alternet--2020-10-19--‘I really despise him’: Trump is hemorrhaging support among white women in a state he can’t afford t

‘I really despise him’: Trump is hemorrhaging support among white women in a state he can’t afford to lose

When President Donald Trump narrowly won Pennsylvania 's 20 electoral votes in 2016 , he did so with help of many white women — about half of whom voted for him in the Keystone State four years ago .
But reporter Julia Terruso , in an article published by the Philadelphia Inquirer on October 19 , stresses that Trump is struggling with that demographic in Pennsylvania in 2020 .
`` Only 37 % of white women in the state support him , according to a Quinnipiac survey earlier this month — a finding similar to other polls in Pennsylvania and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
`` If that big shift holds , it could help deliver Pennsylvania — and the White House — to Democratic candidate Joe Biden . ''
It is n't hard to understand why Pennsylvania could make or break Trump 's chances of winning a second term .
If former Vice President Biden , on November 3 , wins every state that 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton won four years ago but flips Michigan and Wisconsin , Trump ca n't afford to lose Pennsylvania .
In that scenario , Trump 's path to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well as the Sun Belt states in which Biden is competitive — a list that includes Arizona , Florida and Georgia .
Winning every state that Clinton carried and flipping Michigan , Wisconsin and Pennsylvania woud get Biden to 270 electoral votes .
Trump knows that , which is why he has been campaigning so aggressively in the Keystone State .
But according to Terruso , Trump has made things more difficult for himself by alienating so many of Pennsylvania 's white women .
`` Women ( in Pennsylvania ) have been getting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in more rural areas since his election , injecting energy into places where the party did n't have much visibility , '' Terruso observes .
`` These are still overwhelmingly Republican areas where Trump will almost certainly win , but where women say they can drive down his margins of victory .
And that , combined with Trump 's political collapse with suburban voters and the more recent erosion of his support among older voters , could prove politically fatal in a state that is seen as likely to decide who wins the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a rally in Johnstown , which is in Central Pennsylvania .
Democratic strategist James Carville famously described Central Pennsylvania as `` Alabama in the middle '' of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh , and Trump is still popular among white men in that part of the state .
But a heavy turnout from pro-Biden African-American women in densely populated Philadelphia — combined with a lot of votes from white women in different parts of Pennsylvania — could be bad news for Trump .
One of the white female voters the Inquirer interviewed was 54-year-old Tina @ @ @ @ @ @ @ County in Northwestern Pennsylvania .
Discussing Trump , McHugh told the Inquirer , `` Oh my God , I really have to tell you : I really , really despise him .
And I look at him now as a character , not a president . ''
Another resident of Northwestern Pennsylvania the Inquirer interviewed was 58-year-old Elaine Caruso , who voted for Trump in 2016 but is not supporting him this time .
Caruso told the Inquirer , `` I 've had to sit back with myself and think : 'OK , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made you vote for him ?
What words did you hear ? '
He 's a really good con , and some people will let him con them .
But that 's the only base he 's got left — because I really think he alienated everybody else . ''

When President Donald Trump narrowly won Pennsylvania's 20 electoral votes in 2016, he did so with help of many white women — about half of whom voted for him in the Keystone State four years ago. But reporter Julia Terruso, in an article published by the Philadelphia Inquirer on October 19, stresses that Trump is struggling with that demographic in Pennsylvania in 2020.
"Only 37% of white women in the state support him, according to a Quinnipiac survey earlier this month — a finding similar to other polls in Pennsylvania and other battleground states," Terruso explains. "If that big shift holds, it could help deliver Pennsylvania — and the White House — to Democratic candidate Joe Biden."
It isn't hard to understand why Pennsylvania could make or break Trump's chances of winning a second term. If former Vice President Biden, on November 3, wins every state that 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton won four years ago but flips Michigan and Wisconsin, Trump can't afford to lose Pennsylvania. In that scenario, Trump's path to victory would have to include Pennsylvania as well as the Sun Belt states in which Biden is competitive — a list that includes Arizona, Florida and Georgia.
Winning every state that Clinton carried and flipping Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania woud get Biden to 270 electoral votes. Trump knows that, which is why he has been campaigning so aggressively in the Keystone State. But according to Terruso, Trump has made things more difficult for himself by alienating so many of Pennsylvania's white women.
"Women (in Pennsylvania) have been getting involved with local Democratic Party politics even in more rural areas since his election, injecting energy into places where the party didn't have much visibility," Terruso observes. "These are still overwhelmingly Republican areas where Trump will almost certainly win, but where women say they can drive down his margins of victory. And that, combined with Trump's political collapse with suburban voters and the more recent erosion of his support among older voters, could prove politically fatal in a state that is seen as likely to decide who wins the White House."
Trump recently held a rally in Johnstown, which is in Central Pennsylvania. Democratic strategist James Carville famously described Central Pennsylvania as "Alabama in the middle" of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, and Trump is still popular among white men in that part of the state. But a heavy turnout from pro-Biden African-American women in densely populated Philadelphia — combined with a lot of votes from white women in different parts of Pennsylvania — could be bad news for Trump.
One of the white female voters the Inquirer interviewed was 54-year-old Tina McHugh, who lives in rural Carbon County in Northwestern Pennsylvania. Discussing Trump, McHugh told the Inquirer, "Oh my God, I really have to tell you: I really, really despise him. And I look at him now as a character, not a president."
Another resident of Northwestern Pennsylvania the Inquirer interviewed was 58-year-old Elaine Caruso, who voted for Trump in 2016 but is not supporting him this time.
Caruso told the Inquirer, "I've had to sit back with myself and think: 'OK, you're a bright woman. What made you vote for him? What words did you hear?' He's a really good con, and some people will let him con them. But that's the only base he's got left — because I really think he alienated everybody else."


alternet--2020-10-19--This is the hardest state to vote in: analysis

It 's harder than in 49 other states , according to a “ cost-of-voting index '' compiled by political scientists at Northern Illinois University , Jacksonville University and Wuhan University in China .
Obviously , it 's not impossible to vote in Texas ; more than 10 % of the state 's registered voters — about 2 million citizens — had already cast their ballots , either in person or by mail , by Thursday night .
That 's certainly a sign of enthusiasm , and could either be a signal of a bigger-than-normal turnout or that a lot of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so as soon as they could .
But the state has erected obstacles throughout the voting system , and when you compare the comfort and convenience of voting in Texas with other states , Texas ends up at the bottom of the list .
Voting and election law is a persistent struggle in Texas between those who want to knock down impediments to voting and those who think more safeguards are needed to secure the process and the results — though the evidence for this is both anecdotal and thin .
That particular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legal battles over how many drop-offs each county is allowed to provide for voters who would rather not put their absentee ballots in the mail , who 's eligible to vote by mail and whether counties with curbside voting are making things too simple .
Here 's how the researchers wrote up our state 's position on the list : “ Texas maintains an in-person voter registration deadline 30 days prior to Election Day , has reduced the number of polling stations in some parts of the state by more than 50 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the country , according to the analysis . ''
States at the top of the list — where it 's easiest to vote — have voting conveniences that are n't available here , like online voter registration , automatic voter registration and allowing voters to register as late as Election Day .
( The Texas deadline was Oct .
5 . )
Some have universal mail-in voting , which the study considers a hallmark of a state where it 's easy to vote .
In Texas , voting by mail is only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to eligible voters confined to jail , for voters who are out of their county of residence during voting , and for voters who cite a disability that prevents them from safely going to the polls .
And higher-rated states require only a signature for in-person voting , instead of tight voter photo identification laws like the one in Texas .
Texas has one of the lowest voter turnout rates in the country , turning out 45.6 % of its population of eligible voters in 2018 , compared with a national average @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States Election Project .
In the last presidential race , in 2016 , turnout was 51.4 % of the state 's eligible voters , a number that includes adults eligible to vote whether they registered or not .
The national average was 60.1 % .
The cost-of-voting index is an update of a study that includes indexes for elections back to 1996 .
In 2016 , Texas was fifth from the bottom of the list , in company with Indiana , Tennessee , Virginia and Mississippi .
This time around , Texas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the bottom of the barrel with Georgia , Missouri , Mississippi and Tennessee .
Maybe the low turnout in Texas is related to the state 's restrictive voting laws .
Maybe eligible adults in Texas are less interested in voting , and the state 's voting laws are just an excuse for the low civic engagement .
There 's a way to find out , if state lawmakers ' goal is to get more Texans voting .
If they wanted more people to vote , they 'd make it easier .

