaign manager, Jen O’Malley Dillon, talks eagerly of “an expanded map” that puts North Carolina and Florida in the same toss-up category as the Great Lakes states that sent Trump to the White House. Georgia and Texas, she adds, will be tighter than they’ve been in decades.
Dillon might actually be understating things a bit. According to the NYT poll, Biden leads Trump by double digits in those Great Lakes states. A recent Fox News poll has Biden up by two points in Georgia and one in Texas. A Republican campaign consultant who Tim Miller spoke to said that “I’ve got Trump down in Texas.” That’s why Texas and Georgia are the true battlegrounds—or toss-ups.
All of this was happening before Donald Trump took over the Republican Party, but his presidency has accelerated the pace of a realignment that would have otherwise taken several more election cycles to complete. That could be the silver lining to an extremely dark and stormy four years.


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-09--How Trump Is Ensuring That the Economy Will Not Recover

Other than his own special brand of grievance politics , Trump had planned to run his 2020 campaign by touting two things : ( 1 ) the economy , and ( 2 ) all of the extremist conservatives judges he has nominated to the federal courts .
The arrival of the coronavirus crisis totally obliterated his messaging on number one .
That is precisely why he wants to ignore the ravages of the pandemic and has spent so much time on re-opening the economy .
More recently , that focus has shifted to re-opening schools in the fall , going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and threatening to pull federal funding from districts that don ’ t comply .
It ’ s important to keep in mind that the guy who cheated on his SAT ’ s isn ’ t doing all of this because he has a passion for education .
He knows that one of the best ways to get parents back to work is to get their kids back in school .
In other words , this is more about Trump ’ s pressure to get the economy going for his own political benefit than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is demonstrated by the fact that , as is always the case , this administration has no plan .
But if you ’ re like me and actually know some teachers , you might be hearing the same thing they ’ re telling me about all of that .
Here ’ s the scenario I heard from one middle school teacher : “ If a child in my classroom tests positive for COVID-19 , I have to go into quarantine for two weeks .
That will also be true of all of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their classroom , meaning that for just that one case , we ’ ll need six substitute teachers for two weeks .
We already have trouble finding substitutes , so this would be a disaster.
” Compounding that problem is the fact that the coronavirus recession has absolutely devastated state and local budgets .
None of them have the kinds of funds required to ensure the payment of qualified substitute teachers .
So to stay open , schools would probably have to cram more students in each classroom—increasing the odds that the virus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in addition to the health risks for everyone concerned , including teachers , students , and their families .
Unless school districts stand up to the Trump administration on this one ( as some are already doing ) , all of that means that the president ’ s response will simply prolong the spread of COVID-19 and the economic crisis that has resulted from this pandemic .
He is just too impulsive and ignorant to understand that .
And as Gabriel Sherman reports , he won ’ t listen .
Joe Biden is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doesn ’ t take a rocket scientist to get the point he made recently about the most basic fact of this crisis : “ To fix the economy , we have to get control over the virus.
” One of the greatest tragedies of this country ’ s history will be that a self-indulgent narcissist occupied the Oval Office during the coronavirus crisis .
The economy will not recover in time for him to claim any credit .
It will only get worse , as Americans continue to lose both their lives and @ @

Other than his own special brand of grievance politics, Trump had planned to run his 2020 campaign by touting two things: (1) the economy, and (2) all of the extremist conservatives judges he has nominated to the federal courts.
The arrival of the coronavirus crisis totally obliterated his messaging on number one. That is precisely why he wants to ignore the ravages of the pandemic and has spent so much time on re-opening the economy. More recently, that focus has shifted to re-opening schools in the fall, going so far as to override CDC guidelines and threatening to pull federal funding from districts that don’t comply.
It’s important to keep in mind that the guy who cheated on his SAT’s isn’t doing all of this because he has a passion for education. He knows that one of the best ways to get parents back to work is to get their kids back in school. In other words, this is more about Trump’s pressure to get the economy going for his own political benefit than any real concern for children. That is demonstrated by the fact that, as is always the case, this administration has no plan.
