hotair--2020-11-09--Massachusetts wisely rejects the ranked choice voting scheme

Last month , we talked about the curious sources of funding for the group pushing a referendum ( Question 2 ) to institute so-called ranked-choice voting in Massachusetts .
The Yes on 2 campaign was funded almost entirely by out-of-state donors combined with a handful of wealthy liberal activists in the state .
The fundraising was spectacularly successful , generating literally 3,000 times more cash than the small , local group that was trying to raise public awareness and defeat the referendum .
Perhaps the lack of local cash support should have sent them a clue .
Despite their massive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ballot box by double digits and a radical restructuring of how state residents vote was averted .
And you won ’ t believe what the measure ’ s supporters blamed for their defeat .
( Boston Globe ) The campaign to bring ranked choice voting to Massachusetts seemed like it had a lot going for it : endorsements from the deep-blue state ’ s top elected Democrats , an enthusiastic base of support , a roughly 3,000-to-1 fundraising advantage over a last-minute opposition campaign .
Pre-election polls even showed the ballot measure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lead .
But when it came down to it Tuesday , the initiative more than a year-and-a-half in the making could not overcome public skepticism about overhauling the state ’ s elections at a time when voting — and , perhaps more importantly , campaigns — across the country had been disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic .
With nearly 99 percent of precincts reporting , the measure was rejected by a margin of 55 percent to 45 percent .
When asked how they could have failed while holding such a daunting funding advantage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a cheerleader for the measure ) had one explanation at hand .
He said , “ the idea behind it is a reasonable idea , but it ’ s complex , and many voters didn ’ t really grasp what it would mean for them.
” Allow me to translate that for you .
The Massachusetts Secretary of State said that the voters failed to pass ranked-choice voting because they were too stupid to understand the proposition .
The Chairman of the Board for the Yes on 2 campaign reiterated the same idea @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to make sure we could educate enough people about what rank choice voting is.
” That ’ s apparently their attitude at this point .
We failed to educate all of you ignorant peasants and now you ’ ve shot down our referendum .
Another Yes on 2 campaign board member tweeted that he wished they ’ d been able to show people that the scheme wasn ’ t so confusing .
Yes , because all of those ignorant people are so easily confused , right ?
Or perhaps… just maybe… people understood @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t like the smell of it .
Perhaps they understand that there is no rule saying that you have to have a majority to win the election and even the founders anticipated and wrote about how to decide races with multiple candidates .
The only exception is the electoral college , where you eventually need to come up with a majority somewhere , but other than that your state can allow as many candidates as they like .
And it ’ s possible that the voters understood that this system robs the votes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ round , giving them away to others who were not the preferred candidate of the voter .
If you need any more reasons to oppose this plan , just look at who supported it .
“ Squad ” member Rep. Ayanna Pressley carped at the voters after the measure failed , complaining that Massachusetts is “ progressive in theory but less so in practice.
” Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey supported it also , while the state ’ s moderate Republican governor opposed it .
In fact , almost all of the measure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Take from that what you will , but at least for now , standard voting will remain the rule of the day in the Bay State .

Last month, we talked about the curious sources of funding for the group pushing a referendum (Question 2) to institute so-called ranked-choice voting in Massachusetts. The Yes on 2 campaign was funded almost entirely by out-of-state donors combined with a handful of wealthy liberal activists in the state. The fundraising was spectacularly successful, generating literally 3,000 times more cash than the small, local group that was trying to raise public awareness and defeat the referendum. Perhaps the lack of local cash support should have sent them a clue. Despite their massive fundraising advantage, Question 2 failed at the ballot box by double digits and a radical restructuring of how state residents vote was averted. And you won’t believe what the measure’s supporters blamed for their defeat. (Boston Globe)
The campaign to bring ranked choice voting to Massachusetts seemed like it had a lot going for it: endorsements from the deep-blue state’s top elected Democrats, an enthusiastic base of support, a roughly 3,000-to-1 fundraising advantage over a last-minute opposition campaign. Pre-election polls even showed the ballot measure, Question 2, with a slight lead. But when it came down to it Tuesday, the initiative more than a year-and-a-half in the making could not overcome public skepticism about overhauling the state’s elections at a time when voting — and, perhaps more importantly, campaigns — across the country had been disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. With nearly 99 percent of precincts reporting, the measure was rejected by a margin of 55 percent to 45 percent.
When asked how they could have failed while holding such a daunting funding advantage, Secretary of State Bill Galvin (a cheerleader for the measure) had one explanation at hand. He said, “the idea behind it is a reasonable idea, but it’s complex, and many voters didn’t really grasp what it would mean for them.”
Allow me to translate that for you. The Massachusetts Secretary of State said that the voters failed to pass ranked-choice voting because they were too stupid to understand the proposition. The Chairman of the Board for the Yes on 2 campaign reiterated the same idea, saying, “we were competing to make sure we could educate enough people about what rank choice voting is.”
That’s apparently their attitude at this point. We failed to educate all of you ignorant peasants and now you’ve shot down our referendum. Another Yes on 2 campaign board member tweeted that he wished they’d been able to show people that the scheme wasn’t so confusing.
Wish you all could've come to a beer-ranking party. Or a donut-ranking party. You'd see that ranked choice voting isn't confusing, & provides for better-supported and less-extreme outcomes. Regardless I'm so proud & thankful to have worked with so many people to promote RCV. 1/3 — Mike Zarren (@mikezarren) November 4, 2020
Yes, because all of those ignorant people are so easily confused, right?
Or perhaps… just maybe… people understood this scheme perfectly well and didn’t like the smell of it. Perhaps they understand that there is no rule saying that you have to have a majority to win the election and even the founders anticipated and wrote about how to decide races with multiple candidates. The only exception is the electoral college, where you eventually need to come up with a majority somewhere, but other than that your state can allow as many candidates as they like. And it’s possible that the voters understood that this system robs the votes of less mainstream candidates in the second round, giving them away to others who were not the preferred candidate of the voter.
If you need any more reasons to oppose this plan, just look at who supported it. “Squad” member Rep. Ayanna Pressley carped at the voters after the measure failed, complaining that Massachusetts is “progressive in theory but less so in practice.” Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey supported it also, while the state’s moderate Republican governor opposed it. In fact, almost all of the measure’s support came from Democrats. Take from that what you will, but at least for now, standard voting will remain the rule of the day in the Bay State.


hotair--2020-11-10--Jill Biden is bringing the teachers unions into the White House, pledges to continue teaching as Fir

Jill Biden is bringing the teachers unions into the White House, pledges to continue teaching as First Lady

Jill Biden intends to be a full-time working woman outside of the White House .
She kept her job of teaching at a community college while she occupied the Vice-President ’ s house and sees no reason why she can ’ t do the same as the first lady .
Mrs. Biden calls herself “ Dr .
Jill Biden ” on social media and the media play along .
Her “ Dr. ” designation is a Ph.D. , not from a medical degree .
That is not to dismiss her accomplishment .
She has four degrees which include two master @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well as a doctorate .
She has taught in public schools for over thirty years .
The teacher living in Delaware now will bring along some powerful friends when she moves into the White House – teacher unions .
When Joe Biden was vice president from 2009 to 2017 , she continued to teach at Northern Virginia Community College .
And when she takes on the new role of first lady , she will continue teaching at the school .
While she did take a leave of absence from teaching when Joe Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will enter her 36th year of teaching in 2021 .
“ I would love to .
If we get to the White House , I ’ m going to continue to teach , ” she told CBS Sunday in August when asked if she was going to continue her teaching career .
“ I want people to value teachers and know their contributions and to lift up the profession.
” Jill Biden frequently says , “ Teaching is not what I do .
It ’ s who I am.
” Joe Biden says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her Twitter profile bio she lists “ Lifelong educator ” first and “ Wife to Joe Biden ” last after Military mother , Grandmother , and Sister .
She is 69 years old which means she is a baby boomer out to prove herself .
She isn ’ t as in-your-face as Hillary but nonetheless , she comes off very self-confident , to put it gently .
Joe Biden received the endorsements of the major teacher unions .
Jill has boasted about being a member of one herself .
Members of teacher unions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Democrats .
In 2019 she told Vogue magazine that she planned on continuing to teach if her husband won the election .
She has continued to make such statements .
She how great I am ?
That ’ s the vibe she gives off , in my opinion .
Remember when she put Jake Tapper in his place during an interview ?
She refused to allow him to ask a question about Joe ’ s age or something that should have been an easy question and she shut him down .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ didn ’ t even push back .
That ’ s how a lot of journalism is today – Democrat politicians call the shots and reporters are not curious enough ( or bold enough ) to ask substantive questions .
Instead , they parrot Democrat talking points .
Does her decision to work outside the White House full time make any difference ?
No , not as far as the job of First Lady goes , I would imagine .
Sleepy Joe ’ s wife will receive her regular salary from her employer .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ College from 2008 to 2016 during the Obama-Biden years .
The fix is in to tell us how special she is , as opposed , say , to the current first lady .
Look for Jill Biden to be on every women ’ s magazine cover that is published and all the regular magazines , too .
That is how it is when a Democrat woman is the first lady .
Melania Trump is beautiful , a former model , and a wardrobe to die for yet she has been completely ignored .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ her , none have maintained a professional and full-time career while in the White House .
“ They confined their activities to being first lady , ” said Myra Gutin , a first lady historian and professor of communication at Rider University .
“ So , this is very special .
It ’ s very different.
” But unlike those before her , Biden will be splitting her time between her responsibilities as an educator and the first lady .
( Eleanor Roosevelt wrote a regular column for years , including during her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that work wasn ’ t full-time , says Gutin .
And any money Roosevelt earned was donated . )
“ She is very much reflective of the 21st century , ” Gutin said .
“ And whenever the presidential spouse does something like this , it ’ s always going to open up new possibilities.
” If scheduling conflicts come up , I ’ m sure she can get all the time off she wishes to have .
And , she can always recruit her grown daughter or her grown granddaughters to stand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first lady isn ’ t an elected position and she can do with the role as she sees fit .
It ’ s a pity for American families , though , who are desperate for school choice and better schools in poor and disadvantaged neighborhoods .
It seems to me she would benefit the masses more , if that is truly her goal , to work for those goals instead of just keeping her own paid job .
The thoughts of special goodies going to teacher unions won ’ t sit well with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

