Trump's November Toxicity Is Starting A Civil War Inside The Ranks Of Congressional Republicans

All summer, the polls Marist did for NPR-- there have been 4 so far-- have shown Trump's disapproval rating between 54 and 58%. Their newest poll has his approval at 39%-- and among Independent registered voters his approval is just 32% and his disapproval among this key cohort is 57%. You can win in Wyoming and Mississippi with numbers like that-- but it's tough in Texas, Alaska, Georgia, Montana and even South Carolina! The same poll shows that if the congressional elections were held today, 49% of voters would cast ballots for Democrats and just 43% would cast ballots for Republicans.

Those numbers are, at least in part, due to the fact that more and more voters don't trust what Trump says. In March, 37% of registered voters trusted what he had to say about the pandemic, while 60% did not. Today 67% do not and only 31% do. Among Independent voters just 25% trust what he has to say, while a staggering 71% know he's a liar. In the presidential horserace, it's Biden over Trump by 11 points (53-42%), up from an 8 point Biden-lead in June.

And a new poll by Pew, also released yesterday, shows that voters are basically anti-Trump, anti-Republican, not pro-Biden and not pro-Democrat. In fact, 56% of people who intend on voting for Biden say the main reason they're behind him is because of their negative opinion of Trump. Republican Members of Congress are slowing catching on.

Amanda Terkel reported how ultra-endangered Colorado Senator Cory Gardner (R) was pressured by the Trump campaign to run reelection ads for himself glorifying Señor Trumpanzee, so he did-- on Facebook... everywhere but in Colorado. It's filled with lies and the kind of bullshit that would penalize Gardner if Colorado voters were to see it, so they made the ad non-shareable and non-embeddable. Terkel points out that "every other Facebook ad Gardner is running is being seen in Colorado."

McConnell is watching his Senate majority circle the drain. Republican incumbents likely to lose their seats in November, aside from Gardner-- widely considered among the walking dead-- are Susan Collins (ME)-- desperately looking for issues to disagree with Trump on-- Thom Tillis (NC), Martha McSally (AZ), Steve Daines (MT), Joni Ernst (IA), Dan Sullivan (AK)... and even David Perdue (GA). Lindsey Graham (SC) and Miss McConnell (KY Jelly) himself are playing defense.

The situation in the House is also dire for the GOP-- and they know it. At dawn on Friday morning, the Washington Post published a piece by Rachel Bade, To The President, He's 'My Kevin.' To Some Republicans He 'Does Nothing But Lick Trump's Boots.' The DCCC isn't targeting McCarthy and the California Democratic Party is largely ignoring his R+14 district, where Hillary only managed to pull 36% of the vote in 2016 and where McCarthy was reelected 131,113 (63.7%) to 74,661 (36.3%) during the so-called "blue wave" election of 2018. He even won in the Los Angeles County part of the district! By the end of June, McCarthy had raised $16,638,004 and his Democratic opponent, Kim Mangone, had raised $486,753. There has been no significant outside spending in the race.

McCarthy's problem isn't in California; it's in Washington. Bade wrote that "Discontent with Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy is on the rise in the House, as Republicans increasingly fearful of a loss by President Trump on Election Day gear up for an intraparty war over the future of the GOP. A cluster of GOP lawmakers is starting to privately question whether the California Republican is putting loyalty to the president over the good of the conference. And a small group of members is discussing whether someone should challenge him for minority leader if Trump is defeated Nov. 3."

Yesterday, the biggest lagging indicator in the country, the Cook Report moved 11 races in a Democratic direction and 4 in a Republican direction. Yawn; read them on November 4 when they will have mostly caught up with reality. The one ratings move of interest was in NJ-02, where they have down-graded DCCC Blue Dog Jeff Van Drew, who is now a Trumpist Republican from "lean R" to toss up. Generous of them, considering that the latest poll shows Van Drew losing his seat to Democrat Amy Kennedy 51-46%. But Cook is followed closely in DC-- it's kind of a closed feedback loop-- and the GOP incumbents they are ranking as endangered include, aside from Van Drew, seats being contested by Blue America-endorsed candidates that are tenuously held by Donald Bacon (NE-02), Michael McCaul (TX-10), Fred Upton (MI-06), John Katko (NY-24), and, to a lesser extent, Roger Williams (TX-25). Other endangered Republicans, according to Cook-- which is always weeks behind reality-- include Mike Garcia (CA-25), Ann Wagner (MO-02), Chip Roy (TX-21), Steve Chabot (OH-01), David Schweikert (AZ-06), Scott Perry (PA-10), Lee Zeldin (NY-01), Ross Spano (FL-15), Jim Hagedorn (MN-01), Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-01), Don Young (AK-AL), Richard Hudson (NC-08), Rodney Davis (IL-13), and Van Taylor (VA-03).

The matter bubbled to the surface this week with the primary election of Marjorie Taylor Greene, a fringe House candidate in Georgia who espouses the QAnon conspiracy theory and has made numerous racist comments. Multiple Republicans implored McCarthy to help defeat her by supporting her primary opponent. But McCarthy refused, phoning the candidate in an apparent peace accord before the primary, while Trump embraced her on Twitter this week as a “future Republican Star.”

However, the frustration with McCarthy had already been brewing for weeks as Trump’s polling has sagged behind presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden. According to interviews with more than 10 House Republicans-- all of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to be frank-- some GOP lawmakers are worried that McCarthy has tied the conference too much to Trump, refusing to stand up to the president or act as a buffer to distinguish the conference from him.

Others are also furious that he did not shield them from a recent Trump campaign demand that House members donate to the president’s reelection effort.

“There’s no doubt that McCarthy is a Trump loyalist, through and through,” said Doug Heye, a former House GOP leadership staffer who has known McCarthy personally for decades. “I think the challenge for everyone in the Republican conference is, at some point there will be a post-Trump world-- whether that’s coming in three months or later. What direction does the party go?”

One House Republican was blunt in criticism of McCarthy, whom Trump has referred to as “my Kevin”: “He does nothing but lick Trump’s boots. That’s all he cares about-- so no, it’s not helpful.”

The feeling, however, is far from unanimous. McCarthy, an affable politico, maintains a loyal crop of followers, including many conservatives who once viewed him as a foe. He also has raised $82 million for Republicans this cycle, more than the previous two GOP speakers.

...McCarthy’s ultimate test will come on Election Day, when not only Trump but the fates of several dozen Republican lawmakers and candidates hang in the balance. If Republicans pick up seats in conservative districts, McCarthy would be more likely to stave off a challenge.

