Trump Has No Path To Reelection That Doesn't Go Through Florida

Yesterday, at Florida Memorial University in Miami Gardens, Tallahassee mayor Andrew Gillum talked about how he plans to work with Bring It Home Florida towards blocking Trump's reelection bid by helping register more voters in the nation's biggest swing state. This is what Florida party affiliation registration looks like right now:

• Democrats- 4,965,139
• Republicans- 4,718,813
• Independents- 3,593,623
• Minor parties- 119,488

When Mike Bloomberg announced he wasn't running for president after all, he said he would run massive voter registration drives and turnout efforts in the 5 top swing states-- Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and... Florida. The Florida Democratic Party has committed $2 million towards a voter registration drive this cycle and Gillum's own PAC, Forward Florida, has $3.9 million left over from his gubernatorial run. In January he told that media that "whatever resources that I raise and time and energy I spend in this state is going to be around voter registration and deep-level engagement, so that when we have a nominee, we have an apparatus we can turn on."

Now the other side of the coin-- how can Republicans hold down voter registration and suppress the vote? First and foremost, they are working towards undermining Amendment 4, which granted ex-felons the right to vote again.

Florida legislators advanced a bill on Tuesday that is expected to limit the number of former felons who can vote, in part by requiring former felons to pay back all court fees and fines before they can register.

Critics say the measure hits lower-income Floridians hardest and is designed to defy the will of the voters, who passed a constitutional amendment last year restoring voting rights to some felons who have completed their sentences without any mention of fines and fees. Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) wrote on Twitter that the measure was "a poll tax by any other name."

“What the barriers proposed in this bill do is nearly guarantee that people will miss election after election …because they cannot afford to pay financial obligations,” said Julie Ebenstein, a voting rights attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union. “It’s an affront to the Florida voters.”

In November, 65 percent of Floridians voted to approve an amendment to the state's constitution, Amendment 4, that restored voting rights to certain former felons “after they complete all terms of their sentence including parole or probation.” Those who were convicted of “murder or sexual offenses” were not eligible for rights restoration.

The constitutional amendment, which took effect January 2019, said voting rights would be restored to eligible Floridians-- an estimated 1.5 million. Many have registered to vote in the months since then. Still, there was confusion about implementation, such as what qualified as a "sexual offense." The Republican-controlled legislature, at the encouragement of Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis, decided to write legislation on how the state would implement the change.

On Tuesday, a Republican-controlled committee passed a measure that would require felons to pay back all court fees and fines-- even if they are slowly paying those costs back in a court-approved payment plan, for instance-- before they can register to vote.

Ebenstein said the bill "subverts" the will of Florida voters, who she said couldn't have considered the legislature's method of implementing the amendment when voting.

"Keeping voters who can’t afford to pay their fees immediately, keeping them disenfranchised for additional years, decades, or for the rest of their life, is not what was contemplated by voters who passed this amendment," she said.

The Republican chair of Florida's state House Criminal Justice Subcommittee, Rep. James "J.W." Grant, denied suggestions from advocates the bill was politically motivated and rejected the idea that it amounted to a poll tax, according to The Associated Press. Grant did not return a request for comment from NBC News.

Republican-controlled state legislatures across the country have come under fire in the months since the midterm elections for what critics have called attempts to alter or nullify election results where either Democrats or causes championed by progressives triumphed. In Michigan and Wisconsin, Republican lawmakers sought to limit the powers of incoming Democratic governors. In Missouri, Republican lawmakers reportedly said they were considering revisions to voter-approved ethics measures.

In Florida, supporters of Amendment 4 feared having Republicans-- some of whom opposed the restoration of felon voting rights-- craft the legislation on how the new law would be implemented and argued that implementation legislation was not needed.

Ebenstein said the financial obligation element of the bill that advanced Tuesday affects two groups: low-income felons who can't afford to pay back fees, and those who committed property crimes and were sentenced to pay large sums of restitution and put on payment plans.

Even if a court waives the repayment of fees for a former felon, the bill would require the victim or organization to whom the fees were owed must "consent" in order for that person to register, adding a particularly unusual barrier to the process, Ebenstein added.

"I’ve never see anything like that in my time practicing voting rights," she said.

The measure also qualifies a slew of felonies with any kind of sexual component as a disqualifying “sexual offense.” That includes crimes like having an adult entertainment store too close to a school as well as certain prostitution crimes.

“What they’ve done is picked the broadest definition possible to exclude the maximum number of people from having their rights restored,” Ebenstein told NBC News.

There is some possibility that litigation will wipe out the legislative restrictions since there's a legitimate argument on the issue of whether the fees and fines constitute a poll tax when they are a prerequisite to voting. If not, there is talk that a group backed by a big Democratic donor-- Soros I'd venture-- will pick up the tab for a lot of people on their fees and fines, and get them registered. The fees and fines tend to be very modest amounts, although it’s not so modest when you multiply them by 1.7 million felons. I recall that after the 2012 election, Alan Grayson-- who had introduced the first and only national legislation on this (the "No One Can Take Away Your Right to Vote Act")-- did a statewide poll of felons who had served their terms and found that, among this group of non-voters, Obama won by a massive 20%. If that held up in elections without Obama, it would be an insurmountable swing towards Democrats for Democratic candidates. If only the authors of the bill had just copied Grayson's proposed federal legislation, the GOP wouldn't have been able to mount this challenge to it.

Since the founding of the country, conservative have battled to deny participation in the voting process to as many people as they could, fighting viciously to keep the franchise away from women, non-property owners, people of color, young people, poor people, etc. That's pretty much the only way conservatives can win elections.

Republican-Lite Democrats Are Only Good At One Thing: Losing

You think Democratic primary voters want this as their candidate against Trump?

