Donald Is A Failure

5 Watt Bulb by Nancy Ohanian

 

In case you missed the Sydney Morning Herald on Sunday, sometimes it's good to get a look at our own politics from a perspective somewhat removed. Columnists Ian Hughes and Alan Blotcky made it clear why that hasn't been easy anywhere in the world, since, as they wrote, "For almost four years, there has hardly been a day that Donald Trump has not made front-page news. The unrelenting avalanche of lies and norm-shattering behaviour that Trump has unleashed has presented the mainstream media with an unprecedented challenge. It is a challenge that the media has struggled to meet, largely because of the ethical and practical difficulties that journalists face in dealing with Trump’s mental pathology." Ah, yes... Trump's mental pathology, which is becoming more and more of an issue in the U.S. election as the "president" suffers a complete mental breakdown front and center for everyone to see. Over the weekend, a trio of Washington Post reporters wrote about how undecided voters in states that voted for Trump in 2016 have been making up their minds to vote against him this cycle, "choices they say were either made or reinforced in recent weeks as Trump has stumbled through a disastrous stretch that has included embarrassing leaks about his comments disparaging military members, a ridiculed debate performance and a Rose Garden ceremony that some describe as a superspreader for a deadly virus. In the homestretch of the 2020 campaign, there has been little good news for the incumbent. And that is showing up as an ominous turn for him in the polls as Biden consolidates support. What had been a steady national lead for Biden in the high single digits during the late summer has expanded to 12 points in early October."

One voter who didn't like Trump or Hillary in 2016 ("couldn't stand" was her phrase) voted for the Libertarian. This year she said, "Trump is just so scary at this point that I don’t think I can waste my vote on a third party. It just keeps getting worse. From his pick for the Supreme Court to his racist comments to his degrading anyone who doesn’t agree with him to his handling of the virus. I can go on and on." A North Carolina Republican who wrote in Romney in 2016 is voting for Biden this year. He told the Post reporters that Trump is "dangerous... just horrible."

Four years ago, voters who decided in the presidential campaign’s waning days broke decisively for Trump, a political newcomer, delivering him a shock victory. This year, evidence suggests there are few who have yet to make up their minds. But many of those who had been on the fence appear to be coming down on Biden’s side.

Back to Hughes and Blotcky in Australia-- there was a reminder that "Even before his election, mental health professionals were warning that Trump’s psychopathology posed a threat to US democracy and to global stability. After his election, dozens of mental health experts collaborated on the book The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump which became a New York Times bestseller. Over the past three or four months, the number of voices expressing alarm at Trump’s pathology has been growing. The media, however, has largely continued to cover Trump’s actions one story at a time, without joining up the dots and accurately describing his pathology. Of all the thousands of headlines, there is one headline that has not been printed but that makes the most sense of all: "Donald Trump suffers from a dangerous incurable narcissistic disorder which makes him incapable of empathy or reason. He is a grave danger to the US and the world."

The failure of the media to emphasise this obvious fact is a lost opportunity to inform and educate the public so that Trump’s pathology is fully appreciated and understood. As mental health professionals know, Trump’s mental disorder manifests itself in a wide variety of behaviours and not in isolated or disconnected events. In these dangerous times, the challenge for the media, difficult though it is, should be to explain Trump’s pathology in all its complexities and ramifications for the public.

...The evidence about Trump is overwhelming. A free press is one of the central pillars of a democracy. Its role is to be a watchdog on our political leaders and to inform the public. The media can play a vital role in engaging with the alarming reality of Trump’s pathology, despite the difficulties in doing so. Donald Trump is part of a much larger picture. Individuals with dangerous personalities have risen to the highest ranks of power throughout modern history-- from Nixon to Mao, Stalin to Pol Pot. Some have played a crucial role in steering our world towards disaster. A widespread understanding of this basic fact has now become essential for the protection of democracy.

Amy Walter wrote an excellent column on Monday putting all this into a very specific electoral context: Trump's failed bet on his base. She identified 4 requirements for his base electoral strategy to have worked for him (over and above a good economy):

• A united, enthusiastic and engaged GOP base
• A deeply flawed opponent
• Decent support among independent voters (Even as Trump ran up the score among his base in 2016, he also carried independent voters by 2-points.)
• Third-party candidates siphoning off enough votes to allow Trump to win key states with a plurality as he did in 2016

None of that-- including the good economy part-- has worked out for him. And he wasn't counting on a pandemic to expose his incompetence. But that aside, the rock solid GOP base it a little shaky. Biden doesn't appear threatening, even if no one actually likes him. Independent voters hate Trump almost as much as Democrats and he's going to lose every swing state because of that, even a state like Arizona that no one ever counted as a swing state before. And Kanye West? That doesn't seem to be working out for Trump, does it? He might even take Republican votes from Trump... since Democrats aren't going to be this crock from him:

Trump Still Has A Narrow Pathway To Victory

Amy Walter did some significant research for the Cook Report that was published yesterday. It confirms what we already know: Trump's narrow pathway to victory hinges on 2 things, turning out his base of haters-- even the ones who don't normally vote-- in huge numbers, while disenfranchising and discouraging as many normal people from voting as possible.

Trump's polling is in the toilet-- nationally and in the swing states-- and Walter looked at the increasingly narrow pathway he still has. "Trump," she wrote, "is trailing, not because he's losing his 2016 base, but because he has never expanded beyond it." She compared new recent national poll from Pew(7/27-8/2) with the results of Pew's 2016 validated vote survey (basically, a post-election exit poll that uses official voting records). What she found is that "Trump is hitting his 2016 share of the vote among most demographic groups. But, he's not grown beyond those voters. Instead, it's Biden who has improved markedly on Clinton's 2016 performance."

[I]n almost every demographic category, Trump's share of the vote mirrors what he got in 2016. In other words, there's no evidence that he's slipped significantly with his base, or gained support from anyone who didn't support him in 2016.