“He becomes damaged goods [if Trump loses], but it could be offset if he is successful in helping the GOP conference win back a bunch of seats,” said one senior House Republican. “But if we lose... the Republican conference is probably going to be looking for something different in leadership.”

...Freedom Caucus members such as Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) are among McCarthy’s top allies, while those with complaints hail from the moderate or establishment wings.

McCarthy’s embrace of Trump has baffled some who knew the moderate, small-business owner who came to Congress in 2007. But McCarthy, more so perhaps than predecessors such as former speaker Paul D. Ryan, is a political animal who understands alliances. When Trump won the nomination in 2016, he made a choice: He was going be with Trump, even as his other colleagues were squeamish.

“He changed and became fully committed on the Trump train,” said one House Republican. “Kevin has never been a conservative guy; he’s one of the most moderate guys in the House if you look at his voting record. But all of a sudden there was this metamorphosis where it was ‘Everything Trump.’ And look, there’s high-risk, high-reward with that.”

In 2016, it was McCarthy who persuaded Ryan and other House Republicans not to break with Trump over the Access Hollywood tape in which the then-candidate claimed that he could grab women by their private parts with impunity. And during Ryan’s tenure as speaker, McCarthy would often encourage the Wisconsin Republican to keep his disputes with Trump private for the sake of unity.

As minority leader, McCarthy has implored his members to do the same, as seen last fall when Republicans rallied together against Democrats’ impeachment inquiry. McCarthy was able to unite the far-right and the moderates under one set of talking points, a turn that might have been more difficult in previous years.

But still, some Republicans have questioned whether McCarthy has given Trump too much of a pass. In the summer of 2019, several Republicans implored him to stand up to Trump when the president told four Democratic congresswoman of color to “go back” to their countries of origin, though they were all Americans. McCarthy told one of those people, Rep. Paul Mitchell (Mich.), that Trump doesn’t like to be criticized.

In May, despite Trump’s massive war chest breaking records, McCarthy worked with the Trump campaign on a plan to get House Republicans to donate to the president’s reelection. A few weeks later, news broke that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s 42 most vulnerable members had an average 5-to-1 cash advantage over their GOP opponents, while 30 Democratic challengers outraised their Republican opponents in the second quarter of 2020-- putting Democrats in a prime position to grow their majority.

Some GOP members were livid, wondering why they were called on to help fund the well-oiled Trump money machine when some of their own were in trouble.

...There’s also uncertainty about who would take his place or whether anyone would have the nerve to challenge him. Some Republicans have eyed House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (LA), who recently took a political risk and worked to undermine Greene, realizing how much of a problem she could be for the House.

But while Scalise at one point pondered a McCarthy challenge years ago, the two seem to have made amends and worked together in the minority. Additionally, Scalise has also been loyal to Trump-- so if Republicans go in another direction post-election, they could cast their eyes elsewhere.

That’s one of the reasons for all the recent chatter surrounding House Republican Conference Chairwoman Liz Cheney (WY), who has sought to create a lane for herself where she both supports Trump on most policy matters but isn’t afraid to call him out. At a time when Trump wouldn’t wear a mask and seemed to make fun of those who did, Cheney tweeted that real men cover their faces. She also backed Anthony S. Fauci, a member of the White House coronavirus task force and director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, when the administration turned against him.

Democrats have never even tried to turn McCarthy into a demon in the eyes of the public, the way the GOP has done with Pelosi (and the way Democrats have done with McConnell). No one is voting against any Republican incumbents because of McCarthy toxicity. Most voters outside of Kern County don't even recognize his name. It's a different dynamic than in Senate races, where support for McConnell-- as well as for Trump-- is a factor in voters' decisions to flip seats from red to blue. In the House races, it's much more purely about Trump and about Democratic candidates successfully campaigning about the unpopular issues that Trump and his enablers have foisted-- and are trying to foist-- on the public. I asked Kara Eastman how that is playing out in her Omaha-based district, as she successfully points out the connected-at-the-hip relationship between Donald J. Trump and Donald J. Bacon. "It’s on us," Kara told me last night, "to continue to remind voters that Don Bacon refused to stray from Trump’s bitter shadow when it mattered the most: First, when he voted against the health care of the district to destroy the affordable care act, next when he supported the tax scam giveaway to the wealthiest Americans, and recently when he voted no to the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act. Despite his smooth-talking demeanor, Bacon can’t help but vote time and time again with the most extreme Trumpian Republicans."

Liam O'Mara told me that he and his campaign team have been focussing a lot of their outreach on independents, and finding that "their support for the Trump approach has indeed been slipping. If the national approval ratings for Trump get applied to Calvert's share of the NPPs [no party preference voters] here, then he cannot win, so all our fighting right now is concentrated on turning out our respective base and swaying those independents who are frustrated by Trump. But Calvert is in a tight spot, since he needs to brag about how close he is to Trump in order to motivate his Republican base-- and he has, telling them he's voted with Trump 98% of the time-- but that same point plays badly with the non-partisan NPPs who want to know their concerns are heard. Given how shamelessly partisan and obsequious the Republicans have been to Trump, races all over the country are going to be decided by large numbers of independent voters, and if your message cannot resonate with their economic concerns, good luck!"

This Senate Race Was Supposed To Be A "Sure Thing" But If Hickenlooper Wins The Primary It Won't Be

On Friday, Elizabeth Warren released a list of congressional candidates she had just endorsed. The list included progressive champions like Jamaal Bowman (NY), Mike Siegel (TX), Charles Booker (KY) and Julie Oliver (TX). I'm sure all of them are overjoyed at her backing-- even if it's a little late in the game for Bowman and Booker, whose primaries are tomorrow. But whatever goodwill and cred with the progressive netroots, the endorsements generated for Warren, it was squandered when she stepped all over herself by adding grotesque corporate whore John Hickenlooper to the list.

Widely hated by liberals and reformers for his virulent anti-progressive mania-- both as a dismally failed presidential candidate and in his current Schumeristic senatorial campaign-- Hick, AKA, Frackenlooper, has virtually nothing in common with any of Warren's other endorsed candidates and not much in common with Warren herself. I noticed that the #1 Warren-backing outside group in the country, the PCCC, quickly sent out an e-mail to their list emphasizing that they not only back Romanoff but that in their opinion Hickenlooper is "one of the worst corporate Dems" and reminded their supporters that he is "the guy who ran for president and consistently attacked Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders from the right. This is one of the most winnable Senate seats in the nation, and there's no excuse to elect a right-wing Democrat. Andrew Romanoff's running on Medicare For All and a Green New Deal. John Hickenlooper opposes those, supports police policies that encourage violence while proclaiming 'every life matters,' and is now embroiled in an ethics/corruption scandal that could hurt our chances of winning this easy-to-win race in November." BOOM!