A silly new poll from Morning Consult purports to show something about how the 2020 Democratic nomination is shaping up. The same kind of lo-info, identity politics idiots who saddled the party with Hillary Clinton in 2016, want Joe Biden in 2020. Will Democratic primary voters ever think about where a candidate might actually want to take the country rather than the color of their skin or the shape of their genitals? I think so. But it takes some kind of concentration, which isn’t easy when you’re talking about something years in the future (even just 2). Anyway, that list up top is the latest iteration of the laughable horserace tabulation, different from Monday’s. What! No groundswell for the Starbucks guy? No Mayor Buttfuck Buttigieg? No Terry McAuliffe? Where’s The Rock and Hillary, all the governors who want to form unity tickets with John Kasich and the backbencher congressmen no one ever heard of like John Delaney who’s been living in Iowa campaigning for a year and only tangentially more absurd than Seth Moulton or Tulsi Gabbard?

Note: This is stupid, so don't take it seriously

Have you read Steve Phillips’ NY Times’ OpEd about why a conservative Democrat is not going to win in 2020? He implores Democrats to learn “the right lessons from the midterms. He wrote that conventional wisdom dictated that both Andrew Gillum and Stacey Abrams “did not give Democrats their best chance; more traditional, moderate white candidates were seen as the most competitive. In this view, moderate candidates can better appeal to and win over ‘swing’ white voters. And yet, and yet… “Over the past 20 years, the best-performing Democratic candidates in statewide elections in Florida and Georgia have been Mr. Obama, Mr. Gillum and Ms. Abrams. (Hillary Clinton in 2016 was actually Florida’s highest Democratic vote-getter ever.) This year, Ms. Abrams dramatically increased Democratic turnout, garnering more votes— 1.9 million— than any other Democrat running for any office in the history of Georgia (and that includes Jimmy Carter, Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton).”

Midterm results laid bare the fallacy of that view. In Missouri, Claire McCaskill, the incumbent Democratic senator, lost to Josh Hawley by six percentage points, 45.5 percent to 51.5 percent. Senator McCaskill campaigned by highlighting her moderate credentials and ran a radio ad distancing herself from her party: “Claire’s not one of those crazy Democrats,” a narrator said. “She works right in the middle and finds compromise.”

In Tennessee, Phil Bredesen, the state’s former governor, lost his bid for the Senate by over 10 points despite his attempt to peel off Trump supporters by coming out in support of Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court.

The day Bredesen came out in favor of Kavanaugh— leading in nearly a dozen consecutive polls at the time— I wrote that Democrats could kiss base enthusiasm and the Tennessee Senate seat goodbye. Bredesen, a mainstream conservative, outspent extremist Marsha Blackburn $15,246,145 ($5,516,942 from his own fortune) to $11,819,522 and Schumer’s Majority Forward SuperPac and Senate Majority PAC threw another $18.5 million into Tennessee on behalf of Bredesen. But no amount of money could save him after that stupid, pointless statement. So… will Democrats learn the right lesson? Out of the question— at least for life-long know-it-alls like Schumer (and Pelosi, Hoyer and other party leaders).

Phillips suggests looking more closely at Georgia, contrasting the 2014 election and the recent midterm. “The strategy of wooing supposedly moderate whites was put to the ultimate test when Democrats fielded nominees from two of the most prominent Democratic families in the history of Georgia-- the Carters and the Nunns. Jimmy Carter’s grandson Jason Carter ran for governor, and former Senator Sam Nunn’s daughter Michelle Nunn ran for Senate. Together their campaigns spent more than $20 million, pouring enormous sums into television advertising seeking to persuade moderate whites to back their bids.”

They both lost, with about 45% of the vote each. This cycle Stacey Abrams is governing around 49% as more voters are counted in an incredibly corrupt electoral environment. And in the 6th district, where ultimate milquetoast moderate Jon Ossoff— with every dime the Democratic establishment could raise for him-- lost last year, “riding the swell of turnout inspired and organized by Ms. Abrams, the Democrat Lucy McBath flipped that seat.”

Clearly success required a different strategy. Ms. Abrams and Mr. Gillum embraced the Obama playbook for winning elections: It starts with emphasizing mobilization over persuasion. Ms. Abrams’s campaign defied conventional wisdom by spending early and big on a vast mobilization effort that involved calling, texting and knocking on the doors of nearly 600,000 infrequent Georgia voters a full year before the election.

Mr. Gillum took a similar approach and was buoyed by the backing of organizations such as New Florida Majority, which hired community-based canvassers to knock on tens of thousands of their neighbors’ doors to identify and mobilize Gillum supporters long before the rest of the country caught on to his candidacy.

These campaigns laid the groundwork for future Democratic success, because the thousands of volunteers, operatives and new voters will pay dividends for the 2020 Democratic nominee.

Mr. Gillum and Ms. Abrams did exactly what Mr. Obama did: They inspired people across the racial spectrum to participate and vote, and they did it by being unapologetically progressive. They did not shy away from championing Medicaid expansion, pursuing criminal justice reform and promoting gun control policies.

Does this strategy require a candidate of color? No, but it does call for candidates who can inspire voters of color. Beto O’Rourke in Texas is an excellent example, and his inspiring and well-organized campaign brought him closer to winning statewide than any Democrat has come in Texas in years. And nationally, the Democrats reclaimed a majority in the House by winning in nearly a dozen districts with large populations of voters of color.

Ms. Abrams and Mr. Gillum were also not afraid to tackle the not-so-silent racist “dog whistles” emanating from their opponents and the president. Ms. Abrams refused to shirk from condemnation of racism and condemned the ways in which honoring racist imagery like the Confederate monument at Georgia’s Stone Mountain monument-- called out by name in Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech-- undermines democracy and distances entire groups from being part of the body politic. Mr. Gillum offered one of the greatest lines in the history of American politics when he offered, about his opponent, Ron DeSantis, during a debate: “I’m not calling Mr. DeSantis a racist. I’m simply saying the racists believe he’s a racist.”

Notably, this approach of tackling racism head-on is also the best way to woo many white voters. According to the exit polls, both Ms. Abrams and Mr. Gillum received more support from whites in their states than either Mr. Obama or Mrs. Clinton did. White people-- all people-- want to believe in something. Challenging them to reject racism and embrace their highest and best ideals is the most effective way to secure their support.