But if you’re like me and actually know some teachers, you might be hearing the same thing they’re telling me about all of that. Here’s the scenario I heard from one middle school teacher: “If a child in my classroom tests positive for COVID-19, I have to go into quarantine for two weeks. That will also be true of all of the other teachers who have that child in their classroom, meaning that for just that one case, we’ll need six substitute teachers for two weeks. We already have trouble finding substitutes, so this would be a disaster.”
Compounding that problem is the fact that the coronavirus recession has absolutely devastated state and local budgets. None of them have the kinds of funds required to ensure the payment of qualified substitute teachers. So to stay open, schools would probably have to cram more students in each classroom—increasing the odds that the virus would spread. All of that is in addition to the health risks for everyone concerned, including teachers, students, and their families.
Unless school districts stand up to the Trump administration on this one (as some are already doing), all of that means that the president’s response will simply prolong the spread of COVID-19 and the economic crisis that has resulted from this pandemic. He is just too impulsive and ignorant to understand that. And as Gabriel Sherman reports, he won’t listen.
“You can’t underestimate how hard it is to get information through to him,” a Republican close to the White House said. “When you talk to him, he just talks at you. He doesn’t like to read memos, so there’s not really a way to get through to him. Everyone agrees.”
Joe Biden is a pretty smart guy. But it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to get the point he made recently about the most basic fact of this crisis: “To fix the economy, we have to get control over the virus.”
One of the greatest tragedies of this country’s history will be that a self-indulgent narcissist occupied the Oval Office during the coronavirus crisis. The economy will not recover in time for him to claim any credit. It will only get worse, as Americans continue to lose both their lives and livelihoods.


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-09--The Supreme Court Will Let Us See Trump’s Taxes, Just Not Before We Vote

The Supreme Court completed their term on Thursday morning by dropping a pair of 7-2 decisions , with Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissenting in both cases .
One is a clear loss for the president , and the other is more ambiguous but definitely not an outright win .
However , the president has probably succeeded in keeping the public from seeing his financial records before they decide whether or not to reelect him .
The first case is TRUMP v. VANCE , DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF NEW YORK , ET AL .
The question was whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grand jury have the right to subpoena financial documents from a sitting president .
Noting that Aaron Burr successfully demanded records from President Thomas Jefferson during his trial for treason , the Court held that Trump has to comply because “ Article II and the Supremacy Clause do not categorically preclude , or require a heightened standard for , the issuance of a state criminal subpoena to a sitting President.
” This case relates to Trump ’ s 2016 efforts through his then-attorney Michael Cohen to silence two women with whom he carried @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what the SCOTUS technically did here was affirm a lower Court of Appeals ruling which remanded the case back to a District Court with instructions .
So , before this subpoena can result in the production of Trump ’ s financial records , there is an additional loop that Vance must jump through , and even then grand jury materials are not public .
In other words , the public will only see these records if they are produced during a trial , and a trial can not happen until the District Court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a grand jury decides to indict , and a trial is actually scheduled and commences .
If Trump ’ s goal was to keep the public from ever knowing how much he is worth , he ’ s probably failed .
If he hoped to hide his records from future criminal scrutiny , he failed .
But he succeeded in keeping his records hidden through November .
On the other hand , if he loses the election , he should expect to be on trial in Manhattan soon thereafter , and possibly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The second case is TRUMP ET AL .
v. MAZARS USA , LLP and it relates to Congress ’ s right to issue and enforce subpoenas to a sitting president .
It also involves a request for Trump ’ s financial records , and the ruling has much the same political effect as the first .
The court ruled by the same 7-2 majority that Congress can demand records from Trump , but it imposed a new four-part test to assure that the legislative branch doesn ’ t abuse the privilege .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ lower district court ruling that Trump must comply with the congressional request for his tax records .
The SCOTUS ruled that they hadn ’ t decided the case correctly : “ The courts below did not take adequate account of the significant separation of powers concerns implicated by congressional subpoenas for the President ’ s information.