Jill Biden intends to be a full-time working woman outside of the White House. She kept her job of teaching at a community college while she occupied the Vice-President’s house and sees no reason why she can’t do the same as the first lady.
Mrs. Biden calls herself “Dr. Jill Biden” on social media and the media play along. Her “Dr.” designation is a Ph.D., not from a medical degree. That is not to dismiss her accomplishment. She has four degrees which include two master’s degrees in education, as well as a doctorate. She has taught in public schools for over thirty years. The teacher living in Delaware now will bring along some powerful friends when she moves into the White House – teacher unions.
When Joe Biden was vice president from 2009 to 2017, she continued to teach at Northern Virginia Community College. And when she takes on the new role of first lady, she will continue teaching at the school. While she did take a leave of absence from teaching when Joe Biden began his presidential campaign, Jill Biden will enter her 36th year of teaching in 2021. “I would love to. If we get to the White House, I’m going to continue to teach,” she told CBS Sunday in August when asked if she was going to continue her teaching career. “I want people to value teachers and know their contributions and to lift up the profession.”
Jill Biden frequently says, “Teaching is not what I do. It’s who I am.” Joe Biden says the same thing about her. In her Twitter profile bio she lists “Lifelong educator” first and “Wife to Joe Biden” last after Military mother, Grandmother, and Sister. She is 69 years old which means she is a baby boomer out to prove herself. She isn’t as in-your-face as Hillary but nonetheless, she comes off very self-confident, to put it gently.
Joe Biden received the endorsements of the major teacher unions. Jill has boasted about being a member of one herself. Members of teacher unions are like other union members, loyal to Democrats. In 2019 she told Vogue magazine that she planned on continuing to teach if her husband won the election. She has continued to make such statements.
“The beauty of (being FLOTUS) is that you can define it however you want. And that’s what I did as second lady – I defined that role the way I wanted it to be. I would still work on all the same issues. Education would be right up there, and military families. I’d travel all over this country trying to get free community college,” she said.
Dr. Jill Biden, as First Lady, “intends to go back to teaching," a campaign official tells NBC. She told @mikememoli last year: “How great would that be? What would that say about teachers? Wouldn't that lift up the profession and celebrate who they are? It would be my honor.” — Geoff Bennett (@GeoffRBennett) November 10, 2020
She how great I am? That’s the vibe she gives off, in my opinion. Remember when she put Jake Tapper in his place during an interview? She refused to allow him to ask a question about Joe’s age or something that should have been an easy question and she shut him down. “No, no, no.” Tapper didn’t even push back. That’s how a lot of journalism is today – Democrat politicians call the shots and reporters are not curious enough (or bold enough) to ask substantive questions. Instead, they parrot Democrat talking points .
Does her decision to work outside the White House full time make any difference? No, not as far as the job of First Lady goes, I would imagine. Sleepy Joe’s wife will receive her regular salary from her employer. She taught English at Northern Virginia Community College from 2008 to 2016 during the Obama-Biden years. The fix is in to tell us how special she is, as opposed, say, to the current first lady. Look for Jill Biden to be on every women’s magazine cover that is published and all the regular magazines, too. That is how it is when a Democrat woman is the first lady. Melania Trump is beautiful, a former model, and a wardrobe to die for yet she has been completely ignored.
Of the women who will have preceded her, none have maintained a professional and full-time career while in the White House. “They confined their activities to being first lady,” said Myra Gutin, a first lady historian and professor of communication at Rider University. “So, this is very special. It’s very different.” But unlike those before her, Biden will be splitting her time between her responsibilities as an educator and the first lady. (Eleanor Roosevelt wrote a regular column for years, including during her time in the White House, but that work wasn’t full-time, says Gutin. And any money Roosevelt earned was donated.) “She is very much reflective of the 21st century,” Gutin said. “And whenever the presidential spouse does something like this, it’s always going to open up new possibilities.”
If scheduling conflicts come up, I’m sure she can get all the time off she wishes to have. And, she can always recruit her grown daughter or her grown granddaughters to stand in for her with Joe. The first lady isn’t an elected position and she can do with the role as she sees fit. It’s a pity for American families, though, who are desperate for school choice and better schools in poor and disadvantaged neighborhoods. It seems to me she would benefit the masses more, if that is truly her goal, to work for those goals instead of just keeping her own paid job. The thoughts of special goodies going to teacher unions won’t sit well with about half of America, I imagine.


hotair--2020-11-10--Manchin: Don't count on me to go along with "crazy stuff," Dems

A leftover from last night , but very much still of interest for the next few weeks .
I ’ m torn on what Joe Manchin wanted to accomplish in this interview with Fox News ’ Bret Baier .
There are three possible strategies for declaring that he won ’ t vote to allow Kamala Harris to push the Senate into a “ Green New Deal or socialism ” via a 50-50 tiebreaker : West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin III wants to make clear that he will not be the 50th vote in favor of eliminating the legislative filibuster or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a potential 50-50 Senate .
… Democrats still have a narrow path to a Senate majority if they are able to prevail in two January runoff elections in Georgia , assuming Republicans currently leading in North Carolina and Alaska win .
But in a move that seems partly designed to interfere with GOP talking points about the risks of unified Democratic government , Manchin appeared Monday on Fox News to declare dead several progressive priorities .
“ I commit to you tonight , and I commit to all of your viewers and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I want to allay those fears , I want to rest those fears for you right now because when they talk about whether it be packing the courts , or ending the filibuster , I will not vote to do that , ” Manchin said in the interview .
“ I will not vote to pack the courts … and I will not vote to end the filibuster.
” Manchin said that in his estimation , efforts to defund the police and advance “ Medicare for All ” lacked support among members of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Here are the three scenarios , which aren ’ t entirely mutually exclusive : • The Runoff Scenario — Manchin is being put out on national television by Senate Democrats ’ leadership in a pitch to counter GOP messaging in Georgia .
Democrats historically blew an opportunity to convert on a presidential victory and a numeric advantage in Senate races .
They are now trying to counter the progressives ’ year-long control of the party messaging by promising Georgia voters that Manchin will stand guard against the progressives even if they elect the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ runoffs .
• The Olive Branch Scenario — Manchin wants to ensure moderation and cooperation in the incoming Joe Biden/Harris administration and is making it clear what won ’ t work , even in a 50/50+Harris scenario .
At the same time , Manchin is holding out an olive branch to Republicans for serious cooperation on mutual interests .
If everyone works with Manchin , both parties will benefit from a new era of bipartisanship .
• The Party-Switch Scenario — This interview was aimed at Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi to make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to jumping ship if progressives continue to control the agenda and the messaging , especially on energy .
If they can ’ t control themselves , Manchin will do it for them by cutting them out of any kind of control .
Frankly , it ’ s tough to choose between these three , and there could be layers of each in Manchin ’ s mind .
It ’ s very difficult to believe in the first scenario , however ; Manchin doesn ’ t have any reason to support the election of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , especially when the latter won ’ t distance himself from the court-packing demands that Manchin ridicules here .
Best guess is that Manchin wants to project the second scenario publicly while making the third scenario clear sotto voce .
Note well that Manchin never explicitly rules out a party switch under any and all circumstances ; Baier mentions Schumer using committee chairmanships as a lever to win his votes on progressive agenda items , but Mitch McConnell could do the same thing to convince Manchin to switch now .
And with Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if not both of those Georgia runoffs , McConnell might actually have the goods to offer in such a deal — but it ’ s only worth it if Manchin takes up the offer before January 5 .
After a GOP win on that date , McConnell won ’ t need Manchin to flip .
Let ’ s end with two reactions to Manchin ’ s declaration .
First off , the NRSC ’ s senior adviser isn ’ t buying it , likely believing this is a Scenario One declaration : On @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treatment to which Manchin can look forward over the next couple of years within his own party : Scenario Three looks like the most promising path , but if so , Manchin had better call McConnell soon .
Operators are standing by .

