vox--2020-02-14--Furious Oracle employees are demanding that Larry Ellison cancel his Trump fundraiser

Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison ’ s decision to host a fundraiser for Donald Trump next week has awoken the usually passive workforce at his company , angering some employees who are going public with their disgust over Ellison ’ s actions .
Their reaction reflects how toxic Trump remains in Silicon Valley — and the ire that top tech executives can draw when they align themselves with the president .
And it ’ s revealing that it ’ s happening at Oracle , which employees say has a conservative culture that has not been touched by the current bouts of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ It signals what I and many others have always feared , ” one current Oracle employee told Recode .
“ Culturally , Oracle is the type of place where you ’ ll work with many lovely people who you share common ideals with , but those ideals have to be left at the door in service of the company.
” Recode spoke with one former and five current employees who , in sum , described bubbling frustration at Oracle on Thursday .
They said they were privately complaining to colleagues in their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to friends on Facebook Messenger .
But while many say that their coworkers , too , are upset , assessing the full scale of their anger is difficult because of Oracle ’ s culture : It discourages employees from talking about politics .
That ’ s also why it is unclear how substantial the plans to protest Ellison will become .
Still , as of Friday afternoon , at least 230 people in the company feel strongly enough that they signed a petition addressed to Ellison that began circulating that morning .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cancel the fundraising event ; they ’ ve also started a Slack channel , are adding the link to the petition in their email signatures ; and are publicizing it in internal Oracle forums , trying to drum up pressure in a company not known for activism .
“ Larry Ellison ’ s personal implicit endorsement and financial support of Donald Trump not only damages our brand perception and misrepresents the diverse views of our company , but it adversely affects the morale of the individuals and communities who comprise Oracle , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ called Oracle Employees for Ethics .
“ We are signing this petition because we want our voices heard and we refuse to be complacent and complicit in Larry Ellison ’ s support of such a divisive person.
” Oracle declined to comment for this story .
Ellison , the fifth-richest person in the US , surprised the tech industry on Wednesday when news broke that he would host Trump for a golf-filled fundraiser at his estate in California ’ s Coachella Valley next week .
The event is , by far , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump 2020 by a tech titan .
Or as another Oracle employee , granted anonymity like others because they were candidly discussing their boss , told Recode : “ Oracle is not supposed to be political but yet our CEO is doing something very political , no ?
” “ This fundraiser is a slap in the face to all of us , especially as Larry champions the environment and is building a hospital , ” this employee said , referring to Ellison ’ s personal philanthropy .
“ This shows that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And that is what matters .
But what is the average employee to do ?
” Friday ’ s petition is a small but bold step for employees at Oracle .
Companies like Google are famous for fostering an open culture that leaves room for rabble-rousers and vigorous political debate during the workday .
Other tech giants have proven much more outspoken about Trump policies like the ban on immigrants from Muslim countries and the debate over letting DREAMers stay in the United States .
But Oracle , from C-suite on down , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and former employees say .
Politics rarely comes up in the office .
And there is very limited cross-team communication on internal forums about political matters ; plus , employees are concerned that any posts critical of management would be monitored .
Compared to other tech companies , employees at the business-to-business software company say their colleagues skew older and more conservative ( although Oracle ’ s workforce relies heavily on immigrants who have come to the US on H-1B visas , a program that Trump has cracked down on . )
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Ellison , they have been slow to mobilize en masse .
Plus , some employees say they feel resigned because they believe that Ellison will do whatever he likes — regardless of his employees ’ frustrations .
“ Everyone I spoke to had the general attitude of , ‘ It sucks but we can ’ t tell Larry anything , ’ ” said one former employee , who recounted his conversation with five of his colleagues on Thursday .
“ There ’ s a thoroughly defeatist culture within Oracle , ” one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t be any institutional challenge internally.
” It is not as though Ellison ’ s support for Republicans is a total shock .
Oracle has been one of the Silicon Valley giants that has worked hardest to cultivate ties to the Trump administration .
Other tech giants have tried to keep at least some distance from the administration , but Oracle CEO Safra Catz has reportedly been under consideration to take senior roles within the White House , and she has hired several former senior Trump aides at Oracle .
Oracle ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2016 to resign from the company and blast it on the way out — but he was an exception to the rule .
And not all of Oracle ’ s workforce is upset over Ellison ’ s plans to fundraise for Trump .
One current employee told Recode that he was proud of Ellison ’ s decision .
“ I personally love that Ellison is willing to stand up for what he believes in even though it goes against the grain of what most people in the field and employees at his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
But one of the ironies of Ellison ’ s public display of support for Trump is that he is not a dyed-in-the-wool Trump backer .
Ellison was particularly close to Bill Clinton , once attending a ritzy dinner fundraiser in Silicon Valley for the Clinton campaign ’ s reelection race for about a dozen of Clinton ’ s top California donors .
He once joked that the Constitution should have been amended to give Clinton a third term .
He was backing Democrats like Harry Reid as recently as 2013 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the same golf course that Donald Trump will visit next week .
Ellison didn ’ t even donate to Trump in 2016 .
( He was a major donor to a Super PAC backing Sen. Marco Rubio in the Republican presidential primary . )
That ’ s what makes Ellison ’ s decision perplexing to at least one person who was once close to him .
“ He is a huge , huge liberal Democrat , ” said this person .
They described Ellison , a registered Democrat , as having been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he was one of the few [ Fortune 100 ] CEOs who didn ’ t put greed before everything.
” “ Larry looked down on Republicans of all stripes — especially the conservative evangelical ones , ” the person said .
“ This Trump stuff makes no sense .
”

Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison’s decision to host a fundraiser for Donald Trump on Wednesday has awakened the usually passive workforce at his company, angering some employees who are going public with their disgust over Ellison’s actions.
On Thursday, some Oracle employees announced plans to stop working for a few hours in order to protest their boss’s fundraiser, Recode has learned, part of a push described as “No Ethics / No Work.” A group of activists at Oracle are calling on employees to spend their afternoons volunteering with community or advocacy groups, technically part of a “log off” since so many employees work remotely.
Having failed to pressure Ellison into canceling the event, these workers are now calling on Ellison and Oracle’s board to “host a fundraiser or commit funds to a humanitarian cause of their choice” and to issue a statement “denouncing the administration’s reckless, divisive political tactics, reaffirming our company’s commitment to diversity and inclusion, and committing to diversifying the Board of Directors.”
The Oracle employees’ reaction reflects how toxic Trump remains in Silicon Valley — and the ire that top tech executives can draw when they align themselves with the president. And it’s revealing that it’s happening at Oracle, which employees say has a conservative culture that has not been touched by the current bouts of workforce activism sweeping major tech companies.
“It signals what I and many others have always feared,” one current Oracle employee told Recode. “Culturally, Oracle is the type of place where you’ll work with many lovely people who you share common ideals with, but those ideals have to be left at the door in service of the company.”
Employees in touch with Recode in recent days have described bubbling frustration at Oracle. They said they were privately complaining to colleagues in their offices and sharing links about the fundraiser to friends on Facebook Messenger and slowly began to organize in a Slack channel over the holiday weekend. But while many say that their coworkers are also upset, assessing the full scale of their anger is difficult because of Oracle’s culture: It discourages employees from talking about politics. That’s also why it is unclear how substantial the plans to protest Ellison will become.
On Friday, employees began circulating a petition addressed to Ellison that now has almost 6,000 signatures, although non-Oracle employees can sign it as well. The petition calls on him to cancel the fundraising event. Oracle employees are also adding the link to the petition in their email signatures and are publicizing it in internal Oracle forums, trying to drum up pressure in a company not known for activism.
“Larry Ellison’s personal implicit endorsement and financial support of Donald Trump not only damages our brand perception and misrepresents the diverse views of our company, but it adversely affects the morale of the individuals and communities who comprise Oracle,” said the group behind the petition, called Oracle Employees for Ethics. “We are signing this petition because we want our voices heard and we refuse to be complacent and complicit in Larry Ellison’s support of such a divisive person.”
Oracle has repeatedly declined to comment on this new activism. But employees who have complained to an internal integrity helpline have received this message:
“Oracle employees, including its executives, are permitted to personally participate in the political process and support candidates they choose,” the return message reads. “Oracle as a company does not endorse any particular candidates.”
Ellison, the fifth-richest person in the US, surprised the tech industry last week when news broke that he would host Trump for a golf-filled fundraiser at his estate in California’s Coachella Valley. The event on Wednesday is, by far, the most significant public display of support for Trump 2020 by a tech titan, and was expected to raise $7 million for the president.
Or as another Oracle employee, granted anonymity like others because they were candidly discussing their boss, told Recode: “Oracle is not supposed to be political but yet our CEO is doing something very political, no?”
“This fundraiser is a slap in the face to all of us, especially as Larry champions the environment and is building a hospital,” this employee said, referring to Ellison’s personal philanthropy. “This shows that he cares about money over all else. And that is what matters. But what is the average employee to do?”
The petition and the walkout are small but bold steps for employees at Oracle. Companies like Google are famous for fostering an open culture that leaves room for rabble-rousers and vigorous political debate during the workday. Other tech giants have proven much more outspoken about Trump policies like the ban on immigrants from Muslim countries and the debate over letting DREAMers stay in the United States.
But Oracle, from C-suite on down, is basically the anti-Google, some current and former employees say. Politics rarely comes up in the office. And there is very limited cross-team communication on internal forums about political matters; plus, employees are concerned that any posts critical of management would be monitored.
Compared to other tech companies, employees at the business-to-business software company say their colleagues skew older and more conservative (although Oracle’s workforce relies heavily on immigrants who have come to the US on H-1B visas, a program that Trump has cracked down on.)
That explains why despite some employees’ frustrations with Ellison, they have been slow to mobilize en masse.
Plus, some employees say they feel resigned because they believe that Ellison will do whatever he likes — regardless of his employees’ frustrations.
“Everyone I spoke to had the general attitude of, ‘It sucks but we can’t tell Larry anything,’” said one former employee, who recounted his conversation with five of his colleagues.
“There’s a thoroughly defeatist culture within Oracle,” one current employee said. “Won’t be any institutional challenge internally.”
It is not as though Ellison’s support for Republicans is a total shock. Oracle has been one of the Silicon Valley giants that has worked hardest to cultivate ties to the Trump administration. Other tech giants have tried to keep at least some distance from the administration, but Oracle CEO Safra Catz has reportedly been under consideration to take senior roles within the White House, and she has hired several former senior Trump aides at Oracle.
Oracle’s ties to the administration led one executive in 2016 to resign from the company and blast it on the way out — but he was an exception to the rule.
And not all of Oracle’s workforce is upset over Ellison’s plans to fundraise for Trump. One current employee told Recode that he was proud of Ellison’s decision.
“I personally love that Ellison is willing to stand up for what he believes in even though it goes against the grain of what most people in the field and employees at his company believe politically,” this employee said.
But one of the ironies of Ellison’s public display of support for Trump is that he is not a dyed-in-the-wool Trump backer. Ellison was particularly close to Bill Clinton, once attending a ritzy dinner fundraiser in Silicon Valley for the Clinton campaign’s reelection race for about a dozen of Clinton’s top California donors. He once joked that the Constitution should have been amended to give Clinton a third term.
He was backing Democrats like Harry Reid as recently as 2013. In 2015, he hosted Barack Obama at the same golf course that Donald Trump will visit on Wednesday. Ellison didn’t even donate to Trump in 2016. (He was a major donor to a Super PAC backing Sen. Marco Rubio in the Republican presidential primary.)
That’s what makes Ellison’s decision perplexing to at least one person who was once close to him.
“He is a huge, huge liberal Democrat,” said this person. They described Ellison, a registered Democrat, as having been “so proud of the fact that he was one of the few [Fortune 100] CEOs who didn’t put greed before everything.”
“Larry looked down on Republicans of all stripes — especially the conservative evangelical ones,” the person said. “This Trump stuff makes no sense.”


