hotair--2020-11-05--Trump's lead in Georgia has dipped below 10,000 votes with 47,000 left to be counted <span class='re

Trump's lead in Georgia has dipped below 10,000 votes with 47,000 left to be counted (Update: Down to 2,500)

We ’ re still waiting for votes to be counted in Nevada , Pennsylvania , North Carolina and Arizona .
Meanwhile , President Trump ’ s lead in Georgia has been dwindling all day and is now down to a few thousands votes .
But there aren ’ t many votes left to count at this point : Gabriel Sterling , Georgia ’ s voting system implementation manager , told reporters during a press conference at the state capitol Thursday there are 47,277 votes left to be counted , though he said election officials in the state are working to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Having an accurate , fair count is much more vital than having a fast count , ” he said at a news conference Thursday morning .
Here ’ s how close this is right now .
According to the NY Times , Trump has 2,439,925 and Biden has 2,430,499 , a difference of just 9,426 votes .
Nearly every county in the state shows 98 % reporting , but there are still two counties that show less than 90 % reporting .
The biggest of those is Chatham County , which includes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with 87 % reporting , Biden leads 57.7 to 40 percent .
So it ’ s probably safe to say Biden will get the majority of those outstanding votes but not by a lot .
Doing some very rough math , if 13 % of the vote in Chatham is outstanding that ’ s probably around 15,000 votes .
If Biden gets close to 60 % of those he ’ ll likely close the gap by about 2,500 votes .
But Floyd county is also still counting and has reported 89 % of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ running 70.4 % for Trump to 28.4 % for Biden .
But it ’ s a smaller county so the outstanding vote is probably only around 4,000 votes .
If Trump wins 70 % of those he ’ ll extend the gap by around 1,700 .
Combing the two counties it ’ s not quite a wash , Biden still gains several hundred votes , but the change in gap between them is relatively small .
But those two counties represent a bit less than 20,000 outstanding votes .
So there are more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and it ’ s not clear how those will split between the candidates .
I guess the point is that Trump could hang on to Georgia but it ’ s not a sure thing yet just because it ’ s so close .
Meanwhile , in the Georgia Senate races , it looked for a while as if David Perdue would avoid a runoff by pulling out a win over Jon Ossoff with just over 50 % of the vote , but at present Perdue is down to 49.9 % of the vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but because he ’ s under 50 % , this race ( and the other GA Senate race ) will head to a runoff .
That ’ s significant because if Biden wins the White House then Dems could control a 50-50 Senate if they win both Georgia seats .
I don ’ t think that ’ s likely .
In fact , I think both Republican candidates are likely to win the runoff elections but with the Senate potentially on the line ( assuming a Biden win ) you can imagine the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into these races .
It could be hundreds of millions of dollars in negative ads .
Of course if Trump pulls out a win they won ’ t have the same incentive .
His first order of business is to win Georgia , even if it ’ s only by a couple thousand votes .
Here ’ s the press conference Georgia election officials gave this morning .
Keep in mind this was 6 hours ago so vote totals have been updated since then : Update : The race is even tighter now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with 2,446,850 votes to 2,443,364 for Biden , a difference of 3,486 votes .
I do see that Chatham county , discussed above , now shows 98 % of votes are in , like everywhere else in the state .
Meanwhile , Floyd county , also discussed above , is still at 89 % reporting .
It ’ s going to be really tight either way .
If the state is called for Biden that would put him at 269 EVs , though Fox News would presumably have to declare Biden the winner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Update : Just saw this from NBC : So not a lot of votes left to make up the remaining gap .
Update : Even closer .
Trump has 2,447,015 to Biden ’ s 2,444,518 votes .
A difference of 2,497 .
I mentioned Arizona above .
That race also continues to tighten as of right now Biden ’ s lead in the state is down to 46,257 votes with 10 % of the vote yet to be counted .

We’re still waiting for votes to be counted in Nevada, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Arizona. Meanwhile, President Trump’s lead in Georgia has been dwindling all day and is now down to a few thousands votes. But there aren’t many votes left to count at this point:
Gabriel Sterling, Georgia’s voting system implementation manager, told reporters during a press conference at the state capitol Thursday there are 47,277 votes left to be counted, though he said election officials in the state are working to finish their tallies Thursday if possible. “Having an accurate, fair count is much more vital than having a fast count,” he said at a news conference Thursday morning.
Here’s how close this is right now. According to the NY Times, Trump has 2,439,925 and Biden has 2,430,499, a difference of just 9,426 votes. Nearly every county in the state shows 98% reporting, but there are still two counties that show less than 90% reporting.
The biggest of those is Chatham County, which includes the city of Savannah. In Chatham with 87% reporting, Biden leads 57.7 to 40 percent. So it’s probably safe to say Biden will get the majority of those outstanding votes but not by a lot. Doing some very rough math, if 13% of the vote in Chatham is outstanding that’s probably around 15,000 votes. If Biden gets close to 60% of those he’ll likely close the gap by about 2,500 votes.
But Floyd county is also still counting and has reported 89% of the vote. Floyd county is currently running 70.4% for Trump to 28.4% for Biden. But it’s a smaller county so the outstanding vote is probably only around 4,000 votes. If Trump wins 70% of those he’ll extend the gap by around 1,700. Combing the two counties it’s not quite a wash, Biden still gains several hundred votes, but the change in gap between them is relatively small.
But those two counties represent a bit less than 20,000 outstanding votes. So there are more votes out there yet to be counted and it’s not clear how those will split between the candidates. I guess the point is that Trump could hang on to Georgia but it’s not a sure thing yet just because it’s so close.
Meanwhile, in the Georgia Senate races, it looked for a while as if David Perdue would avoid a runoff by pulling out a win over Jon Ossoff with just over 50% of the vote, but at present Perdue is down to 49.9% of the vote. He’s still leading Ossoff but because he’s under 50%, this race (and the other GA Senate race) will head to a runoff.
That’s significant because if Biden wins the White House then Dems could control a 50-50 Senate if they win both Georgia seats. I don’t think that’s likely. In fact, I think both Republican candidates are likely to win the runoff elections but with the Senate potentially on the line (assuming a Biden win) you can imagine the kind of resources the left will pour into these races. It could be hundreds of millions of dollars in negative ads.
Of course if Trump pulls out a win they won’t have the same incentive. His first order of business is to win Georgia, even if it’s only by a couple thousand votes.
Here’s the press conference Georgia election officials gave this morning. Keep in mind this was 6 hours ago so vote totals have been updated since then:
Update: The race is even tighter now. The NY Times site shows Trump with 2,446,850 votes to 2,443,364 for Biden, a difference of 3,486 votes. I do see that Chatham county, discussed above, now shows 98% of votes are in, like everywhere else in the state. Meanwhile, Floyd county, also discussed above, is still at 89% reporting. It’s going to be really tight either way.
If the state is called for Biden that would put him at 269 EVs, though Fox News would presumably have to declare Biden the winner because they have already called Arizona.
Update: Just saw this from NBC:
As of 7:15 p.m., 18,936 votes are left to count in the state, according to the secretary of state.
So not a lot of votes left to make up the remaining gap.
Update: Even closer. Trump has 2,447,015 to Biden’s 2,444,518 votes. A difference of 2,497.
I mentioned Arizona above. That race also continues to tighten as of right now Biden’s lead in the state is down to 46,257 votes with 10% of the vote yet to be counted.
Update: It’s still narrowing. The NY Times reports: “We received 1,031 additional votes from Georgia. Trump is currently up by 1,902 votes.” The biggest county left to report is Clayton which has reported 96% of votes but which is running 85% for Biden. So there are a few thousand more votes there and most will go to Biden. There’s also one more small county running Trump’s direction but it’s tiny, i.e. less than 4,000 votes in all.
Frank Luntz says there’s another pro-Biden dump from Clayton coming at midnight.
Biden might overtake Trump’s current 2,500-vote margin in #Georgia with a 5,726 batch from Clayton County that’s coming at midnight. He just won a smaller batch from there 1,154 to 165. (No, that’s not a typo.) https://t.co/2hyja9yoOp — Frank Luntz (@FrankLuntz) November 6, 2020
Update: This is interesting.
NBC News Decision Desk director John Lapinski says it may not be possible to call the Georgia presidential race for "weeks". — Tom Winter (@Tom_Winter) November 6, 2020
By the way, Trump’s lead is currently at 1,775 votes.
Update: My last update for the night. From the NY Times: “We received 541 additional votes from Georgia. Trump is currently up by 1,267 votes.” And with that, Clayton county has finally ticked over from 96% reporting to 97% reporting.
This race is going to be so tight that Democrats are urging voters to “cure” any problematic ballots, by submitting an affidavit, before the deadline tomorrow.
With Georgia’s 16 electoral votes likely to be decided by a tiny margin, Democrats are urging voters there to fix absentee ballots that were rejected because of invalid or missing signatures before the deadline on Friday evening.
I’m sure we’ll have more on this tomorrow.