A leftover from last night, but very much still of interest for the next few weeks. I’m torn on what Joe Manchin wanted to accomplish in this interview with Fox News’ Bret Baier. There are three possible strategies for declaring that he won’t vote to allow Kamala Harris to push the Senate into a “Green New Deal or socialism” via a 50-50 tiebreaker:
West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin III wants to make clear that he will not be the 50th vote in favor of eliminating the legislative filibuster or expanding the size of the Supreme Court in a potential 50-50 Senate. … Democrats still have a narrow path to a Senate majority if they are able to prevail in two January runoff elections in Georgia, assuming Republicans currently leading in North Carolina and Alaska win. But in a move that seems partly designed to interfere with GOP talking points about the risks of unified Democratic government, Manchin appeared Monday on Fox News to declare dead several progressive priorities. “I commit to you tonight, and I commit to all of your viewers and everyone else that’s watching. I want to allay those fears, I want to rest those fears for you right now because when they talk about whether it be packing the courts, or ending the filibuster, I will not vote to do that,” Manchin said in the interview. “I will not vote to pack the courts … and I will not vote to end the filibuster.” Manchin said that in his estimation, efforts to defund the police and advance “Medicare for All” lacked support among members of the Senate Democratic Conference as well.
Here are the three scenarios, which aren’t entirely mutually exclusive:
The Runoff Scenario — Manchin is being put out on national television by Senate Democrats’ leadership in a pitch to counter GOP messaging in Georgia. Democrats historically blew an opportunity to convert on a presidential victory and a numeric advantage in Senate races. They are now trying to counter the progressives’ year-long control of the party messaging by promising Georgia voters that Manchin will stand guard against the progressives even if they elect the two Democrats in January 5’s runoffs. The Olive Branch Scenario — Manchin wants to ensure moderation and cooperation in the incoming Joe Biden/Harris administration and is making it clear what won’t work, even in a 50/50+Harris scenario. At the same time, Manchin is holding out an olive branch to Republicans for serious cooperation on mutual interests. If everyone works with Manchin, both parties will benefit from a new era of bipartisanship. The Party-Switch Scenario — This interview was aimed at Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi to make it clear that he’s thisclose to jumping ship if progressives continue to control the agenda and the messaging, especially on energy. If they can’t control themselves, Manchin will do it for them by cutting them out of any kind of control.
Frankly, it’s tough to choose between these three, and there could be layers of each in Manchin’s mind. It’s very difficult to believe in the first scenario, however; Manchin doesn’t have any reason to support the election of progressives like Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock, especially when the latter won’t distance himself from the court-packing demands that Manchin ridicules here.
Best guess is that Manchin wants to project the second scenario publicly while making the third scenario clear sotto voce. Note well that Manchin never explicitly rules out a party switch under any and all circumstances; Baier mentions Schumer using committee chairmanships as a lever to win his votes on progressive agenda items, but Mitch McConnell could do the same thing to convince Manchin to switch now. And with Republicans more likely than not to win one if not both of those Georgia runoffs, McConnell might actually have the goods to offer in such a deal — but it’s only worth it if Manchin takes up the offer before January 5. After a GOP win on that date, McConnell won’t need Manchin to flip.
Let’s end with two reactions to Manchin’s declaration. First off, the NRSC’s senior adviser isn’t buying it, likely believing this is a Scenario One declaration:
Yes everyone should trust Joe Manchin, who voted against Judge Barrett, voted for impeachment, voted to block COVID relief several times, and voted against tax cuts. Nobody should trust Joe Manchin. https://t.co/Hktkr6E3PK — Matt Whitlock (@mattdizwhitlock) November 10, 2020
On the other hand, this is the treatment to which Manchin can look forward over the next couple of years within his own party:
Stop worrying about progressives, this might be the reason we don’t win the Senate races in Georgia. Good grief 🤦🏽♀ https://t.co/r45ibpRs7K — Ilhan Omar (@IlhanMN) November 10, 2020
Scenario Three looks like the most promising path, but if so, Manchin had better call McConnell soon. Operators are standing by.
Update: I have corrected Warnock’s first name to “Raphael.”


hotair--2020-11-10--Thom Tillis wins his Senate race as Democrat Cal Cunningham concedes

This race was called by Decision Desk HQ earlier today but it appears no one else called it : However , a couple hours ago , Democrat Cal Cunningham conceded , so now the AP is reporting a win for Tillis in what is now the most expensive Senate race in history : Democrat Cal Cunningham conceded to incumbent Republican U.S. Sen. Thom Tillis in North Carolina on Tuesday , saying “ the voters have spoken ” and it was clear Tillis had won… In North Carolina , Tillis led Cunningham by 94,500 votes , from among more than 5.4 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ absentee and provisional ballots are being counted .
Counties finalize their results on Friday .
“ I just called Sen. Tillis to congratulate him on winning reelection to a second term in the U.S. Senate and wished him and his family the best in their continued service in the months and years ahead , ” Cunningham said .
“ The voters have spoken and I respect their decision.
” Cunningham accepted defeat after outraising Tillis during what became the most expensive U.S. Senate race in history .
All together , the two campaigns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the general election , according to the Center for Responsive Politics .
Sen. Tillis called in to Fox News to talk about his win .
He said that Cunningham had conceded graciously and blamed the tight race on the vast spending involved .
He did not mention the elephant in the room which was the affair that was discovered between Cunningham and a public relations consultant in the final month of the race .
Here are some of the messages congratulating Tillis : With Tillis ’ victory , Republicans now hold 49 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outstanding seats are the two in Georgia which will be going to a special election and the race in Alaska .
Republican Dan Sullivan is expected to hold the Alaska seat .
He currently leads 62.3 % to 32.1 % with 61 % of the votes in .
Finally , it ’ s worth noting that Decision Desk has also called the state for President Trump but again it seems no one else has done so yet .

This race was called by Decision Desk HQ earlier today but it appears no one else called it:
Decision Desk HQ Projects @ThomTillis (R) Has Won Election To The Senate From The State Of NC Race Called At 11-10 1:41 PM EST All Results: https://t.co/mMSMwaoZxw — Decision Desk HQ (@DecisionDeskHQ) November 10, 2020
However, a couple hours ago, Democrat Cal Cunningham conceded, so now the AP is reporting a win for Tillis in what is now the most expensive Senate race in history:
Democrat Cal Cunningham conceded to incumbent Republican U.S. Sen. Thom Tillis in North Carolina on Tuesday, saying “the voters have spoken” and it was clear Tillis had won… In North Carolina, Tillis led Cunningham by 94,500 votes, from among more than 5.4 million votes counted so far. Additional absentee and provisional ballots are being counted. Counties finalize their results on Friday. “I just called Sen. Tillis to congratulate him on winning reelection to a second term in the U.S. Senate and wished him and his family the best in their continued service in the months and years ahead,” Cunningham said. “The voters have spoken and I respect their decision.” Cunningham accepted defeat after outraising Tillis during what became the most expensive U.S. Senate race in history. All together, the two campaigns and outside groups spent $282 million on the general election, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Here’s Cunningham’s full statement:
My statement on the results of this race: pic.twitter.com/dWo5gipxw8 — Cal Cunningham (@CalforNC) November 10, 2020
Sen. Tillis called in to Fox News to talk about his win. He said that Cunningham had conceded graciously and blamed the tight race on the vast spending involved. He did not mention the elephant in the room which was the affair that was discovered between Cunningham and a public relations consultant in the final month of the race.
Our race in North Carolina is over now, but we’ve got to keep working to defend the American dream by holding the US Senate. Join me in fighting to re-elect @KLoeffler and @Perduesenate in Georgia. pic.twitter.com/6EHbvvcOYk — Thom Tillis (@ThomTillis) November 10, 2020
Here are some of the messages congratulating Tillis:
Congratulations to @ThomTillis on a hard fought win! Thank you to the great people in my sister state of North Carolina! Now let’s go win Georgia! pic.twitter.com/onQ4o8RoX5 — Nikki Haley (@NikkiHaley) November 10, 2020
With Tillis’ victory, Republicans now hold 49 seats to 48 for Democrats. The outstanding seats are the two in Georgia which will be going to a special election and the race in Alaska. Republican Dan Sullivan is expected to hold the Alaska seat. He currently leads 62.3% to 32.1% with 61% of the votes in.
Finally, it’s worth noting that Decision Desk has also called the state for President Trump but again it seems no one else has done so yet.


hotair--2020-11-10--Felony charges for purchaser of rifle used in Kenosha shooting

Of all of the court cases currently underway in relation to the riots in Kenosha that followed the police shooting of Jacob Blake , this one looks like the most open-and-shut of the bunch .
As you will recall , the protests quickly evolved into riotous events .
At one point in the evening during the height of the unrest , fights broke out between part of the mob that was there to protest the police and others who were there offering to help clean up and keep local businesses safe .
It was during one of those conflicts that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , killing two of them .
But the case we ’ re dealing with today doesn ’ t directly involve Rittenhouse .
We later learned that Rittenhouse was only 17-years-old at the time , so how did he get his hands on a semiautomatic rifle ?
It turns out that it was purchased for him by a friend earlier in the year using Rittenhouse ’ s money .
That friend is 19-year old Dominick David Black .
And this week he was charged with two felony counts of intentionally selling a firearm to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kyle Rittenhouse shot and killed two people and seriously wounded another man in August during racial justice protests in Kenosha , Wis. , he used an assault rifle a friend had bought for him .
At 17 years old , Rittenhouse was too young to have legally bought the Smith & Wesson M & P-15 rifle himself .
Prosecutors have now charged that friend , 19-year-old Dominick David Black , with two felony counts of intentionally selling a gun to a minor .
Black made his first court appearance on Monday in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faces six charges , including intentional homicide , has not denied being the gunman in the fatal shootings ; his lawyers say he acted in self-defense .
The way the story of the original police shooting has spiraled off into a number of different avenues can make this a rough tale to wrap your head around .
The more we learned about Jacob Blake over time , the more it seemed like he was a rather awkward person to hold up as some sort of heroic resistance fighter who was unjustly shot by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plenty of film footage from the riots on the night that Rittenhouse had his own lethal encounter , the more it looked like he fired in self-defense .
But the one actor in this entire drama who doesn ’ t appear to have a leg to stand on is Dominick Black .
Both he and Rittenhouse obviously knew that the younger man was not of age to legally purchase a firearm .
He ’ s already admitted as much .
And yet he took his friend ’ s cash and traveled to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ purchased a rifle for him .
Unless the shop owner was totally incompetent or operating an illicit operation , Black would have had to have fraudulently filled out the application , avowing that he was purchasing the firearm for himself .
That ’ s the first crime he committed .
He then transferred the firearm to Rittenhouse in an illicit gray market sale .
That ’ s the second law that he broke .
Both of those incidents are serious felonies that can carry prison time .
Given the fact that Black has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get off with a lighter sentence if he ’ s lucky .
But does this mean that Black is somehow involved in or responsible for the shooting of the three men that Rittenhouse fired on ?
It certainly doesn ’ t seem so .
He claims that he bought Rittenhouse the rifle for the purpose of hunting .
Rittenhouse doesn ’ t deny this .
Also , Black was nowhere near the protests on the night in question , nor have we seen any paper trail ( electronic or otherwise ) suggesting that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or during the protests .
It seems as though Rittenhouse brought the illegally obtained firearm to the riots of his own volition , removing it from where he had stored it at his stepfather ’ s house to do so .
Since Black claims that he was led to believe the rifle would be used for hunting , some might claim that this is a valid exercise , but it ’ s really not .
Under Wisconsin law , children as young as the age of 12 are allowed to be in possession @ @ @ @ @ @ @ purpose of hunting , target shooting or related activities , but only while supervised by a responsible guardian .
That doesn ’ t mean they can own a firearm on their own or carry one anywhere unsupervised .
So that wouldn ’ t apply here .
Even if Dominick Black ’ s intentions were benign and he really only wanted to go hunting with his friend , he still broke the law .
And now he ’ s going to be held accountable .
Black has now been released on $ 2,500 bond @ @ @ @ @ @ @ November 19th .