vox--2020-02-16--Pete Buttigieg replies to Rush Limbaugh’s homophobic comments: “I love my husband”

Former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg responded Sunday to homophobic comments right-wing radio show host Rush Limbaugh made about him last Wednesday by standing firmly by his marriage .
Limbaugh , who was feted by President Donald Trump at the 2020 State of the Union address , and was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom , referred to Buttigieg as “ Booty-gieg ” on his radio show last week , and offered a bigoted take on how the former mayor ’ s sexual orientation would affect his chances of winning the presidential nomination .
In particular , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say about Buttigieg .
“ ‘ Okay , how ’ s this going to look , 37-year-old gay guy kissing his husband on stage next to Mr. Man Donald Trump ?
What ’ s going to happen there ?
’ ” Limbaugh said .
“ They ’ ve got to be saying that despite all the great progress and despite all the great wokeness , and despite all the great ground that ’ s been covered , America ’ s still not ready to elect a gay guy kissing his husband on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Buttigieg would be an ideal rival to Trump , who he said would “ have fun ” facing off against a politician who “ loves kissing his husband on debate stages.
” Buttigieg is the first openly gay candidate to mount a major presidential campaign in American history , and has been married to his husband , Chasten , for over two years .
Sunday , CNN ’ s Dana Bash asked Buttigieg to respond to the comments on State of the Union .
“ Well , I love my husband .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ On stage , we usually just go for a hug , but I love him very much , ” Buttigieg said .
“ And I ’ m not going to take lectures on family values from the likes of Rush Limbaugh.
” And in an appearance appearance on Fox News Sunday , Buttigieg took an opportunity to use Limbaugh ’ s remarks to take a direct strike at Trump .
“ I ’ m not going to be lectured on family values from the likes of Rush Limbaugh or anybody who supports Donald @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as political leader of the United States , ” Buttigieg said .
“ America has moved on , and we should have politics of belonging that welcomes everybody , ” Buttigieg continued .
“ That ’ s what the American people are for .
And I am saddened for what the Republican Party has become if they embrace that kind of homophobic rhetoric.
” Limbaugh often makes ugly remarks — these , however , have drawn bipartisan rebuke Limbaugh ’ s comments were par for the course with him .
Despite being given @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who have made positive contributions to American life like Toni Morrison and Ansel Adams , the radio personality has long been a divisive figure who openly peddles racist , sexist , and otherwise inflammatory views .
As Vox ’ s Laura McGann has explained , “ Limbaugh fills hours of airtime each week with hateful commentary directed at African Americans , Asian Americans , women , people with disabilities , and pretty much anyone who is not white , straight , and male.
” He has mocked the president of China by saying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ‘ Ching cha , ching chang cho chow ’ ” ; said the NBA should be rebranded “ the TBA , the Thug Basketball Association ” ; and has recently made sexist , ablest attacks on teenaged climate activist Greta Thunberg .
And these are just a few of his many , many hateful remarks .
Limbaugh ’ s remarks are part of why his base tunes into his show , and have not always drawn bipartisan criticism , but his most recent attacks on Buttigieg did just that , with both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spokesperson for Sen. Lamar Alexander , a Republican from Tennessee , said : “ There may be reasons not to vote for Mayor Buttigieg , but that ’ s not one of them .
This is a tolerant country.
” “ It ’ s a miscalculation as to where the country is at , ” Trump ally and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham said .
“ I think the country is not going to disqualify somebody because of their sexual orientation.
” Democrats offered stronger condemnation , with former Vice President Joe Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ language “ part of the depravity of this administration.
” Sen. Elizabeth Warren tweeted , “ These homophobic attacks against [ Buttigieg ] are hateful and offensive .
... We will fight together against the hate and bigotry that Donald Trump promotes and rewards.
” And while he did not exactly criticize the man he honored weeks ago , even Trump suggested Limbaugh may have gone too far .
When asked during an interview with Geraldo Rivera on Cleveland ’ s Newsradio WTAM if Americans would vote for a gay man to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think so.
” “ I think there would be some that wouldn ’ t .
I wouldn ’ t be among that group , to be honest with you , ” he added .

Former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg responded Sunday to homophobic comments right-wing radio show host Rush Limbaugh made about him last Wednesday by standing firmly by his marriage.
Limbaugh, who was feted by President Donald Trump at the 2020 State of the Union address, and was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, referred to Buttigieg as “Booty-gieg” on his radio show last week, and offered a bigoted take on how the former mayor’s sexual orientation would affect his chances of winning the presidential nomination. In particular, he questioned what Democratic Party officials might say about Buttigieg.
“‘Okay, how’s this going to look, 37-year-old gay guy kissing his husband onstage next to Mr. Man Donald Trump? What’s going to happen there?’” Limbaugh said. “They’ve got to be saying that despite all the great progress and despite all the great wokeness, and despite all the great ground that’s been covered, America’s still not ready to elect a gay guy kissing his husband on the debate stage president.”
Limbaugh added that Buttigieg would be an ideal rival to Trump, who he said would “have fun” facing off against a politician who “loves kissing his husband on debate stages.”
Buttigieg is the first openly gay candidate to mount a major presidential campaign in American history, and has been married to his husband, Chasten, for over two years.
Sunday, CNN’s Dana Bash asked Buttigieg to respond to the comments on State of the Union.
“Well, I love my husband. I’m faithful to my husband. Onstage, we usually just go for a hug, but I love him very much,” Buttigieg said. “And I’m not going to take lectures on family values from the likes of Rush Limbaugh.”
“I love my husband. I’m faithful to my husband,” @petebuttigieg responds to conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh’s recent comments. “I’m not going to take lectures on family values from the likes of Rush Limbaugh.” #CNNSOTUhttps://t.co/bOje6TVl1s pic.twitter.com/icNbNMetlw — State of the Union (@CNNSotu) February 16, 2020
And in an appearance appearance on Fox News Sunday, Buttigieg took an opportunity to use Limbaugh’s remarks to take a direct strike at Trump.
“I’m not going to be lectured on family values from the likes of Rush Limbaugh or anybody who supports Donald J. Trump as the moral as well as political leader of the United States,” Buttigieg said.
“America has moved on, and we should have politics of belonging that welcomes everybody,” Buttigieg continued. “That’s what the American people are for. And I am saddened for what the Republican Party has become if they embrace that kind of homophobic rhetoric.”
Limbaugh often makes ugly remarks. These, however, have drawn bipartisan rebuke.
Limbaugh’s comments were par for the course with him. Despite being given a civilian honor typically reserved for those who have made positive contributions to American life like Toni Morrison and Ansel Adams, the radio personality has long been a divisive figure who openly peddles racist, sexist, and otherwise inflammatory views.
As Vox’s Laura McGann has explained, “Limbaugh fills hours of airtime each week with hateful commentary directed at African Americans, Asian Americans, women, people with disabilities, and pretty much anyone who is not white, straight, and male.”
He has mocked the president of China with offensive language; said the NBA should be rebranded “the TBA, the Thug Basketball Association”; and has recently made sexist, ablest attacks on teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg. And these are just a few of his many hateful remarks.
Limbaugh’s remarks are part of why his base tunes in to his show, and have not always drawn bipartisan criticism, but his most recent attacks on Buttigieg did just that, with both Republicans and Democrats censuring him.
A spokesperson for Sen. Lamar Alexander, a Republican from Tennessee, said: “There may be reasons not to vote for Mayor Buttigieg, but that’s not one of them. This is a tolerant country.”
“It’s a miscalculation as to where the country is at,” Trump ally and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham said. “I think the country is not going to disqualify somebody because of their sexual orientation.”
Democrats offered stronger condemnation, with former Vice President Joe Biden praising Buttigieg and calling Limbaugh’s language “part of the depravity of this administration.”
Sen. Elizabeth Warren tweeted, “These homophobic attacks against [Buttigieg] are hateful and offensive. ... We will fight together against the hate and bigotry that Donald Trump promotes and rewards.”
And while he did not exactly criticize the man he honored weeks ago, even Trump suggested Limbaugh may have gone too far. When asked during an interview with Geraldo Rivera on Cleveland’s Newsradio WTAM if Americans would vote for a gay man to be president, Trump said, “I think so.”
“I think there would be some that wouldn’t. I wouldn’t be among that group, to be honest with you,” he added.