hotair--2020-11-05--Report: Trump talking privately lately about running in 2024

He can ’ t run in 2024 if he ends up winning this election , of course , and as I write this there ’ s still a chance of that happening .
But the odds are against him .
The White House is worried about Pennsylvania calling a lid on the Trump presidency tonight .
And they should be .
I ’ m not as sure as other people are that he ’ ll run in 2024 but the idea is allegedly being kicked around by Trump himself .
The key bit in this passage from the Times isn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of running , though , it ’ s that he ’ ll continue to have influence over not just who rises within the GOP but how the government functions .
Mr. Trump has long toyed with starting his own television network to compete with Fox News , and in private lately he has broached the idea of running again in 2024 , although he would be 78 by then .
Even if his own days as a candidate are over , his 88-million-strong Twitter following gives him a bullhorn to be an influential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him a kingmaker among rising Republicans… That following may yet enable Mr. Trump to eke out a second term and four years to try to rebuild the economy and reshape the Republican Party in his image .
But even from out of office , he could try to pressure Republican senators who preserved their majority to resist Mr. Biden at every turn , forcing them to choose between conciliation or crossing his political base .
Until a new generation of Republicans steps forward , Mr. Trump could position himself as the de facto @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extraordinary database of information about his supporters that future candidates would love to rent or otherwise access .
Allies imagined other Republicans making a pilgrimage to his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida seeking his blessing .
I don ’ t think there ’ ll be a huge “ conciliation ” wing of the GOP with or without pressure from Trump .
There ’ s also a group of Republicans who have little reason to care what he thinks .
McConnell , Collins , and Sasse just won reelection ; Murkowski and Romney are quasi-independents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opposing them .
But it ’ ll take 11 or 12 Republicans to beat a filibuster next year on compromise bills and that ’ d be a heavy lift with Trump hectoring them from the sidelines to vote no on everything in order to make the guy who defeated him miserable .
Which , of course , he ’ d certainly do .
If he ’ s willing to try to con Americans into believing the election is being stolen from him , he ’ s willing to use whatever leverage he has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ under Biden effectively can ’ t operate .
Trump is spite incarnate ; it ’ s the whole reason for his appeal .
If McConnell wants to work with Biden on anything , he ’ ll need to find another half-dozen Republicans in his caucus willing to defy Trump and risk enraging his fans .
Good luck .
I ’ ve made this comparison before , but think of the GOP in 2021 as the Twilight Zone episode “ It ’ s a Good Life.
” Trump is the kid , the congressional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his whims , nervously flattering him about how wonderful he is so as not to earn his wrath , and wishing to God every second of the day that they could be rid of his malevolent selfishness .
Key difference : The kid wasn ’ t as vindictive as Trump is .
In fact , it ’ s already going on today by proxy .
Don Jr tweeted this a little while ago… He ’ s signaling to 2024 aspirants that if they don ’ t get a lot more enthusiastic about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ll have no chance at an endorsement from the president , assuming he doesn ’ t run again himself .
( Which is also an efficient way to Don Jr to signal that he plans to be a kingmaker in the party , assuming he doesn ’ t run in 2024 instead of dad . )
Some Trump toadies are using it as an opportunity to tear down potential 2024 candidates from a wing of the party which they disdain : Anyway .
What if the president *does* run again himself ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it ’ ll be no contest .
Probably right .
There ’ s a fair chance he ’ d even run unopposed : The problem every other Republican would have in challenging him isn ’ t that they couldn ’ t conceivably win .
They ’ d be underdogs , but you can imagine someone like Haley calculating that the stink of defeat on Trump from 2020 plus enduring fatigue from his belligerent shtick — especially after another four years of it as a private citizen on Twitter and TV — plus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her strengths ( e.g.
, the party feeling desperate for someone who can win back suburbanites ) might warrant a challenge .
The problem isn ’ t that she can ’ t win .
It ’ s that she can ’ t win the general election if she beats him .
If , say , 15 percent of the GOP is such a hardcore Trump cult that they ’ d stay home in November with Trump ’ s enthusiastic vindictive approval in order to punish her for defeating him , then there ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the first place .
She ’ ll either lose the primary or she ’ ll lose the general but she ’ ll lose either way .
This is the same calculation the party went through in 2016 , when there were rumors of denying Trump the nomination at the convention , and the same calculation it ’ s gone through every day since , including when it acquitted him at his impeachment trial .
Not every Trump voter is a cultist by any means , but there are *enough* cultists among the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if they walk .
To keep them happy he needs to be indulged , such that anyone who doesn ’ t indulge him is effectively committing career suicide .
In a healthy political culture , Trump would run again in 2024 , take his chances against a slew of younger opponents , and then he and his voters would rally behind the nominee if he falls short .
In our sick and increasingly sicker political culture , the party ’ s victory isn ’ t paramount .
The cult leader ’ s victory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s just a reason to hate the party and to punish the people who opposed him .
And of course , if Haley — or Josh Hawley , Ted Cruz , Tom Cotton , or whoever else — was so “ disloyal ” as to challenge Trump in his big return to politics , their careers would be over if they lost .
The safe play for all of them would be to smile , stand aside , be patient for four more year very long years , and then run in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m 50/50 on whether Trump will run again .
I think he might not mainly because he ’ ll greatly enjoy life once he has all the perks of the job but none of the duties .
Republican politicians and righty media personalities will still kiss his ass effusively and patronize him on whichever nonsense conspiracy he ’ s pushing at a given moment .
He may end up participating in some new TV venture , which I think he ’ d relish .
He ’ s always cared way , waaaaaaay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ratings than he has governance .
Given the rage his team is apparently feeling right now towards Fox News for not pushing his “ voter fraud ” conspiracy… …Trump , ever vindictive , might enjoy taking over OAN or starting his own network and trying to punish Fox by cannibalizing its audience .
He can still do rallies whenever he wants — and charge admission , and sell merchandise !
— without having to do the additional tedious business of running a campaign or handling the presidency .
And I think he ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and losing to another Democrat in 2024 , as it would damage his “ supreme winner ” persona even more .
( I assume Biden won ’ t seek a second term . )
He might decide , at the advanced age of 78 , that he ’ d rather keep having fun in his new gig while working his levers of influence to choose the next GOP nominee .
Or to just crown Don Jr as his heir apparent .
But then I think : Nothing would stroke his ego quite like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ primary in 2024 .
It ’ s one thing to hold a rally when it means nothing , just you jabbering at a mic , but it ’ s another to host it as part of a contest for the GOP nomination .
Hawley , Cruz , Cotton — no one ’ s going to turn out crowds like Trump .
He ’ d savor showing them that .
I ’ d bet anything that he regards them as charisma-less losers and would want to rub their faces in it .
His vindictive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk being beaten again by a Democrat .
He ’ d want revenge , just like he wanted a measure of revenge on Obama for humiliating him at the 2011 White House Correspondents Dinner by running in 2016 .
And if Kamala Harris ended up as the Democratic nominee , Trump might conclude — quite rightly — that she ’ d be a very favorable match-up for him .
Harris isn ’ t a good retail politician and she ’ s further left than the more electable Joe Biden .
She ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic voters were quoted during the primary this year as saying that Biden ’ s “ old white guy ” status reassured them inasmuch as they thought Hillary ’ s gender ended up being a liability for her in 2016 against Trump ’ s alpha-male bravado .
Harris would have that liability too .
Even if she didn ’ t win the nomination , there ’ s no one on the Democratic political landscape right now with the sort of charisma and electability a la Obama 2008 that might present a formidable challenge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ AOC ” either .
Not only would her age spook voters , we just sat through an election that ended up being much closer than anyone expected because lefties ended up weirding out too many swing voters with their radicalism .
Looking at all that , might he decide to run ?
Sure .
It ’ s just a question of whether the next four years are so sweet that he can ’ t bear to give up his new life .
Or , I guess , if he gets sent to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your exit quotation .
Can ’ t wait for the primary .