Of all of the court cases currently underway in relation to the riots in Kenosha that followed the police shooting of Jacob Blake, this one looks like the most open-and-shut of the bunch. As you will recall, the protests quickly evolved into riotous events. At one point in the evening during the height of the unrest, fights broke out between part of the mob that was there to protest the police and others who were there offering to help clean up and keep local businesses safe. It was during one of those conflicts that Kyle Rittenhouse shot three of the protesters/rioters, killing two of them.
But the case we’re dealing with today doesn’t directly involve Rittenhouse. We later learned that Rittenhouse was only 17-years-old at the time, so how did he get his hands on a semiautomatic rifle? It turns out that it was purchased for him by a friend earlier in the year using Rittenhouse’s money. That friend is 19-year old Dominick David Black. And this week he was charged with two felony counts of intentionally selling a firearm to a minor. (WaPo)
When Kyle Rittenhouse shot and killed two people and seriously wounded another man in August during racial justice protests in Kenosha, Wis., he used an assault rifle a friend had bought for him. At 17 years old, Rittenhouse was too young to have legally bought the Smith & Wesson M&P-15 rifle himself. Prosecutors have now charged that friend, 19-year-old Dominick David Black, with two felony counts of intentionally selling a gun to a minor. Black made his first court appearance on Monday in the Kenosha County Circuit Court… Rittenhouse, who faces six charges, including intentional homicide, has not denied being the gunman in the fatal shootings; his lawyers say he acted in self-defense.
The way the story of the original police shooting has spiraled off into a number of different avenues can make this a rough tale to wrap your head around. The more we learned about Jacob Blake over time, the more it seemed like he was a rather awkward person to hold up as some sort of heroic resistance fighter who was unjustly shot by the cops. Similarly, after reviewing plenty of film footage from the riots on the night that Rittenhouse had his own lethal encounter, the more it looked like he fired in self-defense.
But the one actor in this entire drama who doesn’t appear to have a leg to stand on is Dominick Black. Both he and Rittenhouse obviously knew that the younger man was not of age to legally purchase a firearm. He’s already admitted as much. And yet he took his friend’s cash and traveled to a gun shop in Ladysmith, Wisconsin and purchased a rifle for him. Unless the shop owner was totally incompetent or operating an illicit operation, Black would have had to have fraudulently filled out the application, avowing that he was purchasing the firearm for himself.
That’s the first crime he committed. He then transferred the firearm to Rittenhouse in an illicit gray market sale. That’s the second law that he broke. Both of those incidents are serious felonies that can carry prison time. Given the fact that Black has no previous criminal record, he might get off with a lighter sentence if he’s lucky.
But does this mean that Black is somehow involved in or responsible for the shooting of the three men that Rittenhouse fired on? It certainly doesn’t seem so. He claims that he bought Rittenhouse the rifle for the purpose of hunting. Rittenhouse doesn’t deny this. Also, Black was nowhere near the protests on the night in question, nor have we seen any paper trail (electronic or otherwise) suggesting that the two were in contact immediately before or during the protests. It seems as though Rittenhouse brought the illegally obtained firearm to the riots of his own volition, removing it from where he had stored it at his stepfather’s house to do so.
Since Black claims that he was led to believe the rifle would be used for hunting, some might claim that this is a valid exercise, but it’s really not. Under Wisconsin law, children as young as the age of 12 are allowed to be in possession and control of a firearm for the purpose of hunting, target shooting or related activities, but only while supervised by a responsible guardian. That doesn’t mean they can own a firearm on their own or carry one anywhere unsupervised. So that wouldn’t apply here.
Even if Dominick Black’s intentions were benign and he really only wanted to go hunting with his friend, he still broke the law. And now he’s going to be held accountable. Black has now been released on $2,500 bond and is due back in court on November 19th.


hotair--2020-11-10--The calls for unity are falling on deaf ears, at least for now

As soon as the television networks began to call the election for Joe Biden on Saturday morning , spontaneous dance parties began in the streets of major cities .
Just like that , the coronavirus was not on anyone ’ s mind as joyful Biden voters smushed together like sardines in the street .
Social distancing and masks don ’ t matter if the right people are ignoring such guidelines .
And , just like clockwork , the Democrats began demanding unity from Trump voters for their guy , Joe .
We are now one week out from the general @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not settled .
Generally speaking , the only people declaring a win for President Trump are the media and Democrats , but I repeat myself .
Biden is going full steam ahead .
He declared victory and delivered an acceptance speech Saturday night to honking automobile horns and fireworks near his home in Delaware .
During his speech , he made a pitch for unity .
Joe Biden actually delivered the same message that Donald Trump delivered four years ago .
Both men promised to be the president of every American , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Sleepy Joe even continued in his nuanced plagiarism of Barack Obama ’ s 2004 speech to the Democrat convention as he said there are no red states or blue states but the United States .
When Obama delivered that speech , he was hailed as a talented speechmaker .
It was his high water mark , in my opinion , as I still remember that speech because of his strong delivery .
Biden , however , is almost 78 years old now and not the man now that he was in 2008 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a talented speechmaker and now his voice is weak and raspy .
He sounds garbled .
Biden ’ s speech Saturday night was meant to begin the process that requires the losing side of an election to begin to accept the election results .
That is never an overnight kind of thing .
It was particularly contentious in 2000 after George W. Bush defeated Al Gore .
Bush was burned in effigy by Democrat mobs , he was called Bushitler , and later anti-war protesters like Cindy Sheehan camped out near his Texas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strongly opposed by conservatives , in comparison , he was given a smooth transition .
Then when President Trump won in 2016 , we know what happened .
Our memories are not nearly as short as Democrats think .
Trump voters are a mix of populists , conservatives , Republicans , and moderate Democrats .
President Trump ’ s treatment by Democrats , the media , and public figures during the past four years have been nothing short of despicable .
Is it any wonder that calls for unity are falling on deaf @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the election hasn ’ t been settled .
It hasn ’ t been certified .
Trump supporters are not going to take the word of the media and accept what looks to be some really irregular actions happening in Pennsylvania .
In 2000 , only Florida was being contested .
This year , several states are still in question .
Some re-counts will likely be triggered by the final numbers .
The Biden team likes to say that they won an overwhelming victory .
That is simply not true .
Joe Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was quick to jump on Twitter to demand that Trump supporters who question the election vote counts be denied future employment and shunned from “ polite society ” .
Jen Rubin is even making a list and checking it twice .
The blowback was swift and brutal , as it should have been .
Americans don ’ t want to be lectured on civil behavior by such a Trump deranged person .
Lists .
What ’ re next , red stars pinned on the outside of jackets ?
She has been unhinged for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ published her every ugly word against Trump and his administration , as well as his family .
There are calls for just burning down the entire Republican Party .
This guy calls for Republicans to be treated as threats to democracy by the Biden administration .
You know , like the Obama – Biden administration treated Republicans .
CNN ’ s Jake Tapper tweeted an oddly veiled , it seemed , threat to those demanding transparency in counting votes .
Hey , what if a future employer saw your behavior right now ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ anything happened to future opportunities .
Geez .
Character , indeed .
Tapper has now tweeted out that it is too extreme to punish anyone who worked with the Trump administration , as some Democrats threaten to do .
Gosh .
How generous .
Trump supporters and administration officials are regularly runoff from public establishments and attacked in public , or at least they were before the coronavirus lockdowns .
So , if Democrats with platforms are trashing Republicans for not jumping on the Biden train fast enough for their taste , this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part of that hesitancy .
I ’ m not talking about political junkies and people who work in politics , I ’ m talking about regular people who go vote and then get on with their lives .
They are hearing the same stories as everyone else is hearing on their nightly news shows .
There have been some shady stories reported and all of that should be investigated .
It is reasonable for people to hold back and wait for some answers .
Joe Biden is not owed anyone ’ s support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earn it .
Look in the mirror , Democrats and Never Trumpers .
Where has all that civil behavior from your side been for the last four years ?