vox--2020-02-16--Over 1,100 former DOJ officials say Attorney General Bill Barr must resign

Over 1,100 former US Department of Justice officials have signed an open letter calling for Attorney General Bill Barr to resign after senior department officials intervened to reduce a sentencing recommendation for Donald Trump ’ s friend Roger Stone .
“ Each of us strongly condemns President Trump ’ s and Attorney General Barr ’ s interference in the fair administration of justice , ” the former Justice Department officials wrote in an open letter published Sunday , calling Barr ’ s actions “ a grave threat to the fair administration of justice.
” On Monday , federal prosecutors recommended @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who was convicted in November of making false statements to Congress , obstructing an official proceeding , and witness tampering — receive a seven- to nine-year prison sentence for these crimes .
Trump was outraged by the recommendation , something he made clear through a series of late night tweets , in which he slammed the sentence as “ very unfair.
” The next day , it was reported the DOJ planned to amend the sentencing recommendation , leading the entire Stone prosecutorial team to withdraw from the case — and one to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new prosecutor on the case , John Crabb , then submitted a filing to the court saying that the previous sentencing memo “ does not accurately reflect the Department of Justice ’ s position ” and recommending a much shorter prison sentence .
On Wednesday , Trump praised Barr for “ taking charge of a case that was totally out of control and perhaps should not have even been brought.
” That series of events has prompted a huge outcry over concerns that Barr and other senior Justice Department officials were overturning career @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and protect his allies .
Some , like Sens .
Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey , have called on Barr to resign ; other lawmakers demanded the attorney general testify before Congress .
He is expected to appear before the House Judiciary Committee in March .
The signatories of the letter — who note they have served under both Democratic and Republican administrations — now join these critics , and argue that Barr ’ s attempts to protect a political ally have flouted the principle of “ equal justice under the law ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” It details his violations of institutional norms at the Justice Department thusly : The letter does note that later in the week , Barr did appear to push back on Trump ’ s attempts to politicize Justice Department proceedings .
Barr said in an interview with ABC News on Thursday , “ I can not do my job here at the department with a constant background commentary that undercuts me.
” But ultimately the authors of the letter say it ’ s not enough : Barr has been a staunch defender of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ began his tenure as attorney general , and the authors acknowledge that because of this , they have “ little expectation ” that Barr will step down .
Nevertheless , the letter is powerful in its bipartisan censure of the nation ’ s attorney general , and is a trenchant reminder that concerns over the path the Justice Department appears to be heading down go beyond outrage from Democratic lawmakers .
The problem goes deeper than the Stone case Questions over meddling in the Stone case have been raised amid broader concerns about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and amid fears Trump feels emboldened following his acquittal in his impeachment trial .
As Vox ’ s Andrew Prokop has explained , former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn also appears to have recently benefited from a Justice Department keen on protecting Trump allies : The Flynn episode seemed to provide further evidence that senior officials in Trump ’ s Justice Department are willing to meddle in cases in order to assist his friends and allies .
And as Prokop notes , the replacement of former US attorney for the District of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prosecutorial efforts against a number of Trump associates implicated by the Mueller investigation — with a Barr ally , along with the administration suddenly withdrawing Liu ’ s nomination for a Treasury Department post , would seem to suggest personnel seen as obstacles to Trump ’ s political agenda are at risk of being sidelined and punished .
Giving weight to this reading of events is the fact that Trump has openly retaliated against officials outside the DOJ in recent weeks .
As Prokop has pointed out : “ All this has unfolded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ witnesses in the impeachment inquiry : dismissing Alex and Yevgeny Vindman from the National Security Council staff and firing EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland.
” This is the sort of behavior the former DOJ officials are concerned about , and the president and his top officials have given no indication they plan to alter their behavior .
In fact , as senior adviser for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington Walter Shaub told Vox ’ s Aaron Rupar , the president now appears to be engaged in a “ full-court press to push @ @ @ @ @ @ @

More than 1,100 former US Department of Justice officials have signed an open letter calling for Attorney General Bill Barr to resign after senior department officials intervened to reduce a sentencing recommendation for Donald Trump’s friend Roger Stone.
“Each of us strongly condemns President Trump’s and Attorney General Barr’s interference in the fair administration of justice,” the former Justice Department officials wrote in an open letter published Sunday, calling Barr’s actions “a grave threat to the fair administration of justice.”
On Monday, federal prosecutors recommended that Stone — a longtime GOP operative who was convicted in November of making false statements to Congress, obstructing an official proceeding, and witness tampering — receive a seven- to nine-year prison sentence for these crimes.
Trump was outraged by the recommendation, something he made clear through a series of late-night tweets, in which he slammed the sentence as “very unfair.”
This is a horrible and very unfair situation. The real crimes were on the other side, as nothing happens to them. Cannot allow this miscarriage of justice! https://t.co/rHPfYX6Vbv — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 11, 2020
The next day, it was reported the DOJ planned to amend the sentencing recommendation, leading the entire Stone prosecutorial team to withdraw from the case — and one to resign from the DOJ completely.
A new prosecutor on the case, John Crabb, then submitted a filing to the court saying that the previous sentencing memo “does not accurately reflect the Department of Justice’s position” and recommending a much shorter prison sentence. On Wednesday, Trump praised Barr for “taking charge of a case that was totally out of control and perhaps should not have even been brought.”
That series of events has prompted a huge outcry over concerns that Barr and other senior Justice Department officials were overturning career prosecutors’ decisions purely to placate Trump and protect his allies. Some, like Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey, have called on Barr to resign; other lawmakers demanded the attorney general testify before Congress. He is expected to appear before the House Judiciary Committee in March.
The signatories of the letter — who note they have served under both Democratic and Republican administrations — now join these critics, and argue that Barr’s attempts to protect a political ally have flouted the principle of “equal justice under the law” and “require Mr. Barr to resign.” It details his violations of institutional norms at the Justice Department thusly:
Although there are times when political leadership appropriately weighs in on individual prosecutions, it is unheard of for the Department’s top leaders to overrule line prosecutors, who are following established policies, in order to give preferential treatment to a close associate of the President, as Attorney General Barr did in the Stone case. It is even more outrageous for the Attorney General to intervene as he did here — after the President publicly condemned the sentencing recommendation that line prosecutors had already filed in court.
The letter does note that later in the week, Barr did appear to push back on Trump’s attempts to politicize Justice Department proceedings. Barr said in an interview with ABC News on Thursday, “I cannot do my job here at the department with a constant background commentary that undercuts me.”
But ultimately the authors of the letter say it’s not enough:
We welcome Attorney General Barr’s belated acknowledgment that the DOJ’s law enforcement decisions must be independent of politics; that it is wrong for the President to interfere in specific enforcement matters, either to punish his opponents or to help his friends; and that the President’s public comments on DOJ matters have gravely damaged the Department’s credibility. But Mr. Barr’s actions in doing the President’s personal bidding unfortunately speak louder than his words.
Barr has been a staunch defender of the president and his interests since he began his tenure as attorney general, and the authors acknowledge that because of this, they have “little expectation” that Barr will step down. Nevertheless, the letter is powerful in its bipartisan censure of the nation’s attorney general, and is a trenchant reminder that concerns over the path the Justice Department appears to be heading down go beyond outrage from Democratic lawmakers.
The problem goes deeper than the Stone case
Questions over meddling in the Stone case have been raised amid broader concerns about the politicization of the Department of Justice, and amid fears Trump feels emboldened following his acquittal in his impeachment trial.
As Vox’s Andrew Prokop has explained, former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn also appears to have recently benefited from a Justice Department keen on protecting Trump allies:
Flynn is also awaiting sentencing for his guilty plea in connection with the Mueller probe — and, after agreeing to cooperate with the government, apparently reneged on that commitment. So prosecutors recommended in January that Flynn be sentenced “within” the range of zero to six months of incarceration — but, a few weeks later, added that they “do not oppose” a “sentence of probation” instead.
The Flynn episode seemed to provide further evidence that senior officials in Trump’s Justice Department are willing to meddle in cases in order to assist his friends and allies. And as Prokop notes, the replacement of former US attorney for the District of Columbia Jessie Liu — who led the prosecutorial efforts against a number of Trump associates implicated by the Mueller investigation — with a Barr ally, along with the administration suddenly withdrawing Liu’s nomination for a Treasury Department post, would seem to suggest personnel seen as obstacles to Trump’s political agenda are at risk of being sidelined and punished.
Giving weight to this reading of events is the fact that Trump has openly retaliated against officials outside the DOJ in recent weeks. As Prokop has pointed out: “All this has unfolded as Trump has separately taken revenge on witnesses in the impeachment inquiry: dismissing Alex and Yevgeny Vindman from the National Security Council staff and firing EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland.”
This is the sort of behavior the former DOJ officials are concerned about, and the president and his top officials have given no indication they plan to alter their behavior. In fact, as senior adviser for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington Walter Shaub told Vox’s Aaron Rupar, the president now appears to be engaged in a “full-court press to push the boundaries in all directions.”