” So , again , the case was not decided outright but sent back with instructions : First , courts should carefully assess whether the asserted legislative purpose warrants the significant step of involving the President and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] ccasion [ s ] for constitutional confrontation between the two branches ’ should be avoided whenever possible.
” Cheney v. United States Dist .
Court for D. C. , 542 U. S. 367 , 389–390 ( quoting Nixon , 418 U. S. , at 692 ) .
Congress may not rely on the President ’ s information if other sources could reasonably provide Congress the information it needs in light of its particular legislative objective .
Second , to narrow the scope of possible conflict between the branches , courts should insist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ necessary to support Congress ’ s legislative objective .
The specificity of the subpoena ’ s request “ serves as an important safeguard against unnecessary intrusion into the operation of the Office of the President.
” Cheney , 542 U. S. , at 387 .
Third , courts should be attentive to the nature of the evidence offered by Congress to establish that a subpoena advances a valid legislative purpose .
The more detailed and substantial , the better .
That is particularly true when Congress contemplates legislation that raises sensitive constitutional issues @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Fourth , courts should assess the burdens imposed on the President by a subpoena , particularly because they stem from a rival political branch that has an ongoing relationship with the President and incentives to use subpoenas for institutional advantage .
Other considerations may be pertinent as well ; one case every two centuries does not afford enough experience for an exhaustive list .
Pp .
18–20 .
Congress ’ s original subpoena requests may or may not meet the above four-part test .
If not , they could craft new subpoenas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way , it seems extremely doubtful that Congress will get their hands on Trump ’ s taxes before Election Day .
The Court could perhaps be praised for sticking up for the important principle that a president is not above the law when making a decision that will influence the election .
It ’ s important that the Supreme Court stay away from partisan politics as much as possible .
But their decisions will influence the election precisely because the electorate won ’ t have the important information that it needs to make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of anyone who thinks it would benefit Trump if the public saw his financial records .
The assumption behind both of these suits and the rulings is that disclosure would hurt Trump .
So , the president definitely got two wins if you look at it from that narrow perspective .
His problem is that his legal vulnerabilities won ’ t go away after the election .
Even if he wins , these rulings will eventually cause him political difficulties .
He also must be smarting that both Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voted against him .
I remember how he treated Attorney General Jeff Sessions when he thought he didn ’ t show sufficient loyalty , and now I suppose that he only has warm feelings for Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito .
Those Justices were put on the court by the father and son Bush team , and the Bush family is pretty firmly ( if informally ) in Biden ’ s camp in this upcoming election .
The same can be said for the people who served on John McCain ’ s campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lincoln Project .
And , of course , Mitt Romney voted to convict and remove Trump from office after his impeachment trial .
The roosters have not quite made it all the way home to roost , but they ’ re definitely on their way .

The Supreme Court completed their term on Thursday morning by dropping a pair of 7-2 decisions, with Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissenting in both cases. One is a clear loss for the president, and the other is more ambiguous but definitely not an outright win. However, the president has probably succeeded in keeping the public from seeing his financial records before they decide whether or not to reelect him.
The first case is TRUMP v. VANCE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF NEW YORK, ET AL. The question was whether District Attorney Cyrus Vance and a Manhattan grand jury have the right to subpoena financial documents from a sitting president. Noting that Aaron Burr successfully demanded records from President Thomas Jefferson during his trial for treason, the Court held that Trump has to comply because “Article II and the Supremacy Clause do not categorically preclude, or require a heightened standard for, the issuance of a state criminal subpoena to a sitting President.”
This case relates to Trump’s 2016 efforts through his then-attorney Michael Cohen to silence two women with whom he carried out extramarital sexual relationships.
Vance is investigating whether the Trump Organization falsified business records to conceal hush payments to two women, including pornographic film actress Stormy Daniels, who claimed they had sex with Trump before he took office. Trump has denied those claims.