For example, for all the talk of Trump's cratering in the suburbs, the recent Pew poll finds that the president isn't doing any worse today among white, college-educated voters than he did in 2016. In 2016, Trump took just 38 percent of the vote from this group. Today, he's still sitting at 38 percent. But, Biden has improved on Hillary Clinton's 55 percent showing by 6 points to 61 percent. Trump hasn't lost support from his core white, non-college base either. The July/August poll found him taking 64 percent with this group-- the same percentage he got in 2016. But, Biden has improved on Clinton's anemic 28 percent showing by 6 points. Most important, Trump has made no gains among independent voters, while Biden has improved on Clinton's showing by 14 points.

One bright spot for Trump is an increase in support from Latinos. He took 35 percent of the vote among Hispanics in July/August, a 7 point increase from his 2016 showing. His support among Evangelical Protestants has also improved-- from 77 percent in 2016, to 83 percent.

So, how can this work? If Trump isn't really losing support from his 2016 base, but Biden is gaining on Clinton's performance, where are those extra votes coming from?

Answer: a lot is coming from voters who supported third-party/other candidates in 2016. According to the Pew July survey, voters who didn't support either major party candidate last election are now breaking decidedly for Biden-- 55 percent to 39 percent. This group of non-Trump/non-Clinton voters doesn't get the attention of Obama-Trump voters or suburban moms, but they are a not-insignificant portion of the electorate.

In the 2016 election, the non-Clinton/Trump vote was 6 percent. The Pew validated voter survey put it at 7 percent-- so a touch higher than the popular vote...

Trump has failed to broaden his base. Instead, his ability to win this election will come down to whether he can deepen his base.

That means turning out a higher percentage of his base vote and hoping that Biden and Democrats fail to meet that same level of enthusiasm with their core constituencies.

Analysis from my colleague David Wasserman earlier this year revealed a huge number of non-voting, non-college whites in the Upper Midwest. "In 2016, non-college white voters made up 50 percent of the electorate in Michigan, 49 percent in Pennsylvania and 63 percent in Wisconsin. But among non-voters, whites without college degrees were 60 percent in Michigan, 64 percent in Pennsylvania and 64 percent in Wisconsin." In other words, there's a large pool of potential voters for Trump to mine in key swing states.

But, Trump's path to building on his 2016 showing isn't looking as clear and easy as some might expect. An analysis of the most recent Marquette University Law School survey by Craig Gilbert, the pre-eminent expert of voting trends in the state, and a reporter/columnist at the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, finds signs of weakening for Trump in parts of the state he dominated in 2016.

Gilbert found that Biden's strength in the Milwaukee and Madison media markets is similar to Clinton's, but that the former Vice President "is battling Trump to a draw in the combined media markets of Green Bay, Wausau, La Crosse, Duluth and the Twin Cities-- media markets that encompass the kind of small-town, rural areas where Trump beat Clinton by 15 points in 2016.

This could be due to a number of factors, writes Gilbert, including Biden's "own political strengths," an "erosion of support for Trump," and/or the fact that these are parts of the electorate where Clinton underperformed in 2016 and Biden is simply hitting 'normal' Democratic performance.

Either way, it suggests that just trying to run up the score by bringing in low-propensity voters from these parts of the state, may not be enough for Trump to win here in 2020. Of course, we don't know how the events of the last 60+ days of this election may impact this turnout. Will images of burning cities-- especially ones in their own state-- be enough to motivate more non-Trump-like voters to the polls this November? Will Trump be able to do something the campaign has thus been unable to accomplish: drive up Biden's negatives to Hillary Clinton's level? What happens if the coronavirus comes back with a vengeance this fall?

Trump's path to Electoral College victory has always been a narrow one. But, the latest Pew poll suggests that turning out infrequent base voters  is going to be more important than ever.

There hasn't been lot of publicly-available House polling. Occasionally campaigns share it with me but so far this summer there have been a few polls, mostly looking good for Democrats and bad for Republicans-- and applicable to Trump's struggle. Last week, for example, the Bangor Daily News released a poll of Maine's second congressional district which Trump won in 2016-- 51.4% to 41.1% (giving him one of Maine's 4 electoral college votes). Two years late the district flipped from red to blue based on ranked choice voting, giving dishonest conservative Democrat who campaigned as a progressive, Jared Golden a 1 point win. On election night the Republican incumbent's raw vote was 134,184 (46.33%) and Golden's was 132,013 (45.58%). Sinceno one reached 50%, ranked choice voting kicked in and Golden emerged the winner with 142,440 votes (50.62%) to Poliquin's 138,931 (49.38%) The new poll shows Golden beating his GOP opponent by 9 points this cycle.

Earlier this month Monmouth polled Iowa, and showed that the Democrats will keep the 2 seats won by Abby Finkenauer and Cindy Axne in 2018-- Finkenauer by 10 points and Axne by 6 points. The Republicans look likely to hold onto their one seat and possibly win the open blue seat from which Dave Loebsack is retiring. The latest Monmouth poll also shows Trump ahead in Iowa by 2 points.

Trump, His Governors And His Party-- A Toxic Brew Many Republicans Just Will Not Survive

Yesterday, the Cook Report's Amy Walter wrote that Florida has moved from "Toss Up" to "Leans Democrat." She doesn't really believe it; it isn't part of the Cook ideology. Florida can't be leaning Democrat-- even if their own metrics show that it is. "It’s not just Trump," she admitted, "who has seen his numbers slump as the state has struggled to contain the virus this summer. GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis has seen a drastic change in his political fortunes from spring to summer. A Quinnipiac poll released this week found DeSantis’ job approval rating at just 41 percent favorable to 52 percent unfavorable-- a 19 point shift in negative opinion since April. That July Quinnipiac poll found Biden leading Trump by 20 points on who is best able to handle the coronavirus, including an eight-point lead with those 65 and older. For months, Trump has questioned the severity of this crisis. But in Florida, 83 percent of voters see coronavirus as a serious problem, and 66 percent are very, or somewhat worried that they will get this virus. The only group not taking coronavirus seriously are Republican voters; 52 percent say they think the virus is under control."

And Florida isn't the only state where support for the Republican Party is collapsing for a myriad of reasons, none of which include any efforts of the Biden campaign ir the Democratic Party. At Axios, David Nather looked at how governors of Arizona, Georgia and Texas-- as well as Florida-- are losing the confidence of their citizens.