vox--2020-02-16--Biden says Sanders’s response to his supporters’ online attacks is not “sufficient”

Former Vice President Joe Biden criticized Sen. Bernie Sanders on Sunday , arguing the senator has been inadequate in his response to harassment members of Nevada ’ s Culinary Workers Union say they ’ ve faced from some of Sanders ’ s online supporters after the group took aim at Sanders ’ s health care proposal .
In an interview with Meet the Press ’ s Chuck Todd that aired Sunday , Biden said the democratic socialist candidate “ may not be responsible for it , but he has some accountability.
” “ You know me well enough to know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I ’ d disown them .
Flat disown them , ” Biden told Todd .
“ The stuff that was said online .
The way they threatened these two women who are leaders in that culinary union .
It is outrageous.
” On the night of New Hampshire ’ s Democratic primary , February 11 , Nevada ’ s Culinary Union made its opposition to a key plank of Sanders ’ s platform clear by publishing fliers claiming Sanders is the only candidate who would take away the union ’ s health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , wants to enact his Medicare-for-all proposal — a plan that would abolish private health insurance and replace it with a government insurance plan .
It was a pointed political move : The Culinary Union , which represents some 60,000 casino and hospitality workers in the state , is one of the most powerful political forces in Nevada — and the flier was released less than two weeks before the state holds its caucuses .
The Culinary Union ’ s actions were sharply criticized online , and some of those critiques went far @ @ @ @ @ @ @ According to the Nevada Independent , two top officials from the Culinary Union have “ faced threatening phone calls , emails and tweets and say their personal information was shared online.
” The report also said that much of the language directed at the union was bigoted and degrading : It ’ s worth noting , however , that it ’ s difficult to verify just who was leveling these most malicious attacks , and that it is not always possible to identify the true political leanings of people who join harassment campaigns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ found that one of those disparaging the union with bigoted language was a Trump supporter who opposes Medicare-for-all .
And it also can not be ruled out that some anonymous online attacks could be coming from covert social media campaigns designed to stoke political division .
Nevertheless , on Thursday , Sanders addressed the attacks on the Culinary Union .
“ Harassment of all forms is unacceptable to me , and we urge supporters of all campaigns not to engage in bullying or ugly personal attacks , ” Sanders said in a statement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ multi-generational , multi-racial movement of love , compassion , and justice .
We can certainly disagree on issues , but we must do it in a respectful manner.
” But Biden said in his interview with Meet the Press that Sanders has not gone far enough , and said that Sanders needs to “ find out who the hell they are.
” “ I ’ m hoping he ’ s looking .
But I tell you what — so far I don ’ t think it ’ s sufficient just to say , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden said .
Sanders online army is an asset and a liability Sanders has an extraordinarily large and enthusiastic set of supporters online , and their prominence in social media debates has helped drive home to the press and to Democrats just how beloved he is by his supporters .
And Sanders ’ s big and hyperconnected online presence has helped him evolve into one of the most impressive fundraisers in American political history — in the fourth quarter of 2019 , for instance , he raised $ 34.5 million , with an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some of his online supporters have also been criticized for being overly zealous , combative , or for bullying critics online , a criticism that began during his 2016 campaign against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton , and one that has plagued his campaign throughout the 2020 contest — for good reason .
There have been a number of indicators throughout the primary so far that in online debate , a certain set of Sanders supporters — which is difficult to measure in size — is exceptionally abrasive and dehumanizing .
For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sanders supporters online who circulate memes likening former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg to a rat , those who attacked an ALS activist over his support for Sen. Elizabeth Warren , and those who bombarded Warren with snake emojis following a disagreement between the two senators .
It ’ s within this context that the attacks were made against the Culinary Union officials .
Again , it ’ s impossible to verify the identity of the sources of all these attacks — which Biden himself acknowledged in his interview .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ these so-called supporters are , ” Biden said .
“ We ’ re living in a strange world on the Internet .
And sometimes people attack people in somebody else ’ s name.
” But it ’ s precisely because Sanders supporters online already have a reputation for inappropriate or belligerent behavior that this situation is more of a liability for Sanders .
The whole episode is once again raising questions of how much a candidate is to be held responsible for the political culture that surrounds them online .

Former Vice President Joe Biden criticized Sen. Bernie Sanders on Sunday, arguing the senator has been inadequate in his response to harassment members of Nevada’s Culinary Workers Union say they’ve faced from some of Sanders’s online supporters after the group took aim at Sanders’s health care proposal.
In an interview with Meet the Press’s Chuck Todd that aired Sunday, Biden said the democratic socialist candidate “may not be responsible for it, but he has some accountability.”
“You know me well enough to know if any of my supporters did that, I’d disown them. Flat disown them,” Biden told Todd. “The stuff that was said online. The way they threatened these two women who are leaders in that culinary union. It is outrageous.”
On the night of New Hampshire’s Democratic primary, February 11, Nevada’s Culinary Union made its opposition to a key plank of Sanders’s platform clear by publishing fliers claiming Sanders is the only candidate who would take away the union’s health care plan. Sanders, of course, wants to enact his Medicare-for-all proposal — a plan that would abolish private health insurance and replace it with a government insurance plan.
It was a pointed political move: The Culinary Union, which represents some 60,000 casino and hospitality workers in the state, is one of the most powerful political forces in Nevada — and the flier was released less than two weeks before the state holds its caucuses.
Since the whole political world will now be watching whether @Culinary226 endorses someone in Nevada, which would be a genuine earthquake, here’s the candidate policy explainer they’ve sent to members: pic.twitter.com/X3Cgvr3YAX — Matt Pearce (@mattdpearce) February 12, 2020
The Culinary Union’s actions were sharply criticized online, and some of those critiques went far beyond typical online feuding and politicking.
According to the Nevada Independent, two top officials from the Culinary Union have “faced threatening phone calls, emails and tweets and say their personal information was shared online.” The report also said that much of the language directed at the union was bigoted and degrading:
Secretary-Treasurer Geoconda Arguello-Kline, for instance, has come under attack for her Nicaraguan heritage, and union spokeswoman Bethany Khan was accused of being paid off by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other Democratic establishment types. In tweets, the union and its leadership have been referred to as “bitches,” “whore,” “fucking scab” and “evil, entitled assholes.”
It’s worth noting, however, that it’s difficult to verify just who was leveling these most malicious attacks, and that it is not always possible to identify the true political leanings of people who join harassment campaigns.
For example, the Nevada Independent found that one of those disparaging the union with bigoted language was a Trump supporter who opposes Medicare-for-all. And it also cannot be ruled out that some anonymous online attacks could be coming from covert social media campaigns designed to stoke political division.
Nevertheless, on Thursday, Sanders addressed the attacks on the Culinary Union.
“Harassment of all forms is unacceptable to me, and we urge supporters of all campaigns not to engage in bullying or ugly personal attacks,” Sanders said in a statement. “Our campaign is building a multi-generational, multi-racial movement of love, compassion, and justice. We can certainly disagree on issues, but we must do it in a respectful manner.”
But Biden said in his interview with Meet the Press that Sanders has not gone far enough and said that Sanders needs to “find out who the hell they are.”
“I’m hoping he’s looking. But I tell you what — so far I don’t think it’s sufficient just to say, ‘I disassociate myself,’” Biden said.
Sanders’s online army is an asset and a liability
Sanders has an extraordinarily large and enthusiastic set of supporters online, and their prominence in social media debates has helped drive home to the press and to Democrats just how beloved he is by his supporters. And Sanders’s big and hyperconnected online presence has helped him evolve into one of the most impressive fundraisers in American political history — in the fourth quarter of 2019, for instance, he raised $34.5 million, with an average donation of $18.53.
But some of his online supporters have also been criticized for being overly zealous, combative, or for bullying critics online, a criticism that began during his 2016 campaign against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and one that has plagued his campaign throughout the 2020 contest — for good reason.
There have been a number of indicators throughout the primary so far that in online debate, a certain set of Sanders supporters — which is difficult to measure in size — is exceptionally abrasive and dehumanizing. For example, there are at least some Sanders supporters online who circulate memes likening former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg to a rat, those who attacked an ALS activist over his support for Sen. Elizabeth Warren, and those who bombarded Warren with snake emojis following a disagreement between the two senators.
It’s within this context that the attacks were made against the Culinary Union officials. Again, it’s impossible to verify the identity of the sources of all these attacks — which Biden himself acknowledged in his interview. “I don’t know who these so-called supporters are,” Biden said. “We’re living in a strange world on the Internet. And sometimes people attack people in somebody else’s name.”
But it’s precisely because Sanders supporters online already have a reputation for inappropriate or belligerent behavior that this situation is more of a liability for Sanders. The whole episode is once again raising questions of how much a candidate is to be held responsible for the political culture that surrounds them online.