In a spat with Warren on the debate stage, he hissed that maybe Medicare for All could be achieved in 15 years. They'll be dead in 15 years and the way to achieve Medicare for All sooner is by defeating candidates like Cory Gardner and John Hickenlooper and electing candidates like Andrew Romanoff. It isn't that complicated. Hickenlooper has finally stopped calling progressives "Stalinists," probably because he's running against a progressive who happens to be named Romanoff.

Yesterday, Politico's James Arkin pointed out that "Hickenlooper has stumbled in the closing weeks of Colorado’s Senate primary, creating openings for his opponent and Republicans that have unsettled a critical race for Democrats in their bid to recapture the Senate. Democrats acknowledge Hickenlooper has made serious mistakes on what was supposed to be a glide path to the Democratic nomination. After being cited for contempt this month for initially failing to appear before Colorado’s Independent Ethics Commission, Hickenlooper was fined $2,750 for two violations dating back to his second term as governor. He’s also apologized for comments about race, including responding to a question about the Black Lives Matter protests in a recent forum by saying the phrase means 'every life matters,' echoing a common refrain among conservatives."

Republicans are all over Hickenlooper's stumbles, pummeling him as they anticipate gleefully that he will be the easy target for Gardner in November and now, the primary has tightened considerably with all the momentum shifting towards Romanoff.

Not really that "mysterious"-- Schumer's paw prints are all over it

A sewer money SuperPAC, led by Schumer and the DSCC, Let's Turn Colorado Blue, dropped several million dollars into a jihadist-like smear campaign against Romanoff. After defying a subpoena and dodging nearly two dozen debates, Frackenlooper is now hiding behind Schumer's sewer-money attacks, claiming, deceitfully, he doesn't know who's paying for ads.

Arken explained how "Romanoff appeals to primary voters eager for his message of more radical change, including the Green New Deal and Medicare for All. He argues a middle of the road approach doesn’t meet the moment and has said Hickenlooper’s ethics issue is a problem. 'If you break the law, defy a subpoena and get held in contempt, you jeopardize our chances to hold the seat,' Romanoff said in a interview."

Schumer is trying to replace a conservative Republican Senate with a conservative Democratic Senate. With the exception of Steve Bullock in Montana, Schumer's candidates all suck shit. Democratic primary voters are largely unaware that they're voting for a pack of Kyrsten Sinemas. (Sinema was handpicked by Schumer in 2018 and has been the most consistently anti progressive Democrat in the Senate ever since, the closest thing to a Trump-enabler among congressional Democrats.) It still isn't too late to turn the tide, by supporting Andrew Romanoff, which you can do by clicking on the Blue America 2020 Senate thermometer above and contributing what you can.

Which Are The Republicans Most Likely To Lose Their Seats Because Of Their Lockstep Support Of Trump?

This week, Reuters released a new Ipsos poll showing that 72% of registered voters want to see witnesses-- such as John Bolton and Mike Pompeo-- testify in Trump's impeachment trial-- and that includes 69% of Republican voters. Even more Republican voters-- 73% of them-- also said senators should "act as impartial jurors" during the trial. Last week Washington Post reporter Griff Witte brought up Cory Gardner and, yes, he's absolutely one of the senators whose head has been buried up Trump's ass to the detriment of his own reelection efforts. Others are Susan Collins (ME), Martha McSally (AZ), Thom Tillis (NC), Joni Ernst (IA), David Perdue (GA), Kelly Loeffler (GA) and Dan Sullivan (AK). And if the 2020 wave is big enough, Steve Daines (MT), Cindy Hyde-Smith (MS), John Cornyn (TX) and Moscow Mitch (KY) himself could find themselves in trouble with voters as well.

Colorado is a state that has been steadily swinging blue since Gardner was first elected. Obama beat McCain in 2008 53.66% to 44.71% and then beat Romney 51.49% to 46.13%. Even as bad a candidate as Hillary Clinton managed to beat Trump by about 5 points-- 48.16% to 43.25%. The governor, a progressive Democratic gay man won his race in 2018 by 11 points-- and both houses of the state legislature are controlled by the Democrats (41-24 seats in the lower house and 19-16 in the state Senate).

Witte, though, doesn't know much about Cory Gardner. He claims Gardner was a moderate. Gardner was a hard core right-winger in the state legislator and the only times he votes with the Democrats is when he feels voting with the GOP will harm his reelection prospects. Does he have a problem now! He's a dead duck no matter what he does! "Gardner," wrote Witte "is perhaps the most vulnerable Republican of all this year, seeking a second term in a state Trump lost by nearly five points in 2016. Colorado has only shifted further left in the time since as younger, more liberal voters have flooded in and Democrats have tipped a registration deficit in their favor. But rather than run away from Trump as the evidence mounts that he used his office to seek personal political gain, Gardner has drawn nearer."

What little he has said about impeachment-- advisers acknowledge he is being conspicuously quiet on the issue-- has been critical, describing the process as “a total circus.” Having already endorsed Trump’s reelection, the 45-year-old has shown no inclination to bow to Democratic demands for what they describe as the basic ingredients of a fair trial.

The choice reflects the hyperpartisan backdrop as impeachment moves to the Senate for only the third time in American history: Even in a state where voters are famously independent and where demographics favor the Democrats, Republicans believe they have little to gain politically by swimming against the Trump tide.

“Gardner has made a calculus: The Republican base is more necessary to his reelection than being that profile in courage who would try to persuade the persuadable middle,” said Kyle Saunders, a political science professor at Colorado State.

Strategically, Saunders said, that make sense: Colorado has more unaffiliated voters than it has either Democrats or Republicans. But he estimated that only up to 10 percent of the electorate is truly up for grabs, with opinions about Trump deeply entrenched on either side.

While a significant majority of Coloradans disapprove of Trump’s performance, Gardner will need Republicans, who are nearly unanimous in their support of the president, if he has any hope of keeping his seat.

“If he takes on Trump now,” Saunders said, “he demobilizes the base and has absolutely no chance.”

Sticking with the president offers its own peril, allies acknowledge.

“Cory’s got a tough race. The odds are 50-50-- at best,” said Dick Wadhams, a veteran Republican strategist in Colorado and a friend of Gardner’s. “There’s no doubt about it: Trump is a liability.”