"The governors in four of the states hit hardest by the coronavirus," he wrote, "have taken a massive hit in public approval over their handling of the pandemic... Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey, and Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp-- all Republicans-- saw their ratings take a nosedive this month as coronavirus cases skyrocketed in their states... The key to the sharp declines for the four GOP governors was a softening in their support among Republicans, according to SurveyMonkey chief research officer Jon Cohen. In Texas, 69% of Republicans still approve of Abbott's handling of the virus, he said, but that's down from 89% right after Memorial Day... The political damage from the coronavirus won't just be a factor in the presidential election. It's going to affect the political standing-- and the legacies-- of the governors in the hardest-hit states, too."

Frankly, I don't care too much about the legacies of Ron DeSantis, Greg Abbott, Doug Ducey and Brian Kemp-- unless Kemp's includes a long stint in prison for election fraud. But what I do care about is how a toxic combination of gubernatorial incompetence and ideological anti-science policy and all that emanates from the Trump Regime, impacts the 2020 down-ballot races. Earlier today, for example, we saw how Bob Lynch, a Democratic candidate for the state House in Miami-Dade, saw how devastating that combination will be for the GOP at the ballot box: "This is not a year where we should be listening to the traditional handicapping of state legislative races," he told me today. "The catastrophic incompetence of the Trump and DeSantis’ administration has brought our state to the brink of ruin. We’ve had more Floridians die of COVID-19 than every single hurricane in the state’s history combined. Where the hell is the state House? Where is Danny Perez? Why is the state legislature not doing anything to hold these people accountable and save lives and jobs? Because all of the Republicans are complicit, especially the ones in future leadership roles. Anyone who is only looking at so called 'winnable' races based on outdated metrics is missing the big picture and an opportunity for real change in the state of Florida. And it is precisely races like mine that donors should be focusing on because the return on investment is much higher and the capital required is far lower. I will continue to hang Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis around my opponent's neck like a millstone because he is responsible for enabling their incompetence and corruption. People relying on PVI or past breakdowns are living in a different reality. The situation is really bad here and we are entirely controlled by Republicans at the state level. No excuses."

Again-- it isn't just Florida. Look at this Cook chart of district ratings changes. With the single exception Matt Cunningham, all of the Democrats mentioned are godawful and undeserving of another term in Congress or, at best, just a mediocre waste of a seat. Yet, all are rated as more likely to win reelection now than they were last month. Why? Nothing any of them did. It's just Trump. And the Republicans mentioned? All are now less likely to win reelection. With the single exception of Roger Williams (the Yoho accomplice) none of them did anything different from what they always do to earn a downgrade. But a combination of Trump, GOP governance and their own spineless enabling of both have made it more likely that they will lose in November.

Kara Eastman is seeing the same kind of thing in Omaha, where she's running for a seat (NE-02, which Cook moved from "lean R" to "toss up") occupied by a total knee-jerk Trump enabler, Donald J Bacon. "People," she told me this  morning, "aren’t stupid. When they see Republican elected officials ignoring Trump’s mishandling of this crisis, they get angry. Real leaders should be able to call out mismanagement wherever they see it. Sadly, most Republican leaders are afraid to cross Trump. Their silence only enables his horrible deeds."

Cook: Trump Is Dragging Down Republican Candidates With Him

Cook is usually a lagging indicator. They do not move on a dime. If they move a race from "leans Republican" to "toss up," it probably means you should expect a big loss for the GOP. Yesterday, Amy Walter, one of their top prognosticators, used the word "tsunami." It's July; I would interpret that to mean Cook foresees a mass GOP drowning in November-- an actual; threat to to basic well-being of the party's existence. This isn't just about swing states and swing districts-- you can start anticipating painful Republican losses in "solid red" states like Alaska, Texas, Arizona, Georgia and Montana. And that isn't just about electoral votes but about Republicans up for reelection-- or running for-- congressional and state and county legislative seats as well. "This election," wrote Walter, "is looking more like a Democratic tsunami than simply a Blue wave. President Trump, mired in some of the lowest job approval ratings of his presidency, is trailing Biden by significant margins in key battleground states like Pennsylvania (8 points), Michigan (9 points), and Wisconsin (9 points). He’s even running behind Biden in his firewall states of Florida and North Carolina."

She doesn't understand the difference between a Blue wave and an anti-red wave. There's no enthusiasm for Biden or the crappy party he "leads." All the enthusiasm is for stuffing Trump down a toilet and flushing. But the Beltway insiders will never understand that and will continue babbling like chimps about "a Blue wave." Fine, who cares; it ends up with the same results anyway.

Cook changed some of their electoral college predictions "to reflect this reality." All have moved towards the Democrats and all are laughably behind reality. Their best predictions are always the day after the election anyway. They move Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Nebraska’s 2nd district from toss up to lean Democrat. And Maine, which for whatever insane reason, was in the lean Democrat column moved to likely Democrat. Cook is so funny. They also moved Maine's 2nd district from likely Republican to just lean Republican. And she wrote that "Georgia has joined Arizona, North Carolina and Florida in the Toss Up column, although, at this point, Biden would be slightly favored to win at least Arizona and Florida."

Even Republican strategists she spoke with understand that Trump has now reached "a permanent loss of trust and faith of the majority of voters. In talking with strategists on both sides this last week, it’s also clear that Trump is dragging Republican congressional candidates with him as well. Plugged in strategists on both sides tell us that Trump is running behind in districts he easily carried in 2016. As one GOP strategist told us this week, 'I’d be surprised if any House GOP challenger is able to outperform Trump-- they are tied to him.' Meanwhile, Democratic Senate candidates-- even those in second and third-tier races-- are pulling in eye-popping second-quarter fundraising totals."