Yes, the strategy of mobilizing voters of color and progressive whites is limited by the demographic composition of particular states. But what Mr. Obama showed twice is that it works in enough places to win the White House. And that is exactly the next electoral challenge.

Democrats can go the old route that has consistently failed to come close to winning and demoralized supporters down the line, or they can do the math and follow the example of Ms. Abrams and Mr. Gillum and Mr. Obama before them. Invest in the infrastructure and staffing to engage and mobilize voters. Stand as tall, strongly and proudly for the nation’s multiracial rainbow as Mr. Trump stands against it. And mobilize and call forth a new American majority in a country that gets browner by the hour and will be even more diverse by November 2020.

What's Happening With Florida Today? Plus-- A Note From Matt Haggman

Politico: "The general consensus among Republicans is that they will lose the House, and end up in at least a five-seat minority-- that would correspond to a 28-seat loss. Senior Republicans tell us that even in a worst-case scenario, they do not expect to lose 40 seats. A prescient prediction or famous last words?"

Of all the senior Republican lawmakers they spoke with over the weekend, "only one made the case that the GOP will keep the House." If it's who I think it was, he was staggering drunk for the entire weekend. Many Republicans expected the House races to tighten up by election day. Instead the generic ballot polls have gotten even worse for them. The last one for CNN by SSRS shows an absolutely massive 55% to 42% preference for Democrats among likely voters. As I've said before, the pollsters' likely vote modeling is wrong because it is not taking increased Latino and millennial voting into account. Polls predicting less than 30 flipped seats will all be off by as much as 100% tonight.

Let's look at Florida. Yesterday's Marist poll shows Andrew Gillum leading Ron DeSantis in the gubernatorial race-- 50% to 46%-- and Bill Nelson leading Scott in the Senate race by the same 50% to 46%. Democrats are very lucky to have Gillum at the head of the ticket instead of dull conservative Gwen Graham, who had been the establishment candidate and who would have dragged the party down the toilet with her. But it's a shame Florida doesn't have any good congressional candidates who could ride the wave and Andrew's coattails into office. Instead, it's a bunch of DCCC-recruited backs from the Republican wing of the party-- New Dems and Blue Dogs. This is the key today: "Democrats in both races are performing better than their Republican counterparts with likely voters who are independents, minorities and women."

Stoking domestic terrorism goes over especially badly with independent voters

Results from Quinnipiac are nearly identical: seven point leads for both Gillum and Nelson, entirely because of double-digit leads for both among women, minorities and independent voters. Writing Sunday for the Miami Herald Steve Bousquet reported on the surge in early voting for Democrats. On Sunday, "Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, Hillsborough and Orange, the five biggest 'blue' counties, all reported their highest one-day early voting totals of the 2018 campaign. As a result, on a day when President Donald Trump rallied thousands of Republicans in Pensacola, the GOP’s ballot advantage over the Democrats shrank to six-tenths of 1 percentage point (0.6), with GOP ballots at 40.8 percent of the statewide total and Democrats at 40.2 percent." By Monday morning Dems had a +0.5% lead over Republicans in ballots cast. In 2014 Republicans held almost a 6% lead over Dems going into election day.

So how many Democratic candidates will Gillum's coattails and the anti-red wave drag to victory in Florida today? Most of the candidates are so terrible that it's hard to say-- but even the worst of them are less horrible than the Republicans they're opposing. Donna Shalala, as bad a candidate as you'll find anywhere, will probably beat Maria Salazar in bright blue FL-27 (PVI- D+5) despite herself. Nate Silver gives her a 6 in 7 chance to win (84.7%). Next door in Carlos Curbelo's district (FL-26-- where the DCCC and Pelosi's PAC have spent $7,175,066 attacking Curbelo-- another weak Democrat, Debbie Mucarsel-Powell looks like she'll take the seat (PVI is D+6). Silver gives her a 5 in 9 chance (55.6%). The other Republican-held Miami-Dade seat, Mario Diaz-Balart's 25th district (PVI- R+4) has the best of the 3 Democratic challengers, Mary Barzee Flores, but in the toughest race. Silver gives her a 2 in 7 chance (27.8%) to beat Diaz-Balart. The wave will have had to have turned into a tsunami tonight for her to win.

Silver gives Wasserman Schultz a 99.9% chance of retaining her seat in a 3-way contest against progressive Tim Canova and some Republican sacrificial lamb, more or less the same chance Joe Crowley had in beating Congresswoman-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The only polling in the district-- by a GOP firm-- shows Wasserman Schultz exactly tied with Canova.

The DCCC has 4 other Democratic candidates on their Red to Blue page-- Nancy Soderberg (FL-06, Ron DiSantis' open seat with an R+7 PVI), Kristen Carlsen (FL-15, Dennis Ross' open seat stretching from the Tampa suburbs to the Orlando area with an R+6 PVI), David Shapiro (FL-16, Vern Buchanan's Sarasota, Bradenton seat with an R+7 PVI) and Lauren Baer (FL-18, Brian Mast's Treasure Coast district with an R+5 PVI). Silver doesn't give any of them much of a chance to win. Soderberg 1 in 4, Carlsen 3 in 7, Shapiro 1 in 7, and Baer 1 in 12. Soderberg, Baer and Shapiro (as well as Mucarsel-Powell) are all New Dems. The 2 Florida candidates in red districts with the best shot are 2 normal Dems, Kristen Carlsen and Mary Barzee Flores. The DCCC has spent modestly in a few of the races-- $499,932 in FL-06, $146,362 in FL-16, $868,290 in FL-18, and $694,360 in FL-15
.