(Audio unavailable. Click here to listen on texastribune.org.)
It's harder than in 49 other states, according to a “cost-of-voting index" compiled by political scientists at Northern Illinois University, Jacksonville University and Wuhan University in China.
Obviously, it's not impossible to vote in Texas; more than 10% of the state's registered voters — about 2 million citizens — had already cast their ballots, either in person or by mail, by Thursday night. That's certainly a sign of enthusiasm, and could either be a signal of a bigger-than-normal turnout or that a lot of Texas were itching to vote and did so as soon as they could.
But the state has erected obstacles throughout the voting system, and when you compare the comfort and convenience of voting in Texas with other states, Texas ends up at the bottom of the list.
Voting and election law is a persistent struggle in Texas between those who want to knock down impediments to voting and those who think more safeguards are needed to secure the process and the results — though the evidence for this is both anecdotal and thin.
That particular battlefield ranges from voter ID to current legal battles over how many drop-offs each county is allowed to provide for voters who would rather not put their absentee ballots in the mail, who's eligible to vote by mail and whether counties with curbside voting are making things too simple.
Here's how the researchers wrote up our state's position on the list: “Texas maintains an in-person voter registration deadline 30 days prior to Election Day, has reduced the number of polling stations in some parts of the state by more than 50% and has the most restrictive pre-registration law in the country, according to the analysis."
States at the top of the list — where it's easiest to vote — have voting conveniences that aren't available here, like online voter registration, automatic voter registration and allowing voters to register as late as Election Day. (The Texas deadline was Oct. 5.)
Some have universal mail-in voting, which the study considers a hallmark of a state where it's easy to vote. In Texas, voting by mail is only available to people ages 65 and older, to eligible voters confined to jail, for voters who are out of their county of residence during voting, and for voters who cite a disability that prevents them from safely going to the polls.
And higher-rated states require only a signature for in-person voting, instead of tight voter photo identification laws like the one in Texas.
Texas has one of the lowest voter turnout rates in the country, turning out 45.6% of its population of eligible voters in 2018, compared with a national average of 49.4%, according to the United States Election Project. In the last presidential race, in 2016, turnout was 51.4% of the state's eligible voters, a number that includes adults eligible to vote whether they registered or not. The national average was 60.1%.
The cost-of-voting index is an update of a study that includes indexes for elections back to 1996. In 2016, Texas was fifth from the bottom of the list, in company with Indiana, Tennessee, Virginia and Mississippi. This time around, Texas is behind every other state, in the bottom of the barrel with Georgia, Missouri, Mississippi and Tennessee.
Maybe the low turnout in Texas is related to the state's restrictive voting laws. Maybe eligible adults in Texas are less interested in voting, and the state's voting laws are just an excuse for the low civic engagement.
There's a way to find out, if state lawmakers' goal is to get more Texans voting. If they wanted more people to vote, they'd make it easier.


alternet--2020-10-19--'Vulnerable to prosecution': Here are possible areas of legal exposure for Trump if he loses the ele

'Vulnerable to prosecution': Here are possible areas of legal exposure for Trump if he loses the election

The number of allies or former allies of President Donald Trump who have faced criminal prosecutions is staggering : it 's a list that ranges from Trump 's 2016 campaign manager , Paul Manafort , to his former personal attorney , Michael Cohen , to veteran GOP operative Roger Stone to former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn .
If he loses to former Vice President Joe Biden on Tuesday , November 3 , Trump himself could become the target of both federal and state prosecutors — and journalist Jon Schwarz examines some of Trump 's possible legal exposure in an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ October 18 .
Schwarz opens his article by acknowledging that even if Biden wins , it 's `` hard to imagine '' that Trump will `` ever be convicted of any crime , much less serve time in prison . ''
`` No former U.S. president has ever seen the inside of a cell — and not because all presidents have faithfully followed the law , '' Schwarz explains .
`` Presidents accumulate huge favors owed , favors that they cash in , figuratively and literally , when they become former presidents .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ say that `` Trump is more vulnerable to prosecution than other presidents because he 's engaged in so many potential nontraditional presidential crimes . ''
And he describes some things that Trump , possibly , could be investigated for if he loses the election — from `` tax fraud '' to `` bank and insurance fraud '' to `` campaign finance violations '' to `` bribery '' and `` negligent homicide . ''
Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance , Jr. , Schwarz notes , has been investigating Trump for what his office has described @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conduct at the Trump Organization . ''
`` Beyond Trump 's taxes , Vance appears to be probing whether Trump provided insurers and banks with false statements about his financial position in order to receive lower premiums and interest rates on loans , '' Schwarz observes .
`` In certain circumstances , this would be illegal . ''
Another possibly area of concern for Trump , according to Schwarz , is `` obstruction of justice . ''
Former special counsel Robert Mueller , following the Russia investigation , noted that the U.S. Department @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a sitting president but stressed that a president `` does not have immunity after he leaves office . ''
Of all the possible prosecutions that Schwarz describes — many of them for tax and financial matters — the most hotly debated in legal circles might be one for `` negligent homicide . ''
Schwarz notes that Glenn Kirschner , a former federal prosecutor , has argued that Trump could be prosecuted for negligent homicide because of his mishandling of the coronavirus pandemic .
But other legal experts have disagreed with Kirschner , saying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — if it came about in the first place — would be very difficult to prove .
`` This would be controversial , to say the least , '' Schwarz explains .
`` But Kirschner is a serious person who served in the U.S. Attorney 's Office for the District of Columbia for 24 years , eventually becoming chief of the homicide section . ''

The number of allies or former allies of President Donald Trump who have faced criminal prosecutions is staggering: it's a list that ranges from Trump's 2016 campaign manager, Paul Manafort, to his former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, to veteran GOP operative Roger Stone to former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. If he loses to former Vice President Joe Biden on Tuesday, November 3, Trump himself could become the target of both federal and state prosecutors — and journalist Jon Schwarz examines some of Trump's possible legal exposure in an in-depth piece published by The Intercept on October 18.
Schwarz opens his article by acknowledging that even if Biden wins, it's "hard to imagine" that Trump will "ever be convicted of any crime, much less serve time in prison."
"No former U.S. president has ever seen the inside of a cell — and not because all presidents have faithfully followed the law," Schwarz explains. "Presidents accumulate huge favors owed, favors that they cash in, figuratively and literally, when they become former presidents."
Nonetheless, Schwarz goes on to say that "Trump is more vulnerable to prosecution than other presidents because he's engaged in so many potential nontraditional presidential crimes." And he describes some things that Trump, possibly, could be investigated for if he loses the election — from "tax fraud" to "bank and insurance fraud" to "campaign finance violations" to "bribery" and "negligent homicide."
Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance, Jr., Schwarz notes, has been investigating Trump for what his office has described as "possibly extensive and protracted criminal conduct at the Trump Organization."
"Beyond Trump's taxes, Vance appears to be probing whether Trump provided insurers and banks with false statements about his financial position in order to receive lower premiums and interest rates on loans," Schwarz observes. "In certain circumstances, this would be illegal."
Another possibly area of concern for Trump, according to Schwarz, is "obstruction of justice." Former special counsel Robert Mueller, following the Russia investigation, noted that the U.S. Department of Justice has a policy against indicting a sitting president but stressed that a president "does not have immunity after he leaves office."
Of all the possible prosecutions that Schwarz describes — many of them for tax and financial matters — the most hotly debated in legal circles might be one for "negligent homicide." Schwarz notes that Glenn Kirschner, a former federal prosecutor, has argued that Trump could be prosecuted for negligent homicide because of his mishandling of the coronavirus pandemic. But other legal experts have disagreed with Kirschner, saying that a negligent homicide case against Trump — if it came about in the first place — would be very difficult to prove.
"This would be controversial, to say the least," Schwarz explains. "But Kirschner is a serious person who served in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia for 24 years, eventually becoming chief of the homicide section."


alternet--2020-10-19--To combat disinformation, we should treat Facebook like Big Tobacco

Political disinformation and misinformation spreading rapidly on social media sites has become a major problem over the past four years .
While it affects people on both sides of the aisle , it 's primarily been a force for radicalizing conservatives .
From the alt-right in 2016 to QAnon in 2020 , a lack of trust in our democratic institutions , Americans ' lack of media literacy and the failures of the platforms themselves have caused countless conservatives around the country to adopt more extremist and conspiratorial views .
Facebook recently banned QAnon groups from its platform , but as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bans are only so effective .
Users often simply become better at camouflaging what they 're doing .
If we 're going to seriously take on the political disinformation problem , we can not rely on platforms like Facebook to self-police .
We 're going to need a solution from Washington rather than Silicon Valley .
David Carroll , an associate professor of media design at the Parsons School of Design and one of the subjects of the documentary on Cambridge Analytica called The Great Hack , tells AlterNet that we need to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disinformation and start focusing on how it 's become so powerful .
`` There 's no strategic or systemic attempt to get at the root of the radicalizing effect of personal data feeding into algorithms , feeding into a business model and juicing engagement at all costs , '' Carroll says .
`` Facebook banning QAnon is part of its reckoning .
It was a thing on the chan board fringe that was mainstreamed on Facebook through the recommendation engine—algorithms and group recommending—so I think making the companies accountable to product safety and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
Any solution to this problem must avoid trampling on free speech .
Even when Facebook and Twitter recently took action to avoid the spread of a New York Post article on Hunter Biden 's emails that contained personal email addresses and phone numbers—and which many have called Russian disinformation -- Republicans claimed the platforms were censoring content to help Joe Biden win the election .
There are ways we can address this issue without people worrying about tech companies intervening in the free flow of ideas .
Carroll says the goal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the first place and making sure social media companies can be held accountable when their platforms are causing harm to society .
If Biden wins in November , the new administration and administration and Congress should come together and pass legislation that will force companies like Facebook to reveal to the public how their algorithms work and what personal data are being fed into them .
`` Once you give people rights to their data and protection of their data , that creates the basis to then make algorithms more accountable , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ products that they have liability for .
Then they have more incentive to make them safe or take them off of the market if they 're unsafe , '' Carroll says .
As things stand , the algorithms and recommendation engines that power social media platforms like Facebook operate in the shadows .
That makes it difficult to identify exactly how Facebook 's rabbit holes lead people to conspiracism and extremism .
If these companies were forced to be more transparent and allow users to understand how they 're being influenced , that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spread of disinformation and allow us to more specifically point out ways Facebook is failing the public .
`` I think it comes down to mandating explainability—meaning you have to be able to explain how the algorithm is working so that accusations of radicalization can be authoritatively sussed out , which will force companies to design the product so they ca n't be accused of radicalizing , '' Carroll says .
`` Right now , there 's no mechanism to hold the company accountable . ''
Carroll believes that when people know why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ direction politically , such as why they 're receiving the Facebook group recommendations they 're receiving , then they 'll be less likely to be sucked into a toxic spiral .
Recent reporting from Britain 's Channel 4 found that black voters who were shown that they were being targeted by the Trump campaign in 2016 and pushed not to vote wanted to vote even more .
Even Trump supporters were disturbed by how they had been targeted .
Brooke Binkowski , former managing editor of Snopes and the current managing editor of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she would get rid of the algorithm entirely .
`` That 's not organic spread , '' she says .
`` They are still invisibly manipulating the conversation—or at least trying to . ''
Carroll says we need to start thinking about companies like Facebook the way we think about Big Tobacco , alcohol companies or car companies .
He says there are limits to how those industries can market their product and what products they can sell .
Car companies adhere to strict safety rules and regulations that have dramatically reduced highway @ @ @ @ @ @ @ companies are still able to `` innovate and thrive , '' he says .
`` There are plenty of examples where we have succeeded at that—letting industries thrive while also regulating them for safety , '' Carroll says .
`` Algorithms are just the next frontier of that . ''
To take the Big Tobacco analogy further , both Carroll and Binkowski believe Facebook should be held responsible for educating the public in the way cigarette companies were forced to educate the public about the dangers of smoking after the Master Settlement Agreement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the profitability of local news , local journalism .
Local newspapers have become an endangered species , which harms local communities , '' Carroll says .
`` This contributes to the decline in trust in media , so I see these as systemic problems , and systemic solutions need to be considered . ''
Binkowski says she thinks lawmakers should force Facebook to dedicate funding to newsrooms `` in perpetuity . ''
She says this funding should be distributed transparently and overseen by a board of journalists and academics .
`` That funding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They need to be compelled to return to the world what they took from it , '' Binkowski says .
`` They need to pay journalists our fair share .
They sucked up all the funds from what we made , what we created , the content that we risk our lives regularly putting together , generally for a salary that would shock non-journalists if they knew it . ''
Carroll says there 's no `` silver bullet '' for fixing the disinformation problem , but creating a system that has more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It 's also important to force these companies to repair the damage they 've done , which may include forcing them to fund newsrooms .
Disinformation will always find its place on the internet , as it 's very difficult to combat effectively , but if we can get to the root of the problem and make it less potent , then we can start moving in the right direction and create a less chaotic and harmful information ecosystem .