vox--2020-02-16--Why there aren’t more polls about the Nevada caucuses

With less than one week to go until the Nevada caucuses , it ’ s not clear whether any of the eight remaining Democratic presidential candidates has a distinct advantage in the state , because Nevada — referred to as “ the stepchild among the first four [ Democratic primary ] states , ” by Nevada Independent editor Jon Ralston — gets shockingly little attention from pollsters .
The reason ?
Although the caucuses — which will take place on February 22 this year — have been the third Democratic primary contest in the nation since 2008 , the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hard , in fact , that until Friday , the most recent poll included in RealClearPolitics ’ Nevada polling average — from Suffolk University — was more than a month old .
We now have exactly one recent poll of the state , courtesy of the Las Vegas Review-Journal , which shows Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders in the lead among likely caucus-goers with 25 percent support , trailed by former Vice President Joe Biden with 18 percent , and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren with 13 percent .
The poll was taken February 11 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of error of 4.8 percent .
These results should not be taken as absolute fact , however .
Not only are Nevada polls challenging to do , they ’ re challenging to get right .
In 2010 , for example , polls suggested that then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was on course to lose reelection .
Instead , he cruised to a nearly 6-point victory .
Ralston , who founded the nonprofit Nevada Independent in 2017 , has minced no words when it comes to polling the state .
In 2012 , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ polls done in Nevada are garbage , ” and eight years later , he says the state ’ s polling problems have not been resolved .
“ Nevada is a quirky state , ” he told Vox .
“ And the new caucus rules , with early voting , combined with the impact of the Iowa disaster ... make polling very , very difficult.
” Changes to caucusing process has made polling more difficult The Iowa caucuses are a well-established tradition dating back to the 1970s , but Nevada ’ s caucuses are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the caucuses means that pollsters have not had time to build the sort of infrastructure and state expertise that was developed over decades in Iowa .
For a pollster to provide an accurate snapshot of the state , Ralston points out that they need to “ know how to weight the results to fit the picture that will exist on Election Day — that is , what the turnout actually will look like.
” As Vox ’ s Matt Yglesias has explained , pollsters typically give certain responses more weight than others in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reflects the likely electorate .
But given the dearth of historical caucus day data , developing formulas to accurately weigh different responses becomes nearly impossible .
Further increasing the difficulty of developing turnout models is the fact that , as Ralston mentioned , the caucus rules will be different this year .
As Vox ’ s Andrew Prokop writes , Nevada ’ s caucus rules , like Iowa ’ s before it , have been changed to provide greater transparency .
State party leaders will report three sets of caucus numbers : a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ total , and the delegate distribution .
As in Iowa , caucus-goers whose first choice candidate does not receive at least 15 percent support will be asked to realign their support to a candidate who has met that threshold .
The state also has a newly instituted four-day early voting period that attempts to model caucusing by using a system modeled on ranked-choice voting .
The new rules mean pollsters are faced with new questions when it comes to predicting turnout : Will the early voting period increase participation by making the caucus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ caucus day rules — and the confusion similar rules caused in Iowa — lower enthusiasm among potential caucus-goers and reduce turnout ?
For now , these are questions that can ’ t be answered until the caucuses are over .
The answers the caucuses reveal will allow pollsters to build more accurate models for the 2024 election cycle .
But even once these unknowns are solved for , pollsters in the state will still have to overcome another challenge that has made polling difficult : the uniqueness of Nevada ’ s caucus-going population @ @ @ @ @ @ @ above can be overcome , as Iowa ’ s polling has proved .
But Nevada ’ s voting-age population has particular characteristics that lead to additional polling challenges .
It ’ s important to keep in mind that accurate polling requires surveying a representative cross section of a given population , as Vox ’ s Matt Yglesias has explained : Usually a representative sample of the population can be polled through this method , and any undercounted groups can be corrected for by the weighting process Ralston outlined .
However , random phone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nevada .
Ralston says that is because the state has a “ fluctuating population , ” in large part due to its heavy reliance on the tourism and casino industries .
Nevada ’ s population can be transient , and can wax and wane seasonally .
Telephone polls become difficult to conduct in these conditions because as FiveThirtyEight points out , a sizable segment of likely voters does not have local cell phone numbers , numbers in public records may belong to those no longer living in the state , and newer residents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or even eligible — to vote .
And those who work in Nevada ’ s entertainment industry — there are around 60,000 members in the state ’ s Culinary Workers Union alone — can be difficult to reach by telephone due to their hours .
Many jobs in casinos , hotels , or restaurants are filled in shifts over a 24-hour business day instead of a more traditional 9-to-5 schedule .
In 2016 , Mark Mellman , a pollster who ’ s worked with Reid — the top Senate Democrat until his 2017 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Malone that failing to contact these workers , particularly those who belong to unions that encourage caucusing , can badly skew polling results .
“ If you ’ re only polling at night , ” Mellman said , “ you ’ re missing a fair share of electorate ... in the casino and entertainment industry that ’ s highly unionized , that ’ s very Democratic.
” The need for pollsters to have staff conducting field work over a 24-hour period rather than in evenings like in other states , as well as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ records and developing new models , means polling in Nevada is substantially more expensive to produce than in other states .
Patrick Murray , the director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute , told the Las Vegas Sun in August that polling the state could be twice as expensive as elsewhere because of the difficulty of contacting voters alone .
Without the body of reliable polling that has been available in the contests so far , it is hard to say who is truly ahead in Nevada .
Polls or not though , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ began Saturday .
Correction : An earlier version of this story misstated Harry Reid ’ s Senate title in 2010 .
He was majority leader .

With less than one week to go until the Nevada caucuses, it’s not clear whether any of the eight remaining Democratic presidential candidates has a distinct advantage in the state, because Nevada — referred to as “the stepchild among the first four [Democratic primary] states,” by Nevada Independent editor Jon Ralston — gets shockingly little attention from pollsters.
The reason? Although the caucuses — which will take place on February 22 this year — have been the third Democratic primary contest in the nation since 2008, the state is notoriously hard to poll.
So hard, in fact, that until Friday, the most recent poll included in RealClearPolitics’ Nevada polling average — from Suffolk University — was more than a month old.
We now have exactly one recent poll of the state, courtesy of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, which shows Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders in the lead among likely caucus-goers with 25 percent support, trailed by former Vice President Joe Biden with 18 percent, and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren with 13 percent. The poll was taken February 11 to 13, and has a margin of error of 4.8 percent.
These results should not be taken as absolute fact, however. Not only are Nevada polls challenging to do, they’re challenging to get right. In 2010, for example, polls suggested that then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was on course to lose reelection. Instead, he cruised to a nearly 6-point victory.
Ralston, who founded the nonprofit Nevada Independent in 2017, has minced no words when it comes to polling the state. In 2012, he wrote a piece titled “Why most polls done in Nevada are garbage,” and eight years later, he says the state’s polling problems have not been resolved.
“Nevada is a quirky state,” he told Vox. “And the new caucus rules, with early voting, combined with the impact of the Iowa disaster ... make polling very, very difficult.”
Changes to caucusing process has made polling more difficult
The Iowa caucuses are a well-established tradition dating back to the 1970s, but Nevada’s caucuses are relatively new. The relative newness of the caucuses means that pollsters have not had time to build the sort of infrastructure and state expertise that was developed over decades in Iowa.
For a pollster to provide an accurate snapshot of the state, Ralston points out that they need to “know how to weight the results to fit the picture that will exist on Election Day — that is, what the turnout actually will look like.”
As Vox’s Matt Yglesias has explained, pollsters typically give certain responses more weight than others in order to make sure their sample accurately reflects the likely electorate. But given the dearth of historical caucus day data, developing formulas to accurately weigh different responses becomes nearly impossible.
Further increasing the difficulty of developing turnout models is the fact that, as Ralston mentioned, the caucus rules will be different this year.
As Vox’s Andrew Prokop writes, Nevada’s caucus rules, like Iowa’s before it, have been changed to provide greater transparency. State party leaders will report three sets of caucus numbers: a pre-realignment vote total, the post-realignment vote total, and the delegate distribution. As in Iowa, caucus-goers whose first choice candidate does not receive at least 15 percent support will be asked to realign their support to a candidate who has met that threshold.
The state also has a newly instituted four-day early voting period that attempts to model caucusing by using a system modeled on ranked-choice voting.
The new rules mean pollsters are faced with new questions when it comes to predicting turnout: Will the early voting period increase participation by making the caucus process more accessible? Will the new caucus day rules — and the confusion similar rules caused in Iowa — lower enthusiasm among potential caucus-goers and reduce turnout?
For now, these are questions that can’t be answered until the caucuses are over. The answers the caucuses reveal will allow pollsters to build more accurate models for the 2024 election cycle. But even once these unknowns are solved for, pollsters in the state will still have to overcome another challenge that has made polling difficult: the uniqueness of Nevada’s caucus-going population.
Nevada’s workforce means normal best-polling practices aren’t effective
Again, concerns like those outlined above can be overcome, as Iowa’s polling has proved. But Nevada’s voting-age population has particular characteristics that lead to additional polling challenges.
It’s important to keep in mind that accurate polling requires surveying a representative cross section of a given population, as Vox’s Matt Yglesias has explained:
The most basic idea of polling is that you can get a pretty good idea of what a population of several million people thinks by asking a sample of just a few hundred of them. The trick is that for this to work, you want a random sample of the state’s population. If you sample a few hundred people coming out of an exurban megachurch, you’re going to get a sample that’s quite biased toward Republicans. If you sample a few hundred college students, you’ll get a sample that’s quite biased toward Democrats. Traditional telephone polls avoid this by calling people at random.
Usually a representative sample of the population can be polled through this method, and any undercounted groups can be corrected for by the weighting process Ralston outlined. However, random phone calls don’t work well in Nevada.
Ralston says that is because the state has a “fluctuating population,” in large part due to its heavy reliance on the tourism and casino industries. Nevada’s population can be transient, and can wax and wane seasonally. Telephone polls become difficult to conduct in these conditions because as FiveThirtyEight points out, a sizable segment of likely voters does not have local cell phone numbers, numbers in public records may belong to those no longer living in the state, and newer residents are less likely to be registered — or even eligible — to vote.
And those who work in Nevada’s entertainment industry — there are around 60,000 members in the state’s Culinary Workers Union alone — can be difficult to reach by telephone due to their hours. Many jobs in casinos, hotels, or restaurants are filled in shifts over a 24-hour business day instead of a more traditional 9-to-5 schedule.
In 2016, Mark Mellman, a pollster who’s worked with Reid — the top Senate Democrat until his 2017 retirement — told FiveThirtyEight’s Clare Malone that failing to contact these workers, particularly those who belong to unions that encourage caucusing, can badly skew polling results.
“If you’re only polling at night,” Mellman said, “you’re missing a fair share of electorate ... in the casino and entertainment industry that’s highly unionized, that’s very Democratic.”
The need for pollsters to have staff conducting field work over a 24-hour period rather than in evenings like in other states, as well as the costs involved in keeping up-to-date phone records and developing new models, means polling in Nevada is substantially more expensive to produce than in other states.
Patrick Murray, the director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute, told the Las Vegas Sun in August that polling the state could be twice as expensive as elsewhere because of the difficulty of contacting voters alone.
Without the body of reliable polling that has been available in the contests so far, it is hard to say who is truly ahead in Nevada. Polls or not though, the caucuses are coming: Early voting began Saturday.
Correction: An earlier version of this story misstated Harry Reid’s Senate title in 2010. He was majority leader.