I spoke to a handful of candidates running strong in prohibitively red districts. Iowa progressive, J.D. Scholten, pointed out that his right-wing Trumpist opponent, Randy Feenstra "ran his primary campaign on the theme that he's best positioned to 'deliver' for Trump. But Trump's policies have systematically ravaged Iowa's farmers and rural communities in everything from the disastrous trade war to abuses of the Renewable Fuel Standard to corporate bailouts. Iowans don't need nor want another career politician who's beholden to corporate interests and afraid to stand up to power. We understand why folks voted for Trump-- they were looking for change and solutions, but unfortunately, that's not what we got. Our campaign is gaining traction with Trump voters, Republicans, and voters across the political spectrum because we're fighting for them: farmers, workers, and rural communities."

Georgia progressive Lisa Ring told me that through her experiences she's concluded that the most dangerous thing we can do is assume we can predict political outcomes. "Every action," she said, "has the potential of harming or propelling a campaign but the ever-changing nature of politics renders an important development, insignificant within hours. In general, the failures of the Trump administration should be harmful to every legislator or candidate who remains loyal to it. However, it is what Democrats choose to do with the failings of the GOP that will make a difference. Or not.

"Simply pointing out that Rep. Buddy Carter is a Trump lackey who has followed his every direction in order to gain Trump’s official endorsement, is not enough," she continued. "Instead, I must remind the people of my district that Carter and Trump worked hand in hand to destroy the middle class, working class, and disadvantaged, by taking away whatever healthcare they had, letting small businesses fail, allowing our infrastructure to crumble, protections to be rolled back, and failing the millions of unemployed, as well as the millions of infected Americans who were provided no assistance and no leadership during a pandemic that is not even close to being over. 2016 and beyond, should have taught us not to rely on polls or predictors, but rather to continue to focus on the issues, and reach voters one on one. These times are unprecedented and we cannot sit back and analyze with numbers, beliefs that defy all reason. Instead let us hit the streets(virtually, if it must be) and connect truthfully to people who need answers and solutions to the very real problems they face daily."

Texan Julie Oliver shared something that has changed in a pretty big way since the 2018 campaign. "What we’ve seen over the last two election cycles is a growing number of 'independent' voters in TX-25. Some folks share that they’re former Republicans who have lost their party and will never vote for another Trumpublican, like Rep. Roger Williams, again. Sometimes we encounter these newly independent voters when we are phone-banking, or in the pre-pandemic world when we were able to canvass, but what we are seeing in this election cycle that really didn’t happen in the midterms is that many former Republicans reach out to our campaign unsolicited."

Yesterday, Astead Herndon wrote specifically about the Trumpist base in Georgia and Arizona being nonplussed about the GOP establishment Senate candidates. "Many Republican candidates face a perplexing electoral landscape this year, given that Mr. Trump’s conduct has endeared him to the party’s most conservative groups, but has soured some suburban moderates and seniors who are vital parts of any swing state coalition. These candidates are walking a tightrope, made more difficult by a voter base that doesn’t just want to elect Republicans, but rather loyal foot soldiers who take on Mr. Trump’s political and cultural enemies. It is the long-term political war over how Trumpism is best expressed-- not the short-term battle over Mr. Trump himself-- and how a party that has been driven by early-morning tweets for four years will seek to survive the next 40."

In the run-up to the 2018 midterm elections, a record number of House Republicans chose not to seek re-election rather than face conflict with the conservative base, and even a favorable Senate map saw Republicans lose in states like Arizona and Nevada.

With Mr. Trump on the ballot this year, it will be even harder for candidates to paper over the differences, and the uneasy relationship between the party’s most right-wing voters and the statewide Republicans like Ms. Loeffler and Ms. McSally who rely on their votes is bursting into the open.

Governors in both Arizona and Georgia are currently confronting this political challenge, after opening up their states’s economies at the urging of the president and those in the media who support him, only to face pressure to reverse course after coronavirus cases surged.

Polling also shows that Ms. Loeffler and Ms. McSally are underdogs in their respective races, facing an energized Democratic electorate in addition to their inner-party wrangling.

...A recent survey of Arizona voters from the New York Times and Siena College found Ms. McSally trailing her Democratic opponent, the former astronaut and U.S. Navy Captain Mark Kelly, by nine percentage points.

In a recent Fox News poll of the Arizona race, just 73 percent of Republicans supported Ms. McSally, while 88 percent of Democrats supported Mr. Kelly.

“They don’t buy her as a bona fide very conservative Republican,” said Chuck Coughlin, a longtime Republican political consultant in Arizona.

The candidates’ struggles speak to how real divisions among Republicans have been obscured by Mr. Trump’s victory in 2016, and could erupt again should he lose in November.

...Several Republicans in Arizona and Georgia said in interviews that the problem is not with Ms. Loeffler’s or Ms. McSally’s messages, but whether the base is buying the candidates as authentic.  As a sign of their shared troubles among Republicans, some of the most negative publicity for both senators in the past year has come courtesy of Fox News, the cable outlet that is often sympathetic to the president.

...“The electorate has changed a lot,” Mr. Coughlin said, adding that the current Republican Party has “moved away from that narrative that people were originally attracted to. And in my view, has become one that’s reactive to the identity politics of the left.”

Does Biden Have A Place In History Waiting For Him? Yeah-- And REALLY Different From Bernie's

Cook's Amy Walter framed Biden's misguided run for the presidency slightly different from my own preference to hearken directly back to Warren G Harding's Return to Normalcy campaign; hers is Restoration Versus Revolution. That works. Think about the English Civil War (1642-1651). Charles I was executed in 1649. The restoration refers to the period from 1660 when Charles II returned from exile in Holland and was restored to the throne, which those who hated Oliver Cromwell-- who ran the show while there was no king-- called "a divinely ordained miracle." Many who participated in the overthrow of the kind were drawn and quartered, hung, beheaded, imprisoned for life, etc. The Restoration turned England into a cesspool and it was ended when Parliament invited William of Orange to invade England and help them overthrow James II in 1688 (the Glorious Revolution). He was allowed to flee and move in with Louis XIV, finally ending England's political and civil strife by confirming the primacy of Parliament over the monarchy.