Political disinformation and misinformation spreading rapidly on social media sites has become a major problem over the past four years. While it affects people on both sides of the aisle, it's primarily been a force for radicalizing conservatives. From the alt-right in 2016 to QAnon in 2020, a lack of trust in our democratic institutions, Americans' lack of media literacy and the failures of the platforms themselves have caused countless conservatives around the country to adopt more extremist and conspiratorial views.
Facebook recently banned QAnon groups from its platform, but as many have noted, these kinds of bans are only so effective. Users often simply become better at camouflaging what they're doing. If we're going to seriously take on the political disinformation problem, we cannot rely on platforms like Facebook to self-police. We're going to need a solution from Washington rather than Silicon Valley.
Algorithms and consumer protection
David Carroll, an associate professor of media design at the Parsons School of Design and one of the subjects of the documentary on Cambridge Analytica called The Great Hack, tells AlterNet that we need to stop focusing so much on cleaning up disinformation and start focusing on how it's become so powerful.
"There's no strategic or systemic attempt to get at the root of the radicalizing effect of personal data feeding into algorithms, feeding into a business model and juicing engagement at all costs," Carroll says. "Facebook banning QAnon is part of its reckoning. It was a thing on the chan board fringe that was mainstreamed on Facebook through the recommendation engine—algorithms and group recommending—so I think making the companies accountable to product safety and deceptive practices is probably a better strategy."
Any solution to this problem must avoid trampling on free speech. Even when Facebook and Twitter recently took action to avoid the spread of a New York Post article on Hunter Biden's emails that contained personal email addresses and phone numbers—and which many have called Russian disinformation--Republicans claimed the platforms were censoring content to help Joe Biden win the election. There are ways we can address this issue without people worrying about tech companies intervening in the free flow of ideas.
Carroll says the goal should be keeping people from being radicalized in the first place and making sure social media companies can be held accountable when their platforms are causing harm to society. If Biden wins in November, the new administration and administration and Congress should come together and pass legislation that will force companies like Facebook to reveal to the public how their algorithms work and what personal data are being fed into them.
"Once you give people rights to their data and protection of their data, that creates the basis to then make algorithms more accountable, which then makes companies more accountable for products that they have liability for. Then they have more incentive to make them safe or take them off of the market if they're unsafe," Carroll says.
As things stand, the algorithms and recommendation engines that power social media platforms like Facebook operate in the shadows. That makes it difficult to identify exactly how Facebook's rabbit holes lead people to conspiracism and extremism. If these companies were forced to be more transparent and allow users to understand how they're being influenced, that could have a major effect on the spread of disinformation and allow us to more specifically point out ways Facebook is failing the public.
"I think it comes down to mandating explainability—meaning you have to be able to explain how the algorithm is working so that accusations of radicalization can be authoritatively sussed out, which will force companies to design the product so they can't be accused of radicalizing," Carroll says. "Right now, there's no mechanism to hold the company accountable."
Carroll believes that when people know why they're being pushed in a certain direction politically, such as why they're receiving the Facebook group recommendations they're receiving, then they'll be less likely to be sucked into a toxic spiral. Recent reporting from Britain's Channel 4 found that black voters who were shown that they were being targeted by the Trump campaign in 2016 and pushed not to vote wanted to vote even more. Even Trump supporters were disturbed by how they had been targeted.
Brooke Binkowski, former managing editor of Snopes and the current managing editor of Truth or Fiction, tells AlterNet that she would get rid of the algorithm entirely.
"That's not organic spread," she says. "They are still invisibly manipulating the conversation—or at least trying to."
Treating Facebook like Big Tobacco
Carroll says we need to start thinking about companies like Facebook the way we think about Big Tobacco, alcohol companies or car companies. He says there are limits to how those industries can market their product and what products they can sell. Car companies adhere to strict safety rules and regulations that have dramatically reduced highway fatalities and pedestrian fatalities, but those companies are still able to "innovate and thrive," he says.
"There are plenty of examples where we have succeeded at that—letting industries thrive while also regulating them for safety," Carroll says. "Algorithms are just the next frontier of that."
To take the Big Tobacco analogy further, both Carroll and Binkowski believe Facebook should be held responsible for educating the public in the way cigarette companies were forced to educate the public about the dangers of smoking after the Master Settlement Agreement.
"The ad tech industry eroded the profitability of local news, local journalism. Local newspapers have become an endangered species, which harms local communities," Carroll says. "This contributes to the decline in trust in media, so I see these as systemic problems, and systemic solutions need to be considered."
Binkowski says she thinks lawmakers should force Facebook to dedicate funding to newsrooms "in perpetuity." She says this funding should be distributed transparently and overseen by a board of journalists and academics.
"That funding program should be global, not national. They need to be compelled to return to the world what they took from it," Binkowski says. "They need to pay journalists our fair share. They sucked up all the funds from what we made, what we created, the content that we risk our lives regularly putting together, generally for a salary that would shock non-journalists if they knew it."
Carroll says there's no "silver bullet" for fixing the disinformation problem, but creating a system that has more transparency, accountability and enforcement is key. It's also important to force these companies to repair the damage they've done, which may include forcing them to fund newsrooms. Disinformation will always find its place on the internet, as it's very difficult to combat effectively, but if we can get to the root of the problem and make it less potent, then we can start moving in the right direction and create a less chaotic and harmful information ecosystem.


alternet--2020-10-19--‘A bunch of grifters’: Ronald Reagan’s son slams modern GOP for ‘degrading’ the values it once espou

‘A bunch of grifters’: Ronald Reagan’s son slams modern GOP for ‘degrading’ the values it once espoused

Although Ron Reagan , now 62 , is the son of the one of the most influential conservatives of the 20th Century — the late President Ronald Reagan — he is an outspoken liberal who is highly critical of President Donald Trump .
But Ron Reagan 's criticisms of the modern Republican Party go way beyond Trump .
And when he was interviewed by CNN 's Ana Cabrera on Sunday , October 18 , Reagan described the 2020 GOP as a party of `` grifters . ''
Reagan slammed Trump and his Republican allies for using the presidency and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Organization-owned properties at the expense of taxpayers .
The liberal pundit and activist , speaking from Seattle , told Cabrera , `` We 've got a bunch of grifters in the White House .
They 're treating this as a grift… .
They 're using the hotels and the golf clubs to profit off the presidency . ''
Reagan sounded a lot like his sister , Patti Davis — or , for that matter , former Democratic House Speaker Tip O'Neill — when he told Cabrera that although he had policy differences with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he conducted himself with dignity during his eight years in the White House .
And Ron Reagan lamented that he can not say the same thing about the Republicans of 2020 .
Reagan told Cabrera , `` When I think of my father , I think of words like integrity , decency , dignity , honor and patriotism — not nationalism , but patriotism — all of those qualities are in very short supply in this White House .
And , frankly , the Republican Party has been complicit in degrading those @ @ @

Although Ron Reagan, now 62, is the son of the one of the most influential conservatives of the 20th Century — the late President Ronald Reagan — he is an outspoken liberal who is highly critical of President Donald Trump. But Ron Reagan's criticisms of the modern Republican Party go way beyond Trump. And when he was interviewed by CNN's Ana Cabrera on Sunday, October 18, Reagan described the 2020 GOP as a party of "grifters."
Reagan slammed Trump and his Republican allies for using the presidency and the federal government to bring profits to Trump Organization-owned properties at the expense of taxpayers. The liberal pundit and activist, speaking from Seattle, told Cabrera, "We've got a bunch of grifters in the White House. They're treating this as a grift…. They're using the hotels and the golf clubs to profit off the presidency."
Reagan sounded a lot like his sister, Patti Davis — or, for that matter, former Democratic House Speaker Tip O'Neill — when he told Cabrera that although he had policy differences with President Reagan, there was no doubt that he conducted himself with dignity during his eight years in the White House. And Ron Reagan lamented that he cannot say the same thing about the Republicans of 2020.
Reagan told Cabrera, "When I think of my father, I think of words like integrity, decency, dignity, honor and patriotism — not nationalism, but patriotism — all of those qualities are in very short supply in this White House. And, frankly, the Republican Party has been complicit in degrading those values."