“Cory Gardner has chosen a path, and he’s very likely to stick with it: blind allegiance to Donald Trump,” said Craig Hughes, a Democratic strategist who managed Michael F. Bennet’s winning 2010 Senate campaign. “There are places where such a path might make more sense. Here, it’s going to cause real problems.”

The object of Gardner’s strategy, Hughes surmised, has been to avoid a primary challenge on his right flank. That appears to have been successful, with no serious competition in sight.

But Gardner-- whose office declined an interview request for this story, as it has with nearly all impeachment-related media queries in recent months-- still faces a mortal threat to his Senate career.

In November, he is likely to be pitted against either a conservative Democrat John Hickenlooper or against the former speaker of the Colorado House, the progressive in the primary. Romanoff is already hammering Gardner or his ties to Trump, a president who is deep underwater with Colorado voters. Frackenlooper is likely to follow Romanoff's stance.

Fox legal expert Andrew Napolitano penned an OpEd for FoxNews.com yesterday, basically saying Trump is guilty and needs to be removed from office. By all means read the whole thing; but here's how he ends: "What is required for removal of the president? A demonstration of presidential commission of high crimes and misdemeanors, of which in Trump's case the evidence is ample and uncontradicted." Trump doesn't like this kind of talk seeping into his fan base's bubble. Yesterday he went out of his mind when he realized that Fox & Friends viewers saw this ad that Michael Bloomberg made and ran.

Love Those #NeverTrumpers-- Except When They Interfere With The Democratic Party

The newest-- I guess-- #NeverTrumpster conservative group is the Lincoln Project, basically George Conway, Rick Wilson, Steve Schmidt, Reed Galen, Jennifer Horn, Mike Madrid, Ron Steslow, John Weaver, Sally Canfield, Chip Felkel, Molly Jong-Fast, Sophia Nelson, Tom Nichols, Tara Setmayer, and Chris Vance. They call themselves "advisors" to the Lincoln Project. And they define their mission as defeating Trump and Trumpism at the ballot box. "We do not undertake this task lightly nor from ideological preference," they wrote. "Our many policy differences with national Democrats remain. However, the priority for all patriotic Americans must be a shared fidelity to the Constitution and a commitment to defeat those candidates who have abandoned their constitutional oaths, regardless of party. Electing Democrats who support the Constitution over Republicans who do not is a worthy effort... Trump and those who sign onto Trumpism are a clear and present danger to the Constitution and our Republic. Only defeating so polarizing a character as Trump will allow the country to heal its political and psychological wounds and allow for a new, better path forward for all Americans."

OK, they want to defeat Trump... but also Trumpism. And that means Republicans in Congress. That's new for these #NeverTrumper groups. "Next fall’s elections will be about much more than just who controls one house of Congress or the White House. Next November, the American people will decide the path for America’s future. All of the prosperity and freedom we’ve come to take for granted depends on our public servants serving the Constitution first, last and always. Today, one party has abdicated that responsibility and instead pledged their loyalty to one person." And in the New York Times they wrote that:

Patriotism and the survival of our nation in the face of the crimes, corruption and corrosive nature of Donald Trump are a higher calling than mere politics. As Americans, we must stem the damage he and his followers are doing to the rule of law, the Constitution and the American character. . . . Over these next 11 months, our efforts will be dedicated to defeating President Trump and Trumpism at the ballot box and to elect those patriots who will hold the line... Congressional Republicans have embraced and copied Mr. Trump’s cruelty and defended and even adopted his corruption. Mr. Trump and his enablers have abandoned conservatism and longstanding Republican principles and replaced it with Trumpism, an empty faith led by a bogus prophet.

That video up top is theirs. This is what they had to say about it yesterday:

Cory Gardner is a prime example of the kind of weakness that Republicans show in the face of Donald Trump,” said Jennifer Horn, of the Lincoln Project. “As he faces an uphill battle for reelection this year, Senator Gardner has shown he’s willing to put the president before the Constitution and his responsibility to the people of Colorado.”

“Coloradans, and Americans, deserve leaders who will do what’s best for their constituents, who will keep their promises to voters and who will put country over party. So far, Senator Gardner has failed at each of those.”

Senator Cory Gardner was first elected in 2014. Statewide polls in Colorado show him down significantly to his likely General Election opponent.

The Lincoln Project is working to defeat Donald Trump and those candidates who have abandoned their constitutional oaths, regardless of party.

That Cory Gardner is their first congressional target makes perfect sense. He was a hard core conservative in the House but has been so fearful of Trump since he was elected to the Senate, that he has twisted himself into an ideological pretzel to support Trump's every crazy whim and his violence against the Constitution.

Unfortunately, the video highlights the conservative Democrat in the primary for the Democratic nomination, John Hickenlooper, rather than the progressive running, Andrew Romanoff. Clearly, Republicans like 100% of the people involved with the Lincoln Project prefer a conservative like Frackenlooper, who, you'll recall, said he didn’t want the job, wouldn’t be good at it, has skipped 10 debates, sued communities for trying to restrict fracking, literally drank the fracking fluid, refused to sign the No Fossil Fuel Money pledge, opposes the Green New Deal and Medicare for All, blamed a staff member for making him sign a gun-control law, and compared progressives to Karl Marx and Joseph Stalin. That's exactly what Republicans like to see in "Democrats."

Andrew, whose campaign you can support by clicking on the 2020 Blue America Senate thermometer on the right, offers this good news: "Cory Gardner’s approval rating has now fallen to 33 percent-- making him the most vulnerable Republican in the Senate and less popular here in Colorado than even Donald Trump. Gardner loses to a generic Democrat by 10 points-- but we should demand more than a generic Democrat. We should nominate a progressive champion. That means showing up, not dodging the press and ducking debates. It means standing up to special interests, not doing their bidding. And it means taking the courage of our convictions-- on the climate emergency and the health care crisis, among other key priorities-- to Washington."

In case you missed it last week, this was the Lincoln Project's first video. Jennifer Horn, their comms person, wrote that Trump has hijacked the GOP, the conservative movement and now, with the help of these charlatans, one of the largest faith communities in America. It is clear that in exchange for power and money these 'pastors' have been tasked with recasting Trump’s absurdities and moral failures as nothing short of prophetic divinity. President Trump’s corruption and dishonesty destroys every person and institution he touches. But with faith leaders like these, who spin vices as virtues, the President believes he is exempt from the wages of sin as long as he delivers power to those Evangelical leaders who so clearly crave it. Americans of faith, deserve leaders who want to make the world in which we live a better place through their belief. Those Evangelical leaders who lay their loyalty and faith on the altar of Donald Trump are betraying their congregants and their country."