He can’t run in 2024 if he ends up winning this election, of course, and as I write this there’s still a chance of that happening. But the odds are against him. The White House is worried about Pennsylvania calling a lid on the Trump presidency tonight. And they should be.
Trumpworld very anxious right now about the prospect of Fox calling Pa. tonight. — Jonathan Swan (@jonathanvswan) November 5, 2020
I’m not as sure as other people are that he’ll run in 2024 but the idea is allegedly being kicked around by Trump himself. The key bit in this passage from the Times isn’t that he’s thinking of running, though, it’s that he’ll continue to have influence over not just who rises within the GOP but how the government functions.
Mr. Trump has long toyed with starting his own television network to compete with Fox News, and in private lately he has broached the idea of running again in 2024, although he would be 78 by then. Even if his own days as a candidate are over, his 88-million-strong Twitter following gives him a bullhorn to be an influential voice on the right, potentially making him a kingmaker among rising Republicans… That following may yet enable Mr. Trump to eke out a second term and four years to try to rebuild the economy and reshape the Republican Party in his image. But even from out of office, he could try to pressure Republican senators who preserved their majority to resist Mr. Biden at every turn, forcing them to choose between conciliation or crossing his political base. Until a new generation of Republicans steps forward, Mr. Trump could position himself as the de facto leader of the party, wielding an extraordinary database of information about his supporters that future candidates would love to rent or otherwise access. Allies imagined other Republicans making a pilgrimage to his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida seeking his blessing.
I don’t think there’ll be a huge “conciliation” wing of the GOP with or without pressure from Trump. There’s also a group of Republicans who have little reason to care what he thinks. McConnell, Collins, and Sasse just won reelection; Murkowski and Romney are quasi-independents and can probably win even with Trump opposing them. But it’ll take 11 or 12 Republicans to beat a filibuster next year on compromise bills and that’d be a heavy lift with Trump hectoring them from the sidelines to vote no on everything in order to make the guy who defeated him miserable.
Which, of course, he’d certainly do. If he’s willing to try to con Americans into believing the election is being stolen from him, he’s willing to use whatever leverage he has to making sure that the U.S. government under Biden effectively can’t operate. Trump is spite incarnate; it’s the whole reason for his appeal. If McConnell wants to work with Biden on anything, he’ll need to find another half-dozen Republicans in his caucus willing to defy Trump and risk enraging his fans. Good luck.
I’ve made this comparison before, but think of the GOP in 2021 as the Twilight Zone episode “It’s a Good Life.” Trump is the kid, the congressional GOP are the adults around him indulging his whims, nervously flattering him about how wonderful he is so as not to earn his wrath, and wishing to God every second of the day that they could be rid of his malevolent selfishness. Key difference: The kid wasn’t as vindictive as Trump is.
In fact, it’s already going on today by proxy. Don Jr tweeted this a little while ago…
One notable exception seems to be Ron DeSantis right now. He has been active and vocal. @RonDeSantisFL — Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) November 5, 2020
He’s signaling to 2024 aspirants that if they don’t get a lot more enthusiastic about the Trump “voter fraud” con they’ll have no chance at an endorsement from the president, assuming he doesn’t run again himself. (Which is also an efficient way to Don Jr to signal that he plans to be a kingmaker in the party, assuming he doesn’t run in 2024 instead of dad.) Some Trump toadies are using it as an opportunity to tear down potential 2024 candidates from a wing of the party which they disdain:
While some of us are fighting for President Trump… Nikki Haley is eulogizing him. Sad! https://t.co/vuaHk4pha2 — Matt Gaetz (@mattgaetz) November 5, 2020
Anyway. What if the president *does* run again himself? Philip Klein thinks if he jumps in, it’ll be no contest. Probably right. There’s a fair chance he’d even run unopposed:
Were Trump to announce a run at some point in 2023, he would instantly dominate all media coverage. There would be no other candidate who would be able to match his name recognition or to get noticed by voters. Republican rivals failed to land a successful attack on him in 2016, when he was an unknown quantity politically. Yet this time, he’d be running as a figure with a proven record of pursuing conservative policies, including three Supreme Court appointments. Trump has instilled such loyalty that he managed to turn John Bolton — who started his career in politics as a volunteer on the Barry Goldwater campaign and who has for decades fought the DC establishment — into some sort of deep state leftist traitor. Anybody who attacks Trump in a primary would be subjected to the Twitter treatment and become a pariah among Republican voters.
The problem every other Republican would have in challenging him isn’t that they couldn’t conceivably win. They’d be underdogs, but you can imagine someone like Haley calculating that the stink of defeat on Trump from 2020 plus enduring fatigue from his belligerent shtick — especially after another four years of it as a private citizen on Twitter and TV — plus some further demographic shifts that play to her strengths (e.g., the party feeling desperate for someone who can win back suburbanites) might warrant a challenge. The problem isn’t that she can’t win. It’s that she can’t win the general election if she beats him. If, say, 15 percent of the GOP is such a hardcore Trump cult that they’d stay home in November with Trump’s enthusiastic vindictive approval in order to punish her for defeating him, then there’s no point in her challenging him in the first place. She’ll either lose the primary or she’ll lose the general but she’ll lose either way.
This is the same calculation the party went through in 2016, when there were rumors of denying Trump the nomination at the convention, and the same calculation it’s gone through every day since, including when it acquitted him at his impeachment trial. Not every Trump voter is a cultist by any means, but there are *enough* cultists among the Trump base to make the party unviable if they walk. To keep them happy he needs to be indulged, such that anyone who doesn’t indulge him is effectively committing career suicide. In a healthy political culture, Trump would run again in 2024, take his chances against a slew of younger opponents, and then he and his voters would rally behind the nominee if he falls short. In our sick and increasingly sicker political culture, the party’s victory isn’t paramount. The cult leader’s victory is. If he loses, that’s just a reason to hate the party and to punish the people who opposed him.
And of course, if Haley — or Josh Hawley, Ted Cruz, Tom Cotton, or whoever else — was so “disloyal” as to challenge Trump in his big return to politics, their careers would be over if they lost. The safe play for all of them would be to smile, stand aside, be patient for four more year very long years, and then run in 2028.
As I say, I’m 50/50 on whether Trump will run again. I think he might not mainly because he’ll greatly enjoy life once he has all the perks of the job but none of the duties. Republican politicians and righty media personalities will still kiss his ass effusively and patronize him on whichever nonsense conspiracy he’s pushing at a given moment. He may end up participating in some new TV venture, which I think he’d relish. He’s always cared way, waaaaaaay more about television, audience, and ratings than he has governance. Given the rage his team is apparently feeling right now towards Fox News for not pushing his “voter fraud” conspiracy…
Hard to overstate how angry Trump's advisers are at Fox right now. Just incandescent. — Jonathan Swan (@jonathanvswan) November 5, 2020
…Trump, ever vindictive, might enjoy taking over OAN or starting his own network and trying to punish Fox by cannibalizing its audience. He can still do rallies whenever he wants — and charge admission, and sell merchandise! — without having to do the additional tedious business of running a campaign or handling the presidency. And I think he’d be reluctant to risk running again and losing to another Democrat in 2024, as it would damage his “supreme winner” persona even more. (I assume Biden won’t seek a second term.) He might decide, at the advanced age of 78, that he’d rather keep having fun in his new gig while working his levers of influence to choose the next GOP nominee. Or to just crown Don Jr as his heir apparent.
But then I think: Nothing would stroke his ego quite like a Napoleonic return to power in the primary in 2024. It’s one thing to hold a rally when it means nothing, just you jabbering at a mic, but it’s another to host it as part of a contest for the GOP nomination. Hawley, Cruz, Cotton — no one’s going to turn out crowds like Trump. He’d savor showing them that. I’d bet anything that he regards them as charisma-less losers and would want to rub their faces in it. His vindictive impulses might also overcome his reluctance to risk being beaten again by a Democrat. He’d want revenge, just like he wanted a measure of revenge on Obama for humiliating him at the 2011 White House Correspondents Dinner by running in 2016. And if Kamala Harris ended up as the Democratic nominee, Trump might conclude — quite rightly — that she’d be a very favorable match-up for him. Harris isn’t a good retail politician and she’s further left than the more electable Joe Biden. She’s also a woman of color; various Democratic voters were quoted during the primary this year as saying that Biden’s “old white guy” status reassured them inasmuch as they thought Hillary’s gender ended up being a liability for her in 2016 against Trump’s alpha-male bravado. Harris would have that liability too.
Even if she didn’t win the nomination, there’s no one on the Democratic political landscape right now with the sort of charisma and electability a la Obama 2008 that might present a formidable challenge to Trump. Don’t say “AOC” either. Not only would her age spook voters, we just sat through an election that ended up being much closer than anyone expected because lefties ended up weirding out too many swing voters with their radicalism.
Looking at all that, might he decide to run? Sure. It’s just a question of whether the next four years are so sweet that he can’t bear to give up his new life. Or, I guess, if he gets sent to prison before 2024.
Here’s your exit quotation. Can’t wait for the primary.


hotair--2020-11-05--NY Times: Cuban-American editor told readers to 'get over' Latinos voting for Trump and she's being

NY Times: Cuban-American editor told readers to 'get over' Latinos voting for Trump and she's being lectured for it

Consider this one a follow up to the last post I wrote .
A Cuban-American staff editor for the NY Times published a piece in the opinion section headlined , “ Some Latinos Voted for Trump .
Get Over It.
” As you might imagine , that didn ’ t go over well with NY Times readers who are clearly not “ over it ” and are instead lecturing the author about why Hispanics should never have voted for Trump .
Here ’ s a bit of the opinion piece : The reason the “ Latino vote ” befuddles is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nor do “ Latino issues.
” If we want to understand how Latinos vote , we should start by retiring the word “ Latino ” entirely — and maybe “ Hispanic , ” too , a term first used by the United States government in the 1970 census that is based solely on the language native to the European settlers who conquered the Americas .
These labels have served only to reduce us to a two-dimensional caricature : poor brown immigrants who always vote Democrat… Journalists and pundits who have spent some time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Spanish speakers ( and now fancy themselves experts ) have suggested that machismo , and a desire to be closer to whiteness , is what drove these voters to support the man who promised to build a wall to keep caravans of Spanish-speaking brown people out .
That may be true , but it ’ s far from the whole story .
I ’ m a Cuban-American from Miami , and I ’ m not surprised that around 52 percent of Cuban-Americans in Florida voted for Mr. Trump .
No one who was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weeks leading up to the election , Cubans in Miami composed a salsa song in support of Mr. Trump and organized Trump caravans hundreds of cars long .
It may sound ridiculous , but some of those voters are genuinely afraid of socialism , and he leaned into that .
“ We will never have a socialist country , ” he promised .
He understood that for Cubans and Venezuelans , the word is a reminder of the dysfunctional governments they left behind .
The author ’ s problem with the generic term @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is similar to the problem a lot of people have with Latinx .
It ’ s a way to categorize people as a block that glosses over a lot of different cultures .
In any case , NY Times readers are busy Dem-splaining to the author why she ’ s wrong about , well , everything but especially about socialism .
Here are a few samples : You get the idea .
I love that last one .
It ’ s the old “ real socialism was never tried ” argument .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ ll grant that Joe Biden is not a socialist .
But there are some real socialists in his party who are very much hoping he wins this election so they can try to implement some of their own goals .
President Trump is at least willing to call those people out by name and tell them they are wrong .
Biden on the other hand is counting on their support .
Not all of the comments are negative .
I think this is one is closer to the truth .
One @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after this election is that Latinos were somehow “ tricked ” into voting for Trump , as if we have no agency .
That sort of attitude toward voters is what will guarantee that future campaigns will miss out on their vote .
I think that dove-tails with what Matt Yglesias was saying .
But , hey , keep Dem-splaining to minorities why they are wrong to vote as they did .
It ’ s working out great for the party so far .