However, what the SCOTUS technically did here was affirm a lower Court of Appeals ruling which remanded the case back to a District Court with instructions. So, before this subpoena can result in the production of Trump’s financial records, there is an additional loop that Vance must jump through, and even then grand jury materials are not public. In other words, the public will only see these records if they are produced during a trial, and a trial cannot happen until the District Court rules, the records are turned over, a grand jury decides to indict, and a trial is actually scheduled and commences. If Trump’s goal was to keep the public from ever knowing how much he is worth, he’s probably failed. If he hoped to hide his records from future criminal scrutiny, he failed. But he succeeded in keeping his records hidden through November. On the other hand, if he loses the election, he should expect to be on trial in Manhattan soon thereafter, and possibly for more than paying off his paramours.
The second case is TRUMP ET AL. v. MAZARS USA, LLP and it relates to Congress’s right to issue and enforce subpoenas to a sitting president. It also involves a request for Trump’s financial records, and the ruling has much the same political effect as the first. The court ruled by the same 7-2 majority that Congress can demand records from Trump, but it imposed a new four-part test to assure that the legislative branch doesn’t abuse the privilege.
The D. C. Circuit had upheld a lower district court ruling that Trump must comply with the congressional request for his tax records. The SCOTUS ruled that they hadn’t decided the case correctly: “The courts below did not take adequate account of the significant separation of powers concerns implicated by congressional subpoenas for the President’s information.”
So, again, the case was not decided outright but sent back with instructions:
First, courts should carefully assess whether the asserted legislative purpose warrants the significant step of involving the President and his papers. “‘[O]ccasion[s] for constitutional confrontation between the two branches’ should be avoided whenever possible.” Cheney v. United States Dist. Court for D. C., 542 U. S. 367, 389–390 (quoting Nixon, 418 U. S., at 692). Congress may not rely on the President’s information if other sources could reasonably provide Congress the information it needs in light of its particular legislative objective. Second, to narrow the scope of possible conflict between the branches, courts should insist on a subpoena no broader than reasonably necessary to support Congress’s legislative objective. The specificity of the subpoena’s request “serves as an important safeguard against unnecessary intrusion into the operation of the Office of the President.” Cheney, 542 U. S., at 387. Third, courts should be attentive to the nature of the evidence offered by Congress to establish that a subpoena advances a valid legislative purpose. The more detailed and substantial, the better. That is particularly true when Congress contemplates legislation that raises sensitive constitutional issues, such as legislation concerning the Presidency. Fourth, courts should assess the burdens imposed on the President by a subpoena, particularly because they stem from a rival political branch that has an ongoing relationship with the President and incentives to use subpoenas for institutional advantage. Other considerations may be pertinent as well; one case every two centuries does not afford enough experience for an exhaustive list. Pp. 18–20.
Congress’s original subpoena requests may or may not meet the above four-part test. If not, they could craft new subpoenas carefully designed to pass muster. Either way, it seems extremely doubtful that Congress will get their hands on Trump’s taxes before Election Day.
The Court could perhaps be praised for sticking up for the important principle that a president is not above the law when making a decision that will influence the election. It’s important that the Supreme Court stay away from partisan politics as much as possible. But their decisions will influence the election precisely because the electorate won’t have the important information that it needs to make a decision.
I am not aware of anyone who thinks it would benefit Trump if the public saw his financial records. The assumption behind both of these suits and the rulings is that disclosure would hurt Trump. So, the president definitely got two wins if you look at it from that narrow perspective. His problem is that his legal vulnerabilities won’t go away after the election. Even if he wins, these rulings will eventually cause him political difficulties.
He also must be smarting that both Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, his two Supreme Court nominees, voted against him. I remember how he treated Attorney General Jeff Sessions when he thought he didn’t show sufficient loyalty, and now I suppose that he only has warm feelings for Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.
Those Justices were put on the court by the father and son Bush team, and the Bush family is pretty firmly (if informally) in Biden’s camp in this upcoming election. The same can be said for the people who served on John McCain’s campaign, many of whom are behind The Lincoln Project. And, of course, Mitt Romney voted to convict and remove Trump from office after his impeachment trial.