I hope Amy Walter is a fan of English history was wasn't referring to furniture or restoration theater in her title. As for revolution... we all know what that is and many of us are aware that we're not talking about shining the turds on the edges but about fundamental change that would impact the lives of all Americans. "The leaders of the ‘revolution’ wing, Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren," wrote Walters, "aren’t running to simply replace President Trump, but to bring serious, structural change to the country. This week, the leader of the ‘restoration’ wing-- Vice President Joe Biden-- announced his candidacy. To Biden, it’s not the system that’s broken as much as it is the person in charge of the system who is broken. 'I believe history will look back on four years of this president and all he embraces as an aberrant moment in time,' Biden says in his opening video. Biden is only running because of Trump. Sanders and Warren would be running even if another Republican were in the White House."

Biden is running because he's always felt he should be president-- divine right-- and he's failed at it 6 times before. Now he claims he's running because of "the white supremacy march in Charlottesville." He's so full of shit you can smell it on the West Coast. Status Quo Joe Biden would be as good for America as Charles II was for England.

Meanwhile, it is highly likely that Warren and Sanders would be running for president, even if it were President Ted Cruz or President Marco Rubio running for re-election. In his February presidential announcement video, Sanders says that his campaign is not only "about defeating President Trump, the most dangerous president in history...It is about transforming our country and creating a government based on principles of economic, social, racial and environmental justice. Our campaign is about taking on the powerful special interests that dominate our economic life.”

At her presidential kick-off in Lawrence, Massachusetts in February, Warren makes clear that she’s not just running against Trump, she’s running against the system.

"Because the man in the White House is not the cause of what’s broken, he’s just the latest--  and most extreme--  symptom of what’s gone wrong in America. A product of a rigged system that props up the rich and the powerful and kicks dirt on everyone else. And so, once he’s gone, we can’t pretend that all of this never happened. It won’t be enough to just undo the terrible acts of this administration. We can’t afford to just tinker around the edges--  a tax credit here, a regulation there. Our fight is for big, structural change."

There are a bunch of other candidates in the race, of course. But, most fall closer to the ‘restoration’ wing than the ‘revolutionary’ one. For example, while Sens. Kamala Harris and Cory Booker are running as agents of change, they are still coloring within the lines and with a caution that Warren and Sanders do not display.

To me, the big question for these next few months is if Biden will take the fight directly to the "revolutionaries" in a way the other candidates have not.

Biden gave us some hints as to his thinking back in early April. Asked by a reporter to explain why he called himself the most progressive candidate in the race, Biden took a not-so-veiled swipe at Sanders.

"..But my point is, is the definition of 'progressive' now seems to be changing. That is, “Are you a socialist? Well, that’s a real progressive.” Or you believe in, whatever. So I was talking about up until this last time around the traditional judgments of whether or not you were, quote, a 'liberal,' was whether or not-- what your positions on race were; on women; what’s your position on LGBT community; what’s your positions on civil liberties, you know. I’ll stack my record on those things against anybody whose even run, who’s running now, or who will run.”

To be sure, there are plenty of Democrats who’d be happy to stack up their records on women and race with Biden. After all, Biden’s forty-year track record on these issues is littered with inconsistencies. Just this week, those inconsistencies came into stark relief at the "She the People" presidential forum in Houston. Interviews with women of color attending the event by the AP, found a lot of ambivalence to a Biden candidacy, as "black women repeatedly pointed to a singular issue plaguing Biden's candidacy: his handling of the 1991 Supreme Court confirmation hearing of Clarence Thomas and the Senate Judiciary Committee's treatment of Anita Hill.." They also balked at the early conventional wisdom of Biden as a 'safe' and 'electable' choice. "I know that we have been cultured to feel that only the white man can save us," the LaMarque, Texas organizer said Wednesday. "I just don't feel like Biden is our answer."

Before today, Biden has spent most of his pre-candidacy apologizing for and explaining;  his work on the 1994 Crime Bill, his handling of the Anita Hill hearings and his (literally) hands-on style of personal interaction. Now, he has a chance to pivot to the offense. And, to reset the rules and terrain of the game that have, until this point, been set by Bernie Sanders. Let’s see if-- and how-- he does it.

Early Friday morning, Chuck Todd and his team at NBC noted that a Bernie versus Biden race "represents one heck of an ideological contrast." Leaving aside Biden's penchant for the corrupt swampy politics of the status quo DC establishment, the two are at loggerheads over

• health care (Sanders is for a single-payer system; Biden likely will work to protect/strengthen Obamacare);
• trade (Sanders opposed the TPP trade agreement; Biden backed it as Barack Obama’s VP);
• and their vision for 2020 (Sanders is once again calling for a political revolution; Biden is running on a political restoration project).

Team Todd noted that Thursday night "Elizabeth Warren took a swipe at Biden’s entry when she was asked about his record on Wall Street and bankruptcy, per MSNBC’s Shirley Zilberstein. 'At a time when the biggest financial institutions in this country were trying to put the squeeze on millions of hard-working families who were in bankruptcy because of medical problems, job losses, divorce and death in the family, there was nobody to stand up for them,' she said. 'I got in that fight because they just didn't have anyone. And Joe Biden was on the side of the credit card companies.' Ouch."

2018 Midterms-- All About Señor Trumpanzee

Yesterday's Wall Street Journal reported that Marc Short, Trump's liaison to Congress is quitting, complaining that trying to push Trump's agenda through the GOP-controlled Congress has reached a point of "diminishing returns." Far right extremists are delighted because they view him as a champion for the GOP establishment’s. They're always bitching that he didn't obtain funding for the Great Wall of Trumpanzee or repeal ObamaCare. Maybe he'll go back to his old job working for the Koch brothers' political operation.Yesterday's Wall Street Journal reported that Marc Short, Trump's liaison to Congress is quitting, complaining that trying to push Trump's agenda through the GOP-controlled Congress has reached a point of "diminishing returns." Far right extremists are delighted because they view him as a champion for the GOP establishment’s. They're always bitching that he didn't obtain funding for the Great Wall of Trumpanzee or repeal ObamaCare. Maybe he'll go back to his old job working for the Koch brothers' political operation.