Consider this one a follow up to the last post I wrote. A Cuban-American staff editor for the NY Times published a piece in the opinion section headlined, “Some Latinos Voted for Trump. Get Over It.” As you might imagine, that didn’t go over well with NY Times readers who are clearly not “over it” and are instead lecturing the author about why Hispanics should never have voted for Trump. Here’s a bit of the opinion piece:
The reason the “Latino vote” befuddles is because it doesn’t exist, nor do “Latino issues.” If we want to understand how Latinos vote, we should start by retiring the word “Latino” entirely — and maybe “Hispanic,” too, a term first used by the United States government in the 1970 census that is based solely on the language native to the European settlers who conquered the Americas. These labels have served only to reduce us to a two-dimensional caricature: poor brown immigrants who always vote Democrat… Journalists and pundits who have spent some time in Latin America or interviewed a few Spanish speakers (and now fancy themselves experts) have suggested that machismo, and a desire to be closer to whiteness, is what drove these voters to support the man who promised to build a wall to keep caravans of Spanish-speaking brown people out. That may be true, but it’s far from the whole story. I’m a Cuban-American from Miami, and I’m not surprised that around 52 percent of Cuban-Americans in Florida voted for Mr. Trump. No one who was paying attention could be. In the weeks leading up to the election, Cubans in Miami composed a salsa song in support of Mr. Trump and organized Trump caravans hundreds of cars long. It may sound ridiculous, but some of those voters are genuinely afraid of socialism, and he leaned into that. “We will never have a socialist country,” he promised. He understood that for Cubans and Venezuelans, the word is a reminder of the dysfunctional governments they left behind.
The author’s problem with the generic term “Latino” and “Hispanic” is similar to the problem a lot of people have with Latinx. It’s a way to categorize people as a block that glosses over a lot of different cultures.
In any case, NY Times readers are busy Dem-splaining to the author why she’s wrong about, well, everything but especially about socialism. Here are a few samples:
My mother is a Cuban American. She left Cuba during the first exodus following the rise of Fidel Castro, and she became a naturalized American citizen in the following years. She saw the brutality of the Batista regime and equates Trump as a similar figure. Castro is a dictator, and here in the U.S. many of us fear Trump could become the same if given the chance, and so it becomes very confusing and illogical for Cubans and Venezuelans that fled their countries to vote for someone like Trump.
Many good points that “Latino” is not a monolith. It is just hard to believe that people who knew personally what a harsh socialism is would believe the lie that Joe Biden is a socialist.
Sorry, but I think the “fear” of America becoming a socialist nation that Cuban Americans feel is ridiculous. Biden is no more going to turn America into a socialist nation than Trump is going to get some class and behave.
…the usage of the term “socialism” and the branding of Biden with that term does not mean that he or the Democrats, in general, are “socialist”. This is and was a political ploy on the part of Republicans.
Their experience with Castro , a dictator who seized and kept power at the barrel of a gun has nothing to do with real socialism.
You get the idea. I love that last one. It’s the old “real socialism was never tried” argument. That excuse never goes out of style.
I’ll grant that Joe Biden is not a socialist. But there are some real socialists in his party who are very much hoping he wins this election so they can try to implement some of their own goals. President Trump is at least willing to call those people out by name and tell them they are wrong. Biden on the other hand is counting on their support.
Not all of the comments are negative. I think this is one is closer to the truth.
One of the most unfortunate narratives being peddled after this election is that Latinos were somehow “tricked” into voting for Trump, as if we have no agency. That sort of attitude toward voters is what will guarantee that future campaigns will miss out on their vote.
I think that dove-tails with what Matt Yglesias was saying. But, hey, keep Dem-splaining to minorities why they are wrong to vote as they did. It’s working out great for the party so far.


hotair--2020-11-05--Centrist Dem goes off during conference call: Don't say "socialist" ever again

Consider this a sequel to the earlier post about Nancy Pelosi ’ s disappearing Democratic majority .
Everyone ’ s focused on the presidential race , understandably , but you really should carve out a few minutes today to enjoy the thought of centrist Democrats and progressives having a two-year-long knife fight over who blew the 2020 election .
The arguments on both sides are achingly familiar to anyone who ’ s ever participated in a “ center versus fringe ” ideological war .
To progressives , it ’ s the centrists ’ lame watered-down essentially right-wing policies that have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , not pale pastels on policy to attract voters , to borrow a term Ted Cruz liked to use .
To centrists , it ’ s the fringe ’ s radicalism that ’ s to blame for scaring off swing voters .
Progressives made a big push for socialism in the Democratic primary this year .
How did they think Cuban-American voters would react to that ?
How cool did they think nonideological persuadable voters would be with the idea of … abolishing the police ?
Abigail Spanberger was one of the Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cycle .
She knocked off tea-partier Dave Brat in Virginia ’ s Seventh District , which leans Republican by six points .
That made her a rising star of the party ’ s centrist wing , one who would presumably be reelected easily this year once the “ blue tsunami ” swept across America .
She was reelected , but not easily — she won her House race by 1.2 points , a slightly smaller margin than she enjoyed in her race against Brat .
She ’ s not happy .
The “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officially arrived : Some Dems on today ’ s call resented having the party ’ s dirty laundry aired on what was supposed to be a private call and have already started whining about leaks : It ’ s still going as I write this .
Apparently they ’ re whining about Schumer now : What a sh*tshow they ’ re going to be in the run-up to 2022 .
I wonder if , ironically , voters didn ’ t do them a favor by handing the Senate back to McConnell .
As @ @ @ @ @ @ @ centrists and lefties for control , it would have been vastly nastier if Biden and Schumer had had to decide whether to trend centrist or leftist on policy .
With Cocaine Mitch in charge of the Senate , that ’ s no longer a problem .
Biden gets to govern from the center and if progressives don ’ t like it he can just say , “ Complain to McConnell.
” But that ’ s still months away .
For now , first enjoy centrist former Sen. Claire McCaskill urging her party to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which has left space for Trump to appeal to swing voters… …and then also enjoy hard leftist AOC taking her out to the woodshed for worrying about illegal immigration : Didn ’ t Bernie Sanders also lose a couple of elections , one to the widely despised Hillary Clinton , the other to canned ham Joe Biden ?
Should we listen to Bernie on how to win elections ?
AOC would say yes , I suspect .
As far as I know the conference call is still going as of 4 p.m @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in case Spanberger comes back on the line to call Ilhan Omar a scumbag or whatever .

Consider this a sequel to the earlier post about Nancy Pelosi’s disappearing Democratic majority.
Everyone’s focused on the presidential race, understandably, but you really should carve out a few minutes today to enjoy the thought of centrist Democrats and progressives having a two-year-long knife fight over who blew the 2020 election. The arguments on both sides are achingly familiar to anyone who’s ever participated in a “center versus fringe” ideological war. To progressives, it’s the centrists’ lame watered-down essentially right-wing policies that have alienated voters. Dems need bold colors, not pale pastels on policy to attract voters, to borrow a term Ted Cruz liked to use. To centrists, it’s the fringe’s radicalism that’s to blame for scaring off swing voters. Progressives made a big push for socialism in the Democratic primary this year. How did they think Cuban-American voters would react to that?
How cool did they think nonideological persuadable voters would be with the idea of … abolishing the police?
Abigail Spanberger was one of the Democrats’ big success stories of the 2018 cycle. She knocked off tea-partier Dave Brat in Virginia’s Seventh District, which leans Republican by six points. That made her a rising star of the party’s centrist wing, one who would presumably be reelected easily this year once the “blue tsunami” swept across America. She was reelected, but not easily — she won her House race by 1.2 points, a slightly smaller margin than she enjoyed in her race against Brat.
She’s not happy. The “Dems in disarray” news cycle has officially arrived:
If we run this race again we will get fucking torn apart again in 2022, Spanberger says — Erica Werner (@ericawerner) November 5, 2020
We have a mandate! Pelosi says before getting off the call — Erica Werner (@ericawerner) November 5, 2020
Members are definitely speaking up about the “defund the police” attacks and those resonating in their districts, per sources — Manu Raju (@mkraju) November 5, 2020
Some Dems on today’s call resented having the party’s dirty laundry aired on what was supposed to be a private call and have already started whining about leaks:
Some of my colleagues are literally live-leaking our internal Dem Caucus call right now to CNN, The Hill, NBC, Politico, etc. I've gotten texts from 3 different reporters asking me to live-leak juicy details to them. No. We (Dems and the media) need to stop this nonsense. — Rep. Jared Huffman (@JaredHuffman) November 5, 2020
It’s still going as I write this. Apparently they’re whining about Schumer now:
It just keeps going as Pascrell now calling out Schumer.
Pelosi’s done an amazing job … but where’s Schumer in all of this? Says Pelosi has one hand tied behind her back — Erica Werner (@ericawerner) November 5, 2020
What a sh*tshow they’re going to be in the run-up to 2022. I wonder if, ironically, voters didn’t do them a favor by handing the Senate back to McConnell. As heated as the fight will be between centrists and lefties for control, it would have been vastly nastier if Biden and Schumer had had to decide whether to trend centrist or leftist on policy. With Cocaine Mitch in charge of the Senate, that’s no longer a problem. Biden gets to govern from the center and if progressives don’t like it he can just say, “Complain to McConnell.”
But that’s still months away. For now, first enjoy centrist former Sen. Claire McCaskill urging her party to stop being so nutty on cultural issues, which has left space for Trump to appeal to swing voters…
Claire McCaskill: "Whether you are talking guns or…abortion…or gay marriage and rights for 'transexuals' and other people who we as a party 'look after' and make sure they are treated fairly. As we circled the issues we left voters behind and Republicans dove in." pic.twitter.com/bMh9JALAxg — Waleed Shahid (@_waleedshahid) November 5, 2020
…and then also enjoy hard leftist AOC taking her out to the woodshed for worrying about illegal immigration:
Why do we listen to people who lost elections as if they are experts in winning elections? McCaskill tried her approach. She ran as a caravan-hysteria Dem& lost while grassroots organizers won progressive measures in MO. Her language here shows how she took her base for granted. https://t.co/ZnTXI59MW9 — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) November 5, 2020
Didn’t Bernie Sanders also lose a couple of elections, one to the widely despised Hillary Clinton, the other to canned ham Joe Biden? Should we listen to Bernie on how to win elections? AOC would say yes, I suspect.
As far as I know the conference call is still going as of 4 p.m. ET so stand by for updates in case Spanberger comes back on the line to call Ilhan Omar a scumbag or whatever.


hotair--2020-11-05--Today's hot topics on #TEMS: Election update, runoff stalemate, 2024 wait, will SCOTUS skate, and mo

Today's hot topics on #TEMS: Election update, runoff stalemate, 2024 wait, will SCOTUS skate, and more!