The roosters have not quite made it all the way home to roost, but they’re definitely on their way.


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-09--COVID-19 Has Created a New Kind of International Gamesmanship

COVID-19 has a proven antiviral remedy called Remdesivir , but buying up three months ’ worth of the drug ’ s global supplies has put the United States in the crosshairs of international criticism , making America look both heartless and hypocritical .
Just a few months ago , Western nations were calling out China for actively promoting profiteers snatching up global supplies of protective PPE medical gear .
China directed an army of market marauders to take big bites out of other countries ’ economies and medical infrastructures in order to leave them vulnerable , if not for dead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bought and shipped back to the People ’ s Republic just before the pandemic hit the rest of the world .
China then turned around either to sell PPE for enormous profit or slowly dole it out for diplomatic gain with plagued nations .
The United States cried foul when China hoarded PPE , but is arguing all ’ s fair with Remdesivir .
There is a difference , though .
Remdesivir is on the open market at a time when everyone on the planet already knows about the coronavirus .
Today , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reach and destruction .
The world is now knowledgeable .
While It may be unfair that rich countries can buy up stocks of lifesaving American drugs , the fair market allows highest bidders to get the goods .
At $ 3,100 for a course of the antiviral Remdesivir , poor countries can ’ t compete .
Back in January , however , the world was cruelly COVID-unaware , and China purposefully misled everyone about the coronavirus ’ virulence and lethality .
That ’ s when China bought up protective medical PPE equipment , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
China ’ s outrageous price gouging on the desperate world market followed .
N-95 respirator masks soared from $ 1.27 to an astronomical $ 23 per mask .
This did not happen accidentally ; it was insider trading .
Beijing had more than an inkling of the virus ’ ravaging and extremely contagious character .
It bought low , based on its insider knowledge , and sold high once the pandemic hit the rest of the world .
They hid the virus and weaponized the world ’ s supply of emergency PPE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to weaken , undermine or destroy countries with which they compete .
In an ever-evolving world , this is a universal truth .
Sometimes , they go to the extreme of launching invasions and fighting violent ground wars .
Other times , they use means that are less obvious , aggressive , or inviting of retaliation .
Medical supplies and weaponizing critical supply chains is just one example .
Countries in both the East and West use stealth and aggressively compete just below the threshold of outright military conflict .
Scholars and military @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as occurring in the “ gray zone.
” On the surface , things may look and feel normal , but there is a whole lot of aggressive and dangerously hidden activity taking place just below the surface .
PPE-gate was a quiet shot across the bow .
Gray-zone activity is hard to detect and harder to confront , unlike openly hostile behavior .
Direct actions taken by states against states are open and shut , black and white .
They demand retaliatory action .
If , for example , Moscow launched an ICBM @ @ @ @ @ @ @ war .
Moscow ’ s horrifying and reprehensible act of paying Afghans bounties to kill American GIs , however , edges right up to the point of conflict but lands in the gray zone .
Russia complicates the issue by using proxies to maintain distance and deniability .
Former CIA Director and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta argues that the Russian bounties come “ as close to an act of war as you can get.
” President-for-life Vladimir Putin is expert at hybrid warfare .
China is paying close attention during “ World War @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the coronavirus war is for nations to collaborate by sharing data , research , equipment , expertise and medicine .
China instead used this crisis to attack the national resilience of countries like Australia and the United States .
There is precedent for nations strategically cutting off medical supplies to hurt their enemies .
During World War I , for example , Germany actively sought to corner the market on a critical pharmaceutical—aspirin .
Germany ’ s Bayer was the dominant global manufacturer and the country kept “ the miracle drug ” away @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
COVID-19 cases are rapidly rising , but states are not now wildly scrambling to find protective gear or build hospital capacity .
Remdesivir offers hope , vaccines are being developed and masks control community spread .
As a result , China ’ s pandemic profiteers are no longer in as strong a position to make big money from panicked Americans .
Instead , they ’ ll profit off America ’ s tragic addictions .
China , after all , continues to supply the United States ’ illegal and lethal street fentanyl .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a gray-zone war .