In Sleepy, Backward Part Of The Country, People Seriously In Need Of Dental Care Still Back Trump

Mark Green (R-TN)

Yesterday, little known far right freshman Republican backbencher, Mark Green, was on NPR's Here & Now for some reason, talking about Trump and Syria. The congressman from a backward west Tennessee district (where Hillary only scored 28.2% against Trumpanzee) is less unknown now, after saying, "Yeah, I disagree with what he’s doing now, I wish it wasn’t happening, but I still fully support it." In districts like Green's-- the PVI is R+20 and he was elected last year with 66.9% of the vote, winning all 19 counties. Many in Congress are beginning to panic about Trump's already disastrous and sinking poll numbers. The Fox poll this week-- showing that 51% of the countries already convinced that Trump should be impeached and removed-- was a wakeup call for congressional Republicans. As Jonathan Lemire noted in a piece he wrote for the Associated Press yesterday, "Trump has spent his time in office trying to bend the conventions of the American presidency to his will. Now he appears to be trying to override a core principle of democracy: that no one is above the law. Faced with an impeachment inquiry, Trump has openly defied the core constructs of the Constitution. He chafes at the idea of co-equal branches of government and rejects the House’s right to investigate him. He has deployed a convoluted logic in which he has declared that the courts can’t investigate him because as president he cannot be charged with a crime but also that Congress cannot impeach him because its inquiry is politically illegitimate."

Beyond Fox, the latest polls from Ipsos, YouGov, Quinnipiac and Marist all show support for dumping Trump rising. The Marist poll is the most recent and it shows that approval of the impeachment inquiry is now 52%, mostly because independent votes have had it with Trump and his antics. 54% of independents now approve of the impeachment proceedings, a huge swing since last September when only 44% of independent backed impeachment hearings. Yesterday, public radio listeners in Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas and other Trump bastions heard that "Republicans are dug in against the impeachment inquiry with nearly 9 in 10 disapproving of it. Two-thirds also say they would be less likely to vote for their representative from Congress if that lawmaker votes to impeach Trump. Despite the lack of enthusiasm for impeachment, Americans clearly don't approve of Trump's recent behavior, don't think he shares Americans' moral values and are pessimistic about the direction the country is headed. For example, 68% say it's not acceptable to ask a foreign country's leader for help investigating a potential political opponent; that includes 40% of Republicans. And 61% say Trump does not share the moral values most Americans try to live by; and just 35% say the country is headed in the right direction... Other answers in the survey should continue to raise red flags for the president and his reelection campaign team, including that 52% say they will definitely vote against Trump in 2020, and just 42% approve of the job the president is doing."

Asked if he would vote to impeach Trump if he were still in Congress, former Congressman Carlos Curbelo (R-FL) said "I would certainly be supporting the inquiry. I think it is important to see [the outcome of] the inquiry before reaching a decision on articles of impeachment-- and I think that applies to Democrats as well... Republicans are coming to the realization that this is different than the Mueller probe. This is a lot more radioactive. They are coming to terms with the fact that there is real political risk here for members in swing states and swing districts." That leaves out members like Green. He could lose every Democratic vote and every independent vote-- he won't-- and still be reelected. If the anti-Trump tsunami wipes out 50 or 60 Republican seats, which looks more and more possible by the day, Green and others from politically super-backward districts like his will still be reelected with big margins.

The most recent Tracking Trump survey shows there are just 9 states that still stand strongly with Trump in the way Green said he does-- and Tennessee is one of them. These are the AlwaysTrump states with their net approval numbers:

• Alabama +22%
• Mississippi +21%
• Idaho +20%
• West Virginia +20%
• Wyoming +16%
• Louisiana +15%
• Kentucky +15%
• Tennessee +13%
• Oklahoma +11%

Those are the only states left where Trump doesn't have to campaign and where Republicans can feel safe supporting him. Traditionally safe Republican states that are less safe for Trump and more scary for GOP Congress members include states where the GOP-- and individual candidates-- are going to have to spend millions of dollars to hang on:

• Ohio- minus 5%
• Arizona- minus 4%
• North Carolina- minus 3%
• Montana- minus 3%
• Utah- minus 2%
• Florida- minus 2%
• Nebraska- minus 2%
• Georgia- plus 1%
• Alaska- plus 1%
• Texas- plus 2%
• Indiana- plus 2%

These numbers are all from September, before the Ukraine scandal and the betrayal of the Kurds began shaking some GOP resolve to stick with Trump. Writing for the Associated Press yesterday, Nick Riccardi filed a report that demonstrates why all these numbers-- maybe not in Green's district but everywhere else-- are likely to continue going down.

A simple yes-or-no question keeps tripping up Senate Republicans: Should the president ask foreign countries to investigate political rivals?

A month ago the question was a legal and constitutional no-brainer. It’s illegal to accept foreign help in a political campaign, an action that also raises questions about U.S. sovereignty. But President Donald Trump last week forcefully defended his right to do so as he publicly called on both China and Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and Biden’s son, Hunter. A private request for Ukraine to launch a probe triggered an impeachment inquiry in the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives.

On Thursday, two Republican senators-- Joni Ernst of Iowa and Cory Gardner of Colorado-- repeatedly refused to answer reporters’ questions on whether a president should make such a request of a rival power. “I don’t know that we have that information in front of us,” Ernst said in Iowa, even though the president made the request in front of cameras on the White House lawn.

In Denver, Gardner likewise wouldn’t answer reporters’ variations on the question 12 separate times before an appearance with the Colorado Chamber of Commerce. Like Ernst, he tried to punt to the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is investigating the circumstances around Trump’s private call with Ukraine. “It’s an answer that you get from a very serious investigation,” Gardner told reporters when asked about the appropriateness of the president’s public comments.

The hesitance of the two senators, who are both up for re-election next year in competitive states, contrasted with the stances of two Republicans not facing the voters anytime soon. On Wednesday, Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, who is retiring next year, said in a statement that it was “inappropriate” for Trump to make his request. But, Alexander added, impeachment would be a “mistake.”

Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio, who was easily re-elected in 2016, told reporters on Tuesday that Trump’s request was “wrong” but argued it isn’t an impeachable offense.

Ari Fleischer, a former spokesman for President George W. Bush, who has often defended Trump, tweeted Thursday: “Trump doesn’t hide what he does. But it’s still wrong for Presidents and candidates to ask foreign governments to get involved in our elections.”

In contrast, Ernst and Gardner seemed to follow a pattern set by fellow Republican Arizona Sen. Martha McSally-- also a top Democratic target next year. On Monday, McSally also wouldn’t answer whether the president can ask for overseas help, instead referring to the Senate Intelligence Committee probe and taking swipes at House Democrats.