Sounds grand to me-- for the Democrats. The Capitol Hill Republicans hate his guts as much as Democrats do-- maybe more, if that's possible... but they whisper it and clam up when there are microphones around... pining for an Eisenhower in 2020 to save them. Nazis are in heaven. "Deal with it," said Corey Stewart, the anti-immigrant, pro-Confederate symbols, new Republican nominee for Senate in Virginia: "This is the new Republican Party." As for the people resisting, Stewart said, "They’re dinosaurs. They need to wake up and understand that President Trump has fundamentally remade the Republican Party." In his concession speech, Mark Sanford said, "We are a nation of laws." In her victory speech, the self funding Trumpist who beat him, Katie Arrington had a different interpretation of the Republican Party: "We are the party of President Donald J. Trump."

She's probably right-- and her assertion will be examinable in November. Amy Walter observed for the Cook Political Report yesterday that Trump Is Everything Voters Hoped/Feared He Would Be. She's correct when she asserts that "If you are surprised at what President Donald Trump is doing or how he is behaving or what he is prioritizing, you shouldn’t be. This is what he was doing, what he was saying, and how he was acting throughout the 2016 campaign. On some topics, he has been espousing the same rhetoric for years and years."

Is anyone really surprised that Trump is not interested in following the priorities of GOP party leaders in Congress? Shouldn’t we have expected that the “I alone can fix it” candidate would not feel constrained by the other co-equal branches of government?

...President Trump is not all that much different than candidate Trump. This is why his base of support has remained solid, and why those who never liked him in the first place are as turned off by him as ever.

A Fox News poll, taken June 3-6, asked respondents to give one specific reason for why they either approved or disapproved of the President.  Among the 45 percent of voters who said they approved of the job Trump was doing, the number one reason, volunteered by 24 percent of respondents, was “helping the economy/creating jobs.” But, a combined 53 percent focused more on his style than substance, like “keeping promises,” “getting things done,” “doing what he said,” “putting America first,” and “shaking things up.”

...Trump is everything today as president that voters had hoped or feared he would be when he was a candidate.

This helps explains why Trump’s job approval ratings in the most recent polls from Fox (45 percent) and NBC/Wall Street Journal (44 percent) are close to where he was on Election Day 2016 when he took 46 percent of the vote.

The other similarity between this election and the one in 2016 is that where the spotlight is focused this fall will determine if the election breaks for Democrats or for Republicans. As I wrote back then, when the spotlight was trained on Clinton’s weaknesses (emails, “deplorables,” the Wikileaks trove), her numbers went down and Trump’s went up. When Trump and his temperament were in the spotlight, he went down and she went up.

In 2018, Democrats would like the spotlight to be trained on health care and tax reform. Specifically, they want to be talking about the rising cost of health care and a GOP crafted tax law that they argue is tilted toward the wealthy and big corporations over struggling middle class families. In fact, some of the lowest approval ratings for the president-- and some of the largest advantages Democrats have had on the congressional ballot-- came during the debates and votes on health care legislation and the tax bill.

Republicans certainly would like to see the president be more disciplined. But, the constant swirl and clamor also make it hard for even bad stories to stick around before they are swept off the front pages by something else. The consistently good economic news helps as well.

But, let's be honest, we have no idea where that spotlight will be shining by November. Will it be on a recently released Mueller report? Health care premium hikes? The success/failure of North Korean denuclearization?

One thing we do know, however, is that Trump will never be out of the spotlight. And, as such, opposition to or support for him is what will ultimately determine the outcome of 2018.

Amy's right. Does Pelosi understand that? Does the DCCC? I asked Alan Grayson (D-FL) what he thinks. "Obviously, it’s extremely important to propose and implement policies that improve the lives of ordinary people; that’s what this is supposed to be all about. However, the GOP has set out-- largely successfully-- to make every policy debatable. Universal healthcare, progressive taxation, immigration reform, even climate change: the Republicans have consistently undermined any effort distinguish good policies from bad. The one thing that remains undebatable in the minds of almost everyone is Trump himself,"

And Andy Borowitz sure does too:

As new details emerge from this week’s summit in Singapore, the White House has confirmed that Donald J. Trump unilaterally offered to let Kim Jong Un have Mike Pence as his personal manservant.

The offer reportedly came after Kim spoke glowingly to Trump about the Vice-President’s obsequiousness, sources said.

“Even by North Korean standards, Pence puts my toadies to shame,” Kim reportedly said.

Once the necessary paperwork is squared away, Pence could begin bowing and scraping in Pyongyang as early as next week.

Going forward, Pence’s duties as senior sycophant to Trump are expected to be performed by Representative Devin Nunes, Republican of California.

Although State Department insiders were taken by surprise by Trump’s offering of Pence, for whom the U.S. will receive nothing in return, the deal has been met with nearly universal approval.

“At least Trump didn’t give away much this time,” one diplomat said

 

Is Trump More Insane Or More Dishonest? Will Voters Care In 2018?

At one time MSNBC's Morning Joe seemed to be Trump's favorite TV show. He was a guest numerous times and even bandied about the idea of naming Joe Scarborough his vice president, And remember when he asked Scarborough's co-host and fiancé, Mika Brzezinski, to come visit transition headquarters in Trumpanzee Tower? Thursday morning, before Comey's testimony at the Senate Intelligence Committee, Brzezinski speculated what many Americans fear, that Trump is "mentally ill." On the air yesterday she said "I think he's such a narcissist, it's possible that he is mentally ill in a way. He's not well. At the very least he's not well... And he's so narcissistic he does not believe the rules apply to him. That's where the ignorance label may apply because this is a man who says he can grab women anywhere because he's famous. The point is, he feels he can say or do things different from the norm because he's famous, because he's a celebrity, because he has power."

And while she was going on about Trump's personal qualities, Quinnipiac was releasing their newest poll which reports some pretty strong, widely-shared opinions about Trump's personal qualities. Hours later, when Comey said several times under oath that Trump is a liar, he was confirming what 59% of Americans already know. Trump's job approval sank to it's lowest ever-- 34-57%, 3 points lower than in late May.

"There is zero good news for President Donald Trump in this survey, just a continual slide into a chasm of doubt about his policies and his very fitness to serve," said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll.