Today on The Ed Morrissey Show ( 4 pm ET ) , we have another great lineup for the news of the day !
The show will be streamed on Hot Air ’ s Facebook page and embedded here and on the show page for those who are not on Facebook .
Join us as we welcome : • Duane “ Generalissimo ” Patterson brings us up to date on the week ’ s top stories and gives us a preview of tomorrow ’ s Hugh Hewitt show .
What else can we discuss but the state of the 2020 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ show ?
We ’ ll run down the latest in each of the unsettled states and give our best-case and worst-case scenarios .
• We ’ ll also cover the Senate stalemate at the moment .
Georgia will likely have two runoffs on January 5th — and the fate of the Senate will ride on them .
Plus , could Kevin McCarthy be the next Speaker ?
• Will Mitch McConnell use this opportunity to un-nuke the Senate ?
• And for fun , we may even get around to discussing why Joe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Upper Chamber for the next couple of months .
If Trump ’ s out of the way , can Cocaine Mitch flip Manchin ?
The Ed Morrissey Show and its dynamic chatroom can be seen on the permanent TEMS page .
Be sure to join us , and don ’ t forget to keep up with the debate on my Facebook page , too !
How can Republicans and conservatives keep winning after 2016 ?
Find out in GOING RED , published in April from Crown Forum !

Today on The Ed Morrissey Show (4 pm ET), we have another great lineup for the news of the day! The show will be streamed on Hot Air’s Facebook page and embedded here and on the show page for those who are not on Facebook.
Join us as we welcome:
Duane “Generalissimo” Patterson brings us up to date on the week’s top stories and gives us a preview of tomorrow’s Hugh Hewitt show. What else can we discuss but the state of the 2020 election as of the start of the show? We’ll run down the latest in each of the unsettled states and give our best-case and worst-case scenarios.
We’ll also cover the Senate stalemate at the moment. Georgia will likely have two runoffs on January 5th — and the fate of the Senate will ride on them. Plus, could Kevin McCarthy be the next Speaker?
Will Mitch McConnell use this opportunity to un-nuke the Senate?
And for fun, we may even get around to discussing why Joe Manchin might be the most popular man in the Upper Chamber for the next couple of months. If Trump’s out of the way, can Cocaine Mitch flip Manchin?
The Ed Morrissey Show and its dynamic chatroom can be seen on the permanent TEMS page. Be sure to join us, and don’t forget to keep up with the debate on my Facebook page, too!
How can Republicans and conservatives keep winning after 2016? Find out in GOING RED, published in April from Crown Forum!


hotair--2020-11-05--Vox: The left should reconsider its commitment to intersectional politics (aka 'the Latinx problem')

When he ’ s not being a troll on Twitter , Vox ’ s Matt Yglesias occasionally writes something sensible .
Today he published a piece pointing out that election results show Democrats have a problem with minority voters , particularly with Hispanic voters .
While Cuba-specific issues are tactically central to electoral battles in Florida , the fact is that even before all the results are in , it ’ s clear Biden ’ s weakness with Latino voters was broader than that .
In South Florida , Biden lost ground with a diverse Hispanic population that includes many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or Colombia , as well as Cuba broadly .
More to the point , Democrats turned in extremely disappointing performances in the Rio Grande Valley of Texas , even in the context of a large overall improvement in the state .
Trump actually won Zapata County , for example , a small border jurisdiction that ’ s 84 percent Hispanic and which Hillary Clinton won by 30 points in 2016 .
So what exactly is the problem here ?
Why would Hispanic voters gravitate toward someone the left has universally condemned as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deeper than tactics .
Instead , he argues it ’ s about a difference between how progressive thinkers view racism and how actual minorities view it .
He then points to one specific example where the left ’ s academically oriented racial politics comes into conflict with people ’ s actual culture : The use of the word “ Latinx.
” For the past several years , the term “ Latinx ” has been gaining momentum in progressive circles , even though only 3 percent of US Hispanics actually use it themselves .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ circles , having been coined in 2004 and only gaining popularity about 10 years later .
The term is meant to solve two problems .
One is that the Spanish language uses the masculine term “ Latino ” to refer not just to men but also to mixed-gender groups , implying a kind of problematic privileging of the male gender .
The other is that the binary nature of grammatical gender — Latino men and Latina women — is a poor fit for the needs and lives of nonbinary and gender-nonconforming people .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Latinx ” suggests itself as an elegant gender-neutral solution .
The message of the term , however , is that the entire grammatical system of the Spanish language is problematic , which in any other context progressives would recognize as an alienating and insensitive message .
Yglesias isn ’ t claiming that the use of this word is causing people to vote Trump .
He calls it a “ symptom ” of a broader problem with how the intersectional left addresses racial issues .
As he puts it , there ’ s a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ linguistic innovations in addressing social justice concerns.
” There ’ s a reason for that which involves the nature of far left politics , which believes everything is essentially a social construct mediated by words .
Words are literally seen as holding power over social change .
You change the words to alter the construct .
That ’ s why the far left insists on “ Latinx ” even though Hispanic people don ’ t like it .
In any case , the left ’ s problem isn ’ t just with Hispanics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , are also shifting gradually away from the Democratic Party .
Again the issue is that black voters don ’ t appear to be quite as racially motivated as white progressives think they should be .
Among self-identified Democrats , for example , a Pew survey this summer showed that African Americans were slightly less likely than whites to favor cutting police spending , while Hispanics were much less likely… Self-identified white liberals report warmer feelings about immigrants than do Hispanics… To say that working-class nonwhites don ’ t care about racial justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them may not accept the academic constructs of what these things mean .
To put it simply , woke white progressives are more racially sensitive than a lot of minorities .
That ’ s potentially a big problem if your politics is founded on the idea of calling out racial grievances as a path to utopia .
It potentially messes up the left ’ s whole vision of where the country is headed .
For many years the left has been pitching a theory of “ demographic destiny.
” The idea is that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as black and Hispanic voters become a majority , the country ’ s politics would naturally slide to the left .
That has happened to some degree in California , where Hispanics are now the largest percentage of the population .
The state is entirely controlled by Democrats .
And you could look at the Squad as another example of leftists politics coinciding with minority representation in Congress .
But this election shows that there ’ s nothing essential about that leftward drift .
Just as Hispanics are becoming a larger portion of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be moving right .
And while the shift is more subtle with black voters , it ’ s happening there as well .
Demographics don ’ t necessarily mean leftists will assume control of the country .
On the contrary , it might even be the case that the Democrats ’ claim over these voting blocks is falling apart because the left is so extreme .
Black voters may decide they don ’ t want to defund the police even though the Marxist-led BLM is pushing that .
If the Hispanic vote continues @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have to either reconsider its commitment to identity politics or find fresh ways to denounce the GOP as racists .
I guess Yglesias ’ piece is evidence the former is being considered but then there ’ s also evidence the latter path is being taken as well .

When he’s not being a troll on Twitter, Vox’s Matt Yglesias occasionally writes something sensible. Today he published a piece pointing out that election results show Democrats have a problem with minority voters, particularly with Hispanic voters.
While Cuba-specific issues are tactically central to electoral battles in Florida, the fact is that even before all the results are in, it’s clear Biden’s weakness with Latino voters was broader than that. In South Florida, Biden lost ground with a diverse Hispanic population that includes many families from Puerto Rico, Venezuela, or Colombia, as well as Cuba broadly. More to the point, Democrats turned in extremely disappointing performances in the Rio Grande Valley of Texas, even in the context of a large overall improvement in the state. Trump actually won Zapata County, for example, a small border jurisdiction that’s 84 percent Hispanic and which Hillary Clinton won by 30 points in 2016.
So what exactly is the problem here? Why would Hispanic voters gravitate toward someone the left has universally condemned as a racist? Yglesias says the problem is deeper than tactics. Instead, he argues it’s about a difference between how progressive thinkers view racism and how actual minorities view it. He then points to one specific example where the left’s academically oriented racial politics comes into conflict with people’s actual culture: The use of the word “Latinx.”
For the past several years, the term “Latinx” has been gaining momentum in progressive circles, even though only 3 percent of US Hispanics actually use it themselves. The word originates in academic and activist circles, having been coined in 2004 and only gaining popularity about 10 years later. The term is meant to solve two problems. One is that the Spanish language uses the masculine term “Latino” to refer not just to men but also to mixed-gender groups, implying a kind of problematic privileging of the male gender. The other is that the binary nature of grammatical gender — Latino men and Latina women — is a poor fit for the needs and lives of nonbinary and gender-nonconforming people. In academic and activist circles, “Latinx” suggests itself as an elegant gender-neutral solution. The message of the term, however, is that the entire grammatical system of the Spanish language is problematic, which in any other context progressives would recognize as an alienating and insensitive message.
Yglesias isn’t claiming that the use of this word is causing people to vote Trump. He calls it a “symptom” of a broader problem with how the intersectional left addresses racial issues. As he puts it, there’s a “tendency to privilege academic concepts and linguistic innovations in addressing social justice concerns.” There’s a reason for that which involves the nature of far left politics, which believes everything is essentially a social construct mediated by words. Words are literally seen as holding power over social change. You change the words to alter the construct. That’s why the far left insists on “Latinx” even though Hispanic people don’t like it.
In any case, the left’s problem isn’t just with Hispanics. Black voters, especially black men, are also shifting gradually away from the Democratic Party. Again the issue is that black voters don’t appear to be quite as racially motivated as white progressives think they should be.
Among self-identified Democrats, for example, a Pew survey this summer showed that African Americans were slightly less likely than whites to favor cutting police spending, while Hispanics were much less likely… Self-identified white liberals report warmer feelings about immigrants than do Hispanics… To say that working-class nonwhites don’t care about racial justice would be absurd. But many of them may not accept the academic constructs of what these things mean.
To put it simply, woke white progressives are more racially sensitive than a lot of minorities. That’s potentially a big problem if your politics is founded on the idea of calling out racial grievances as a path to utopia. It potentially messes up the left’s whole vision of where the country is headed.
For many years the left has been pitching a theory of “demographic destiny.” The idea is that as the country becomes less white, as black and Hispanic voters become a majority, the country’s politics would naturally slide to the left. That has happened to some degree in California, where Hispanics are now the largest percentage of the population. The state is entirely controlled by Democrats. And you could look at the Squad as another example of leftists politics coinciding with minority representation in Congress.
But this election shows that there’s nothing essential about that leftward drift. Just as Hispanics are becoming a larger portion of the population, they also appear to be moving right. And while the shift is more subtle with black voters, it’s happening there as well. Demographics don’t necessarily mean leftists will assume control of the country. On the contrary, it might even be the case that the Democrats’ claim over these voting blocks is falling apart because the left is so extreme. Black voters may decide they don’t want to defund the police even though the Marxist-led BLM is pushing that.
If the Hispanic vote continues to shift right the left may soon have to either reconsider its commitment to identity politics or find fresh ways to denounce the GOP as racists. I guess Yglesias’ piece is evidence the former is being considered but then there’s also evidence the latter path is being taken as well.
https://twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1323787949058785283