...The Colorado senator’s repeated dodging of the question may have made for awkward television, but it seemed to make one important viewer happy. Trump liked a tweet from a reporter describing Gardner’s refusal to discuss the appropriateness of the president’s requests.

Last night, Governor Larry Hogan (R-MD) was on PBS’ Firing Line where he said of the impeachment inquiry, "I think we do need an inquiry because we have to get to the bottom of it. I’m not ready to say I support impeachment and the removal of the president, but I do think we should have an impeachment inquiry." He's the third Republican governor to express those sentiments, following Phil Scott (R-VT) and Charlie Baker (R-MA). All those states are very far from Clarksville, Lawrenceburg and Bolivar in Mark Green's district.

Last Night Even Conservative DCCC Chair Cheri Bustos Gave Up Trying To Sabotage An Impeachment Inquiry. And Even 30 Republicans "Would Like To" Impeach Him

Technically, the call for an official impeachment inquiry into Trump's treason is bipartisan, since ex-Republican Jason Amash (I-MI) is adamantly in favor of it. There are still no actual Republican members of Congress on board-- something that will likely hurt the reelection chances of Republicans Brian Fitzpatrick (PA), John Katko (NY), Fred Upton (MI), Chris Smith (NJ), Brian Mast (FL), Lee Zeldin (NY), Rodney Davis (IL), Michael McCaul (TX), Donald Bacon (NE), Elise Stefanik (NY), Peter King (NY), Scott Perry (PA), Vern Buchanan (FL), Steve Chabot (OH), Mario Diaz-Balart (FL), George Holding (NC), Tim Walberg, Chip Roy (TX), Peter Stauber (MN)... This morning, though, the Associated Press reported that Vermont Governor Phil Scott became the first Republican governor to back an impeachment inquiry. At a press conference today he said he wasn’t surprised by the allegations and said it is Congress' "solemn responsibility" to uphold the Constitution.

So far all the House Republicans and even vulnerable Senate Republicans, are holding firm: "Trump is being framed" or something like that. But if even the most timid of Democrats, Andy Kim of New Jersey, and Colin Allred of Texas are coming out for impeachment, there may be Republicans already doing the plus/minus calculations in their heads. But not Lindsey Graham! Boston Globe reporter Liz Goodwin asked Lindsey, South Carolina senator and Trump defender-to-the-death, to describe what he thinks would be "an inappropriate quid pro quo scenario." Lindsey lisped dramatically in that way southern closet cases always do: "Uh, hey pal, you know, you need to like, go after the Bidens or I ain’t gonna give you any money." He insisted Trump had to be "really like, thuggish about it."

Since my list of Democrats opposing impeachment yesterday, these have all changed their positions and now back a formal impeachment inquiry, many of whom were just waiting for the OK from Pelosi:

• Albio Sires (D-NJ)
• Kathy Castor (D-FL)
• Antonio Delgado (D-NY)
• Darren Soto (New Dem-FL)
• Marc Veasey (New Dem-TX)
• Lizzie Fletcher (New Dem-TX)
• Charlie Crist (Blue Dog-FL)
• Rosa DeLauro (D-CT)
• John Larson (D-CT)
• Steny Hoyer (D-MD)
• Donald McEachin (New Dem-VA)
• Steven Horsford (New Dem-NV)
• Susie Lee (New Dem-NV)
• Andy Kim (D-NJ)
• Joseph Morelle (D-NY)
• Susan Davis (New Dem-CA)
• Lois Frankel (D-FL)
• Debbie Wasserman Schultz (New Dem-FL)
• Linda Sanchez (D-CA)
• Ami Bera (New Dem-NY)
• Cindy Axne (New Dem-IA)
• Jahana Hayes (D-CT)
• Joe Courtney (D-CT)
• Jerry McNerney (D-CA)
• Gregory Meeks (New Dem-NY)
• Elijah Cummings (D-MD)
• David Scott (Blue Dog-GA)
• Bobby Scott (D-VA)
• Jim Clyburn (D-SC)
• Dave Loebsack (D-IA)
• Jimmy Panetta (New Dem-CA)
• T.J. Cox (New Dem-CA)
• Jim Costa (Blue Dog-CA)
• Ed Case (Blue Dog-HI)
• Richard Neal (D-MA)
• Mike Thompson (Blue Dog-CA)
• Raul Ruiz (New Dem-CA)
• Susan Wild (New Dem-PA)
• Donna Shalala (D-FL)
• Abby Finkenauer (D-IA
• Peter Visclosky (D-IN)
• Stephen Lynch (New Dem-MA)
• Josh Gottheimer (Blue Dog-NJ)
• Sanford Bishop (Blue Dog-GA)

A few more members will keep announcing for impeachment today and tomorrow. Right now, these are the ones still not convinced-- a combination of political cowards and actual Trump enablers:

• Colin Allred (New Dem-TX)
• Anthony Brindisi (Blue Dog-NY)
• Cheri Bustos (New Dem-IL)
• Joe Cunningham (Blue Dog-SC)
• Henry Cuellar (Blue Dog-TX)
• Sharice Davids (New Dem-KS)
• Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI)
• Jared Golden (D-ME)
• Vicente González (Blue Dog-TX)
• Kendra Horn (Blue Dog-OK)
• Ron Kind (New Dem-WI)
• Conor Lamb (D-PA)
• Al Lawson (New Dem-FL)
• Dan Lipinski (Blue Dog-IL)
• Ben McAdams (Blue Dog-UT)
• Stephanie Murphy (Blue Dog-FL)
• Tom O'Halleran (Blue Dog-AZ)
• Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)
• Max Rose (Blue Dog-NY)
• Kurt Schrader (Blue Dog-OR)
• Terri Sewell (New Dem-AL)
• Xochitl Torres Small (Blue Dog-NM)
• Jeff Van Drew (Blue Dog-NJ)
• Frederica Wilson (D-FL)

People who guessed Van Drew.. seem to be onto something

Meanwhile-- and seemingly unrelated-- it's worth noting that yesterday 11 Republicans voted with the Democrats to end the bogus national emergency that he declared in February as an excuse for stealing congressionally allocated money from the Pentagon to build his vanity wall. It passed 54-41 but will be vetoed by Trump. Below are the 11 Republicans who voted against Trump. You'll note super-endangered Colorado Republican Cory Gardner was not among them. He voted with Trump... again. I spoke with Gardner's most formidable opponent, Andrew Romanoff, who told me that "The real emergency here is that Cory Gardner-- like most of his GOP colleagues-- has done nothing to counter a corrupt and lawless president. A handful of Republicans have stood up to Donald Trump as he disregards the Constitution and diverts public funds to fulfill a political promise. Cory Gardner, who campaigned as a 'new kind of Republican,' has proven to be anything but." The other senatorial Cory had a few words for Gardner and Republican lapdogs like him:

• Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
• Roy Blunt (R-MO)
• Susan Collins (R-ME)
• Mike Lee (R-UT)
• Jerry Moran (R-KS)
• Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)
• Rand Paul (R-KY)
• Rob Portman (R-OH)
• Mitt Romney (R-UT)
• Pat Toomey (R-PA)
• Roger Wicker (R-MS)

Not enough to impeach. But... Robert Costa of the Washington Post noted that "several" of the Senate's usual Trump enablers were stunned yesterday and questioned the White House’s judgment after it released a rough transcript of President Trump’s call with the Ukraine president that showed Trump offering the help of the U.S. attorney general to investigate Joe Biden. One Senate Republican, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak candidly, said the transcript’s release was a 'huge mistake' that the GOP now has to confront, even as they argue that House Democrats are overreaching with their impeachment effort." He reported that one of the top Senate staffers, likely someone in Moscow Mitch's office was expecting yesterday's closed-door lunch to be "tense as Republicans react to the transcript and debate their next step."

Mitt Romney, no fan of Trump's-- ok, no one hates Trump's guts more than Romney-- said he finds the transcript "troubling in the extreme. It’s deeply troubling. Clearly what we’ve seen from the transcript itself is deeply troubling." He seemed to even encourage the impeachment inquiry: "There’s a process the House is pursuing. The Senate is also looking at the testimony of the whistleblower." Ben Sasse (NE), another anti-Trump Republican who generally keeps his mouth shut, "In general terms, American elections should be for Americans. And the idea that we would have foreign nation-states coming into the American electoral process, or the information surrounding an election, is really, really bad." Yes, really, really. A Republican strategist, Mike Murphy told Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC that a Republican senator told him "if it was a secret vote, 30 Republican senators would vote to impeach Trump."

Approached by the media, Maine Republican Susan Collins was not budging from her comfort zone: "If there are articles of impeachment I would be a juror just as I was in the trial for President Clinton, and as a juror I think it’s inappropriate for me to reach conclusions about evidence or to comment on the proceedings in the House." Bernie was less reticent. This is the statement he sent out to his supporters yesterday:

Gregg Miller, Shane Harris and Karoun Demirjian reported the about the cherry on Trump's cake: Joseph Maguire, Trump's hand-picked Acting Director of National Intelligence "threatened to resign over concerns that the White House might attempt to force him to stonewall Congress when he testifies Thursday about an explosive whistleblower complaint about the president. The revelation reflects the extraordinary tensions between the White House and the nation’s highest-ranking intelligence official over a matter that has triggered impeachment proceedings against President Trump." He warned the White House that "he was not willing to withhold information from Congress."

Republicans don't care what Schiff has to say-- especially Senate Republicans. After all he's only the House Intelligence Committee Chair. Why should they care; they're senators and someone might pick them to be president or vice president someday! Here are ten of them telling reporters their take-- or something-- on the whistleblower thing:

Only 2 People Like The New Schumer Policy Attacking Progressive Candidates: Cory Gardner & Ben Ray Luján

Andrew Romanoff: "I signed the Fossil Fuel Money Pledge-- rejecting contributions from the oil, gas, and coal industry. Our campaign doesn't take any PAC money at all."

No one liked Cheri Bustos' decision to blackball all consultants and vendors who work candidates running against incumbents. It has been a disaster for the DCCC which no longer has an executive director and saw it's entire executive level staffers either quit or be fired. The DCCC isn't in turmoil since it doesn't actually exist other than as a money vacuum. And Bustos herself has been forced to go to see a professional therapist to help her with her racism problems. Everyone I know has been repulsed by this whole episode. And then there's one asshole in Washington who looked at it and said... hold my beer.

It should be breaking widely in the media today that Chuck Schumer and his DSCC puppet Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) at the DSCC have decided to go a step further than Bustos did. They are blackballing consultants and vendors who work for candidates other than candidates they back. Let's take Colorado for example. While Schumer's candidate, John Frackenlooper, was pretending to be a presidential candidate-- and who had an average preference score of 0.3% and was booed by Democratic audiences for his conservative policy stances-- there was a Senate race in full swing. There are close to 20 candidates running serious campaigns, including top tier candidates like former Ambassador Dan Baer, ex-state Senator Mike Johnston, ex-House Majority Leader Alice Madden, ex-House Speaker Andrew Romanoff, state Senator Angela Williams, who had hired staffers. Now Schumer and Cortez Masto are trying to force them-- on pain of blacklisting-- to quit the campaigns that some have been working on for months-- after Frackenlooper admitted he would make a shitty senator and pledged to not run.

This is insane. One political operative who I know pretty well, went nuts on the phone today and told me that he had "received calls over the last few days from campaign managers who are running races (now) against the DSCC's preferred candidate. To say they are livid would be a gross understatement. One manager used the term 'disgusting creature' to describe Schumer just two hours ago. Another called the staff at the DSCC 'Nazi youth' after he received a call from one of them demanding he quit the race. I have a feeling these anecdotes will get even fiercer over the coming days." These are the kinds of shenanigans one would expect from the fascist party, not from the Democratic Party. Schumer and Cortez Masto should both be removed from their leadership positions before anyone gives a nickel more to the DSCC or to Hickenlooper who was boasting yesterday that money is flooding into his campaign from the exact sources that real Democrats prefer to not accept money from.

The 74% who want to see progressive legislation pass are going to be mighty disappointed if Schumer helps Frankenlooper worm his way into the Senate

Ernest Luning, writing for ColoradoPolitics.com, reported that on Monday 6 women running-- Angela Williams, Diana Bray, Lorena Garcia, Alice Madden, Stephany Rose Spaulding and Michelle Ferrigno Warren-- wrote a "strongly-worded letter" to Schumer and Cortez Masto telling them that their endorsement of Hickenlooper in the primary was "premature" and should be rescinded. "Washington insiders should watch the race develop and hear from all of the candidates before getting involved. To be clear, this race is not a coronation of any candidate. We hope the DSCC will give strong consideration to rescinding its endorsement, and allow Coloradans to decide the outcome of this primary campaign... What is more troubling is Hickenlooper’s rhetoric throughout his failed Presidential bid he derisively referred to progressives as 'socialist' and paternally lectured us on how our progressive values will 're-elect Donald Trump.' Let us not forget that it was progressives who fought for the rights of women and communities of color in the 1960s and 1970s that we still enjoy today. Governor Hickenlooper’s statements have offended and angered many of the voters in Colorado. Just like Senator Gardner, Governor Hickenlooper is utterly disrespectful and tone deaf to the contributions of activists and communities that make Colorado a leader on progressive values."