"If this were a prize fight, some in his corner might be thinking about throwing in the towel. This is counter puncher Donald Trump's pivotal moment to get up off the mat.

"With a third of the members of his own party questioning his level headedness, this is clearly the moment the president needs to steady the ship."

American voters say 68 - 29 percent that President Trump is not level-headed, his worst grade on that quality. Republicans say 64 - 32 percent he is level-headed. Voter opinions of most other Trump qualities are negative:

• 59 - 36 percent that he is not honest;
• 58 - 39 percent that he does not have good leadership skills;
• 58 - 40 percent that he does not care about average Americans

...American voters disapprove 62 - 32 percent of Trump's decision to withdraw from the Paris Accord. Republicans are the only listed group to approve, 72 - 20 percent.

A total of 76 percent of voters are "very concerned" or "somewhat concerned" about climate change and 65 percent say the U.S. needs to do more to address climate change.

Immediately after the Comey testimony at the Senate yesterday, that gross Huckabee daughter who works for Trump said "No, I can say definitively the president is not a liar." Well I guess that settles that.

The Cook Report's Amy Walter pointed out the further growth of "a clear 'enthusiasm' gap is opening between Democrats and Republicans, with Democrats more engaged (or is it enraged?) than their GOP counterparts. We are seeing a drop in 'strong' approval for President Trump as well as less than robust turn-out from GOP voters in special elections in Kansas, Georgia and Montana.

The latest example of this enthusiasm gap is the drop in the percentage of Americans who identify as Republican. Polling taken in May by Gallup finds 45 percent of Americans identify themselves as Democrats and 38 percent identify as Republican. The seven-point gap is the largest recorded by Gallup since April of 2015. With Trump’s overall job rating stalled in the high 30’s to low 40’s and the GOP- controlled Congress yet to rally around (or pass) a significant legislative agenda, it’s not surprising to see fewer Americans identify themselves as a Republican. Think of party identification (do you identify as a Republican, Democrat or independent), like the “bandwagon” effect in sports. The better your team is doing, the more likely that you will follow their games, wear their gear, and proudly tell people you are a fan. But, when your team starts losing, the gear goes back into the closet, the TV is tuned to another program and you give your season tickets away to anyone willing to go to the stadium.

But, before Democrats get too excited about these latest numbers, it’s important to note that there has not been a corresponding bump in the percentage of Americans who identify as Democratic. As Gallup writes, “the Republican decline has been offset mostly by a three-point increase in the percentage of Americans with no party preference or leaning.” In other words, voters may be souring on Republicans but that doesn’t mean they are transferring their allegiance to Democrats.

Democratic Recruiting-- Take Orange County

Katie Porter is running for Congress

Democratic voters need to be very careful about Republicans switching party registration and announcing their candidacy for high office. There are a few exception-- and I can't emphasize enough how few-- but no matter how "progressive-ish" they pretend to be during the election (especially primariues), once they get into Congress they almost always revert to what made them a lifelong Republican. There is not way to describe life-long Republican-turned-conservaDem Patrick Murphy's record in the House as anything short of repulsive and destructive-- and the DSCC and Wall Street couldn't wait to promote him to the Senate. In Nebraska, the DCCC wasted millions and millions of dollars-- dollars that could have been spent building two-cycle cases against Devin Nunes and Kevin McCarthy in California or, say, Paul Ryan in Wisconsin-- to elect and try (unsuccessfully of course) Republican Brad Ashford. Ashford immediately joined the Blue Dogs and managed to build a record that gave Paul Ryan and Kevin McCarthy chills down their legs. There were Republicans with more progressive voting records than Ashford! Today we have Republicans like Charlie Crist (FL) and Tom O'Halleran (AZ)-- to name just a couple-- calling themselves Democrats and voting with the GOP. As we showed yesterday, neither of these Republicans backs the Democratic Medicare for All bill and both have voting records that show them voting far more frequently with the GOP than with the Democrats on crucial roll calls.

Disgusting, right? But I'll tell you something more disgusting. The DCCC hired a hackish conservative staffer, Kyle Layman, who's running around recruiting conservative candidates, including (so far) at least one "ex"-Republican, Harley Rouda (who's running against Dana Rohrabacher in an Orange County district Hillary managed to beat-- barely: 47.9% to 46.2%-- Trump. It's a district the Democrats should be targeting... but not with a Republican opportunist who talks a good game and is likely to just be another Patrick Murphy, Brad Ashford, Tom O'Halleran or Charlie Crist, someone who's only function in Congress is to allow Ryand and McCarthy to call their poisonous agenda "bipartisan."

Just east of Rohrabacher's district is CA-45, another all-Orange County district (Irvine, Lake Forest, Mission Viejo, Rancho Santa Margarita, Villa Park, the Anaheim Hills). The PVI is R+7 and Obama lost both times-- with 47% against McCain and 43% against Romney. Trump lost though-- 49.8% to 44.4%. A combination of well-educated, well-off whites plus growing Asian and Hispanic populations-- respectively 21% and 19%-- was too much for Trump. But the conservative Republican incumbent, Mimi Walters, has never had a problem winning there. For one thing, the DCCC has never challenged her-- or her conservative Republican predecessor John Campbell. In 2016 she beat Ron Varasteh 171,736 (59%) to 119,521 (41%). He spent $42,761 to her $1,663,841. Varasteh says he plans on running again. But he isn't alone.

Combined with Hillary's success in the district and the excitement among Democrats at how poorly Trumpism is being viewed in suburban districts, there are two locals with worthwhile bona fides jumping in too-- an Elizabeth Warren protégé, a Sherrod Brown protégé (Kia Hamadanchy) and a Chuck Schumer protégé (David Min). Yesterday Martin Wisckol broke the news about Katie Porter's candidacy in the OC Register. Laguna Beach, where he reports Walters lives, is a gorgeous beachside community for wealthy white people. It isn't in her district and it isn't easy to get to her district from there. But it's certainly a lovely place to live when you're not in DC and it isn't illegal to live in another district than the one you claim to represent. Maybe voters want someone who lives in their own district though-- like Katie Porter.