alternet--2020-10-20--Pompeo facing investigation after alluding to the possible release of Clinton emails 'before electio

Pompeo facing investigation after alluding to the possible release of Clinton emails 'before election day'

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is at the helm of an investigation and the Office of Special Counsel will determine if he illegally used his position to bolster politics on behalf of President Donald Trump .
The investigation into Pompeo was sparked from a Fox News interview conducted in early October where he teased about the release of emails connected to former secretary and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton `` before the election , '' per Politico .
`` We 've got the emails , we 're getting them out .
We 're going to get all this information @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it , '' Pompeo told Fox News 's Dana Perino during the interview .
`` We 're doing it as fast as we can .
I certainly think there 'll be more to see before the election . ''
During that interview , Pompeo responded to pressure and criticism from Trump who had also discussed the Clinton emails that same day when he said : `` They 're in the State Department , but Mike Pompeo has been unable to get them out , which is very sad , actually .
I 'm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He was unable to get them out .
I do n't know why .
You 're running the State Department , you get them out . ''
Pompeo insisted the release will come before the election , raising questions about whether or not he could be violating the Hatch Act , which `` limits certain political activities of federal employees , as well as some state , D.C. , and local government employees who work in connection with federally funded programs , '' according to the Office of Special Counsel 's website @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to ensure that federal programs are administered in a nonpartisan fashion , to protect federal employees from political coercion in the workplace , and to ensure that federal employees are advanced based on merit and not based on political affiliation . ''
In a letter dated Friday , October 16 , the watchdog group American Oversight expressed concern about Pompeo 's remarks with Election Day just two weeks away .
According to the group , Pompeo 's remark `` warrants an investigation of whether Secretary Pompeo has given directives or orders to State @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
Now , Pompeo is denying any possibility that he would illegally politicize his office .
When asked whether he would release Clinton-related emails so close to the upcoming election date , he said : `` Releasing emails for the sake of transparency ca n't possibly be a violation of the Hatch Act .
That 's a ridiculous question . ''

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is at the helm of an investigation and the Office of Special Counsel will determine if he illegally used his position to bolster politics on behalf of President Donald Trump.
The investigation into Pompeo was sparked from a Fox News interview conducted in early October where he teased about the release of emails connected to former secretary and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton "before the election," per Politico.
"We've got the emails, we're getting them out. We're going to get all this information out so the American people can see it," Pompeo told Fox News's Dana Perino during the interview. "We're doing it as fast as we can. I certainly think there'll be more to see before the election."
During that interview, Pompeo responded to pressure and criticism from Trump who had also discussed the Clinton emails that same day when he said: "They're in the State Department, but Mike Pompeo has been unable to get them out, which is very sad, actually. I'm not happy about him for that reason. He was unable to get them out. I don't know why. You're running the State Department, you get them out."
Pompeo insisted the release will come before the election, raising questions about whether or not he could be violating the Hatch Act, which "limits certain political activities of federal employees, as well as some state, D.C., and local government employees who work in connection with federally funded programs," according to the Office of Special Counsel's website.
"The law's purposes are to ensure that federal programs are administered in a nonpartisan fashion, to protect federal employees from political coercion in the workplace, and to ensure that federal employees are advanced based on merit and not based on political affiliation."
In a letter dated Friday, October 16, the watchdog group American Oversight expressed concern about Pompeo's remarks with Election Day just two weeks away. According to the group, Pompeo's remark "warrants an investigation of whether Secretary Pompeo has given directives or orders to State employees in violation of the Hatch Act."
Now, Pompeo is denying any possibility that he would illegally politicize his office. When asked whether he would release Clinton-related emails so close to the upcoming election date, he said: "Releasing emails for the sake of transparency can't possibly be a violation of the Hatch Act. That's a ridiculous question."


alternet--2020-10-20--Trump’s inner circle ‘furious’ with FBI’s Wray for undercutting Biden smear: report

According to a report from Politico , high-ranking members of Donald Trump 's administration are `` furious '' with FBI Director Christopher Wray for siding with the intelligence community and calling recent revelations about former Vice President Joe Biden 's son Hunter part of a Russian disinformation campaign .
As the New York Post story about the Democratic presidential nominee 's son continues to fall apart — with even Fox News reportedly passing on it before Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani took it to the Post — Wray , who has had a strained relationship with the president is allowing his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden 's .
That , in turn , has angered White House officials looking for a helping hand to help out the president 's cratering re-election campaign .
According to Politico , `` Trump 's inner circle was already furious at Wray for echoing the intelligence community 's finding that Russia is acting to damage Biden 's candidacy , as well as his description of antifa as 'an ideology ' rather than an organized entity .
Now , they 're ratcheting up calls for Trump to fire his handpicked director . ''
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had been hoping that Wray would open up a full-scale investigation into the sketchy accusations based upon unverified information reportedly found on the younger Biden 's laptop computer .
For his part , Wary is reportedly loath to enter the fray with an eye on the election just two weeks away , and his own future uncertain .
`` Other congressional and law enforcement sources noted that Trump might lack the leverage to bend Wray — who , like past FBI directors , was appointed to serve a 10-year term , a setup @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — to his will , '' the report states .
`` A public offensive against Biden by the FBI would doom Wray 's chances of remaining atop the bureau in a potential Biden administration .
Wray , they say , would have no incentive to burn the rulebook in order to score a point for Trump , particularly when he enjoys relatively bipartisan support in the Capitol . ''
According to those who know Wray , he is unlikely to take the president 's side this time .
`` Chris does not need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a former FBI chief of staff .
`` He is smart and thoughtful and principled and has the best interests of the FBI and the nation in mind . ''
You can read more here .

According to a report from Politico, high-ranking members of Donald Trump's administration are "furious" with FBI Director Christopher Wray for siding with the intelligence community and calling recent revelations about former Vice President Joe Biden's son Hunter part of a Russian disinformation campaign.
As the New York Post story about the Democratic presidential nominee's son continues to fall apart — with even Fox News reportedly passing on it before Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani took it to the Post — Wray, who has had a strained relationship with the president is allowing his department to investigate Russia instead of the Biden's.
That, in turn, has angered White House officials looking for a helping hand to help out the president's cratering re-election campaign.
According to Politico, "Trump's inner circle was already furious at Wray for echoing the intelligence community's finding that Russia is acting to damage Biden's candidacy, as well as his description of antifa as 'an ideology' rather than an organized entity. Now, they're ratcheting up calls for Trump to fire his handpicked director."
The report goes on to note that Republicans had been hoping that Wray would open up a full-scale investigation into the sketchy accusations based upon unverified information reportedly found on the younger Biden's laptop computer.
For his part, Wary is reportedly loath to enter the fray with an eye on the election just two weeks away, and his own future uncertain.
"Other congressional and law enforcement sources noted that Trump might lack the leverage to bend Wray — who, like past FBI directors, was appointed to serve a 10-year term, a setup designed to insulate the bureau from politics — to his will," the report states. "A public offensive against Biden by the FBI would doom Wray's chances of remaining atop the bureau in a potential Biden administration. Wray, they say, would have no incentive to burn the rulebook in order to score a point for Trump, particularly when he enjoys relatively bipartisan support in the Capitol."
According to those who know Wray, he is unlikely to take the president's side this time.
"Chris does not need my advice," explained Chuck Rosenberg, a former FBI chief of staff. "He is smart and thoughtful and principled and has the best interests of the FBI and the nation in mind."
You can read more here.