Matt Haggman is one of the progressive Democrats Blue America endorsed this cycle but who didn't win his primary, losing out, in this case, to an establishment nothing with lots of name recognition and money but with nothing to offer the voters except that she's not a Trumpist. Tragic waste of a blue seat but Matt has been good sport about it, endorsed her and has been working to help elect her. He agreed to catch us up on what he's been up to down in South Florida. He reiterated that "This is the most important mid-term election in our lifetimes. It’s a moment when we will decide as a country who we are and who we are not. Here in Florida I have been working to help Andrew Gillum, Donna Shalala, Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, Mary Barzee Flores and Bill Nelson all win. Just this weekend I was out canvassing. But, before this, I was a candidate. I was one of the many across the country who left good jobs to up and run for Congress following the 2016 presidential election. For me, it didn’t go as hoped. I lost to Donna Shalala in Florida’s Congressional District 27. Howie asked that I share a blog post I wrote in the weeks after the Aug. 28 Florida primary. It’s a reminder of the reasons why this mid-term is so important. Why each of us can have a big impact even if we’re not on the ballot. And why, whether a candidate or supporter, we must do all we can to ensure everyone gets out to vote this Election Day to turn a new page in our politics."

Until Next Time, Thank you

It’s been a few weeks since the primary election. Obviously, for me, it was a disappointment. But the many great wishes since election night from friends and supporters has been wonderful. I wanted to write a post and say thank you. And also reflect a bit on the past 13 months campaigning for US Congress.

Before doing that, I again congratulate Donna Shalala on her victory. This is a moment in our politics that is bigger than any individual and it’s critical that the Democratic party take control of the U.S. House of Representatives. We must unite behind her. In addition, we have to elect Andrew Gillum as our next Governor! His campaign has energized us all, and it’s time to bring it home.

Looking back on the primary, my overriding feeling is gratitude. I’m extremely thankful to my wife Danet, who supported me in this effort, and thankful to all of the people who propelled our campaign--  the volunteers, fellows, staff, donors and, ultimately, voters. I had never run for any elected office, yet so many went all-in supporting our campaign. Thank you very, very much.

Our fellows were, in particular, an inspiration to me. We recruited more than 50. Most were in college, some still in high school. Working on the campaign after class or full-time during summer break. Weekends, nights. Calling voters, knocking on doors. They were passionate and dedicated. Now, they are back on campus. At schools from Miami Dade College and Michigan to Boston University and Palmetto Senior High School. At a time when our political system badly needs a reset, they showed what it means to take hold of our democracy. With them, our future is so blazingly bright.

Along with our fellows, what I loved about being a candidate was talking with voters and being out in the community. I loved it. Going door to door on sweltering summer afternoons in Kendall, or Little Havana, or Richmond Heights. Evenings canvassing in Westchester or Palmetto Bay. Unfiltered and alone, it was just us; talking about our community and country. On those days and nights there was no place I would rather be.

Life revealed itself in its many forms on these unannounced visits. The couple celebrating their daughter who was headed to college. The single mom working three jobs to keep current on her mortgage. The middle-aged woman who tried to chat amiably but, after a time, couldn’t hold it back any longer, sharing that she’d just been diagnosed with cancer. “I need a hug,” she said, a tear running down her cheek, which she quickly and defiantly wiped away.

The conversations were always so real--  standing at front doors, sitting in living rooms, meeting people where they are, learning about their hopes and concerns, aspirations and struggles. At a time when Washington has so fundamentally and collectively lost its way, at the grassroots people are making sense. We need to spend more time listening to them.

Indeed, throughout the campaign I often said the best ideas come from the community, not candidates. I really meant it. Change happens from the ground up, and that’s never been more true than today. From start to finish, our campaign sought to stay true to that ethos. Namely, we focused on voters, rather than cutting down competitors as a means to win.

We visited every precinct, we knocked on some 45,000 doors. Again and again, I found a sincerity, thoughtfulness and a belief that things will get better. I always thought we lived in a special community, but over the last year I’ve vividly seen it with my own eyes in one neighborhood after another. Those thousands of conversations leave me today more hopeful and optimistic than ever.

If only our politics can be as good as them. I think it can, but we are going to have to change in big ways.

To me, election night 2016 was a shattering moment--  and it’s what ultimately prompted me to run. I had believed that America would never elect a person who said and did the things that Donald Trump said and did. I believed that America today would never elect a bully, a liar, someone who preyed upon our worst fears and sought to divide us to win support. We might come close to electing such a demagogue, but at this stage in our country’s history we would never actually do it. I was obviously wrong.

The better angels of our nature had given way to our most base sensibilities. A presidency built on hope was followed by one grounded in our worst fears.

In early January, as President Obama prepared to leave office, he gave his farewell address, warning that we can’t take democracy for granted. That it “falls on each of us to be anxious, jealous guardians of our democracy.” What the speech said to me is that, yes, America is a special place. But it’s only special because generation after generation has continually engaged in making it so--  even as there are setbacks, sometimes dramatic setbacks, along the way.

Then, at Danet’s urging, on January 21st we attended the Women’s March in Washington, D.C. My sister Meghan and our friend Lissette went too. It was an extraordinary day as millions around the world rose up. It was there that I thought to myself that this remarkable moment of protest must also be a moment of real and lasting change--  and wondered how to try and live that. It was there that I decided to run.

The reason I decided to drop everything, leave my job at Knight Foundation and do something I’d never done before was because I believed we were--  and are--  at a pivotal moment. This is not a normal election year.

I firmly believe that years from now people will ask about this time, what did we do?

What did we do when a President--  along with a compliant Republican-controlled Congress--  called for border walls, Muslim bans, tore thousands of immigrant children from their parents, bowed to a foreign power that meddled in our election, sympathized with neo-Nazis, sought to use law enforcement as a means to settle political scores, and declared the press an enemy of the state.

This election is our moment to reaffirm and declare who we are-- and who we are not--  as a country.

But, in doing so, we have to realize that this election is about what’s next. It can’t just be about what we’re against, but it has to be about what we’re for. Indeed, while Donald Trump has contributed much to our dysfunctional politics, the truth is that he’s the result of a dysfunctional system that has been spiraling for some time.

We are only going to achieve the change we need if we dispense with the incrementalism that has defined our politics for so long and think--  and do--  in dramatic new ways. And allow new leaders to emerge in a political system that’s long become stuck.