As soon as the television networks began to call the election for Joe Biden on Saturday morning, spontaneous dance parties began in the streets of major cities. Just like that, the coronavirus was not on anyone’s mind as joyful Biden voters smushed together like sardines in the street. Social distancing and masks don’t matter if the right people are ignoring such guidelines. And, just like clockwork, the Democrats began demanding unity from Trump voters for their guy, Joe.
We are now one week out from the general election on November 3. The election is not settled. Generally speaking, the only people declaring a win for President Trump are the media and Democrats, but I repeat myself. Biden is going full steam ahead. He declared victory and delivered an acceptance speech Saturday night to honking automobile horns and fireworks near his home in Delaware. During his speech, he made a pitch for unity. Joe Biden actually delivered the same message that Donald Trump delivered four years ago. Both men promised to be the president of every American, whether someone voted for him or not. Sleepy Joe even continued in his nuanced plagiarism of Barack Obama’s 2004 speech to the Democrat convention as he said there are no red states or blue states but the United States. When Obama delivered that speech, he was hailed as a talented speechmaker. It was his high water mark, in my opinion, as I still remember that speech because of his strong delivery. Biden, however, is almost 78 years old now and not the man now that he was in 2008. Biden has never been known as a talented speechmaker and now his voice is weak and raspy. He sounds garbled.
Biden’s speech Saturday night was meant to begin the process that requires the losing side of an election to begin to accept the election results. That is never an overnight kind of thing. It was particularly contentious in 2000 after George W. Bush defeated Al Gore. Bush was burned in effigy by Democrat mobs, he was called Bushitler, and later anti-war protesters like Cindy Sheehan camped out near his Texas ranch. Even though Barack Obama was strongly opposed by conservatives, in comparison, he was given a smooth transition. Then when President Trump won in 2016, we know what happened.
Our memories are not nearly as short as Democrats think. Trump voters are a mix of populists, conservatives, Republicans, and moderate Democrats. President Trump’s treatment by Democrats, the media, and public figures during the past four years have been nothing short of despicable. Is it any wonder that calls for unity are falling on deaf ears now? As I mentioned above, the election hasn’t been settled. It hasn’t been certified. Trump supporters are not going to take the word of the media and accept what looks to be some really irregular actions happening in Pennsylvania. In 2000, only Florida was being contested. This year, several states are still in question. Some re-counts will likely be triggered by the final numbers. The Biden team likes to say that they won an overwhelming victory. That is simply not true. Joe Biden has no mandate.
One Never Trumper was quick to jump on Twitter to demand that Trump supporters who question the election vote counts be denied future employment and shunned from “polite society”. Jen Rubin is even making a list and checking it twice.
Any R now promoting rejection of an election or calling to not to follow the will of voters or making baseless allegations of fraud should never serve in office, join a corporate board, find a faculty position or be accepted into "polite" society. We have a list. — Jennifer 'pro-reality' Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) November 6, 2020
The blowback was swift and brutal, as it should have been. Americans don’t want to be lectured on civil behavior by such a Trump deranged person. Lists. What’re next, red stars pinned on the outside of jackets? She has been unhinged for four years and the Washington Post has published her every ugly word against Trump and his administration, as well as his family.
There are calls for just burning down the entire Republican Party. This guy calls for Republicans to be treated as threats to democracy by the Biden administration. You know, like the Obama – Biden administration treated Republicans.
You can't heal or reform the GOP who are now an extremist party. They have to be broken, burned down and rebuilt. When Biden is in power treat them like the active threats to democracy they are. If those who committed crimes aren't punished then they will be more emboldened. — Wajahat Ali (@WajahatAli) November 10, 2020
CNN’s Jake Tapper tweeted an oddly veiled, it seemed, threat to those demanding transparency in counting votes. Hey, what if a future employer saw your behavior right now? It’d be a shame if anything happened to future opportunities. Geez. Character, indeed.
2/ I mean, I don’t expect the ride-or-die crew to listen to me, but … “So, it says here on your resume that you drove a sex offender to testify at Four Seasons Total Landscaping, north of the Tacony-Palmyra bridge…” — Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) November 9, 2020
Tapper has now tweeted out that it is too extreme to punish anyone who worked with the Trump administration, as some Democrats threaten to do. Gosh. How generous. Trump supporters and administration officials are regularly runoff from public establishments and attacked in public, or at least they were before the coronavirus lockdowns.
You
Are
No
Different "but how any future employers might see your character…," you just said yesterday — Heather Champion (@winningatmylife) November 10, 2020
So, if Democrats with platforms are trashing Republicans for not jumping on the Biden train fast enough for their taste, this kind of ugly behavior is a large part of that hesitancy. I’m not talking about political junkies and people who work in politics, I’m talking about regular people who go vote and then get on with their lives. They are hearing the same stories as everyone else is hearing on their nightly news shows. There have been some shady stories reported and all of that should be investigated. It is reasonable for people to hold back and wait for some answers. Joe Biden is not owed anyone’s support. He and his people have to earn it.
Look in the mirror, Democrats and Never Trumpers. Where has all that civil behavior from your side been for the last four years?


hotair--2020-11-10--Republicans flip another House seat (how many will the GOP gain?)

Yesterday I wrote about the trend in California which has Democrats worried and upset .
There are three House seats which Dems flipped in 2018 that now appear likely to flip back to the GOP this cycle .
In fact , one of those races was finally called today .
I ’ m particularly pleased by this result because it means my own representative to Congress is once again a Republican : In a major win for the GOP , U.S. Rep. Harley Rouda conceded to his Republican opponent , Michelle Steel , in the race for California ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hard-fought contests in areas that until recently were considered conservative strongholds .
The election win hands back to Republicans one of several seats lost in 2018 when Democrats made big gains in Orange County and other red-leaning areas… “ I was proud to be the first Democrat ever to represent California ’ s 48th Congressional District , ” Rouda said in a statement .
“ While one campaign ends today , another is just beginning .
I look forward to having voters compare my opponent ’ s two years in Congress with my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I guess that means Rouda is planning to run for the seat again in two years .
Back in 2018 , Rouda ’ s victory was helped by a big donation of $ 4 million from Michael Bloomberg .
I guess we ’ ll find out in 2022 if Bloomberg still has more to spend on him .
Meanwhile , here ’ s the reaction from Michelle Steel : Steel was born in South Korea but came to the U.S. as a child .
She has a business degree from Pepperdine and an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ becomes one of only two Korean-American women to serve in Congress .
In a video thanking supporters published today she said that “ conservative ideas transcend gender , race , religion or nationality.
” There ’ s an idea that should give the Democratic party chills .
Steel brings the GOP net gain in the House to +6 .
Meanwhile , there are still about 16 seats according to the NY Times ( 19 seats according to Fox News ) that have yet to be called .
You would think that calling these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t be hard but some of them are really close , separated by a couple hundred votes .
Others are separated by thousands of votes but the outstanding vote may be heavily in favor of one party .
So with the caveat that these are somewhat educated guesses but still just guesses , here ’ s how I think this will eventually shake out .
The GOP will end up with around 210 seats to Democrats 225 , though if the GOP wins every race it is currently leading it would be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ looks like the GOP will hold on in CA-21 and CA-39 , though I think Dems will probably flip CA-25 .
That would bring the net gain to +7 .
Other potential pickups for the GOP are NY-11 and NY-22 , though there are still a lot of votes to be counted .
There are two very tight races in Iowa-2 and Utah-4 .
Assuming the GOP gets one of those and both the NY seats that would bring the gain to +10 .
There ’ s also one long shot race in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrat Thomas Suozzi .
This was a race Democrats were expected to win easily so the fact that Santos is still up by a few thousand votes is pretty remarkable .
If elected it would be another pickup for the GOP and Santos would become the first openly gay Republican in congress .
Correction : Actually , that ’ s not right .
Santos would be the first openly gay Republican from New York but Rep. Steve Gunderson was outed as gay in 1994 and Rep. Jim Kolbe came out as gay in @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Yesterday I wrote about the trend in California which has Democrats worried and upset. There are three House seats which Dems flipped in 2018 that now appear likely to flip back to the GOP this cycle. In fact, one of those races was finally called today. I’m particularly pleased by this result because it means my own representative to Congress is once again a Republican:
In a major win for the GOP, U.S. Rep. Harley Rouda conceded to his Republican opponent, Michelle Steel, in the race for California’s 48th Congressional District, one of several hard-fought contests in areas that until recently were considered conservative strongholds. The election win hands back to Republicans one of several seats lost in 2018 when Democrats made big gains in Orange County and other red-leaning areas… “I was proud to be the first Democrat ever to represent California’s 48th Congressional District,” Rouda said in a statement. “While one campaign ends today, another is just beginning. I look forward to having voters compare my opponent’s two years in Congress with my accomplishments on Nov. 8, 2022.”
I guess that means Rouda is planning to run for the seat again in two years. Back in 2018, Rouda’s victory was helped by a big donation of $4 million from Michael Bloomberg. I guess we’ll find out in 2022 if Bloomberg still has more to spend on him. Meanwhile, here’s the reaction from Michelle Steel:
This victory has been hard-fought and hard-won, and I could not be more humbled to have your support nor more honored to serve our community in Congress. Now, let's get to work. #CA48 pic.twitter.com/5aVvsvABiw — Michelle Steel (@MichelleSteelCA) November 10, 2020
Steel was born in South Korea but came to the U.S. as a child. She has a business degree from Pepperdine and an MBA from USC. Today, she becomes one of only two Korean-American women to serve in Congress.
In a video thanking supporters published today she said that “conservative ideas transcend gender, race, religion or nationality.” There’s an idea that should give the Democratic party chills.
Thank you, #CA48! Time to get to work pic.twitter.com/VL0CbolORz — Michelle Steel (@MichelleSteelCA) November 10, 2020
Steel brings the GOP net gain in the House to +6.
Meanwhile, there are still about 16 seats according to the NY Times (19 seats according to Fox News) that have yet to be called. You would think that calling these races a week after the election wouldn’t be hard but some of them are really close, separated by a couple hundred votes. Others are separated by thousands of votes but the outstanding vote may be heavily in favor of one party. So with the caveat that these are somewhat educated guesses but still just guesses, here’s how I think this will eventually shake out.
The GOP will end up with around 210 seats to Democrats 225, though if the GOP wins every race it is currently leading it would be 212 to 223. Specifically, it looks like the GOP will hold on in CA-21 and CA-39, though I think Dems will probably flip CA-25. That would bring the net gain to +7. Other potential pickups for the GOP are NY-11 and NY-22, though there are still a lot of votes to be counted. There are two very tight races in Iowa-2 and Utah-4. Assuming the GOP gets one of those and both the NY seats that would bring the gain to +10.
There’s also one long shot race in NY-3 where Republican George Santos is beating Democrat Thomas Suozzi. This was a race Democrats were expected to win easily so the fact that Santos is still up by a few thousand votes is pretty remarkable. If elected it would be another pickup for the GOP and Santos would become the first openly gay Republican in congress.
Could we have made history with the 1st openly gay Republican elected to Congress? George Santos is currently up by 4,185 in NY-03. There are 92k provisional ballots left to be reviewed/counted.
George needs money to legally ensure this count is fair. Please help @Santos4Congress — Richard Grenell (@RichardGrenell) November 9, 2020
Correction: Actually, that’s not right. Santos would be the first openly gay Republican from New York but Rep. Steve Gunderson was outed as gay in 1994 and Rep. Jim Kolbe came out as gay in 1996. Sorry for the error.