alternet--2020-10-20--Understanding the North's climate change trifecta

The Arctic Circle became unbelievably hot on June 20 .
In the Russian community of Verkhoyansk , temperatures topped 38C , marking what may be the highest air temperature ever recorded within the Arctic .
The temperatures at Verkhoyansk are part of a larger trend across western Russia this summer , with small communities throughout the region reporting temperatures that are smashing local records that have stood for decades .
During the latter half of June , surface temperatures throughout western Siberia were as much as 10C above historical norms , marking one of the hottest Junes on record despite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the month .
For scientists the world-over these record-breaking temperatures are alarm bells , demonstrating the kind of extreme weather events we can expect to see more often if climate change continues unchecked .
However , it is the long-term fallout from modern heat waves that has many northern scientists deeply concerned , as they will affect our planet for decades to come .
During heat waves surface temperatures soar , often triggering a chain of fire-promoting weather conditions including extreme thunderstorms .
These thunderstorms have hundreds of lightning strikes that can ignite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as fuel for fire .
In northern regions like the boreal biome , these fire-promoting conditions can cause large-scale wildfires that burn millions of hectares of forest in a single summer .
Historically , humanity has considered wildfire a true disaster and spent considerable resources to suppress them .
We now understand that despite the initial loss of established trees and soils , wildfires are a natural and integral part of the boreal biome .
Modern wildfires , however , are occurring with increasing frequency and intensity , covering a larger area due @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In extreme fire years , these modern wildfires can burn deep into the organic soils that characterize boreal forests .
These carbon-rich soils have been built up over thousands of years and hold approximately 30 per cent of the world 's terrestrial carbon stocks .
When fires burn deep into soils or return too quickly to a forest , they lose their “ ancient carbon '' stocks .
Instead of being held in the ground these ancient carbon reserves are combusted and released back into the atmosphere , increasing the carbon levels .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ wildfires intensify climate change impacts like heat waves , which can lead to further wildfires , forming a powerful “ positive feedback '' loop with climate change .
While these trends alone are alarming , northern researchers warn that the fallout from heat waves wo n't stop when the fires burn out .
In northern regions where the soils historically stay frozen year-round , a whole new set of changes are beginning to take form .
Permafrost forms on the landscape when soil materials remain below freezing for two or more consecutive years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ direct response to a cold climate .
As one moves further south , however , permafrost becomes increasingly dependent on the presence of thick organic soils , surface vegetation and a shady overstorey to survive the warm summer months .
In those cases , the ecosystem acts like a giant protective blanket , limiting the sun 's heat that is able to reach the frozen permafrost materials below .
When permafrost ecosystems burn , the wildfire consumes these protective layers , often triggering permafrost thaw .
This can occur gradually , with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or abruptly , with the thawed layer expanding dramatically over years .
The land may cave in or sink , plant communities may change completely and local water flows may be rerouted .
In both cases , the loss of permafrost makes the massive Arctic carbon reserves more vulnerable to loss .
With gradual thaw microbes are able to break down and release the previously frozen carbon back to the atmosphere as carbon dioxide .
In contrast , abrupt thaw commonly occurs in ice-rich permafrost resulting in warmer but also wetter soils .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ carbon is commonly returned to the atmosphere as methane , a greenhouse gas approximately 30 times more powerful at trapping heat than carbon dioxide .
All this lost carbon may make the positive feedback with climate change even stronger .
While scientists are working to understand if the vegetation that grows after permafrost thaw is able to offset all the carbon released during decomposition , most current models indicate that permafrost thaw will ultimately be a source of atmospheric carbon .
Read more : More frequent fires could dramatically alter boreal forests and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ understand just how tightly linked these disturbances caused by climate change really are .
What appears as an individual event — heat wave , forest fire or permafrost thaw — has cascading ramifications through time and space in the Arctic , potentially serving as the seed crystal for the next disturbance in the coming months , years or even decades that follow .
Heat waves , wildfires and permafrost thaw represent an environmental trifecta that are inherently linked and drive change in the occurrence and intensity of one another .
This article is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Commons license .
Read the original article .

Catherine Dieleman, University of Guelph
The Arctic Circle became unbelievably hot on June 20. In the Russian community of Verkhoyansk, temperatures topped 38C, marking what may be the highest air temperature ever recorded within the Arctic.
The temperatures at Verkhoyansk are part of a larger trend across western Russia this summer, with small communities throughout the region reporting temperatures that are smashing local records that have stood for decades. During the latter half of June, surface temperatures throughout western Siberia were as much as 10C above historical norms, marking one of the hottest Junes on record despite relatively cool temperatures at the start of the month.
For scientists the world-over these record-breaking temperatures are alarm bells, demonstrating the kind of extreme weather events we can expect to see more often if climate change continues unchecked. However, it is the long-term fallout from modern heat waves that has many northern scientists deeply concerned, as they will affect our planet for decades to come.
The fires that follow
During heat waves surface temperatures soar, often triggering a chain of fire-promoting weather conditions including extreme thunderstorms. These thunderstorms have hundreds of lightning strikes that can ignite the dry soils and vegetation that serve as fuel for fire.
In northern regions like the boreal biome, these fire-promoting conditions can cause large-scale wildfires that burn millions of hectares of forest in a single summer.
Historically, humanity has considered wildfire a true disaster and spent considerable resources to suppress them. We now understand that despite the initial loss of established trees and soils, wildfires are a natural and integral part of the boreal biome.
Modern wildfires, however, are occurring with increasing frequency and intensity, covering a larger area due weather events like severe heat waves. In extreme fire years, these modern wildfires can burn deep into the organic soils that characterize boreal forests. These carbon-rich soils have been built up over thousands of years and hold approximately 30 per cent of the world's terrestrial carbon stocks.
When fires burn deep into soils or return too quickly to a forest, they lose their “ancient carbon" stocks. Instead of being held in the ground these ancient carbon reserves are combusted and released back into the atmosphere, increasing the carbon levels. The higher carbon dioxide levels generated by wildfires intensify climate change impacts like heat waves, which can lead to further wildfires, forming a powerful “positive feedback" loop with climate change.
While these trends alone are alarming, northern researchers warn that the fallout from heat waves won't stop when the fires burn out. In northern regions where the soils historically stay frozen year-round, a whole new set of changes are beginning to take form.
When permafrost perishes
Permafrost forms on the landscape when soil materials remain below freezing for two or more consecutive years. In some areas permafrost forms in direct response to a cold climate.
As one moves further south, however, permafrost becomes increasingly dependent on the presence of thick organic soils, surface vegetation and a shady overstorey to survive the warm summer months. In those cases, the ecosystem acts like a giant protective blanket, limiting the sun's heat that is able to reach the frozen permafrost materials below.
Carbon-rich peat burns readily, making it good fuel for lightning-caused fires.
(U.S. National Parks Service, Western Arctic National Parklands)
When permafrost ecosystems burn, the wildfire consumes these protective layers, often triggering permafrost thaw. This can occur gradually, with the thawed layer expanding slowly over decades, or abruptly, with the thawed layer expanding dramatically over years. The land may cave in or sink, plant communities may change completely and local water flows may be rerouted.
In both cases, the loss of permafrost makes the massive Arctic carbon reserves more vulnerable to loss. With gradual thaw microbes are able to break down and release the previously frozen carbon back to the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. In contrast, abrupt thaw commonly occurs in ice-rich permafrost resulting in warmer but also wetter soils. Under these conditions decomposition still occurs but carbon is commonly returned to the atmosphere as methane, a greenhouse gas approximately 30 times more powerful at trapping heat than carbon dioxide.
All this lost carbon may make the positive feedback with climate change even stronger. While scientists are working to understand if the vegetation that grows after permafrost thaw is able to offset all the carbon released during decomposition, most current models indicate that permafrost thaw will ultimately be a source of atmospheric carbon.
Read more: More frequent fires could dramatically alter boreal forests and emit more carbon
Researchers are coming to understand just how tightly linked these disturbances caused by climate change really are. What appears as an individual event — heat wave, forest fire or permafrost thaw — has cascading ramifications through time and space in the Arctic, potentially serving as the seed crystal for the next disturbance in the coming months, years or even decades that follow.
Heat waves, wildfires and permafrost thaw represent an environmental trifecta that are inherently linked and drive change in the occurrence and intensity of one another.
Catherine Dieleman, Research associate, Department of Integrative Biology, University of Guelph
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


alternet--2020-10-20--Trump is collapsing into a ball of self-absorbed spite and destruction

In the last weeks of the campaign , Donald Trump is collapsing in on himself .
That 's the story his campaign and White House team itself seems to want to push in the scurry to avoid blame themselves .
On Sunday , a New York Times piece reported on gloom , grievance , and `` backbiting '' among Trump 's staff as his reelection prospects dim , but more of note is the blame getting directed at the big orange hateburper himself .
`` Among some of Mr. Trump 's lieutenants , '' reports the Times , there is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can do for the final stretch is to keep the president occupied , happy and off Twitter as much as possible , rather than producing a major shift in strategy . ''
Yes , it is truly a shocking development .
In the last weeks of the campaign , Donald Trump is ignoring all advice , doubling down on his most hateful behaviors , and choosing closing themes based solely on his own obsessions , grievances , and malevolence .
Whoever could have seen that coming ?
( Aside from everyone . )
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ so toxic that they are noticeable even to a four-year-flaccid national press .
Trump 's propensity to target women , select political enemies for demonization , and his renewed vigor in seemingly attempting to goad supporters into violent acts against them are becoming topics with more public weight than any campaign message the shouting twit threatens to stumble into in these last preelection days .
It turns out that Donald Trump , left to himself with campaign staff abandoning any further pretense at controlling him , is hateful , spiteful , anti-democratic , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and self-absorbed to the point of self-destruction .
If there 's anyone who has survived through four full years of Trump 's attentions and they did n't predict that , among his inner circle , they would have to be burrowed so far up his *** that they can peek out his nostrils .
The problem here is that Trump is only going to get worse in the next few weeks—no matter what .
If polls continue to look bleak , his narcissistic bitterness will overwhelm him and his demands of his supporters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attacks on Democratic leaders that take pandemic precautions—which he considers to be personal attacks on himself and therefore illegitimate , whether the moves save American lives or not—have been getting more vigorous , but his inner circle continues to support those attacks wholeheartedly .
He is already obsessing over the notion of invisible election `` fraud '' as means of delegitimizing the results—as a malignant narcissist , he will adopt whatever delusion is necessary to protect himself from the notion that his own actions are responsible for his failures , as opposed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he wins ?
God help us .
A Trump fully untethered from ever having to face voters again , supported by an attorney general who has been so eagerly crooked in tilting the scales of justice that he may already rank as the worst in history , backed by a party fully purged of any but the most obscene lawmakers hailing from the most hard-right of gerrymandered districts ; there would be no institutions left .
No government scientists , no statistics gatherers , no oversight , no public services , nothing but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to every office .
His `` conservative '' team is turning the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention into a Trump-tailored propaganda shop during a worldwide pandemic .
There 's literally nothing left they would not be craven enough to do .
The good news is it looks like he 's losing .
Possibly even for real this time .
The transparent Russian propaganda , though propped up this time by Republican senators and the clownish Rudy Giuliani , is n't motivating his hard-right base into nearly the froth against his male opponent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a woman .
The Trump question of what do you have to lose has been clarified to all .
The notion of choosing a reality show host as world leader does not have the same appeal as it once might have across generic American suburbia .
Trump 's campaign and White House staff seem to know it .
Last week saw a Washington Post report of the angst of Trump 's phalanx of worst enablers as they fretted over possible career repercussions of 1 ) endlessly lying to the American people and 2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a man in 3 ) reforming the government into a white nationalist-premised , incompetent kleptocracy while destroying longstanding democratic institutions and premises .
Consequences !
Can you imagine there being consequences for such things ?
Truly , conservative pundits are beginning to stammer , it would be the end of democracy as we know it .
Lord help us , we are almost there .
Only to Election Day , mind you : After that , even under the best-case scenario of American voters delivering a thumping to Trump so severe that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ results , we still face an embittered Trump and Republican Party willing to dynamite the country into oblivion rather than let it pass unscathed into non-Republican hands .
For now , let 's take some comfort in Dear Orange Leader apparently beginning to realize that he is in deep , deep trouble .
Hopefully it will unhinge him mostly in ways that harm only himself and his malevolent aides , allies , and hangers-on .
If we 're lucky he 'll demand William Barr arrest himself , or will turn on Rudy Giuliani @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Of Secret Crimes story with enough vim .