Put another way, it’s a two-part challenge: ensure that today does not become the new normal, and provide a vision for what tomorrow will look like. With that in mind, we sought to run a campaign that actually represented the change we seek.

At a time when money is undermining our democracy, we didn’t accept any funding from political action committees, federal lobbyists or special interests like big sugar.

At a time when so many have given up on politics, our campaign was powered by extraordinary campaign fellows who were the heart and soul of our effort.

At a time when so many are disconnected from our government, we built a field program that sought to personally engage voters in every neighborhood in every part of the district.

At a time when the leadership in Congress hasn’t changed in years, we called for an entirely new slate of people in leadership roles in the House. The new faces in the next Congress must not be just newly elected members, but the leaders at the top too.

Of course, our efforts did not result in a victory. But I have no regrets. After all, this is a moment to take chances. And throughout my life I’ve always sought to take chances by diving into entirely new things; and going all-in when I do.

Whether it was going to New Orleans to write a biography on Professor Longhair (still unfinished). Or moving to Miami-- where I didn’t know a soul (but met my soulmate)--  to become a journalist (where I had a great run that lasted nearly a decade). Or leaving the Miami Herald to join Knight Foundation (where I had an even better run), in which I launched an entirely new program that planted the seeds and propelled Miami’s rapidly emerging startup and entrepreneurial community.

I want to stretch myself, test boundaries and be willing to do entirely new things. Incumbent to that approach will be wins and losses. It’s the in-between that I want to avoid.

Make no mistake, I dearly wish I was part of the Blue Wave at this critical point in our country’s history. But I’m not. This moment belongs to candidates with names like Gillum, O’Rourke, Pressley, Lamb, Ocasio-Cortez, and so many others. I will be cheering every one of them on, and support in any way I can. We need them to win and be good leaders when a new Congress is sworn in in January.

And, each in our own way, we all need to lean in and help. The moment is too important. The challenges are too great. The stakes too high. No one can sit this out.

So what’s next? The short answer is, I don’t know.

I do know that I have many people to thank. I remember when I decided to run, a friend advised that people look at you differently when you’re a political candidate. He cautioned that you’ll be disappointed by friends you thought would be there. But he also said you’ll be surprised by the support from those you didn’t know before or never expected. Focus and delight in the latter, he said. And I will.

(One quick note: Danet and I took some time away after the election. If you haven’t heard from me yet, you’ll be hearing from me soon.)

After such an all-consuming period I also have many friendships to renew, which I am looking forward to doing.

Life is about chapters and seasons. The thing about political campaigns is the chapter ends so suddenly. After such an intense period, it’s quickly and suddenly over. It’s a crash landing. But a new chapter begins. There is power in blank canvases. I’ve experienced it before. It’s at moments like these when you can edit your life and think completely anew. It’s often at these moments when the unimagined happens, when you follow completely new paths and find unexpected success.

I have no idea what this next chapter will bring, but I’m excited to find out.

After the race, I spoke with Reggie, who is a great friend and the father of Joshua, my little through Big Brother Big Sister for more than a decade. Reggie said to me: “You gotta keep pressing on my man. It’s all good.”

That pretty much says it all. Keep pressing on.

Enabling Trump-- That's What Congressional Republicans Continue To Do

Trump by Joel Peter Witkin

In 1790, the first president of the United States, wrote a letter to the congregants of the Touro Synagogue in Newport, Rhode Island, which said, in part, that "the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support... May the children of the Stock of Abraham, who dwell in this land, continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other Inhabitants; while every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig-tree, and there shall be none to make him afraid. May the father of all mercies scatter light and not darkness in our paths, and make us all in our several vocations useful here, and in his own due time and way everlastingly happy."

Sunday, Jewish community leaders in Pittsburgh sent a letter to the current occupant of the White House, an illegitimate, fake president who stokes hatred and bigotry to unite his violent, hate-filled, moron followers.

President Trump:

Yesterday, a gunman slaughtered 11 Americans during Shabbat morning services. We mourn with the victims’ families and pray for the wounded. Here in Mr. Rogers’ neighborhood, we express gratitude for the first responders and for the outpouring of support from our neighbors near and far. We are committed to healing as a community while we recommit ourselves to repairing our nation.

For the past three years your words and your policies have emboldened a growing white nationalist movement. You yourself called the murderer evil, but yesterday’s violence is the direct culmination of your influence.

President Trump, you are not welcome in Pittsburgh until you fully denounce white nationalism.

Our Jewish community is not the only group you have targeted.  You have also deliberately undermined the safety of people of color, Muslims, LGBTQ people, and people with disabilities. Yesterday’s massacre is not the first act of terror you incited against a minority group in our country.

President Trump, you are not welcome in Pittsburgh until you stop targeting and endangering all minorities.

The murderer’s last public statement invoked the compassionate work of the Jewish refugee service HIAS at the end of a week in which you spread lies and sowed fear about migrant families in Central America. He killed Jews in order to undermine the efforts of all those who find shared humanity with immigrants and refugees.

President Trump, you are not welcome in Pittsburgh until you cease your assault on immigrants and refugees.

The Torah teaches that every human being is made b’tzelem Elohim, in the image of God.

This means all of us.

In our neighbors, Americans, and people worldwide who have reached out to give our community strength, there we find the image of God.  While we cannot speak for all Pittsburghers, or even all Jewish Pittsburghers, we know we speak for a diverse and unified group when we say:

President Trump, you are not welcome in Pittsburgh until you commit yourself to compassionate, democratic policies that recognize the dignity of all of us.

Melania will go to Pittsburgh with Trumpanzee. I bet she doesn't wear that fetching "I Don't Give A Damn" designer jacket this time. It might unsettled the Adelsons and other wealthy kapos and court Jews.