hotair--2020-11-10--Azar: Enough COVID-19 vaccines will be available by April for "all Americans"

Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said today that every American will be able to receive a COVID-19 vaccine by April 2021 .
The first Americans will be able to receive a vaccine by the end of this month .
Secretary Azar predicts that by the end of January 2021 , there will be enough vaccines available for nursing home residents , health care workers , and first responders .
This is truly good news .
The Pfizer vaccine , the vaccine that made news yesterday because it has been proven to be 90 % effective in clinical trials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about .
Up to 10 million doses could be distributed in the second quarter of 2021 .
During an interview on NBC ’ s TODAY show , Azar said that there will be “ enough for all Americans by the end of March to early April to have general vaccination programs.
” Pfizer is expected to produce 20 million doses a month .
Also announced Monday was that the Food and Drug Administration ( FDA ) has granted an emergency use authorization for Eli Lilly ’ s Covid-19 monoclonal antibody treatment , called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the therapy is meant for adults and children over age 12 with mild to moderate illness but who have high risks of getting much worse and needing hospitalization .
That includes people with underlying health conditions , such as diabetes , sickle cell disease , chronic kidney disease or obesity , or anyone over age 65 .
The move vastly expands doctors ’ ability to use Eli Lilly ’ s monoclonal antibody treatment .
Previously , physicians were limited to trying the drug in clinical trials .
Eli Lilly applied for emergency use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said research suggested that the therapy could help keep Covid-19 patients from progressing to where they would need to be hospitalized .
The action “ provides health care professionals on the frontline of this pandemic with another potential tool in treating Covid-19 patients , ” Dr. Patrizia Cavazzoni , acting director of the FDA ’ s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research , said in a statement .
Bamlanivimab is similar to a drug given to President Trump when he was hospitalized for COVID-19 .
The FDA is clarifying with this announcement that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ patients who are in the hospital or who are having trouble breathing .
Patients may do worse if they are in need of high-flow oxygen or mechanical ventilation .
The FDA said the decision was based on interim analysis from a phase 2 clinical trial in 465 adults with mild to moderate Covid-19 symptoms .
The research suggested that the drug was no better than a placebo in helping patients clear the virus from their bodies ; however , it did reduce the likelihood that patients would later need to be hospitalized .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a single dose .
In safety studies of about 800 people , the drug led to a severe allergic reaction in one person who needed an emergency medication called epinephrine to stop the reaction .
Remember when President Trump would say that a vaccine was on target to become available by the end of the year , maybe sooner ?
The Democrats and the media , who have enjoyed politicizing the coronavirus in order to blame Trump for it in an election year , mocked him and said he was lying about that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Even Dr. Fauci , a member of the White House coronavirus taskforce who often disagrees publicly with President Trump ’ s statements about the coronavirus pandemic , agreed on the coming availability of a vaccine .
Some days he is more agreeable than others with the president .
Fauci says there will likely be another vaccine available by the end of the year .
Fauci , the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , added that there will likely be another vaccine similar to the one developed by Pfizer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by fellow drug company Moderna ( MRNA ) soon .
“ It ’ s likely that we are going to have more than one vaccine that is effective , ” he said .
“ There is another company , Moderna , who has a vaccine very similar , if not identical to this , their results will be coming out soon , ” he added .
Let ’ s just hope that the Biden administration doesn ’ t put Dr. Zeke Emanuel , an Oncologist , in charge of the vaccine distribution programs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the coronavirus .
He is famously known for saying that people have little reason to live past the age of 75 years old .
That ’ s bad news for Sleepy Joe .
Biden is 77 now , soon to be 78 .

Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said today that every American will be able to receive a COVID-19 vaccine by April 2021. The first Americans will be able to receive a vaccine by the end of this month. Secretary Azar predicts that by the end of January 2021, there will be enough vaccines available for nursing home residents, health care workers, and first responders.
This is truly good news. The Pfizer vaccine, the vaccine that made news yesterday because it has been proven to be 90% effective in clinical trials, is the vaccine Azar is talking about. Up to 10 million doses could be distributed in the second quarter of 2021. During an interview on NBC’s TODAY show, Azar said that there will be “enough for all Americans by the end of March to early April to have general vaccination programs.” Pfizer is expected to produce 20 million doses a month.
Also announced Monday was that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted an emergency use authorization for Eli Lilly’s Covid-19 monoclonal antibody treatment, called bamlanivimab.
The FDA action specifies that the therapy is meant for adults and children over age 12 with mild to moderate illness but who have high risks of getting much worse and needing hospitalization. That includes people with underlying health conditions, such as diabetes, sickle cell disease, chronic kidney disease or obesity, or anyone over age 65. The move vastly expands doctors’ ability to use Eli Lilly’s monoclonal antibody treatment. Previously, physicians were limited to trying the drug in clinical trials. Eli Lilly applied for emergency use authorization in early October after the company said research suggested that the therapy could help keep Covid-19 patients from progressing to where they would need to be hospitalized. The action “provides health care professionals on the frontline of this pandemic with another potential tool in treating Covid-19 patients,” Dr. Patrizia Cavazzoni, acting director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said in a statement.
Bamlanivimab is similar to a drug given to President Trump when he was hospitalized for COVID-19. The FDA is clarifying with this announcement that the emergency use authorization does not include patients who are in the hospital or who are having trouble breathing. Patients may do worse if they are in need of high-flow oxygen or mechanical ventilation.
The FDA said the decision was based on interim analysis from a phase 2 clinical trial in 465 adults with mild to moderate Covid-19 symptoms. The research suggested that the drug was no better than a placebo in helping patients clear the virus from their bodies; however, it did reduce the likelihood that patients would later need to be hospitalized. Bamlanivimab is given through an IV in a single dose. In safety studies of about 800 people, the drug led to a severe allergic reaction in one person who needed an emergency medication called epinephrine to stop the reaction.
Remember when President Trump would say that a vaccine was on target to become available by the end of the year, maybe sooner? The Democrats and the media, who have enjoyed politicizing the coronavirus in order to blame Trump for it in an election year, mocked him and said he was lying about that. Looks like he was right. Even Dr. Fauci, a member of the White House coronavirus taskforce who often disagrees publicly with President Trump’s statements about the coronavirus pandemic, agreed on the coming availability of a vaccine. Some days he is more agreeable than others with the president. Fauci says there will likely be another vaccine available by the end of the year.
Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, added that there will likely be another vaccine similar to the one developed by Pfizer (PFE)that could be distributed by fellow drug company Moderna (MRNA)soon. “It’s likely that we are going to have more than one vaccine that is effective,” he said. “There is another company, Moderna, who has a vaccine very similar, if not identical to this, their results will be coming out soon,” he added.
Let’s just hope that the Biden administration doesn’t put Dr. Zeke Emanuel, an Oncologist, in charge of the vaccine distribution programs. Emanuel has been advising Team Biden on the coronavirus. He is famously known for saying that people have little reason to live past the age of 75 years old. That’s bad news for Sleepy Joe. Biden is 77 now, soon to be 78.


hotair--2020-11-10--Today's hot topics on #TEMS: Election news, SCOTUS' Obamacare views, transition clues, #FoxExit blue

Today's hot topics on #TEMS: Election news, SCOTUS' Obamacare views, transition clues, #FoxExit blues, 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 : • Andrew Malcolm joins us for Tuesdays with Andrew !
The Prince of Twitter and I will discuss all of the hot political stories of the day .
What ’ s the latest from last week ’ s national elections , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has the media begun caring about immediate transitions ?
Is polling dead , or is it just lurking ?
• Jeff Dunetz joins us to discuss # FoxExit , the big win for Republicans at the state level , and the 82nd anniversary of Kristallnacht .
Don ’ t miss it !
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 !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ momentum going ?
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:
Andrew Malcolm joins us for Tuesdays with Andrew! The Prince of Twitter and I will discuss all of the hot political stories of the day. What’s the latest from last week’s national elections, and what are the next steps? Why has the media begun caring about immediate transitions? Is polling dead, or is it just lurking?
Jeff Dunetz joins us to discuss #FoxExit, the big win for Republicans at the state level, and the 82nd anniversary of Kristallnacht. Don’t miss it!
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 the momentum going? Find out in GOING RED, published in April from Crown Forum!