COVID-19 has a proven antiviral remedy called Remdesivir, but buying up three months’ worth of the drug’s global supplies has put the United States in the crosshairs of international criticism, making America look both heartless and hypocritical.
Just a few months ago, Western nations were calling out China for actively promoting profiteers snatching up global supplies of protective PPE medical gear. China directed an army of market marauders to take big bites out of other countries’ economies and medical infrastructures in order to leave them vulnerable, if not for dead.
Masks, gowns, ventilators were bought and shipped back to the People’s Republic just before the pandemic hit the rest of the world. China then turned around either to sell PPE for enormous profit or slowly dole it out for diplomatic gain with plagued nations.
The United States cried foul when China hoarded PPE, but is arguing all’s fair with Remdesivir. There is a difference, though. Remdesivir is on the open market at a time when everyone on the planet already knows about the coronavirus.
Today, all nations understand the pandemic’s reach and destruction. The world is now knowledgeable. While it may be unfair that rich countries can buy up stocks of lifesaving American drugs, the fair market allows highest bidders to get the goods. At $3,100 for a course of the antiviral Remdesivir, poor countries can’t compete.
Back in January, however, the world was cruelly COVID-unaware, and China purposefully misled everyone about the coronavirus’ virulence and lethality. That’s when China bought up protective medical PPE equipment, hoarding supplies and protecting its manufacturing stranglehold. China’s outrageous price gouging on the desperate world market followed. N-95 respirator masks soared from $1.27 to an astronomical $23 per mask. This did not happen accidentally; it was insider trading.
Beijing had more than an inkling of the virus’ ravaging and extremely contagious character. It bought low, based on its insider knowledge, and sold high once the pandemic hit the rest of the world. They hid the virus and weaponized the world’s supply of emergency PPE. Adversarial nations use all available means to weaken, undermine or destroy countries with which they compete. In an ever-evolving world, this is a universal truth. Sometimes, they go to the extreme of launching invasions and fighting violent ground wars. Other times, they use means that are less obvious, aggressive, or inviting of retaliation. Medical supplies and weaponizing critical supply chains is just one example. Countries in both the East and West use stealth and aggressively compete just below the threshold of outright military conflict. Scholars and military planners refer to this hybrid warfare activity as occurring in the “gray zone.” On the surface, things may look and feel normal, but there is a whole lot of aggressive and dangerously hidden activity taking place just below the surface. PPE-gate was a quiet shot across the bow. Gray-zone activity is hard to detect and harder to confront, unlike openly hostile behavior. Direct actions taken by states against states are open and shut, black and white. They demand retaliatory action. If, for example, Moscow launched an ICBM at Washington, that action leads to war. Moscow’s horrifying and reprehensible act of paying Afghans bounties to kill American GIs, however, edges right up to the point of conflict but lands in the gray zone. Russia complicates the issue by using proxies to maintain distance and deniability. Former CIA Director and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta argues that the Russian bounties come “as close to an act of war as you can get.” President-for-life Vladimir Putin is expert at hybrid warfare. China is paying close attention during “World War C.” The sane approach to fighting the coronavirus war is for nations to collaborate by sharing data, research, equipment, expertise and medicine. China instead used this crisis to attack the national resilience of countries like Australia and the United States. There is precedent for nations strategically cutting off medical supplies to hurt their enemies. During World War I, for example, Germany actively sought to corner the market on a critical pharmaceutical—aspirin. Germany’s Bayer was the dominant global manufacturer and the country kept “the miracle drug” away from the civilians and militaries it battled. COVID-19 cases are rapidly rising, but states are not now wildly scrambling to find protective gear or build hospital capacity. Remdesivir offers hope, vaccines are being developed and masks control community spread. As a result, China’s pandemic profiteers are no longer in as strong a position to make big money from panicked Americans. Instead, they’ll profit off America’s tragic addictions. China, after all, continues to supply the United States’ illegal and lethal street fentanyl. Drugs are one more way to fight a gray-zone war.