Charlie Dent is a mainstream conservative-- albeit with a 93% Trump adhesion record-- from Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley. He retired from Congress in May and the heart of his old district (now PA-07) will likely go to Democrat Susan Wild. On Thursday, Dent was on a CNN panel when he was asked about his former House colleague Ron DeSantis taking contributions from Nazis in his gubernatorial race. Steven Alembik, who once called President Obama a "Muslim nigger," has given DeSantis thousands of dollars. Dent's response was that he wasn’t aware of it "I certainly would’ve returned it... if he’s getting contributions from people who have this type of history, I would certainly just send it back. I don’t understand why he would hang on to it."



If I lived in Allentown-- I used to live just north of there in Stroudsburg-- I would have admired Dent for that... but because I disagree with him on fundamental issues, I still would not have voted for him. Sure, good for ex-Congressman Dent. But... that's it. Look at that voting record linked in the first sentence of the first paragraph!

It gets worse. Trump and DeSantis are brothers from another mother-- and Trump got him the nomination and has two more rallies in Florida for him in the next week. There are no Republicans in Congress standing up to Trump's poisonous, divisive rhetoric, not even in the mild way Dent stood up against DeSantis. Monday, Bernie wrote to his supporters that "Trump is going to try to divide us in this final week before the election. He is going to try to pit us against each other by race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, immigration status and however he can do it. He is desperate to do it because he knows that if working people, young people, and people of color stand united, we are going to win. If he can divide us up, right-wing Republicans and the big-money interests will win. What I saw on my tour was a people who are united. People who know that real change is possible when large numbers of ordinary Americans speak out, get involved in the democratic process, and vote. Progressive change is coming." Not if Trump-- and his Republican enablers can stop it. And Trump doesn't believe in any kinds of boundaries. He's in it to win it. For him it's all "Fuck the norms; fuck the rules."

Chuck Todd and his crew noted that "Tragedy and terror have dominated the last 72 hours in American politics." It was all about the #MAGAbomber in Florida and the #MAGAshooter in Pittsburgh. "Both," they wrote, "appear to be products of our toxic political environment. Sayoc was a Trump fan who plastered his white van with Trump and 'Make America Great Again' paraphernalia. The accused shooter in Pittsburg posted conspiracy theories and messages about the migrant caravan walking to the U.S.-Mexico border."

But there is a fundamental divide about our current politics-- the overheated and demeaning rhetoric, the inability to compromise, partisanship all the time. While most politicians, Democrats and Republicans, see this as a problem, President Trump sees it as an opportunity. Something to exploit. Something to help turn out his voters.

Consider Trump’s rally in Illinois on Saturday just hours after the shooting in Pittsburgh. The president first addressed the tragedy and condemned the killings. “This evil anti-Semitic attack is an assault on all of us. It’s an assault on humanity. It will require all of us working together to extract the hateful poison of anti-Semitism,” he said.

But then he returned his attention to his familiar targets. On the caravan: “Republicans want no crime, and no caravans, right?... This will be election of caravans, Kavanaugh, law and order and common sense.”

On Nancy Pelosi and Maxine Waters: “Now I did a little tiny bit of research and Mike's opponent, Brendan Kelly, is a vote for Nancy Pelosi, and of course, Maxine Waters, and their job-killing agenda.”

On Elizabeth Warren: “We can’t use Pocahontas anymore, she’s got no Indian blood!” he said. “I have more than she does, and I have none. So I can’t call her Pocahontas anymore, but I think I will anyway, do you mind?”

On his critics and opponents: “You have the haters and they continue to hate. These are foolish and very stupid people. Very stupid.”

John Cohen, counter-terrorism expert at Rutgers University, told NPR this morning that this kind of political rhetoric is dangerous. “Our political rhetoric has become much more demonizing. Your opponent isn’t just somebody you disagree with; it is somebody who is corrupt, it is evil. Problems such as immigration are not simply problems of resources and problems of policy; but the people who are coming here are treated as criminals.”

Trump tweeted last night and this morning that it was unfair to blame him for the pipe bomb scare and the shooting in Pittsburgh. “The Fake News is doing everything in their power to blame Republicans, Conservatives and me for the division and hatred that has been going on for so long in our Country. Actually, it is their Fake & Dishonest reporting which is causing problems far greater than they understand!”

But how can the president participate in finding a solution to the division and hatred when he doesn’t see them as problems-- but instead conditions to exploit?

And while the president views the criticism of his leadership as an opportunity to showcase himself as a victim to fire up his base, the silence of the rest of the GOP is what’s so loud this time.

Compare this moment with the aftermath of Charlottesville. There haven’t been any Republicans who have distanced themselves from Trump. It shows just how much of the GOP’s elected leadership fears the divisive tone Trump has set is actually the KEY to stoking the base for the election.

Let that sink in.

WILL THE LAST 72 HOURS OF NEWS BE THE FINAL ISSUE-EVENTS OF THE 2018 CAMPAIGN?

With eight days to go until the 2018 midterms, it is very possible that the pipe bomb scare and shootings in Pittsburgh are the final issue-events of this campaign season. Of course, there’s still plenty of time for another event or story. But with eight days left...

TRUMP, GOP DEFIANT THAT INCENDIARY RHETORIC DIDN’T CAUSE THE RECENT VIOLENCE

The Washington Post: “President Trump and his Republican allies remained defiant Sunday amid allegations from critics that Trump’s incendiary attacks on political rivals and racially charged rhetoric on the campaign trail bear some culpability for the climate surrounding a spate of violence in the United States.”

More: “Trump, who has faced calls to tone down his public statements, signaled that he would do no such thing-- berating billionaire liberal activist Tom Steyer, a target of a mail bomb sent by a Trump supporter, as a ‘crazed & stumbling lunatic’ on Twitter, after Steyer said on CNN that Trump and the Republican Party have created an atmosphere of ‘political violence.’”

Vice President Mike Pence told NBC’s Vaughn Hillyard this when asked about Trump’s language: "Look, everyone has their own style, and frankly, people on both sides of the aisle use strong language..."