In the last weeks of the campaign, Donald Trump is collapsing in on himself. That's the story his campaign and White House team itself seems to want to push in the scurry to avoid blame themselves. On Sunday, a New York Times piece reported on gloom, grievance, and "backbiting" among Trump's staff as his reelection prospects dim, but more of note is the blame getting directed at the big orange hateburper himself.
"Among some of Mr. Trump's lieutenants," reports the Times, there is "a sense that the best they can do for the final stretch is to keep the president occupied, happy and off Twitter as much as possible, rather than producing a major shift in strategy."
Yes, it is truly a shocking development. In the last weeks of the campaign, Donald Trump is ignoring all advice, doubling down on his most hateful behaviors, and choosing closing themes based solely on his own obsessions, grievances, and malevolence. Whoever could have seen that coming? (Aside from everyone.)
The results speak for themselves—no, are so toxic that they are noticeable even to a four-year-flaccid national press. Trump's propensity to target women, select political enemies for demonization, and his renewed vigor in seemingly attempting to goad supporters into violent acts against them are becoming topics with more public weight than any campaign message the shouting twit threatens to stumble into in these last preelection days. It turns out that Donald Trump, left to himself with campaign staff abandoning any further pretense at controlling him, is hateful, spiteful, anti-democratic, misogynistic, openly racist, paranoid, and self-absorbed to the point of self-destruction.
If there's anyone who has survived through four full years of Trump's attentions and they didn't predict that, among his inner circle, they would have to be burrowed so far up his *** that they can peek out his nostrils.
The problem here is that Trump is only going to get worse in the next few weeks—no matter what. If polls continue to look bleak, his narcissistic bitterness will overwhelm him and his demands of his supporters will get even more extreme. His attacks on Democratic leaders that take pandemic precautions—which he considers to be personal attacks on himself and therefore illegitimate, whether the moves save American lives or not—have been getting more vigorous, but his inner circle continues to support those attacks wholeheartedly. He is already obsessing over the notion of invisible election "fraud" as means of delegitimizing the results—as a malignant narcissist, he will adopt whatever delusion is necessary to protect himself from the notion that his own actions are responsible for his failures, as opposed to widespread conspiracy against him.
And if he wins? God help us. A Trump fully untethered from ever having to face voters again, supported by an attorney general who has been so eagerly crooked in tilting the scales of justice that he may already rank as the worst in history, backed by a party fully purged of any but the most obscene lawmakers hailing from the most hard-right of gerrymandered districts; there would be no institutions left. No government scientists, no statistics gatherers, no oversight, no public services, nothing but a hierarchy of sycophants from Washington down to every office. His "conservative" team is turning the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention into a Trump-tailored propaganda shop during a worldwide pandemic. There's literally nothing left they would not be craven enough to do.
The good news is it looks like he's losing. Possibly even for real this time. The transparent Russian propaganda, though propped up this time by Republican senators and the clownish Rudy Giuliani, isn't motivating his hard-right base into nearly the froth against his male opponent that near-identical hokum spurred when directed at a woman. The Trump question of what do you have to lose has been clarified to all. The notion of choosing a reality show host as world leader does not have the same appeal as it once might have across generic American suburbia.
Trump's campaign and White House staff seem to know it. Last week saw a Washington Post report of the angst of Trump's phalanx of worst enablers as they fretted over possible career repercussions of 1) endlessly lying to the American people and 2) support a corrupt, cretinous toad of a man in 3) reforming the government into a white nationalist-premised, incompetent kleptocracy while destroying longstanding democratic institutions and premises. Consequences! Can you imagine there being consequences for such things? Truly, conservative pundits are beginning to stammer, it would be the end of democracy as we know it.
Lord help us, we are almost there. Only to Election Day, mind you: After that, even under the best-case scenario of American voters delivering a thumping to Trump so severe that not even his scandal-mongers can discredit the results, we still face an embittered Trump and Republican Party willing to dynamite the country into oblivion rather than let it pass unscathed into non-Republican hands.
For now, let's take some comfort in Dear Orange Leader apparently beginning to realize that he is in deep, deep trouble. Hopefully it will unhinge him mostly in ways that harm only himself and his malevolent aides, allies, and hangers-on. If we're lucky he'll demand William Barr arrest himself, or will turn on Rudy Giuliani for failing to sell the Moist Laptop Of Secret Crimes story with enough vim.


alternet--2020-10-20--Trump's final ad buy betrays just how broke his campaign really is

On a call Monday , Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien revealed the campaign 's total ad buy for the last two weeks of the presidential race would be a whopping a paltry $ 55 million ... split between no fewer than 11 states .
Um , just wow .
And that 's not only the Trump campaign , it represents coordinated spending with the Republican National Committee ( RNC ) too .
Far from being a muscular way to close out the race , it feels more like a cry for help .
By comparison , Biden campaign manager Jen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still anticipates raising another $ 234 million through the election .
The 11 states included on the target list for both entities are : Arizona , Florida , Georgia , Iowa , Maine-2 , Michigan , North Carolina , Nevada , Ohio , Pennsylvania , and Wisconsin .
According to an Axios article last week , Stepien views Ohio , Florida , Georgia , Iowa , and Maine 's 2nd district as the foundation of their path to 270—in other words , must gets .
In fact , the article quoted Stepien calling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , '' but apparently not so easy that they 're forgoing dropping money in all four supposed gimmes .
As New York Times journalist Shane Goldmacher , who was on the call , noted , `` On the one hand , Stepien says he is 'certain ' that they are winning Ohio and Iowa .
On the other hand , he announces the campaign will be up with ads in those two states in final two weeks . ''
Go figure .
One state the Trump campaign appears to have finally given up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Monday , the Trump camp had announced cancelling ad buys in several Midwestern states even as they were preparing to reinvest in some of them through this coordinated ad buy with the RNC .
But Minnesota , which has pretty much always been a pipe dream for Team Trump , was dropped altogether .
Even before this final Trump ad buy in the closing weeks , Biden 's ad spending had outpaced Trump 's by a 2-to-1 ratio for months , according to The New York Times .
In a review of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states , the only state where Trump outspent Biden was Georgia—which does n't exactly jibe with that state 's inclusion in Stepien 's so-called `` easy '' list .
Biden 's spending strategy has clearly centered on the Midwest .
`` His dominance is most pronounced in three critical swing states — Michigan , Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — where he spent about $ 53 million to Mr. Trump 's $ 17 million over the past month largely on ads assailing the president 's handling of the virus as well as the economy and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And while Trump initially enjoyed a digital ad advantage in the early part of the campaign , Biden has steadily closed that gap in recent months , achieving near parity in the last 30 days at $ 50 million for each ad campaign on Google and Facebook , according to the Times .
What is perhaps most interesting in these final weeks is just how small Trump is playing even as Team Biden has played very big—and not just in terms of overall spending .
As this Politico piece explains , the Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 270 open up that in some cases they realized it would be more cost effective to make national buys rather than spending astronomical amounts in smaller battleground markets .
It 's a worth a read .
Under normal circumstances , most campaigns at this point would be making buys to leverage their position in 10 or even fewer states .
But the Biden campaign realized that making some national buys through the networks would actually cost only slightly more , for instance , than purchasing air time in states with major Senate races @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Georgia , where pricing had gone through the roof .
The big upside of the national buys was that they had the advantage of not only reaching the desired markets in key battlegrounds but also establishing a Biden presence in states that were newly on the radar , like Texas .
`` We are looking at a very wide map right now , '' Becca Siegel , the Biden campaign 's chief analytics officer , said .
`` Normally at this stage of the campaign , we would be narrowing in .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we have a lot of pathways that have opened up . ''
So as Trump closes out with a whimper , Biden is heading out with a roar , and his sizable cash advantage has made all that possible .