Conservative Democrats who oppose progressive values and polices-- like Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Michael Bennet and Time Kaine-- have also endorsed Frackenlooper.

Reporting for the Denver Post, Justin Wingerter wrote that Scumer's moronic decision has "sparked an intense email discussion among state Democratic Party officers over the weekend, with allusions to Nazism, criticisms of Hickenlooper and calls for formal opposition. The emails offer a window into an intraparty conflict that is sure to spill out in public for weeks and months to come as Democrats debate who should be their nominee to take on Republican Sen. Cory Gardner.

“Hickenlooper has made it clear that he neither understands nor cares about the true problems in our country,” wrote Dana Torpey-Newman, chair of the Douglas County Democratic Party, “and I object to being told that I, as a party chair, am unable to take sides in a primary, but the DSCC… is able to put a thumb on the scale and force out our candidates who actually comprehend the deeper roots of the societal problems we face.”

...“It is getting to the point that people feel, why bother showing up, as decisions have already been made by the higher-ups?” wrote Paula Ozzello, chair of the Las Animas County Democratic Party in southern Colorado. She called the DSCC’s endorsement of Hickenlooper a “slap in the face” to other candidates, some of whom are “damn good.”

...Democratic Party officials in Clear Creek and Custer counties defended the DSCC. Elliot Jackson, who is listed as a second vice chair in the Custer County Democratic Party, said she has zero patience for intraparty warfare. Democrats should focus on beating Gardner in 2020, she said.

“The absolute ONLY thing I admire about Republicans is their unwavering devotion to doing whatever is necessary to gain power,” Jackson wrote. “They can’t govern worth a damn, because they don’t care about that, but they are masterly at getting into power. Part of that strategy is rallying behind their candidates, and convincing the public that the enemy is Democrats."

Jackson advised her fellow Democrats to study Nazi Germany, saying she was “haunted by the image of German communists and socialists at each other’s throats in the concentration camps, as they were waiting to be put to death by the Nazis they couldn’t be bothered to stick together to oppose.”

Peter Monson, secretary of the Clear Creek County Democrats, agreed with Jackson, saying he also had no interest in intraparty squabbles.

“So the DSCC came out in support of Hick. So what?” Monson wrote. “Maybe I am naive, but I don’t think that will have much sway among primary voters and caucus-goers one way or another. Voters are the ones who will decide, and my only hope is that they pick candidates for president and Senate with the best chance of winning in the general election. That is, or should be, our overriding priority for 2020."

Monson confirmed Monday that he sent the email. Several others in the chain declined to comment.

Much of the emailed discussion centered on how the Colorado Democratic Party should respond to the DSCC’s endorsement. Vinson, the party’s executive director, said the state party will remain neutral in the primary election, which is a Colorado Democratic Party policy. But others wanted a strong statement from the state party denouncing the DSCC endorsement.

“We should not submit this to the media but should send it to all of the national party leaders, in my opinion,” Torpey-Newman, of Douglas County, wrote. “Merely saying that the people of Colorado will decide is not enough, in my opinion. They must be told explicitly why this is unacceptable and what the potential consequences of doing so are."

Susan Newcomer, chair of the Grand County Democratic Party, agreed. So did Sheena Kadi, a vice chair in the Adams County Democratic Party, who is also deputy director of One Colorado. Kadi said Hickenlooper had made Colorado proud but party apparatuses should not endorse.

"I have received dozens of calls, texts, emails, and asks from fellow Democrats wondering why the DSCC is ‘interfering/meddling/obstructing’ in our primary process,” Kadi wrote. She worried the endorsement would convince Democratic voters the race had already been decided and stifle engagement in the election. “And if they don’t show up, unaffiliated voters won’t be persuaded and will not turn out to vote, and we will have another six years of Senator Cory Gardner.”

Jackson, the Custer County party official, said she wouldn’t mind telling national Democratic groups to hold off on endorsing until 2020, but any statement must avoid “trashing another Democrat.”

Morgan Carroll, chair of the Colorado Democratic Party, briefly inserted herself into the email discussion to say the party’s response to the DSCC “needs to be that the people of Colorado will decide who their nominee will be.” As of Tuesday morning, no public response to the DSCC endorsement had been issued by the state party.

"The Colorado Democratic Party has a strict policy of neutrality in primaries and we will not change that policy,” Carroll said in a statement to The Post. “There’s a lot of grassroots energy to defeat Cory Gardner, which is why so many excellent candidates have stepped up to run. At the end of the day, the people of Colorado will be the ones to decide who will run against the most vulnerable Republican senator in the country, and it will be the people of Colorado who lead us to another blue wave in 2020."

Heather Brewer, the campaign manager for Maggie Toulouse Oliver's U.S. Senate campaign, told me early this morning that "While we haven't had any direct efforts (yet) to threaten our consultants or otherwise put the squeeze on us, I believe it is only a matter of time. We are ready to fight back against any DSCC attempts to bully their way to victory." Pelosi immediately endorsed Luján, who, of course, lists no policy on his lame cut-out DCCC website. She slammed the DSCC and the DCCC for "this disgusting un-democratic and un-Democratic practice... Washington insiders don't get to decide who becomes the next U.S. Senator from New Mexico, the voters do. Washington is broken and desperate attempts to circumvent the democratic process to consolidate power with the D.C. elite aren't going to fix it. Only with new leaders, like Maggie Toulouse Oliver, who are beholden only to those they represent, can we begin to repair the damage and implement much-needed progressive policies like the Green New Deal and Medicare for All."

Help Colorado progressives defeat Frackenlooper-- and New Mewxico progressives defeat Ben Ray Luján-- by contributing to Andrew Romanoff's campaign and Maggie Oliver's campaign at the 2020 Senate thermometer above. Schumer has demanded that the big "progressive affiliated organizations and the in-the-pocket unions (like the firefighters, who are practically part of the Democratic Party establishment and always go for the worst candidates, be in Biden or Luján) and other institutional Democratic sources of campaign contributions, immediately stop giving contributions to Andrew Romanoff, Maggie Oliver and any of the other candidates other than the handpicked Frackenlooper and Ben Ray Luján.