vox--2020-02-15--A new report raises more questions about Bloomberg’s alleged sexism and sexual harassment

As presidential candidate and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has risen in Democratic primary polls — he ’ s currently in third place nationally according to RealClearPolitics ’ polling average — he ’ s faced increasing scrutiny about his past .
In particular , Bloomberg has been challenged about allegations of sexism and sexual harassment in the workplace , and has been questioned about a number of lawsuits filed against him and his eponymous company regarding those issues .
On Saturday , a new investigative report from the Washington Post ’ s Michael Kranish once again surfaced those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ documents , depositions , and interviews with witnesses , Kranish ’ s reporting details vulgar and misogynistic comments Bloomberg allegedly made toward women .
The report also features a former employee who says he heard one of the most notorious accusations against Bloomberg himself — that the former mayor once told a pregnant subordinate to “ kill ” her unborn child ( Bloomberg has denied saying this ) .
And in a week in which Bloomberg was accused of being racist due to resurfaced comments about the stop-and-frisk program he once championed , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bloomberg allegedly made that are startlingly degrading to African Americans ; one lawsuit claims Bloomberg once advised an employee to find “ some black who doesn ’ t have to speak English ” to work as a nanny for her .
Most of the accusations are from decades ago , when Bloomberg worked at the financial information services company he founded and that made him a billionaire .
But they ’ ve become newly relevant as he has begun to surge in national polls and emerged as a real contender for the nomination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Super Tuesday , a day when a third of the primary ’ s national delegates will be up for grabs across sixteen contests .
The allegations contained in the Post ’ s reporting — many of which Bloomberg has denied — are likely to join a list of concerns that have been raised by both his progressive rivals and some Democratic voters about his personal and political history .
These critics claim his past stances on stop-and-frisk , his unprecedented use of wealth to buy name recognition , and the allegations he faces @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he is fundamentally out of touch with Democratic Party .
And these allegations could also intensify calls for Bloomberg to release former employees from nondisclosure agreements made regarding the lawsuits , something Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren called for in December .
Whether these concerns are shared by the moderate voters whom Bloomberg is targeting with his campaign is an open question , however .
Bloomberg has been accused of some shocking behavior toward women Much of what the Post lays out in its investigation of Bloomberg ’ s inappropriate conduct has been reported @ @ @ @ @ @ @ critical new details .
Sekiko Sakai Garrison , a top saleswoman who worked for Bloomberg in his business information firm , sued him and his company in the ’ 90s for workplace discrimination .
The Post published some of the details of the complaints mentioned in the lawsuits : Bloomberg has denied accusations that he told her to “ kill ” the unborn child under oath , and he reached a confidential settlement with Garrison .
But the Post interviewed a former Bloomberg employee , David Zielenziger , who said that he personally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confirmed that he heard it , he said it was typical .
“ He talked kind of crudely about women all the time , ” he told the Post .
The Post also obtained and published a notorious booklet compiled by a Bloomberg employee that allegedly contained some of his most degrading and profane comments around the workplace .
Entitled “ The Wit and Wisdom of Michael Bloomberg , ” the 32-page booklet contains crude boasts and jokes , such as the claim that his famous computer system “ will do everything , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I guess that puts a lot of you girls out of business.
” In 2001 , a Bloomberg spokesman admitted that the booklet contained “ some of the things he might have said ” and Bloomberg has apologized to people offended by the booklet .
But what ’ s striking is that Bloomberg ’ s campaign today takes the stance that he never said anything in that booklet .
“ Mike simply did not say the things somebody wrote in this gag gift , ” Bloomberg spokesman Stu Loeser told the Post @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statement about Bloomberg ’ s past remarks that have stirred controversy : “ Mike openly admits that his words have not always aligned with his values and the way he has led his life and some of what he has said is disrespectful and wrong.
” It ’ s worth noting the lack of specificity of the statement given the number of accusations made against Bloomberg , and the fact that it is not an apology for his past behavior .
The Bloomberg campaign did not respond to a request for comment from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seemed to address the Post article , however , Bloomberg wrote , “ I would not be where I am today without the talented women around me .
I ’ ve depended on their leadership , their advice and their contributions .
As I ’ ve demonstrated throughout my career , I will always be a champion for women in the workplace.
” Garrison ’ s complaint also reportedly contains some allegations Bloomberg made racist remarks while at the office , including the remark about finding “ some black ” to serve as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mayor referred to Mexican clients as “ jumping beans.
” Bloomberg ’ s behavior toward women is only one of many fronts on which he ’ s facing questions over whether it ’ s appropriate for him to seek the Democratic nomination .
He has also , as the New York Times ’ Alexander Burns , Nicholas Kulish , Lazaro Gamio , and Karl Russell have reported , faced questions about the appropriateness of his charitable and political contributions , and the influence those gifts have given him .
Those reporters noted : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spending has also secured the allegiance or cooperation of powerful institutions and leaders within the Democratic Party who might take issue with parts of his record were they not so reliant on his largess.
” And in recent days , the candidate has had to defend himself against allegations he is racist following a progressive podcaster resurfacing a 2015 speech .
Bloomberg gave the speech defending New York ’ s stop-and-frisk program ( which was declared unconstitutional in 2013 ) , in which he said , “ Ninety-five percent of your murders — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ M.O .
You can just take the description , Xerox it and pass it out to all the cops .
They are male , minorities , 16 to 25.
” A clip of that speech went viral , and led to # BloombergIsRacist trending for much of the day Tuesday .
Bloomberg has apologized for supporting the program in recent months , and did so again Thursday , saying , “ I defended it , looking back , for too long because I didn ’ t understand then the unintended pain it was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and their kids .
...
I apologize.
” The effectiveness of these apologies — and what , if any , damage to Bloomberg ’ s campaign these controversies are inflicting — remains to be seen .
For now , Bloomberg remains strikingly popular among black voters ; a recent Quinnipiac poll , for instance , found he is the second most popular candidate among that demographic group , behind only former Vice President Joe Biden .
And he has won the endorsements of a number of prominent black and women politicians , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ London Breed , and Washington , DC Mayor Muriel Bowser .
Many of the concerns about the former mayor appear to come from progressive candidates ( like Warren ’ s call for Bloomberg to release those bound by NDAs ) and their surrogates ( like Sanders surrogate Shaun King ’ s critiques of Bloomberg on race , sex , and religion ) .
It is not clear that moderate voters share these concerns — particularly given Bloomberg ’ s poll numbers — meaning the candidate ’ s moment of truth is likely to @ @ @ @ @