TRUMP “READS THE DUTIFUL WORDS OF UNITY AND GRIEF … THAT AIDES PUT IN FRONT OF HIM, BUT HE REFUSES TO STICK TO THE SCRIPT”

The New York Times: “The president has made clear he does not see national harmony as his mission. He mocks the notion of being ‘presidential,’ and the crowds at his rallies egg him on, eager for him to ‘tone it up’ rather than ‘tone it down,’ as he puts it. He reads the dutiful words of unity and grief and determination that aides put in front of him, but he refuses to stick to the script. His people want a fighter, in his view, and he plans to give it to them. If the mandarins of Washington and the cable channels tut-tut over his language, it is because they are out to get him.”

Best of luck with that attitude. A poll released yesterday by the non-partisan Public Religion Research Institute found that a majority of Americans say there is nothing that Señor Trumpanzee could do to change their opinion of him. More than four in ten (46%) say they disapprove of Trump’s job performance and that there is nothing he could do to win their approval, while 14% say they approve of Trump and that there is nothing he could do to lose their approval. By contrast, four in ten Americans either approve (27%) or disapprove (13%) of the president but say that there is something he could do to change their mind. Among Democrats, almost eight in ten (78%) say they disapprove of the president and there is nothing he can do to win their approval, while 12% disapprove but say there is something he could do win their approval. By contrast, nearly four in ten (37%) Republicans say they approve of the president and that there is nothing he can do to lose their support. A slim majority (51%) of Republicans approve of Trump but say there is something he could do lose their approval."

This morning, though, the Washington Post reported that congressional leaders from both parties-- McConnell, Ryan, Schumer and Pelosi-- have all declined invitations to join Trump on his visit to Pittsburgh, where the city's mayor and most Jewish leaders have pleaded for him to stay away since his regime has fueled anti-Semitism through their rhetoric before and after Saturday’s massacre. CNN reported that "A spate of local and state officials also said they would not appear with Trump when he visits a hospital and pays respects to the 11 victims of Saturday’s massacre."

"Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves; ensure justice for those being crushed."

-Proverbs 31:8

Trump's Pogram And People On Both Sides Of The Aisle

Sparks by Nancy Ohanian

Ivanka and Kushner-in-law are Jews. When government-sanctioned Cossacks-- quietly sanctioned-- were murdering Jews in Imperial Russia there were tsars who protected wealthy Jews in St. Petersburg. A few years ago, I visited the Grand Choral Synagogue that Alexander II sanctioned in 1869 at the request of wealthy Jewish financier Joseph Günzburg-- loudly sanctioned-- Petersburg's first synogogue. Decades later, my grandfather, fleeing Cossacks raiding the countryside, spent his last night in Russia before immigrating to America at that synagogue.

Over the weekend, the Trumpist Regime sent Pence out to the media to claim Trump was not responsible for rabid anti-Semite, self-proclaimed Nazi and Trumpist Cesar Sayoc (#MAGAbomber) in Florida nor for Robert Bowers (#MAGAshooter) in Pittsburgh, who killed 11 people praying in their synagogue and them said "All these Jews need to die." NBC reported that Pence "rejected the suggestion that there is a link between the kind of political rhetoric" used by devoted neo-Nazi Señor Trumpanzee and "acts of violence like Saturday's deadly shooting at a synagogue in Pittsburgh or last week's mail bombs sent to prominent Trump critics." Pence said "Everyone has their own style, and frankly, people on both sides of the aisle use strong language about our political differences. But I just don’t think you can connect it to acts or threats of violence." Isn't that nice? Just think fall those neo-Nazis whose dinners were spoiled by people on the other side of the aisle. Senator McConnell may have gotten a tummy ache when someone yelled at him.

The vice president called for “unity” earlier in the day at a campaign event in Las Vegas. "What happened this morning in Pittsburgh was not just a criminal act, it was evil," he told NBC News. He added that the administration is "absolutely determined to do everything in our power to prevent these types of attacks from happening in the future."

But when asked about calling Democrats a "mob," as he did at campaign stops a day before, Pence indicated that was part of political debate.

“The American people believe in the freedom of speech,” Pence said. “And throughout the history of this country we’ve always had vigorous debates and then we settle those debates in the ballot box. We don’t settle them through acts or threats of violence like the pipe bombs we saw sent to the Obamas, the Clintons, to CNN and others.”

And he characterized the president’s penchant for name calling as part of the reason Trump has effectively connected with a large contingency of the country.

“The president and I have different styles, but the president connected to the American people because he spoke plainly.”

When asked if the president’s rhetoric is “healthy” for the country’s civil discourse, the vice president said “debate is healthy in America,” and, again, dismissed any connection between “the kind of violent behavior we witnessed in Pittsburgh” to “the political debate.”

After the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting it has become abundantly clear to more Jews that to support Trump now is to say that his pro-Israel policies are more important than his enflaming of anti-Semitism. Jay Michaelson reminded Daily Beast readers yesterday that "After the 9/11 attacks, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres said that countries now had to choose between fighting terror and abetting it, that there was no neutral ground. In his metaphor, you were either sitting in the smoking section, or the no-smoking section. In the wake of the worst attack on Jews in American history, all of us, but especially American Jews like me, face a similar decision. We either support Donald Trump and the movement of hate he has unleashed, or we oppose it. There is no neutral ground, no justification that the benefits outweigh the costs. You’re in the smoking section, or the no-smoking section."

For American Jews in particular, this is a moment of reckoning. In the Jewish community, support for Trump is lower than it has been for most Republican presidents, but it’s still around 21 percent. The majority of Jewish Trump supporters are either Orthodox or right-wing on Israel-- in most cases, both. Among Orthodox Jews-- who comprise about one-fifth of American Jews-- support for Trump runs as high as 90 percent.

For two years, Jewish Trump supporters have said that the anti-Semitic alt-right isn’t Trump’s fault; that the president is not personally anti-Semitic (after all, his daughter and son-in-law are Jewish); and, most importantly, he has been a staunch supporter for Israel.

This, they say, outweighs whatever reservations we may have about Trump and the bigotry of his most ardent supporters.

As of October 27, 2018, that jig is up.