On a call Monday, Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien revealed the campaign's total ad buy for the last two weeks of the presidential race would be a whopping a paltry $55 million ... split between no fewer than 11 states.
Um, just wow. And that's not only the Trump campaign, it represents coordinated spending with the Republican National Committee (RNC) too. Far from being a muscular way to close out the race, it feels more like a cry for help. By comparison, Biden campaign manager Jen O'Malley Dillon said last week that she still anticipates raising another $234 million through the election.
The 11 states included on the target list for both entities are: Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Maine-2, Michigan, North Carolina, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
According to an Axios article last week, Stepien views Ohio, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, and Maine's 2nd district as the foundation of their path to 270—in other words, must gets. In fact, the article quoted Stepien calling that line up the "easy part," but apparently not so easy that they're forgoing dropping money in all four supposed gimmes.
As New York Times journalist Shane Goldmacher, who was on the call, noted, "On the one hand, Stepien says he is 'certain' that they are winning Ohio and Iowa. On the other hand, he announces the campaign will be up with ads in those two states in final two weeks." Go figure.
One state the Trump campaign appears to have finally given up on altogether is Minnesota. Earlier on Monday, the Trump camp had announced cancelling ad buys in several Midwestern states even as they were preparing to reinvest in some of them through this coordinated ad buy with the RNC. But Minnesota, which has pretty much always been a pipe dream for Team Trump, was dropped altogether.
Even before this final Trump ad buy in the closing weeks, Biden's ad spending had outpaced Trump's by a 2-to-1 ratio for months, according to TheNew York Times. In a review of the two campaigns' spending in 10 battleground states, the only state where Trump outspent Biden was Georgia—which doesn't exactly jibe with that state's inclusion in Stepien's so-called "easy" list.
Biden's spending strategy has clearly centered on the Midwest. "His dominance is most pronounced in three critical swing states — Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — where he spent about $53 million to Mr. Trump's $17 million over the past month largely on ads assailing the president's handling of the virus as well as the economy and taxes," writes the Times.
And while Trump initially enjoyed a digital ad advantage in the early part of the campaign, Biden has steadily closed that gap in recent months, achieving near parity in the last 30 days at $50 million for each ad campaign on Google and Facebook, according to the Times.
What is perhaps most interesting in these final weeks is just how small Trump is playing even as Team Biden has played very big—and not just in terms of overall spending. As this Politico piece explains, the Biden campaign has seen so many paths to 270 open up that in some cases they realized it would be more cost effective to make national buys rather than spending astronomical amounts in smaller battleground markets. It's a worth a read.
Under normal circumstances, most campaigns at this point would be making buys to leverage their position in 10 or even fewer states. But the Biden campaign realized that making some national buys through the networks would actually cost only slightly more, for instance, than purchasing air time in states with major Senate races like Arizona, North Carolina, and Georgia, where pricing had gone through the roof. The big upside of the national buys was that they had the advantage of not only reaching the desired markets in key battlegrounds but also establishing a Biden presence in states that were newly on the radar, like Texas.
"We are looking at a very wide map right now," Becca Siegel, the Biden campaign's chief analytics officer, said. "Normally at this stage of the campaign, we would be narrowing in. But at this stage of the campaign, we have a lot of pathways that have opened up."
So as Trump closes out with a whimper, Biden is heading out with a roar, and his sizable cash advantage has made all that possible.


alternet--2020-10-20--Republicans are growing anxious about losing a Senate seat in Texas — once again

The final two weeks of the 2020 election are upon us , and with the political climate continuing to favor Democrats overall , Daily Kos Elections is moving our race ratings in 11 more contests—nine shift to the left , while two move towards the GOP .
We also now have a total of 11 GOP-held Senate seats rated as Lean Republican or better for Democrats .
You can find all our Senate , gubernatorial , and House ratings at each link .
• TX-Sen ( Likely R to Lean R ) : Democrat MJ Hegar not only swamped Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the last quarter , she just got a big vote of confidence from the Senate Majority PAC , which announced it would invest almost $ 9 million to support her bid—the first time outside Democratic groups have spent money on a Texas Senate race in forever .
( Yep , even Beto did n't get that kind of love . )
All polls still have Cornyn ahead , and Texas is still Texas .
But the gap has narrowed , and with presidential polling showing a near-tie , the once unthinkable is now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ himself also seems to be feeling the heat : After spending four years positioning himself as nothing but an ardent Trump ally , the senator insisted to reporters over the weekend that he 'd disagreed with the White House plenty of times but kept his dissent private .
• CO-Sen ( Lean D to Likely D ) : With reports that the National Republican Senatorial Committee ( NRSC ) and the Senate Leadership Fund have both drastically scaled back their spending in Colorado 's Senate race , Republicans have now all but abandoned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the top Democratic super PAC , Senate Majority PAC , has also cut seven figures from its planned advertising .
Every single poll of this race has shown Gardner trailing Democrat John Hickenlooper , most by double digits .
At this point , Colorado is simply too blue for a Republican with no real ability to distance himself from Donald Trump—like Gardner .
• VT-Gov ( Likely R to Safe R ) : Despite Vermont 's deep blue hue , the state has continued its long history of electing Republican governors , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in part because of his handling of the coronavirus pandemic .
Limited polling has shown him crushing his Democratic opponent , Lt. Gov .
David Zuckerman , and there 's been no indication that outside groups plan to get involved here in the final weeks .
• CA-21 ( Lean D to Tossup ) : Democrat TJ Cox narrowly unseated Republican Rep. David Valadao in one of the biggest upsets of 2018 , and he faces a difficult campaign to stop Valadao from reclaiming California 's 21st Congressional District this year .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this southern Central Valley seat was a mid-September American Viewpoint internal for the pro-Republican Congressional Leadership Fund that found Valadao ahead 49-38 .
It may seem implausible that Valadao could have a huge lead in a district that Trump lost 55-40 , but Democrats have not responded with better numbers , and Politico also recently reported that this was one of only a few seats that Team Blue is `` growing increasingly nervous '' about .
There are some other factors that could complicate Cox 's chances even in a good year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump running better with Latino voters than he did four years ago , which could help him make up some ground in this heavily Latino district .
And Valadao has always run ahead of the GOP ticket in past years , sometimes quite dramatically .
Cox may still be the slight favorite to hang on , but a Valadao win would no longer be a surprise .
• FL-18 ( Safe R to Likely R ) : Republican Rep. Brian Mast looked secure after he beat a well-funded opponent by a convincing 54-46 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but he faces another credible challenge this year from Navy veteran Pam Keith in Florida 's 18th Congressional District .
A mid-September survey from St. Pete Polls found Mast ahead by a wide—but not insurmountable—50-42 margin even as respondents narrowly favored Biden in a district that had backed Trump 53-44 four years earlier .
An early October Keith internal from Clearview Research then showed her ahead 45-43 , and Mast 's allies have n't responded with alternate numbers .
There has been no notable outside spending so far in this seat , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Treasure Coast to the north , but an upset is possible if Nov. 3 is a strong night for Team Blue .
• IL-13 ( Lean R to Tossup ) : We had thought that Betsy Dirksen Londrigan 's near-miss against Republican Rep. Rodney Davis in 2018 might have been a high-water mark for Democrats in central Illinois ' 13th Congressional District , which is n't necessarily the most favorable sort of turf from Team Blue .
But a recent survey for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee ( DCCC ) found her leading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after prior polls showed the race neck-and-neck , and we have n't seen any sort of GOP response .
The D-Trip has backed up its data with hard dollars : Along with the House Majority PAC , they 've matched spending with the big outside Republican groups .
This one is looking very close once again .
• MI-03 ( Likely R to Lean R ) : Michigan 's 3rd Congressional District has n't been competitive in a general election in some time , but outside groups from both parties are spending serious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ succeed Republican-turned-independent-turned-Libertarian Rep. Justin Amash , who is retiring after a tumultuous career .
The few polls we 've seen have shown an unsettled contest in this Grand Rapids-based seat between Democrat Hillary Scholten , an immigration attorney , and Republican Peter Meijer , whose family owns an eponymous retail chain with almost 200 locations .
A mid-September internal from Global Strategy Group for Scholten 's allies at House Majority PAC showed a 41-41 tie as Biden led 49-41 in a district that backed Trump 52-42 in 2016 ; weeks later , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that had her ahead 44-42 .
Meijer did get better news , though , when a late September survey from the conservative firm We Ask America had him leading 48-41 as Biden and Trump deadlocked 47-47 .
This seat is still red enough that Meijer remains the frontrunner , but Scholten 's chances are as strong as they 've ever been .
• NC-08 ( Likely R to Lean R ) : While Republican Rep. Richard Hudson is still the favorite against Democrat Pat Timmons-Goodson , a former justice on the state Supreme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sides have begun spending serious amounts of money late in the contest for North Carolina 's 8th Congressional District .
The only two polls we 've seen in recent weeks have both come from Democrats , and they 've each shown a close race .
A late September internal from Brilliant Corners for Timmons-Goodson showed Hudson up 44-42 as Trump led only 47-44 in a seat he took 53-44 four years ago .
An early October DCCC Analytics poll was even more favorable : It found Timmons-Goodson and Biden up 42-39 and 47-43 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ release contradictory numbers .
There 's also one other factor that could complicate Hudson 's path in this seat , which includes Fayetteville and some of Charlotte 's suburbs : Because of court-supervised redistricting , the Republican is seeking reelection in a seat where a quarter of all residents are new to him , which could prevent him from enjoying the full benefits of incumbency .
• SC-01 ( Tossup to Lean D ) : Freshman Democratic Rep. Joe Cunningham won South Carolina 's coastal 1st Congressional District in one of the bigger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the frontrunner going into the final weeks of his bid for reelection .
An early October DCCC internal from GQR found Cunningham leading GOP state Rep. Nancy Mace by a wide 55-42 margin as respondents backed Biden 48-47 in a district that Trump took 53-40 last time .
Mace responded the following week with a Strategic National survey that showed her ahead 47-45 as Trump led 47-44 , but even fellow Republicans do n't seem to believe she 's actually doing that well : Last week , Politico recently reported that Republicans privately @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
Major outside groups on both sides are still spending heavily here , and a Mace win is still very possible , but Cunningham , for perhaps the first time in his political career , is the favorite .
• TX-32 ( Lean D to Likely D ) : Freshman Democratic Rep. Colin Allred flipped Texas ' 32nd District after a very expensive 2018 battle , but it will be hard for businesswoman Genevieve Collins to reclaim it for her party .
This historically red suburban North Dallas seat swung from 57-41 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and well-educated constituencies like this have only become more hostile to the GOP over the last four years .
Major outside groups also are n't acting like this will be close : While both parties are pouring millions into the neighboring 24th District , they 've steered clear of this race so far .
Collins still has the resources to run a credible campaign on her own , but it would be a big surprise if she emerged victorious .
• WA-03 ( Likely R to Lean R ) : Republican Rep. Jaime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrat Carolyn Long , whom she defeated 53-47 in 2018 , but their rematch for southern Washington 's 3rd Congressional District has been looking more competitive recently .
In late September , Long released an internal from GQR that found Herrera Beutler up 49-47 as Trump led just 48-47 in a district he took 50-43 in 2016 .
That 's the only survey we 've seen here in some time , but major outside groups are acting like this seat is very much in play .
The National Republican Congressional Committee and Congressional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Oct. 13 to aid the congresswoman , the very same day the DCCC released its first anti-Herrera Beutler ads .
Altogether , national GOP groups spent almost $ 900,000 during the week of Oct. 12 , while the DCCC dropped $ 470,000 during that time .
Herrera Beutler still has the advantage , though , in this conservative seat .
The incumbent pulled off a healthy win last cycle , and even Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell narrowly lost the 3rd District 51-49 that year while she was winning statewide in a 58-42 landslide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be a stronger year for Team Blue than 2018 was , Long will have an opportunity to notch an upset .