hotair--2020-11-10--NY Times' Nate Cohn: 'national polls were even worse than they were four years ago'

I ’ ve been waiting for this for a few days .
Nate Cohn is the NY Times ’ polling expert , sort of their alternative to Nate Silver .
Today Cohn has published his first take of what went wrong with polling in 2020 .
The first big point worth highlighting is that Cohn believes there definitely was a big problem this year , i.e .
the polls were pretty far off nationally and in several swing states .
In fact , he suggests it may have been worse than 2016 : It ’ s not too early to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of President Trump ’ s support was very similar to the polling misfire of four years ago , and might have exceeded it… The national polls were even worse than they were four years ago , when the industry ’ s most highly respected and rigorous survey houses generally found Hillary Clinton leading by four points or less — close to her 2.1-point popular-vote victory .
This year , Mr. Biden is on track to win the national vote by around five percentage points ; no major national live-interview telephone survey showed him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over the final month of the race .
But the big question is why ?
Why were polls as bad or worse this time out even after pollsters made efforts to correct for the mistakes made in 2016 .
In answer to this question , Cohn offers five possible explanations for what went wrong .
I ’ m going to take these out of order from the way Cohn presents them : The idea here isn ’ t that Trump voters are lying to pollsters but that maybe pollsters just aren ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pandemic made Democrats more responsive to pollsters Cohn presents this point later but I think it ’ s sort of related to the point above .
Maybe Trump voters were harder for pollsters to reach and meanwhile , Democrats started responding much more often once the pandemic set in : The resistance also made Dems more likely to respond to pollsters This jibes with my own idea about how the polls shaped the election .
The idea here is that as the number of voters increases , polls of likely voters become less @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more accurate .
In this case , polls of registered voters showed a tighter race than the LV polls we usually pay attention to .
A point many have remarked upon which seems to have had an impact in Florida and in Texas especially .
Trump just did better with minority voters than anyone expected .
There were some late surveys that suggested this was happening and that made Democrats very nervous but pollsters seem to have missed this possibility for most of the race .
To wrap this up I just want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wasn ’ t merely bad this year it was bad in ways that shaped the race it was supposedly reflecting .
I think you can at least argue that the first three points above boil down to the idea that Democrats saw pollsters as friends while Republicans saw them as enemies .
Dems were eager to talk and Republicans were the opposite .
And instead of correcting for this , the pollsters and the media kept amplifying it .
Democrats were predicting a blue wave and in fact what we had was a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ holding the Senate ( at least probably ) and gaining as many as 10 seats in the House .
Yesterday Allahpundit argued the opposite point , i.e .
polls were as likely to make Democrats complacent as they were to make Republicans discouraged .
He pointed to this Huff Post piece which suggested Democrats may have lost the Senate in part because the GOP and independents at some point stopped being willing to cross party lines .
Maybe it ’ s true that the GOP held the Senate , at least in part @ @ @ @ @ @ @ less persuadable .
But if so , the paragraph suggests the turning point was the assumption that Trump was going to lose .
Where did this come from ?
From the polls of course .
I think this suggests that as Republicans became convinced Trump was going to lose ( polls showed Biden winning nationally by +10 ) they decided to at least hold the Senate .
It ’ s hard to know what would have happened if polls hadn ’ t been so wrong .
Maybe the GOP wouldn ’ t have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maybe they wouldn ’ t have become discouraged about Trump and they ’ d have held the White House .
Elections happen at the margins and in this case several states were decided by a few thousand votes .
Ultimately it ’ s a counterfactual and we can ’ t ever really know how it might have gone .
But I think there ’ s at least some evidence the GOP was beaten down a bit by the polls and not much indication Democrats were complacent .

I’ve been waiting for this for a few days. Nate Cohn is the NY Times’ polling expert, sort of their alternative to Nate Silver. Today Cohn has published his first take of what went wrong with polling in 2020.
The first big point worth highlighting is that Cohn believes there definitely was a big problem this year, i.e. the polls were pretty far off nationally and in several swing states. In fact, he suggests it may have been worse than 2016:
It’s not too early to say that the polls’ systematic understatement of President Trump’s support was very similar to the polling misfire of four years ago, and might have exceeded it… The national polls were even worse than they were four years ago, when the industry’s most highly respected and rigorous survey houses generally found Hillary Clinton leading by four points or less — close to her 2.1-point popular-vote victory. This year, Mr. Biden is on track to win the national vote by around five percentage points; no major national live-interview telephone survey showed him leading by less than eight percentage points over the final month of the race.
But the big question is why? Why were polls as bad or worse this time out even after pollsters made efforts to correct for the mistakes made in 2016. In answer to this question, Cohn offers five possible explanations for what went wrong. I’m going to take these out of order from the way Cohn presents them:
A version of the shy Trump voter theory
The idea here isn’t that Trump voters are lying to pollsters but that maybe pollsters just aren’t reaching Trump’s voters:
“We now have to take seriously some version of the Shy Trump hypothesis,” said Patrick Ruffini, a Republican pollster for Echelon Insights. It would be a “problem of the polls simply not reaching large elements of the Trump coalition, which is causing them to underestimate Republicans across the board when he’s on the ballot.”
The Pandemic made Democrats more responsive to pollsters
Cohn presents this point later but I think it’s sort of related to the point above. Maybe Trump voters were harder for pollsters to reach and meanwhile, Democrats started responding much more often once the pandemic set in:
“The basic story is that after lockdown, Democrats just started taking surveys, because they were locked at home and didn’t have anything else to do,” said David Shor, a Democratic pollster who worked for the Obama campaign in 2012. “Nearly all of the national polling error can be explained by the post-Covid jump in response rates among Dems,” he said.
The resistance also made Dems more likely to respond to pollsters
Another related point:
Are the “MSNBC moms” now excited to take a poll while they put Rachel Maddow on mute in the background? Like most of the other theories presented here, there’s no hard evidence for it — but it does fit with some well-established facts about propensity to respond to surveys.
This jibes with my own idea about how the polls shaped the election.
Turnout made polls of likely voters misleading
The idea here is that as the number of voters increases, polls of likely voters become less accurate and polls of registered voters become more accurate. In this case, polls of registered voters showed a tighter race than the LV polls we usually pay attention to.
The Hispanic vote
A point many have remarked upon which seems to have had an impact in Florida and in Texas especially. Trump just did better with minority voters than anyone expected. There were some late surveys that suggested this was happening and that made Democrats very nervous but pollsters seem to have missed this possibility for most of the race.
To wrap this up I just want to return to my contention that polling wasn’t merely bad this year it was bad in ways that shaped the race it was supposedly reflecting. I think you can at least argue that the first three points above boil down to the idea that Democrats saw pollsters as friends while Republicans saw them as enemies. Dems were eager to talk and Republicans were the opposite. And instead of correcting for this, the pollsters and the media kept amplifying it. Democrats were predicting a blue wave and in fact what we had was a razor thin race for President, Republicans holding the Senate (at least probably) and gaining as many as 10 seats in the House.
Yesterday Allahpundit argued the opposite point, i.e. polls were as likely to make Democrats complacent as they were to make Republicans discouraged. He pointed to this Huff Post piece which suggested Democrats may have lost the Senate in part because the GOP and independents at some point stopped being willing to cross party lines.
GOP internal polling showed that as voters across the board became more aware Biden was likely to win the presidency in the final weeks, it became harder for Democratic candidates to win over the Republicans and conservative-leaning independents they needed to win. The chance to compete slipped away from Democrats in Kansas and Montana. Greenfield’s advantage over Ernst in Iowa ― one poll showed the Democrat winning 10% of Trump voters ― evaporated.
Maybe it’s true that the GOP held the Senate, at least in part, because GOP and independent voters became less persuadable. But if so, the paragraph suggests the turning point was the assumption that Trump was going to lose. Where did this come from? From the polls of course.
I think this suggests that as Republicans became convinced Trump was going to lose (polls showed Biden winning nationally by +10) they decided to at least hold the Senate.
It’s hard to know what would have happened if polls hadn’t been so wrong. Maybe the GOP wouldn’t have held the Senate. Then again, maybe they wouldn’t have become discouraged about Trump and they’d have held the White House.
Elections happen at the margins and in this case several states were decided by a few thousand votes. Ultimately it’s a counterfactual and we can’t ever really know how it might have gone. But I think there’s at least some evidence the GOP was beaten down a bit by the polls and not much indication Democrats were complacent.


hotair--2020-11-10--Pompeo: We'll have a smooth transition ... to "a second Trump administration"