No amount of pro-Israel policies-- no embassy in Jerusalem, no encouragement of settlements, no increased aid-- outweighs the existential danger to Jews of the Trump movement’s coddling, or even overt encouragement, of anti-Semitism, racism, and nativism. Even those Jews not motivated by solidarity with Muslims, Mexicans, the media, and others singled out by Trump for opprobrium must now recognize that we Jews, ourselves, are at risk.

Although this should have been clear following the 60-percent increase in anti-Semitic attacks between 2016 and 2017, it is surely undeniable now.

It is beyond obvious that Trump, Fox News, and the “soft” alt-right are guilty of what has been called “stochastic terrorism.”  While they are not legally responsible for any individual particular terrorist act, including the slaughter in Pittsburgh, they have, over the past several years, created the environment in which “lone wolves” like Robert Bowers inevitably commit horrific acts.

In the case of stochastic terrorism, those responsible for it may still condemn each individual act of violence. They may sincerely be disgusted by it.  But without their acts, it would not have happened. They are responsible.

By way of analogy, stochastic terrorists are like teenagers who put grain alcohol in a punch bowl. They may not be legally responsible when a bunch of kids get drunk, and one gets behind the wheel and kills someone in an accident. But any ethical human being knows that such consequences are unavoidable. Maybe not at every party, but one is enough.

In Bowers’ case, the causal connection is clearer that usual. Bowers parroted talking points not merely of the alt-right, which blames Jews for multiculturalism, but also of the ‘soft right’ like Fox News, which has ceaselessly repeated lies that dangerous “Middle Easterners” are among the current caravan of refugees; that ‘illegal’ immigrants are disproportionately criminals (in fact, the crime rate among undocumented people is lower than that of citizens); that immigration is thus an existential danger to America.

Trump, of course, has also said some of the same things, even though his own advisers know that they are false.

If you think about it, how could someone like Robert Bowers not commit a terrorist act? He’s been marinating in a stew of anti-Semitism, nativism, nationalism, and above all, rage. If not Bowers, then it would have been someone else.

And no, it does not matter that Trump condemned the attacks, and that the attacker himself believes Trump isn’t anti-Semitic enough.  For years, Trump’s leading supporters (and family members) have retweeted overt white supremacists and given platforms to them. Even in his recent condemnation of the 13 letter bomb attacks, he managed only to condemn “political violence,” feeding into the right-wing myth that there is equal violence on both sides, just as there were good people on both sides of the Charlottesville white supremacy march. As if antifa activists punching Richard Spencer or heckling Mitch McConnell are equal to a Robert Bowers, Cesar Altieri Sayoc, or Dylann Roof.

Nor, finally, does it matter whether Trump himself is anti-Semitic, which he almost certainly is not (even beyond his family, many of his longtime business associates, as well as his chief mentor, Roy Cohn, are Jewish). He is either unwilling or unable to see how his vicious rhetoric against immigrants and Muslims supports a right-wing movement that also hates Jews. He is unwilling or unable to see how his furious midnight tweets and shouted insults at rallies encourage tens of millions of Americans to be enraged at the media, Hollywood, and ‘elites’-- all of which, in anti-Semitic imagination, are disproportionately Jewish.

He may not get it, but he is responsible. And even if Trump himself can’t see that, we American Jews must.

David Frum noted in his Atlantic column that "one of the special moral challenges for American Jews in the Trump years is that-- for once-- we have largely been exempt from vilification by a hate-exploiting demagogue. Jews historically assume that bigots of any kind must sooner or later turn upon us as well. But Trump largely refrains from explicit anti-Semitism, and to a remarkable degree the pro-Trump conservative media refrain as well. In a true “only in America” moment, people who bear Jewish names and participate in Jewish life have been full partners in much of the Trump project."

There’s no politician to blame for the ideas in the synagogue murderer’s head. There are plenty to blame for the weapons in his hands. And at the top of that list is Trump, whose response to the killing was to blame the synagogue for not having armed guards of its own. In his famous letter to the Jewish congregations of Newport, Rhode Island, the nation’s first president pledged to them a country that would fulfill the biblical prophecy: “Every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree and there shall be none to make him afraid.”

Trump is an unworthy successor to George Washington who feeds off fear, normalizes it, and exploits it. He’s done it again today. This crime is not his fault at all. And yet he nevertheless found a way to use this crime to add to his own accumulating shame.

One week from tomorrow, the American people can start the process of stopping this home-grown fascism-- that is now rearing its ugly head on our soil-- in its tracks. As Andrew Gillum said Saturday, "The reports from Pittsburg are heartbreaking and devastating. Our houses of worship-- like our schools and movie theaters-- should be safe from this epidemic of gun violence. All Americans need words of healing; words of affirmation; and words of condemnation for the rising tide of hatred and anti-Semitism in this country. This epidemic of violence impacts all of us, from worshipers in a synagogue to a bible study meeting in Charleston to the brave men and women in law enforcement who give so much to keep us all safe. Hatred and violence will never win. What is right in our society will triumph over what is wrong."

Late last night the NY Times published an analysis by Peter Baker and Maggie Haberman, For Trump, Dutiful Words of Grief, Then Off to the Next Fight. They wrote that Republican officials have been complaining for months-- among themselves-- that the orangutan occupying the Oval Office "lacks the ability to confront moments of crisis with moral clarity," as though an orangutan can grok the concept of moral clarity, let alone live by it. Trump choses "to inflame the divisions that have torn the country apart rather than try to bring it together." His phony-baloney statement of outrage "at anti-Semitism after Saturday’s slaughter at a Pittsburgh synagogue" was crafted by Ivanka and Kushner-in-law while Trump smoldered, eager to get back "into partisan mode, assailing his enemies. By the evening’s end he was tweeting about baseball, and on Sunday he went after another [Jewish] foe… Inside the White House, advisers veer between resolve, resignation and resentment-- struggling to get Mr. Trump to do and say what a typical president might, frustrated that he does not always heed their guidance and bitter that his critics are piling on. Sometimes they take it upon themselves to do what he will not."