As presidential candidate and former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg has risen in Democratic primary polls — he’s currently in third place nationally according to RealClearPolitics’ polling average — he’s faced increasing scrutiny about his past.
In particular, Bloomberg has been challenged about allegations of sexism and sexual harassment in the workplace, and has been questioned about a number of lawsuits filed against him and his eponymous company regarding those issues. On Saturday, a new investigative report from the Washington Post’s Michael Kranish once again surfaced those concerns.
Drawing from previously unreleased court documents, depositions, and interviews with witnesses, Kranish’s reporting details vulgar and misogynistic comments Bloomberg allegedly made toward women. The report also features a former employee who says he heard one of the most notorious accusations against Bloomberg himself — that the former mayor once told a pregnant subordinate to “kill” her unborn child (Bloomberg has denied saying this).
And in a week in which Bloomberg was accused of being racist due to resurfaced comments about the stop-and-frisk program he once championed, Kranish’s work also highlights comments Bloomberg allegedly made that are startlingly degrading to African Americans; one lawsuit claims Bloomberg once advised an employee to find “some black who doesn’t have to speak English” to work as a nanny for her.
Most of the accusations are from decades ago, when Bloomberg worked at the financial information services company he founded and that made him a billionaire. But they’ve become newly relevant as he has begun to surge in national polls and emerged as a real contender for the nomination — particularly if he performs well on Super Tuesday, when a third of the primary’s national delegates will be up for grabs across 16 contests.
The allegations contained in the Post’s reporting — many of which Bloomberg has denied — are likely to join a list of concerns that have been raised by both his progressive rivals and some Democratic voters about his personal and political history. These critics claim his past stances on stop-and-frisk, his unprecedented use of wealth to buy name recognition, and the allegations he faces about his treatment of women mean that he is fundamentally out of touch with the Democratic Party.
These allegations could also intensify calls for Bloomberg to release former employees from nondisclosure agreements made regarding the lawsuits, something Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren called for in December.
Whether these concerns are shared by the moderate voters whom Bloomberg is targeting with his campaign is an open question, however.
Bloomberg has been accused of some shocking behavior toward women
Much of what the Post lays out in its investigation of Bloomberg’s inappropriate conduct has been reported on before, but there are some critical new details.
Sekiko Sakai Garrison, a top salesperson who worked for Bloomberg in his business information firm, sued him and his company in the ’90s for workplace discrimination. The Post published some of the details of the complaints mentioned in the lawsuits:
On April 11, 1995 at approximately 11:20 a.m., Bloomberg was having a photograph taken with two female Company salespeople and a group of N.Y.U. Business School students, in the company snack area. When Bloomberg noticed Garrison standing nearby, he asked, “Why didn’t they ask you to be in the picture? I guess they saw your face.” Continuing his penchant for ridiculing recently married women in his employ, Bloomberg asked plaintiff, “How’s married life? You married?” Plaintiff responded that her marriage was great and was going to get better in a few months: that she was pregnant, and the baby was due the following September. He responded to her “Kill it!” Plaintiff asked Bloomberg to repeat himself, and again he said, “Kill it!” and muttered, “Great! Number 16!” suggesting to plaintiff his unhappiness that sixteen women in the Company had maternity-related status. Then he walked away.
Bloomberg has denied under oath the accusations that he told her to “kill” the unborn child, and he reached a confidential settlement with Garrison.
But the Post interviewed a former Bloomberg employee, David Zielenziger, who said that he witnessed the conversation. Zielenziger not only confirmed that he heard it, he said it was typical. “He talked kind of crudely about women all the time,” he told the Post.
The Post also obtained and published a notorious booklet compiled by a Bloomberg employee that contained some of his most degrading and profane alleged comments around the workplace. Titled “The Wit and Wisdom of Michael Bloomberg,” the 32-page booklet contains crude boasts and jokes, such as the claim that his famous computer system “will do everything, including give you [oral sex]. I guess that puts a lot of you girls out of business.”
In 2001, a Bloomberg spokesperson admitted that the booklet contained “some of the things he might have said” and Bloomberg has apologized to people offended by the booklet. But what’s striking is that Bloomberg’s campaign today takes the stance that he never said anything in that booklet. “Mike simply did not say the things somebody wrote in this gag gift,” Bloomberg spokesperson Stu Loeser told the Post.
Loeser also added a general blanket statement about Bloomberg’s past remarks that have stirred controversy: “Mike openly admits that his words have not always aligned with his values and the way he has led his life and some of what he has said is disrespectful and wrong.” It’s worth noting the lack of specificity of the statement given the number of accusations made against Bloomberg, and the fact that it is not an apology for his past behavior.
The Bloomberg campaign did not respond to a request for comment from Vox.
In a Saturday tweet that seemed to address the Post article, however, Bloomberg wrote, “I would not be where I am today without the talented women around me. I’ve depended on their leadership, their advice and their contributions. As I’ve demonstrated throughout my career, I will always be a champion for women in the workplace.”
Garrison’s complaint also reportedly contains some allegations Bloomberg made racist remarks while at the office, including the remark about finding “some black” to serve as a nanny, and that the former mayor referred to Mexican clients as “jumping beans.”
Bloomberg faces increasing scrutiny on many fronts
Bloomberg’s behavior toward women is only one of many fronts on which he’s facing questions over whether it’s appropriate for him to seek the Democratic nomination.
He has also, as the New York Times’s Alexander Burns, Nicholas Kulish, Lazaro Gamio, and Karl Russell have reported, faced questions about the appropriateness of his charitable and political contributions, and the influence those gifts have given him. Those reporters noted: Bloomberg’s “political and philanthropic spending has also secured the allegiance or cooperation of powerful institutions and leaders within the Democratic Party who might take issue with parts of his record were they not so reliant on his largess.”
And in recent days, the candidate has had to defend himself against allegations that he is racist following a progressive podcaster resurfacing a 2015 speech. Bloomberg gave the speech defending New York’s stop-and-frisk program (which was declared unconstitutional in 2013), in which he said, “Ninety-five percent of your murders — murderers and murder victims — fit one M.O. You can just take the description, Xerox it and pass it out to all the cops. They are male, minorities, 16 to 25.”
A clip of that speech went viral and led to #BloombergIsRacist trending for much of the day Tuesday.
Bloomberg has apologized for supporting the program in recent months, and did so again Thursday, saying, “I defended it, looking back, for too long because I didn’t understand then the unintended pain it was causing to young black and brown families and their kids. ... I apologize.”
The effectiveness of these apologies — and what, if any, damage to Bloomberg’s campaign these controversies are inflicting — remains to be seen.
For now, Bloomberg remains strikingly popular among black voters; a recent Quinnipiac poll, for instance, found he is the second most popular candidate among that demographic group, behind only former Vice President Joe Biden. And he has won the endorsements of a number of prominent black women politicians, including Rep. Lucy McBath, San Francisco Mayor London Breed, and Washington, DC, Mayor Muriel Bowser.
Many of the concerns about the former mayor appear to come from progressive candidates (like Warren’s call for Bloomberg to release those bound by NDAs) and their surrogates (like Sanders surrogate Shaun King’s critiques of Bloomberg on race, sex, and religion). It is not clear that moderate voters share these concerns — particularly given Bloomberg’s poll numbers — meaning the candidate’s moment of truth is likely to come on Super Tuesday.


vox--2020-02-15--Poll: Bernie Sanders is beating every other candidate in Nevada

A new Las Vegas Review-Journal/AARP Nevada poll shows Sen. Bernie Sanders leading the Democratic presidential field in Nevada , where the third contest of the Democratic primaries will be held in one week .
The poll found 25 percent of likely Democratic caucus-goers support Sanders , 18 percent back former Vice President Joe Biden , 13 percent favor Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren , and 11 percent support former hedge fund manager Tom Steyer .
Both former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar have the support of 10 percent of likely caucus-goers , and 8 percent of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ polling firm WPA Intelligence conducted the telephone survey on behalf of the Review-Journal and AARP Nevada in the days after the New Hampshire primary , February 11 to 13 ; the poll has a margin of error of 4.8 percentage points .
It is important to note that this poll , while professionally conducted , should be taken with some caution .
The results are certainly in line with recent trends — Sanders has surged in a number of national and state polls , and ahead of the Nevada caucuses , many have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investments in the state and has unrivaled support from Latino voters .
But , that margin of error means Biden could actually top the field in the state ; and broadly , Nevada is a state that is notoriously difficult to poll accurately .
It is so difficult that according to RealClearPolitics ’ s polling aggregator , there have been only three major Nevada surveys in 2020 ( in contrast to more than 20 conducted in advance of the New Hampshire primary ) .
In both previous 2020 Nevada polls , the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sanders .
A Suffolk University/USA Today poll from early January showed Biden in the lead with 19 percent support , Sanders with 18 percent , and their nearest competitor — Warren — 8 percentage points behind .
A Fox News poll taken at the beginning of January showed Biden coming in with 23 percent support and Sanders at 17 percent , with Warren and Steyer 5 percentage points behind the senator from Vermont .
Why polling in Nevada is extremely difficult , briefly explained There are a few reasons why Nevada is so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2004 election , the state switched from holding primaries to caucuses , and was pushed much earlier on the primary calendar as part of an effort to make the primary system more inclusive of the Democratic Party ’ s demographic make-up .
( Nevada ’ s population is almost a third Latino . )
While this change did make the Democratic primary more diverse , it also introduced new uncertainties into the polling and candidate selection process .
This has made pollsters ’ work more difficult in that respondents aren ’ t always @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and because decades of caucusing data isn ’ t available to help build models or make assumptions .
And as FiveThirtyEight ’ s Clare Malone has reported , part of the difficulty of Nevada polling is that ’ s it ’ s simply harder to talk to people .
The state has a disproportionate amount of people who work odd hours , and a relatively transient population .
That all being said , the poll ’ s findings don ’ t seem surprising given how Sanders is trending across the nation , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Nevada .
A recent national poll conducted by Morning Consult , for example , shows Sanders is dominant among Latino voters , with more than double the support of any other candidate .
In 2019 , Sanders received more financial support from Latino donors than any other 2020 hopeful , snagging up over a third of the roughly $ 24 million that Latinos donated to Democratic presidential candidates .
Following his New Hampshire win , Sanders is on the rise in other polls as well Sanders has leaped from third place to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ South Carolina , according to an East Carolina University poll released Friday .
The university ’ s pollsters found Biden has 28 percent support in the state , Sanders has 20 percent , and Steyer has 14 percent .
South Carolina has been considered Biden ’ s “ firewall ” in the primaries — his path to the presidency relies on heavy support from black voters — but his support there has been declining .
Sanders also has been looking strong in key states that will vote on Super Tuesday , a day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ race ’ s national delegates will be up for grabs .
In particular , as Vox ’ s Dylan Scott reported on Friday , Sanders is surging in Texas and in California , the most delegate-rich state to vote on March 3 : A new University of Texas/Texas Tribune poll shows a Sanders surge , with the Vermont senator increasing his support by 12 points since last fall , up to 24 percent and ahead of former Vice President Joe Biden at 22 percent .
Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts is in third @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which was taken January 31 to February 9 and has a margin of error of 4 percent .
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg gets 10 percent .
Former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota are in single digits .
Earlier this week , a Capitol Weekly poll of California taken February 6 to 9 gave Sanders a healthy 13-point lead over Warren , well beyond the margin of error , with 29 percent of the vote .
Biden , Buttigieg , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the poll .
The Sanders surge in the polls is a pretty clear phenomenon , and a victory in Nevada seems quite possible .
The key question there — and in other states where he ’ s leading — is whether he can pull off the sorts of decisive victories needed to ensure he ’ s positioned to win a majority of pledged delegates before the Democratic National Convention in July .
And as of right now , that ’ s far from a sure thing .