It ’ s a joke … although perhaps not in the best of taste .
Mike Pompeo told the State Department press corps that there will be a successful transition no matter who wins , but first we have to “ get it right ” in counting “ all of the votes.
” When the dust settles from that , the US will be perfectly capable of conducting a smooth transition to the next administration , Pompeo argued .
In the immortal words of Matthew McConaughey in Dazed & Confused , it ’ d be a lot cooler if it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Pompeo implicitly suggested .
Kidding !
He kids , he kids… It ’ s not clear why The Hill tagged this as # BREAKING .
Their write-up suggests that this was a joke , and the embedded tweet they used from a BBC correspondent made it pretty clear too : “ There will be a smooth transition to a second Trump administration , ” Pompeo replied with a smile .
“ We ’ re ready , ” Pompeo continued .
“ The world is watching what ’ s taking place .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ votes .
When the process is complete , there ’ ll be electors selected .
There ’ s a process .
The Constitution lays it out pretty clearly .
The world should have every confidence that the transition necessary to make sure that the State Department is functional today … and successful with a president who ’ s in office on Jan. 20 , a minute after noon , will also be successful.
” Pompeo has a pretty good point about transitions and the sudden emphasis on the existential need for the entire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ didn ’ t seem all that concerned with it four years ago , when Hillary Clinton began a four-year arc of claiming that she got cheated out of her birthright , nor of three years of Russiagate dominating the news .
As we discovered over the last year or so , the Obama administration spent the transition time doing a Logan Act probe of , and setting a perjury trap for , Donald Trump ’ s incoming national security adviser .
Nor did it turn out to be much of a problem twenty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seemed unconcerned over Al Gore ’ s legal challenges to the election outcome in Florida .
Still , that ’ s pretty much where the comparison ends .
Trump didn ’ t lose in one state where the gap was measured in the hundreds and which could have turned the Electoral College ; he lost in several states by margins of tens of thousands , roughly the same way he won in 2016 .
To get to a “ second Trump administration , ” his boss will have to flip more than one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ each one of them a million-to-one long shot to succeed .
Jokes about a second Trump term seem overly optimistic at best , and a demonstration of denial at worst .
It ’ s good to point out that we have a legal process for contesting the election that still allows for successful transitions to a succeeding administration .
Maybe Pompeo can just stick to that point in the future , and save the jokes for his post-State career .

It’s a joke … although perhaps not in the best of taste. Mike Pompeo told the State Department press corps that there will be a successful transition no matter who wins, but first we have to “get it right” in counting “all of the votes.” When the dust settles from that, the US will be perfectly capable of conducting a smooth transition to the next administration, Pompeo argued.
In the immortal words of Matthew McConaughey in Dazed & Confused, it’d be a lot cooler if it was “a second Trump administration,” Pompeo implicitly suggested. Kidding! He kids, he kids…
#BREAKING: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo says, "There will be a smooth transition to a second Trump administration." pic.twitter.com/7PPAwHFNCX — The Hill (@thehill) November 10, 2020
It’s not clear why The Hill tagged this as #BREAKING. Their write-up suggests that this was a joke, and the embedded tweet they used from a BBC correspondent made it pretty clear too:
“There will be a smooth transition to a second Trump administration,” Pompeo replied with a smile. “We’re ready,” Pompeo continued. “The world is watching what’s taking place. We’re gonna count all the votes. When the process is complete, there’ll be electors selected. There’s a process. The Constitution lays it out pretty clearly. The world should have every confidence that the transition necessary to make sure that the State Department is functional today … and successful with a president who’s in office on Jan. 20, a minute after noon, will also be successful.”
Pompeo has a pretty good point about transitions and the sudden emphasis on the existential need for the entire ten weeks of it. The media didn’t seem all that concerned with it four years ago, when Hillary Clinton began a four-year arc of claiming that she got cheated out of her birthright, nor of three years of Russiagate dominating the news. As we discovered over the last year or so, the Obama administration spent the transition time doing a Logan Act probe of, and setting a perjury trap for, Donald Trump’s incoming national security adviser. Nor did it turn out to be much of a problem twenty years ago, when the same media seemed unconcerned over Al Gore’s legal challenges to the election outcome in Florida.
Still, that’s pretty much where the comparison ends. Trump didn’t lose in one state where the gap was measured in the hundreds and which could have turned the Electoral College; he lost in several states by margins of tens of thousands, roughly the same way he won in 2016. To get to a “second Trump administration,” his boss will have to flip more than one of those states in circumstances which makes each one of them a million-to-one long shot to succeed. Jokes about a second Trump term seem overly optimistic at best, and a demonstration of denial at worst.
It’s good to point out that we have a legal process for contesting the election that still allows for successful transitions to a succeeding administration. Maybe Pompeo can just stick to that point in the future, and save the jokes for his post-State career.


hotair--2020-11-10--Gang-infested Baltimore works on fixing... the police

In Maryland , Baltimore County became the first government entity in the state to enact a police reform bill this year .
Given the national appetite for such things among activists from the Black Lives Matter movement and its supporters , this probably won ’ t come as much of a surprise .
The final details of the bill were not , however quite as bad as the original framework that had been under discussion last year .
In fact , some of the provisions strike me as fairly reasonable compromises .
Still , as soon as it was announced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wasn ’ t enough and had taken too long to be put in place .
( Baltimore Sun ) The reform bill pushed by County Executive Johnny Olszewski Jr. and approved by the County Council does not require officers to spend more time walking a beat and meeting with residents .
But , among other changes , it compels officers to intervene if they witness excessive use of force .
And it is designed to curtail the use of chokeholds by county officers , allowing that use of force only in defense against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s needed in order to restore what we ’ re losing as far as our community trust , ” said Kelly Fenner , the police department ’ s chief diversity and inclusion officer .
Taking away chokeholds as a means of non-lethal intervention isn ’ t a great idea , but the new rules still allow for the use of that technique if the officer ’ s life or physical safety is in danger .
As I said , perhaps imperfect , but it ’ s at least a compromise .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ have mandated that officers spend a percentage of their time literally “ walking the beat ” so they could be more in touch with the people in the neighborhoods .
After it was pointed out that some of those neighborhoods are simply not safe for anyone to walk around in , particularly if you ’ re wearing a police uniform , that portion of the plan was dropped .
In another compromise , officers will take part in what amount to community town halls where residents can ask questions and air their concerns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to mandate that officers must live in the communities they patrol .
Instead , they will be “ encouraged ” to do so , but they can ’ t realistically force them to do that .
Still , that wasn ’ t enough for the local NAACP chapter .
“ The proof is in the pudding , ” said Tony Fugett , president of the Baltimore County branch of the NAACP .
“ You ’ ve checked all the boxes .
Now the work has to begin , and are you really in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Fugett said the NAACP has been “ screaming at the top of our lungs ” about the police department ’ s issues internally and with traffic stop disparities , but he ’ s glad the county is finally taking steps to address it .
Another activist was upset that civilians weren ’ t put in charge of the police disciplinary board .
Given the atmosphere on the streets of the city , you can imagine what types of findings they would have been handing down .
Instead , two of the twelve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to civilian members of the community while the rest are comprised of law enforcement professionals .
I suppose not everyone was going to be satisfied no matter what they did .
What ’ s still not being mentioned throughout this debate is what the city plans to do about its gang violence problem .
Baltimore still has just about the highest per capita murder rate in the country .
Reducing the total number of cops as well as scaling back the gang control task force isn ’ t getting them any closer to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be clear , the city of Baltimore is not safe for its residents .
That ’ s the first job of any elected government and Charm City is failing at the task miserably .
Finding new and more creative ways to blame the cops for their problems isn ’ t moving the ball down the field .

In Maryland, Baltimore County became the first government entity in the state to enact a police reform bill this year. Given the national appetite for such things among activists from the Black Lives Matter movement and its supporters, this probably won’t come as much of a surprise. The final details of the bill were not, however quite as bad as the original framework that had been under discussion last year. In fact, some of the provisions strike me as fairly reasonable compromises. Still, as soon as it was announced, people quickly began complaining that it wasn’t enough and had taken too long to be put in place. (Baltimore Sun)
The reform bill pushed by County Executive Johnny Olszewski Jr. and approved by the County Council does not require officers to spend more time walking a beat and meeting with residents. But, among other changes, it compels officers to intervene if they witness excessive use of force. And it is designed to curtail the use of chokeholds by county officers, allowing that use of force only in defense against death or serious bodily injury. “It’s needed in order to restore what we’re losing as far as our community trust,” said Kelly Fenner, the police department’s chief diversity and inclusion officer.
Taking away chokeholds as a means of non-lethal intervention isn’t a great idea, but the new rules still allow for the use of that technique if the officer’s life or physical safety is in danger. As I said, perhaps imperfect, but it’s at least a compromise. One of the originally planned provisions would have mandated that officers spend a percentage of their time literally “walking the beat” so they could be more in touch with the people in the neighborhoods. After it was pointed out that some of those neighborhoods are simply not safe for anyone to walk around in, particularly if you’re wearing a police uniform, that portion of the plan was dropped. In another compromise, officers will take part in what amount to community town halls where residents can ask questions and air their concerns.
The county also abandoned a plan to mandate that officers must live in the communities they patrol. Instead, they will be “encouraged” to do so, but they can’t realistically force them to do that. Still, that wasn’t enough for the local NAACP chapter.
“The proof is in the pudding,” said Tony Fugett, president of the Baltimore County branch of the NAACP. “You’ve checked all the boxes. Now the work has to begin, and are you really in earnest going to do the work?” Fugett said the NAACP has been “screaming at the top of our lungs” about the police department’s issues internally and with traffic stop disparities, but he’s glad the county is finally taking steps to address it.
Another activist was upset that civilians weren’t put in charge of the police disciplinary board. Given the atmosphere on the streets of the city, you can imagine what types of findings they would have been handing down. Instead, two of the twelve seats on the board are being given to civilian members of the community while the rest are comprised of law enforcement professionals. I suppose not everyone was going to be satisfied no matter what they did.
What’s still not being mentioned throughout this debate is what the city plans to do about its gang violence problem. Baltimore still has just about the highest per capita murder rate in the country. Reducing the total number of cops as well as scaling back the gang control task force isn’t getting them any closer to making the city safe. And to be clear, the city of Baltimore is not safe for its residents. That’s the first job of any elected government and Charm City is failing at the task miserably. Finding new and more creative ways to blame the cops for their problems isn’t moving the ball down the field.