hotair--2020-11-05--The state of play as of 2 p.m. ET: Nevada slipping away from Trump; <span class='red'>Update: Will F

The state of play as of 2 p.m. ET: Nevada slipping away from Trump; Update: Will Fox call the race first?

Late numbers are finally trickling in today in NV , which has the smallest number of electoral votes of any state still on the board but remains important in a few scenarios .
I ’ ll give you Jon Ralston ’ s take on the latest round of ballots and then we ’ ll do some electoral math .
Looks like Trump and his base of working-class whites — and Latinos , to a lesser extent — made a real ballgame of it in Nevada .
But they ’ ll fall just short .
Ryan Matsumoto , an analyst at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as highly likely to go to Biden .
Why does a state with six EVs matter ?
Because , of the five states left to be called — Nevada , Arizona , Georgia , North Carolina , and Pennsylvania — Biden might actually need those six votes to get over the hump .
Right now he has 253 in the bank thanks to his flips of Wisconsin , Michigan , and Nebraska ’ s Second District .
He needs 17 more .
If he takes Nevada , he needs 11 .
Arizona has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 15 .
Georgia has 16 .
Pennsylvania has 20 .
In other words , Nevada plus any single state makes Biden the winner .
*Without* Nevada , neither AZ , NC , or GA alone could get him over the hump .
His best showing among them would be a 269-269 tie if he won Georgia and nothing else .
Nevada officially puts him one state away , anywhere on the map .
But you ’ ve probably noticed from the math that there ’ s one scenario in which Biden wins even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he takes Pennsylvania — and right now , Pennsylvania is looking fairly solidly blue .
Biden still trails in the official count but there are hundreds of thousands of mail ballots left out there from heavily blue counties that should break overwhelmingly for him .
In fact , from tracking the chatter among election nerds this morning , it sounds like Biden has a better chance to take PA than he does Arizona , Georgia , or North Carolina .
And if he takes PA , that ’ s the end .
No @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cohn : So far , Mr. Biden has been winning absentee votes , 77 percent to 22 percent , according to the Pennsylvania secretary of state .
At that pace , he needs only 288,000 more mail votes before taking the lead .
By my count , there are about 500,000 mail ballots left .
The secretary of state reported a total of 2.6 million absentee ballots cast as of Tuesday , and so far 2.1 million absentee votes have been counted .
If Mr. Biden won those 500,000 ballots by the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a lead of about 100,000 votes in the state .
That ’ s a pretty decent cushion .
That estimate may also be conservative .
For one , the remaining mail ballots are disproportionately in Democratic counties , so he ’ ll probably do better than 77-22 .
Another factor : There are more remaining absentee votes than estimated here ; the state tally as of Tuesday does not include mail ballots postmarked by Election Day that arrived afterward ( and I ’ m not entirely sure whether it includes mail ballots placed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ m assuming so out of caution ) … And finally , there are still Election Day ballots left in Philadelphia , as well as provisional ballots — votes cast by people who couldn ’ t initially be verified as eligible voters when they showed up to cast a ballot , like someone who went to the wrong precinct — that will cushion Mr. Biden .
Biden is actually outperforming Hillary Clinton in Pennsylvania ’ s blue counties this year , another reason why the remaining ballots should be heavily blue : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the *extremely* tight margins in Arizona and Georgia — both of which could be decided by a few thousand votes — Pennsylvania shouldn ’ t be extremely tight in the end .
Biden might win it by a point or two , which would be larger than Trump ’ s margin there in 2016 .
And if you ’ re thinking that would be an abnormally large win for a Rust Belt battleground in 2020 , go look at the latest count in Michigan .
Biden ’ s lead is up to 2.7 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ barely held on in Wisconsin but Michigan wasn ’ t much of a cliffhanger once the mail votes were counted .
None of the other states matter if Pennsylvania goes blue .
But for what it ’ s worth , analysts also think Biden might end up just nosing ahead in Georgia as the last ballots are counted : That 63/37 margin isn ’ t that daunting when you grasp that most of the remaining ballots come from urban counties like Fulton .
And many of them are mail votes , which trend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s bleating about fraud scared Republicans away from voting by mail .
“ Even in a place like Bryan County , where Trump won by 43 points in 2016 , Biden is actually winning by 15 in mail votes that were processed today , ” Silver noted on his blog .
“ Those mail votes are just coming in very blue , sometimes even in red counties.
” Again , Georgia is academic if Pennsylvania flips to Biden , as are Arizona , North Carolina , and Nevada .
But obviously Dems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rights , as a talking point that the formerly reliably red south isn ’ t so reliably red in an era where suburbanites are shifting blue and black voters are organizing .
It ’ s weird to think we might be entering an era where Georgia is a major battleground while Florida is safely red , but here we are .
Biden ’ s a few thousand votes away from making it happen .
If he holds on in Nevada , he ’ s at 259 .
If he wins Pennsylvania , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ threshold he needs .
If he gets Georgia , 295 .
If he holds onto Arizona , 306 — the very same number Trump won four years ago .
Few people seem to think he ’ s going to come back and take North Carolina , as there are fewer ballots there remaining to be counted , but if he got that he ’ d reach 321 .
Rumor has it that Team Trump is slowly reconciling itself to the reality : The first few minutes of this CNN segment confirm that Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t good .
How far he ’ ll go to try to gaslight people into believing the outcome is still in doubt is unclear , but Pennsylvania ’ s secretary of state said within the past hour that they expect all ballots to be counted by the end of today .
If Cohn and others are right about the trend there , we may know by this evening if Biden won the election .
Update : Fox refuses to back off its projection that Biden has won Arizona even though analysts like Steve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state remains in play .
That means Biden is actually at 264 in Fox ’ s count — which also means that , if they call Nevada for him , they have him at 270 .
They might be the first network to project that Joe Biden has won the presidency .