The final two weeks of the 2020 election are upon us, and with the political climate continuing to favor Democrats overall, Daily Kos Elections is moving our race ratings in 11 more contests—nine shift to the left, while two move towards the GOP. We also now have a total of 11 GOP-held Senate seats rated as Lean Republican or better for Democrats. You can find all our Senate, gubernatorial, and House ratings at each link.
• TX-Sen (Likely R to Lean R): Democrat MJ Hegar not only swamped Republican Sen. John Cornyn 2:1 in fundraising over the last quarter, she just got a big vote of confidence from the Senate Majority PAC, which announced it would invest almost $9 million to support her bid—the first time outside Democratic groups have spent money on a Texas Senate race in forever. (Yep, even Beto didn't get that kind of love.)
All polls still have Cornyn ahead, and Texas is still Texas. But the gap has narrowed, and with presidential polling showing a near-tie, the once unthinkable is now a whole lot more thinkable. Cornyn himself also seems to be feeling the heat: After spending four years positioning himself as nothing but an ardent Trump ally, the senator insisted to reporters over the weekend that he'd disagreed with the White House plenty of times but kept his dissent private.
• CO-Sen (Lean D to Likely D): With reports that the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) and the Senate Leadership Fund have both drastically scaled back their spending in Colorado's Senate race, Republicans have now all but abandoned Cory Gardner. Confirming the development, the top Democratic super PAC, Senate Majority PAC, has also cut seven figures from its planned advertising. Every single poll of this race has shown Gardner trailing Democrat John Hickenlooper, most by double digits. At this point, Colorado is simply too blue for a Republican with no real ability to distance himself from Donald Trump—like Gardner.
• VT-Gov (Likely R to Safe R): Despite Vermont's deep blue hue, the state has continued its long history of electing Republican governors, and Phil Scott has remained exceedingly popular, in part because of his handling of the coronavirus pandemic. Limited polling has shown him crushing his Democratic opponent, Lt. Gov. David Zuckerman, and there's been no indication that outside groups plan to get involved here in the final weeks.
• CA-21 (Lean D to Tossup): Democrat TJ Cox narrowly unseated Republican Rep. David Valadao in one of the biggest upsets of 2018, and he faces a difficult campaign to stop Valadao from reclaiming California's 21st Congressional District this year.
The only recent poll we've seen out of this southern Central Valley seat was a mid-September American Viewpoint internal for the pro-Republican Congressional Leadership Fund that found Valadao ahead 49-38. It may seem implausible that Valadao could have a huge lead in a district that Trump lost 55-40, but Democrats have not responded with better numbers, and Politico also recently reported that this was one of only a few seats that Team Blue is "growing increasingly nervous" about.
There are some other factors that could complicate Cox's chances even in a good year for his party. National polls show Trump running better with Latino voters than he did four years ago, which could help him make up some ground in this heavily Latino district. And Valadao has always run ahead of the GOP ticket in past years, sometimes quite dramatically. Cox may still be the slight favorite to hang on, but a Valadao win would no longer be a surprise.
• FL-18 (Safe R to Likely R): Republican Rep. Brian Mast looked secure after he beat a well-funded opponent by a convincing 54-46 during last cycle's Democratic wave, but he faces another credible challenge this year from Navy veteran Pam Keith in Florida's 18th Congressional District.
A mid-September survey from St. Pete Polls found Mast ahead by a wide—but not insurmountable—50-42 margin even as respondents narrowly favored Biden in a district that had backed Trump 53-44 four years earlier. An early October Keith internal from Clearview Research then showed her ahead 45-43, and Mast's allies haven't responded with alternate numbers. There has been no notable outside spending so far in this seat, which includes the Palm Beach area and the Treasure Coast to the north, but an upset is possible if Nov. 3 is a strong night for Team Blue.
• IL-13 (Lean R to Tossup): We had thought that Betsy Dirksen Londrigan's near-miss against Republican Rep. Rodney Davis in 2018 might have been a high-water mark for Democrats in central Illinois' 13th Congressional District, which isn't necessarily the most favorable sort of turf from Team Blue. But a recent survey for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) found her leading Davis by five points in her rematch after prior polls showed the race neck-and-neck, and we haven't seen any sort of GOP response.
The D-Trip has backed up its data with hard dollars: Along with the House Majority PAC, they've matched spending with the big outside Republican groups. This one is looking very close once again.
• MI-03 (Likely R to Lean R): Michigan's 3rd Congressional District hasn't been competitive in a general election in some time, but outside groups from both parties are spending serious amounts of money in the contest to succeed Republican-turned-independent-turned-Libertarian Rep. Justin Amash, who is retiring after a tumultuous career.
The few polls we've seen have shown an unsettled contest in this Grand Rapids-based seat between Democrat Hillary Scholten, an immigration attorney, and Republican Peter Meijer, whose family owns an eponymous retail chain with almost 200 locations. A mid-September internal from Global Strategy Group for Scholten's allies at House Majority PAC showed a 41-41 tie as Biden led 49-41 in a district that backed Trump 52-42 in 2016; weeks later, the Democratic nominee released numbers from ALG Research that had her ahead 44-42. Meijer did get better news, though, when a late September survey from the conservative firm We Ask America had him leading 48-41 as Biden and Trump deadlocked 47-47.
This seat is still red enough that Meijer remains the frontrunner, but Scholten's chances are as strong as they've ever been.
• NC-08 (Likely R to Lean R): While Republican Rep. Richard Hudson is still the favorite against Democrat Pat Timmons-Goodson, a former justice on the state Supreme Court, major outside groups on both sides have begun spending serious amounts of money late in the contest for North Carolina's 8th Congressional District.
The only two polls we've seen in recent weeks have both come from Democrats, and they've each shown a close race. A late September internal from Brilliant Corners for Timmons-Goodson showed Hudson up 44-42 as Trump led only 47-44 in a seat he took 53-44 four years ago. An early October DCCC Analytics poll was even more favorable: It found Timmons-Goodson and Biden up 42-39 and 47-43, respectively. Republicans have yet to release contradictory numbers.
There's also one other factor that could complicate Hudson's path in this seat, which includes Fayetteville and some of Charlotte's suburbs: Because of court-supervised redistricting, the Republican is seeking reelection in a seat where a quarter of all residents are new to him, which could prevent him from enjoying the full benefits of incumbency.
• SC-01 (Tossup to Lean D): Freshman Democratic Rep. Joe Cunningham won South Carolina's coastal 1st Congressional District in one of the bigger upsets of 2018, but he's the frontrunner going into the final weeks of his bid for reelection.
An early October DCCC internal from GQR found Cunningham leading GOP state Rep. Nancy Mace by a wide 55-42 margin as respondents backed Biden 48-47 in a district that Trump took 53-40 last time. Mace responded the following week with a Strategic National survey that showed her ahead 47-45 as Trump led 47-44, but even fellow Republicans don't seem to believe she's actually doing that well: Last week, Politico recently reported that Republicans privately believe Mace's prospects are "dimming."
Major outside groups on both sides are still spending heavily here, and a Mace win is still very possible, but Cunningham, for perhaps the first time in his political career, is the favorite.
• TX-32 (Lean D to Likely D): Freshman Democratic Rep. Colin Allred flipped Texas' 32nd District after a very expensive 2018 battle, but it will be hard for businesswoman Genevieve Collins to reclaim it for her party.
This historically red suburban North Dallas seat swung from 57-41 Romney to 49-47 Clinton, and diverse and well-educated constituencies like this have only become more hostile to the GOP over the last four years. Major outside groups also aren't acting like this will be close: While both parties are pouring millions into the neighboring 24th District, they've steered clear of this race so far. Collins still has the resources to run a credible campaign on her own, but it would be a big surprise if she emerged victorious.
• WA-03 (Likely R to Lean R): Republican Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler is still the frontrunner against Democrat Carolyn Long, whom she defeated 53-47 in 2018, but their rematch for southern Washington's 3rd Congressional District has been looking more competitive recently.
In late September, Long released an internal from GQR that found Herrera Beutler up 49-47 as Trump led just 48-47 in a district he took 50-43 in 2016. That's the only survey we've seen here in some time, but major outside groups are acting like this seat is very much in play. The National Republican Congressional Committee and Congressional Leadership Fund went on the air on Oct. 13 to aid the congresswoman, the very same day the DCCC released its first anti-Herrera Beutler ads. Altogether, national GOP groups spent almost $900,000 during the week of Oct. 12, while the DCCC dropped $470,000 during that time.
Herrera Beutler still has the advantage, though, in this conservative seat. The incumbent pulled off a healthy win last cycle, and even Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell narrowly lost the 3rd District 51-49 that year while she was winning statewide in a 58-42 landslide. However, if 2020 turns out to be a stronger year for Team Blue than 2018 was, Long will have an opportunity to notch an upset.