Democrat Katie Porter, a prominent consumer advocate lawyer and UC Irvine professor, has announced she’ll challenge the 2018 reelection bid of Rep. Mimi Walters, R-Laguna Beach.

Porter is part of a growing wave of high-profile Democrats announcing challenges of Orange County Republican Congress members, all four of whom saw their districts favor Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump last year.

Porter, 43, has specialized in the abuses of home mortgage lenders and was appointed by then-Attorney General Kamala Harris to oversee California’s share of a $25 billion national mortgage settlement.

She has been endorsed by Harris and by Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. Porter studied with Warren at Harvard Law School and the two co-authored The Law of Debtors and Creditors.

“The powers in Washington have favored Wall Street banks over middle-class families,” Porter said. “I’ve spent my career fighting powerful interests. I’m running to take that fight to Washington.”

Porter is the first to declare her candidacy against Walters, but like Democratic candidates in other local districts, she is looking to link her GOP opponent closely to Trump.

She got a head start in that direction last week when the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee launched online ads attacking Walters for supporting Republicans’ abandoned effort to replace Obamacare.

Walters voted for the measure in committee and was the sole Orange County Republican member of Congress to offer unequivocal support.

"The AHCA is a rare opportunity to provide Americans access to the low cost, high quality, patient-centered health care that they deserve,” Walters said before the measure was set aside. “This bill will lead to lower premiums, greater choice in coverage options and large reductions in the federal deficit.”

...“(Porter’s) been in the trenches with me fighting for families for nearly two decades and she’s gotten real results,” Warren said. “She’s fought relentlessly for important protections that safeguard consumers and force banks to give families a fair shake.

“There’s no one I trust more to take on Donald Trump and the entrenched special interests in Washington on behalf of working families.”

One of the country's most well-versed reporters on the foreclosure crisis is David Dayen, the first person to ever tell me about Katie. This morning he told me that she "took what was really a thankless job, monitoring a not very good foreclosure fraud settlement, and turned it into something worthwhile. It reminds me of what Elizabeth Warren did with the Congressional Oversight Panel for TARP. Katie got personally involved in individual foreclosure cases, going toe to toe with big banks and getting results. She rewrote communications to homeowners from the banks to maximize response rates. She authored half a dozen reports that really showed how the banks were gaming the system, from calling out the cruel practice of dual tracking (when banks negotiate loan terms and pursue foreclosure at the same time) to the 'completed' application scam (where banks would capitalize on one missing document to nullify a modification and move to foreclose instead). And she took on government officials when they weren't learning from the conditions on the ground and making the same mistakes that let the banks off the hook. Overall, California got better results than the rest of the country and Porter's work put the national settlement oversight monitor to shame. She has expressed to me that she would put the same skills to work to fight for working families in Congress."

Writing for the Cook Report yesterday, Amy Walter emphasized the anti-Trump tsunami building against the GOP right now-- How to Lose a Majority. The House Republicans can usually count on an incredibly incompetent DCCC to keep it in power. That might not be enough in 2018 and 2020. She attributes it to "the very public intra-party fight between President Trump and the Freedom Caucus," calling it "just the latest twist in the ongoing fight over the philosophical, strategic and ideological direction of the Republican party. As has been his mode of operation since his candidate days, Trump has taken to Twitter to shame/intimidate/cajole members of his own party. In this case, it was to get rebellious GOPers to 'take one for the team' and support a flawed, but nonetheless GOP-authored Obamacare replacement bill. But, in the end, it’s not the Freedom Caucus that gets hurt by this infighting. They sit in safe Republican seats and know their voters better than anyone in DC. Instead, it’s the vulnerable GOP incumbents who lose this fight. Why? The more the GOP gets bogged down in process instead of progress, the more likely it is that their voters become disillusioned and that independent voters abandon them. Combine these ingredients with an energized Democratic base and you have all the ingredients for a disastrous midterm election in 2018 for the GOP."

Excellent description of the mess Mimi Walters-- who announced she would vote for TrumpCare-- finds herself in. If the DCCC doesn't screw this up by recruiting a Republican or a Republican-lite candidate, Mimi Walters can enjoy a nice retirement in Laguna Beach without having ever lived in the district she was supposed to be representing.

[T]he current situation of Republican-infighting, a lack of legislative accomplishments and a President determined to keep stoking political divisions is a very dangerous path for the GOP... [I]f Trump’s numbers continue to look this bad, it helps Democrats recruiting efforts to challenge these incumbents and more. In fact, Trump’s numbers now look more like those of a president who is about to be hit by a wave election that wipes his party out of power in the House, than one who is going to be able to ride a wave of success. This should worry Trump, not just because it means he loses legislative leverage for his agenda, but it means that Democrats now get subpoena power. If you think the Russia/Trump stories are bad for the administration now, just imagine what they’ll look like with Democrats in charge of the oversight committees.

Yesterday I spoke with Katie Porter on the phone, primarily about her stellar record, but I think I may have shocked her at one point when I asked her a question I ask all new candidates for Congress, namely if she would get into Congress and start hanging out with the Blue Dogs and vote with the Republicans. She didn't hesitate for even a second: "HELL NO!" Good answer!


UPDATE: Moments Ago...

...I got my first press release from Katie's campaign. And she is definitely off on the right track! I'd say Mimi Walters is going to be in for a very rough ride this year! Every Democratic candidate should be putting out press releases just like this today. Take a look:

Katie Porter Statement on Pres. Trump Signing Rep. Mimi Walters' Bill Repealing Consumer Privacy Protections

IRVINE -- Consumer advocate and congressional candidate Katie Porter released the following statement this morning after President Trump signed her opponent's, Congresswoman Mimi Walters (CA-45), bill repealing basic privacy protections for Orange County internet users:

"I've spent my career fighting powerful interests on behalf of consumers and families. But Donald Trump and Congresswoman Walters are helping those same powerful interests in Washington-- at our families expense. It's common sense-- cable companies shouldn't be allowed to sell Orange County residents' browsing history without their consent, but Congresswoman Walters' bill would do just that."