Late numbers are finally trickling in today in NV, which has the smallest number of electoral votes of any state still on the board but remains important in a few scenarios. I’ll give you Jon Ralston’s take on the latest round of ballots and then we’ll do some electoral math. Looks like Trump and his base of working-class whites — and Latinos, to a lesser extent — made a real ballgame of it in Nevada. But they’ll fall just short.
Biden is up by 11.4K right now in NV. Dems are going to win these mail ballots coming in from Election Day and yesterday — 63K. And they should win them decisively. That leaves 60K provisionals, which have been evenly split. I see no path left for Trump here. — Jon Ralston (@RalstonReports) November 5, 2020
Ryan Matsumoto, an analyst at Inside Elections, also now rates Nevada as highly likely to go to Biden. Why does a state with six EVs matter? Because, of the five states left to be called — Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania — Biden might actually need those six votes to get over the hump. Right now he has 253 in the bank thanks to his flips of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Nebraska’s Second District. He needs 17 more. If he takes Nevada, he needs 11.
Arizona has 11 electoral votes. North Carolina has 15. Georgia has 16. Pennsylvania has 20. In other words, Nevada plus any single state makes Biden the winner. *Without* Nevada, neither AZ, NC, or GA alone could get him over the hump. His best showing among them would be a 269-269 tie if he won Georgia and nothing else.
Nevada officially puts him one state away, anywhere on the map.
But you’ve probably noticed from the math that there’s one scenario in which Biden wins even without Nevada. That’s if he takes Pennsylvania — and right now, Pennsylvania is looking fairly solidly blue. Biden still trails in the official count but there are hundreds of thousands of mail ballots left out there from heavily blue counties that should break overwhelmingly for him. In fact, from tracking the chatter among election nerds this morning, it sounds like Biden has a better chance to take PA than he does Arizona, Georgia, or North Carolina. And if he takes PA, that’s the end. No matter what else happens anywhere. Nate Cohn:
So far, Mr. Biden has been winning absentee votes, 77 percent to 22 percent, according to the Pennsylvania secretary of state. At that pace, he needs only 288,000 more mail votes before taking the lead. By my count, there are about 500,000 mail ballots left. The secretary of state reported a total of 2.6 million absentee ballots cast as of Tuesday, and so far 2.1 million absentee votes have been counted. If Mr. Biden won those 500,000 ballots by the same 77-22 pace, he would end with a lead of about 100,000 votes in the state. That’s a pretty decent cushion. That estimate may also be conservative. For one, the remaining mail ballots are disproportionately in Democratic counties, so he’ll probably do better than 77-22. Another factor: There are more remaining absentee votes than estimated here; the state tally as of Tuesday does not include mail ballots postmarked by Election Day that arrived afterward (and I’m not entirely sure whether it includes mail ballots placed in Election Day drop boxes, but I’m assuming so out of caution)… And finally, there are still Election Day ballots left in Philadelphia, as well as provisional ballots — votes cast by people who couldn’t initially be verified as eligible voters when they showed up to cast a ballot, like someone who went to the wrong precinct — that will cushion Mr. Biden.
Biden is actually outperforming Hillary Clinton in Pennsylvania’s blue counties this year, another reason why the remaining ballots should be heavily blue:
The 2016 -> 2020 county shift map for Pennsylvania counties with >95% of expected votes reporting shows a lot of blue arrows. The trends are clear. Biden is outperforming Clinton across the vast majority of the state.#Election2020 #ElectionDay pic.twitter.com/nAAyxHryHg — Ryan Matsumoto (@ryanmatsumoto1) November 5, 2020
For all the excitement right now over the *extremely* tight margins in Arizona and Georgia — both of which could be decided by a few thousand votes — Pennsylvania shouldn’t be extremely tight in the end. Biden might win it by a point or two, which would be larger than Trump’s margin there in 2016. And if you’re thinking that would be an abnormally large win for a Rust Belt battleground in 2020, go look at the latest count in Michigan. Biden’s lead is up to 2.7 points as I write this. He barely held on in Wisconsin but Michigan wasn’t much of a cliffhanger once the mail votes were counted.
None of the other states matter if Pennsylvania goes blue. But for what it’s worth, analysts also think Biden might end up just nosing ahead in Georgia as the last ballots are counted:
GEORGIA UPDATE Trump leads by 13,540 votes 50,401 uncounted ballots in Georgia Biden must win the remaining ballots about 63% – 37% to close the gap. I'm beginning to like Biden's chances here.https://t.co/38K3cRq5NR — Ryan Matsumoto (@ryanmatsumoto1) November 5, 2020
OK this would be a big deal. If the unspecified votes are in Clayton Co., that’s very good for Biden.https://t.co/B9wwI3OjcX — Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 5, 2020
That 63/37 margin isn’t that daunting when you grasp that most of the remaining ballots come from urban counties like Fulton. And many of them are mail votes, which trend heavily blue anyway this year because Trump’s bleating about fraud scared Republicans away from voting by mail. “Even in a place like Bryan County, where Trump won by 43 points in 2016, Biden is actually winning by 15 in mail votes that were processed today,” Silver noted on his blog. “Those mail votes are just coming in very blue, sometimes even in red counties.”
Again, Georgia is academic if Pennsylvania flips to Biden, as are Arizona, North Carolina, and Nevada. But obviously Dems would love to have it for bragging rights, as a talking point that the formerly reliably red south isn’t so reliably red in an era where suburbanites are shifting blue and black voters are organizing. It’s weird to think we might be entering an era where Georgia is a major battleground while Florida is safely red, but here we are. Biden’s a few thousand votes away from making it happen.
If he holds on in Nevada, he’s at 259. If he wins Pennsylvania, he’s at 279, over the threshold he needs. If he gets Georgia, 295. If he holds onto Arizona, 306 — the very same number Trump won four years ago. Few people seem to think he’s going to come back and take North Carolina, as there are fewer ballots there remaining to be counted, but if he got that he’d reach 321.
Rumor has it that Team Trump is slowly reconciling itself to the reality:
https://twitter.com/KellieMeyerNews/status/1324417563980345347
The first few minutes of this CNN segment confirm that Trump seems to know the outlook isn’t good. How far he’ll go to try to gaslight people into believing the outcome is still in doubt is unclear, but Pennsylvania’s secretary of state said within the past hour that they expect all ballots to be counted by the end of today. If Cohn and others are right about the trend there, we may know by this evening if Biden won the election.
Update: Fox refuses to back off its projection that Biden has won Arizona even though analysts like Steve Kornacki and Nate Silver are warning that the state remains in play. That means Biden is actually at 264 in Fox’s count — which also means that, if they call Nevada for him, they have him at 270. They might be the first network to project that Joe Biden has won the presidency.


hotair--2020-11-05--Rumor mill: Did ballot counters in PA take the day off?

No , no one ’ s goldbricking in Pennsylvania .
I ’ m not sure where this rumor started , but it ran like wildfire on social media for a while .
Ballot counters in Allegheny County , Pennsylvania did put aside around 29,000 ballots until tomorrow , but as WESA-TV ’ s Chris Potter reports , it ’ s not to get some time in on the golf course .
It ’ s because an Allegheny County vendor screwed up its initial delivery of ballots to those voters , requiring special handling — which everyone knew would happen .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ picking up on the story from our friend Jim Geraghty : Allegheny County , which includes Pittsburgh and is the second-most populous county in the state , accidentally sent out 29,000 copies of the wrong ballot to voters earlier this month , giving people ballots for races in other districts .
The county is sending out replacement ballots .
But if someone sends back the incorrect ballot and doesn ’ t send back the correct one , should it count ?
Should it only count for the races in their district ?
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the correct one , will any accidentally get double counted ?
All of those are good questions , and election officials in Allegheny came up with a process to deal with the situation .
Those ballots got put aside to be handled after all of the other ballots were counted .
Potter points out why that was necessary in a lengthy and exasperated Twitter thread : The review board will meet for the first time tomorrow , Potter reports next in his thread .
The county chairs of both parties are on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the two congressional candidates whose race was impacted by it .
WTAE reporter David Kaplan explains in his own Twitter thread that everyone entered into a consent decree less than two weeks ago that dictates exactly how these ballots are to be handled : I did chuckle a bit at Kaplan ’ s specificity earlier in his thread about the vendor being an “ Ohio printer , ” but otherwise this is pretty straightforward — and not at all a mystery .
If Pennsylvania wasn ’ t a close-run state , few people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is , however , every single hiccup in this process will get magnified into a national story , if not a national outrage .
By the way , this isn ’ t an attempt to minimize the real issue in this story .
The election may well come down to how well this consent-decree process works on these disputed ballots .
As Potter notes , those will mainly be processed by hand , which makes this claim questionable : That would only be true if the margin of victory exceeds the 29,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials will work hard to get those done accurately , but it will not be a quick process .
And rest assured , no one in Pennsylvania is goldbricking this process , not with the nation focused on them and the spectre of Florida 2000 in our peripheral vision .

No, no one’s goldbricking in Pennsylvania. I’m not sure where this rumor started, but it ran like wildfire on social media for a while. Ballot counters in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania did put aside around 29,000 ballots until tomorrow, but as WESA-TV’s Chris Potter reports, it’s not to get some time in on the golf course. It’s because an Allegheny County vendor screwed up its initial delivery of ballots to those voters, requiring special handling — which everyone knew would happen.
Jazz wrote about this last week, picking up on the story from our friend Jim Geraghty:
Allegheny County, which includes Pittsburgh and is the second-most populous county in the state, accidentally sent out 29,000 copies of the wrong ballot to voters earlier this month, giving people ballots for races in other districts. The county is sending out replacement ballots. But if someone sends back the incorrect ballot and doesn’t send back the correct one, should it count? Should it only count for the races in their district? If someone sends back both the incorrect one and the correct one, will any accidentally get double counted?
All of those are good questions, and election officials in Allegheny came up with a process to deal with the situation. Those ballots got put aside to be handled after all of the other ballots were counted. Potter points out why that was necessary in a lengthy and exasperated Twitter thread:
So you have to give those ballots special scrutiny to make sure that a) people don't vote twice, and b) if they just send in the old one, they don't vote in races they aren't eligible for. So you can't just scan them with the rest. — Chris Potter (@CPotterPgh) November 5, 2020
When ballots require special scrutiny, the county records the vote through a return board whose members are sworn in for that purpose. The board reviews the results tallied up by election workers after polls close, but also addresses provisional ballots, military ballots, etc. — Chris Potter (@CPotterPgh) November 5, 2020
The review board will meet for the first time tomorrow, Potter reports next in his thread. The county chairs of both parties are on board with this process, as were the two congressional candidates whose race was impacted by it. WTAE reporter David Kaplan explains in his own Twitter thread that everyone entered into a consent decree less than two weeks ago that dictates exactly how these ballots are to be handled:
Here's the part expounding on how ballots would be counted given multiple possible situations of what exactly a voter returned in terms of their ballot or if they voted in person. Long story short, all those voters were identified in county system and were pulled aside or noted. pic.twitter.com/0V5su6w8nQ — David Kaplan (@DKaplanWTAE) November 5, 2020
So to sum it all up. These votes are not being counted yet because this is what the courts and the law is requiring. This was the plan for the county all along (initial press release), agreed to by Republican and Democratic candidates in Allegheny County. — David Kaplan (@DKaplanWTAE) November 5, 2020
I did chuckle a bit at Kaplan’s specificity earlier in his thread about the vendor being an “Ohio printer,” but otherwise this is pretty straightforward — and not at all a mystery. If Pennsylvania wasn’t a close-run state, few people would have even noticed this. As it is, however, every single hiccup in this process will get magnified into a national story, if not a national outrage.
By the way, this isn’t an attempt to minimize the real issue in this story. The election may well come down to how well this consent-decree process works on these disputed ballots. As Potter notes, those will mainly be processed by hand, which makes this claim questionable:
Alright, PA Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar says it's likely we could know by TODAY the winner in the state of PA. The outstanding 550K +/- votes are being counted today. — Abby D. Phillip (@abbydphillip) November 5, 2020
That would only be true if the margin of victory exceeds the 29,000 or so sequestered ballots. Allegheny County officials will work hard to get those done accurately, but it will not be a quick process. And rest assured, no one in Pennsylvania is goldbricking this process, not with the nation focused on them and the spectre of Florida 2000 in our peripheral vision.