A new Las Vegas Review-Journal/AARP Nevada poll shows Sen. Bernie Sanders leading the Democratic presidential field in Nevada, where the third contest of the Democratic primaries will be held in one week.
The poll found 25 percent of likely Democratic caucus-goers support Sanders, 18 percent back former Vice President Joe Biden, 13 percent favor Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, and 11 percent support former hedge fund manager Tom Steyer. Both former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar have the support of 10 percent of likely caucus-goers, and 8 percent of respondents said they were undecided.
Republican polling firm WPA Intelligence conducted the telephone survey on behalf of the Review-Journal and AARP Nevada in the days after the New Hampshire primary, February 11 to 13; the poll has a margin of error of 4.8 percentage points.
It is important to note that this poll, while professionally conducted, should be taken with some caution. The results are certainly in line with recent trends — Sanders has surged in a number of national and state polls, and ahead of the Nevada caucuses, many have noted that he’s made strong investments in the state and has unrivaled support from Latino voters. But, that margin of error means Biden could actually top the field in the state; and broadly, Nevada is a state that is notoriously difficult to poll accurately.
It is so difficult that according to RealClearPolitics’s polling aggregator, there have been only three major Nevada surveys in 2020 (in contrast to more than 20 conducted in advance of the New Hampshire primary).
In both previous 2020 Nevada polls, the state seemed to be torn between Biden and Sanders. A Suffolk University/USA Today poll from early January showed Biden in the lead with 19 percent support, Sanders with 18 percent, and their nearest competitor — Warren — 8 percentage points behind. A Fox News poll taken at the beginning of January showed Biden coming in with 23 percent support and Sanders at 17 percent, with Warren and Steyer 5 percentage points behind the senator from Vermont.
Why polling in Nevada is extremely difficult, briefly explained
There are a few reasons why Nevada is so difficult to poll accurately.
After the 2004 election, the state switched from holding primaries to caucuses, and was pushed much earlier on the primary calendar as part of an effort to make the primary system more inclusive of the Democratic Party’s demographic make-up. (Nevada’s population is almost a third Latino.)
While this change did make the Democratic primary more diverse, it also introduced new uncertainties into the polling and candidate selection process. This has made pollsters’ work more difficult in that respondents aren’t always familiar with the ins-and-outs of caucusing, and because decades of caucusing data isn’t available to help build models or make assumptions.
And as FiveThirtyEight’s Clare Malone has reported, part of the difficulty of Nevada polling is that’s it’s simply harder to talk to people. The state has a disproportionate amount of people who work odd hours, and a relatively transient population.
That all being said, the poll’s findings don’t seem surprising given how Sanders is trending across the nation, and given the demographics of the Democratic electorate in Nevada.
A recent national poll conducted by Morning Consult, for example, shows Sanders is dominant among Latino voters, with more than double the support of any other candidate. In 2019, Sanders received more financial support from Latino donors than any other 2020 hopeful, snagging up over a third of the roughly $24 million that Latinos donated to Democratic presidential candidates.
Following his New Hampshire win, Sanders is on the rise in other polls as well
Sanders has leaped from third place to second place in the past month in South Carolina, according to an East Carolina University poll released Friday. The university’s pollsters found Biden has 28 percent support in the state, Sanders has 20 percent, and Steyer has 14 percent. South Carolina has been considered Biden’s “firewall” in the primaries — his path to the presidency relies on heavy support from black voters — but his support there has been declining.
Sanders also has been looking strong in key states that will vote on Super Tuesday, a day when more than 33 percent of the race’s national delegates will be up for grabs.
In particular, as Vox’s Dylan Scott reported on Friday, Sanders is surging in Texas and in California, the most delegate-rich state to vote on March 3:
A new University of Texas/Texas Tribune poll shows a Sanders surge, with the Vermont senator increasing his support by 12 points since last fall, up to 24 percent and ahead of former Vice President Joe Biden at 22 percent. Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts is in third place at 15 percent in the poll, which was taken January 31 to February 9 and has a margin of error of 4 percent. Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg gets 10 percent. Former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota are in single digits. Earlier this week, a Capitol Weekly poll of California taken February 6 to 9 gave Sanders a healthy 13-point lead over Warren, well beyond the margin of error, with 29 percent of the vote. Biden, Buttigieg, and Bloomberg were clustered below 15 percent in the poll.
The Sanders surge in the polls is a pretty clear phenomenon, and a victory in Nevada seems quite possible. The key question there — and in other states where he’s leading — is whether he can pull off the sorts of decisive victories needed to ensure he’s positioned to win a majority of pledged delegates before the Democratic National Convention in July. And as of right now, that’s far from a sure thing.


vox--2020-02-15--France reports the first coronavirus death outside of Asia

A Chinese tourist died due to Covid-19 — the illness caused by the coronavirus outbreak first observed in Wuhan , China — at a French hospital Friday .
The case was the first reported death caused by the virus outside of Asia .
“ I was informed last night of the death of the 80-year-old patient who has been hospitalized at Bichat hospital since January 25 , and who was suffering from a coronavirus pulmonary infection , ” France ’ s health minister , Agnès Buzyn , said in a statement Saturday .
The victim , who has not been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tourist on January 16 .
He was hospitalized and placed under strict isolation on January 25 .
The man was from the Chinese province of Hubei , the center of the coronavirus outbreak and where the largest concentration of infections have been confirmed .
The tourist ’ s daughter was also hospitalized , but French authorities say she is expected to recover .
There are 10 patients with confirmed coronavirus infections in France — six are in hospitals , but four have fully recovered and been released .
And the prognosis for those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of those patients Saturday : “ Their condition does not give cause for concern.
” So far nine countries across Europe have reported a combined 46 cases of the virus .
Germany has reported the most : 16 .
There are currently more than 60,000 confirmed Covid-19 cases globally , with the overwhelming majority of those cases occurring in China .
More than 1,500 people have died from infections ; more than 8,500 have recovered .
Beyond France and mainland China , the Philippines , Hong Kong , and Japan have also seen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus outbreak remains of greatest concern for those in mainland China US officials have advised Americans to avoid traveling to China if possible , with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the US State Department having issued their highest-level travel alerts for China .
But those outside of that country , as Vox ’ s Julia Belluz has explained , do not need to harbor concerns about falling victim to the virus , or panic about it spreading : [ P ] eople worried about travel should remember that these advisories @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is currently playing out .
Of the cases right now , 99 percent are in mainland China .
And more than half of those are in Hubei .
“ The risk of acquiring this infection outside of Hubei and , truly , outside of China is remarkably low , ” said Isaac Bogoch , a professor at the University of Toronto who studies how air travel influences the dynamics outbreaks — including the new coronavirus infection .
People with the virus have been detected in other countries , which is the reason the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emergency .
But to date , those have mainly been travelers from China and their close contacts .
“ So if people are traveling [ anywhere outside of China , ] your risk is close to zero percent , ” Bogoch said .
Experts say East Asia and Southeast Asia are most at risk at the moment , particularly given that cases discovered in countries outside of mainland China have not led to local outbreaks of illness .
Covid-19 cases in Europe and elsewhere are certainly cause for concern — which is why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ responses to the novel virus — but they do not yet represent a pandemic .

A Chinese tourist died due to Covid-19 — the illness caused by the coronavirus outbreak first observed in Wuhan, China — at a French hospital Friday. The case was the first reported death caused by the virus outside of Asia.
“I was informed last night of the death of the 80-year-old patient who has been hospitalized at Bichat hospital since January 25, and who was suffering from a coronavirus pulmonary infection,” France’s health minister, Agnès Buzyn, said in a statement Saturday.
The victim, who has not been named, arrived in France as a tourist on January 16. He was hospitalized and placed under strict isolation on January 25. The man was from the Chinese province of Hubei, the center of the coronavirus outbreak and where the largest concentration of infections have been confirmed.
The tourist’s daughter was also hospitalized, but French authorities say she is expected to recover.
There are 10 patients with confirmed coronavirus infections in France — six are in hospitals, but four have fully recovered and been released. And the prognosis for those still hospitalized is positive; Buzyn said of those patients Saturday: “Their condition does not give cause for concern.”
So far nine countries across Europe have reported a combined 46 cases of the virus. Germany has reported the most: 16.
There are currently more than 60,000 confirmed Covid-19 cases globally, with the overwhelming majority of those cases occurring in China. More than 1,500 people have died from infections; more than 8,500 have recovered. Beyond France and mainland China, the Philippines, Hong Kong, and Japan have also seen Covid-19 deaths.
For now, the coronavirus outbreak remains of greatest concern for those in mainland China
US officials have advised Americans to avoid traveling to China if possible, with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the US State Department having issued their highest-level travel alerts for China. But those outside of that country, as Vox’s Julia Belluz has explained, do not need to harbor concerns about falling victim to the virus, or panic about it spreading:
[P]eople worried about travel should remember that these advisories focus on China, where the epidemic is currently playing out. Of the cases right now, 99 percent are in mainland China. And more than half of those are in Hubei. “The risk of acquiring this infection outside of Hubei and, truly, outside of China is remarkably low,” said Isaac Bogoch, a professor at the University of Toronto who studies how air travel influences the dynamics outbreaks — including the new coronavirus infection. People with the virus have been detected in other countries, which is the reason the WHO declared the outbreak a public health emergency. But to date, those have mainly been travelers from China and their close contacts. “So if people are traveling [anywhere outside of China,] your risk is close to zero percent,” Bogoch said.
Experts say East Asia and Southeast Asia are most at risk at the moment, particularly given that cases discovered in countries outside of mainland China have not led to local outbreaks of illness. Covid-19 cases in Europe and elsewhere are certainly cause for concern — which is why global health experts are collaborating in their responses to the novel virus — but they do not yet represent a pandemic.