hotair--2020-11-05--Riot declared in Portland as Antifa holds 'march of terror'

After gathering downtown Antifa marched through the streets carrying a banner that read “ The vote is over the fight goes on.
” They were clearly not happy about Mayor Ted Wheeler ’ s defeat of Antifa-sympathizer Sarah Iannarone .
The group very quickly turned to vandalism of businesses , smashing windows and destroying ATMs as they passed : This was apparently an anti-capitalist march , though I think they all are to some degree : Lots of broken windows as well .
The official excuse is anti-capitalism but the real reason is that these are juvenile a-holes having a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They also broke the windows of a Catholic Church : The Multnomah County Sheriff ’ s Office had something to say about that : Some business owners weren ’ t having it : After all of this damage the whole thing was declared a riot and police moved in : And for the first time , the Oregon National Guard was sent in : Weapons were collected .
Police later clarified that the arrested man had thrown a firework not a Molotov .
Eventually the mob returned to the courthouse where they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ngo points out that all of this chaos was pre-planned : In an interview with Sky News , Ngo dubbed it a “ march of terror.
” 11 people were arrested in Portland last night .
Willamette Week reported today on what it called “ indiscriminate vandalism ” by which they mean that the group broke things belonging to other leftists : Among the small businesses hit : the downtown store of clothing brand Wildfang , which sells shirts reading “ Wild Feminist ” and androgynous jumpsuits .
The store has branded itself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reproductive rights and immigration .
The seemingly indiscriminate vandalism reflected frustrations among some of the city ’ s most strident activists , who appear as irked with mainstream Democrats as with the White House .
The anti-fascist group Popular Mobilization , or Pop Mob , organized tonight ’ s march to protest what it described as attempts by Trump “ to stage a coup in the face of a projected Biden win .
But this ain ’ t over—no matter how this goes , Portland ’ s coming out to show these rotting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up.
” The backdrop of all of this is that the Portland City Council is set to vote today on further defunding of the police : The council has a hearing at 2 p.m. to decide whether to slash another $ 18 million from the police budget .
They already cut $ 15 million from Portland Police Bureau ( PPB ) budget in June amid historic , nationwide anti-police protests following the death of George Floyd… Portland Police Chief Chuck Lovell said the cuts would be detrimental to the safety of the community @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 18 million would require significant layoffs and affect the police bureau ’ s ability to respond to 911 calls , ” he said .
“ In addition , the proposed budget reductions also will reduce training and diversity initiatives , increase response times , slow investigations , and challenge the police bureau ’ s ability to meet our community ’ s expectations and needs.
” The fewer police they have on hand , the more the violent extremists will be in charge of the streets .
That ’ s what the mob wants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ members of the City Council want as well .
Two videos to close this out .
The first lays out the vote that will take place today .
Two City Councilmembers have already said they are in favor of the cuts , three others including Mayor Wheeler haven ’ t said how they ’ ll vote .
Below that is another report on today ’ s vote which features an interview with the head of the Portland Police Association .
He argues that cutting the budget by an additional $ 18 million will @ @ @ @ @ @

After gathering downtown Antifa marched through the streets carrying a banner that read “The vote is over the fight goes on.” They were clearly not happy about Mayor Ted Wheeler’s defeat of Antifa-sympathizer Sarah Iannarone.
Antifa march through downtown Portland tonight chanting, “F— Ted Wheeler!” #antifa pic.twitter.com/rgUzmfy2bt — Andy Ngô (@MrAndyNgo) November 5, 2020
The group very quickly turned to vandalism of businesses, smashing windows and destroying ATMs as they passed:
There were a few workers inside at the time, running to the doors making sure they were locked. @fox12oregon https://t.co/3lTOpxaCmD — Brenna Kelly (@BrennaKellyNews) November 5, 2020
This was apparently an anti-capitalist march, though I think they all are to some degree:
That’s why ATMs are a frequent target:
Lots of broken windows as well. The official excuse is anti-capitalism but the real reason is that these are juvenile a-holes having a tantrum at the expense of the adults.
They also broke the windows of a Catholic Church:
Saint André Bessette Church has windows bashed out. Down the street, people throw things out of windows at this group. @fox12oregon pic.twitter.com/YVknkdlbFL — Brenna Kelly (@BrennaKellyNews) November 5, 2020
The Multnomah County Sheriff’s Office had something to say about that:
Saint Andre Bessette Church is one of the many buildings that had their windows broken out during this evening's riot. This organization helps those who are homeless, experiencing poverty, mental health issues and substance abuse. https://t.co/0iVqp3tYyk — Multnomah Co. Sheriff’s Office (@MultCoSO) November 5, 2020
Some business owners weren’t having it:
A man stands guard with weapons-in-hand outside of the underU4men gay men’s underwear store. Businesses were targeted by #antifa tonight in their march of terror. #PortlandRiots https://t.co/DMZff322Xt — Andy Ngô (@MrAndyNgo) November 5, 2020
After all of this damage the whole thing was declared a riot and police moved in:
Officers moving in on rioters again. We’re asked to keep our distance. Rioters throwing things at them. So far I haven’t seen tear gas deployed or smelled it in the streets. @fox12oregon pic.twitter.com/tyexShlRWO — Brenna Kelly (@BrennaKellyNews) November 5, 2020
And for the first time, the Oregon National Guard was sent in:
The National Guard was activated for the first time to respond to rioting in Portland. #antifa https://t.co/HYacvA0oFi — Andy Ngô (@MrAndyNgo) November 5, 2020
The National Guard was activated for the first time tonight in Portland at the #antifa riot. In the past six months of rioting, the governor refused to bring in the National Guard. #PortlandRiots #antifa https://t.co/A3Rcrjkbov — Andy Ngô (@MrAndyNgo) November 5, 2020
Arrests were made:
https://twitter.com/KittyLists/status/1324242994774507520
Weapons were collected. Police later clarified that the arrested man had thrown a firework not a Molotov.
Loaded rifle seized in arrest. Deputies arrested a man believed to have thrown a Molotov cocktail at PPB officers. Deps. seized a rifle w/ a full magazine. They also recovered add'l magazines, commercial grade fireworks, a knife & spray paint cans. Arrest info to come later. pic.twitter.com/8kERARSSQw — Multnomah Co. Sheriff’s Office (@MultCoSO) November 5, 2020
Eventually the mob returned to the courthouse where they made a lot of threats:
https://twitter.com/KittyLists/status/1324263429046071296
https://twitter.com/KittyLists/status/1324274392340160512
Andy Ngo points out that all of this chaos was pre-planned:
Just a reminder that the Portland antifa riot and march of terror was pre-planned: https://t.co/nGh4etgvcW — Andy Ngô (@MrAndyNgo) November 5, 2020
In an interview with Sky News, Ngo dubbed it a “march of terror.”
After Election Day, #antifa in Portland organized a "march of terror" through the heart of downtown where they smashed a Catholic church, dozens of businesses & property. The National Guard was activated. Watch my @SkyNewsAust interview: https://t.co/iZRj18mZl9 pic.twitter.com/k1FEPJjZos — Andy Ngô (@MrAndyNgo) November 5, 2020
11 people were arrested in Portland last night. Willamette Week reported today on what it called “indiscriminate vandalism” by which they mean that the group broke things belonging to other leftists:
Among the small businesses hit: the downtown store of clothing brand Wildfang, which sells shirts reading “Wild Feminist” and androgynous jumpsuits. The store has branded itself as feminist and LBGTQ-friendly, advocating for reproductive rights and immigration. The seemingly indiscriminate vandalism reflected frustrations among some of the city’s most strident activists, who appear as irked with mainstream Democrats as with the White House. The anti-fascist group Popular Mobilization, or Pop Mob, organized tonight’s march to protest what it described as attempts by Trump “to stage a coup in the face of a projected Biden win. But this ain’t over—no matter how this goes, Portland’s coming out to show these rotting institutions we’re fed the fuck up.”
The backdrop of all of this is that the Portland City Council is set to vote today on further defunding of the police:
The council has a hearing at 2 p.m. to decide whether to slash another $18 million from the police budget. They already cut $15 million from Portland Police Bureau (PPB) budget in June amid historic, nationwide anti-police protests following the death of George Floyd… Portland Police Chief Chuck Lovell said the cuts would be detrimental to the safety of the community. “An additional cut of $18 million would require significant layoffs and affect the police bureau’s ability to respond to 911 calls,” he said. “In addition, the proposed budget reductions also will reduce training and diversity initiatives, increase response times, slow investigations, and challenge the police bureau’s ability to meet our community’s expectations and needs.”
The fewer police they have on hand, the more the violent extremists will be in charge of the streets. That’s what the mob wants and its appears to be what some members of the City Council want as well.
Two videos to close this out. The first lays out the vote that will take place today. Two City Councilmembers have already said they are in favor of the cuts, three others including Mayor Wheeler haven’t said how they’ll vote. Below that is another report on today’s vote which features an interview with the head of the Portland Police Association. He argues that cutting the budget by an additional $18 million will result in 100 fewer officers.