Never Too Late For Predictions?

 

Earlier today, I quoted part of a post from William Steding's blog, Ameritecture, Tomorrow is Almost Here. I left out two paragraphs I didn't want to start a debate about at the time:

Of course, with a nation awash in guns and hatred, there will be blood. People in Kansas have already been shooting each other over yard signs. Hopefully, incidents of ignorance and violence will remain isolated and contained. Depending on where you live, have a plan to hide until cooler heads prevail. Innocents are a bully’s first target. And, a wild-eyed steroidal idiot with an assault rifle may be itching to make his video-game fantasies come true.

When all votes have been counted, and relative calm returns, Obama’s “Hope and Change,” updated by Biden as “Build Back Better,” will return to our doorstep with Joe as its shepherd. Answer the door when you hear the bell. Take a deep breath. Take a nap. Hug yourself. Then, commit yourself anew; prepare to do the crucial work to save our future.

The new work-- saving our future-- must be founded in humility and purpose. Revenge is satisfying, but only for a moment. Evening the score will compromise unification that is so urgently needed to deal with issues like Covid-19 and climate change. Vice must be set aside in favor of virtue. Healing our scarred souls and embracing unity as our highest aim--e pluribus unum-- must become, once again, our north star. Us vs. Them and Win-Lose scenarios have no place in our collective pursuit of redemption. Hate must be put asunder. America’s restoration lies in empowering others rather than coercive schemes of dominance. 

We tried that already... after the Civil War. Instead of hanging every rebel. And the result? The virtual re-enslavement of southern blacks. An inability of our country to move forward because of heel dragging from the descendants of the ones who got away without hanging. Did you watch this video?





Did you ever read any of Hunter S. Thompson's last works, like Kingdom of Fear: Loathsome Secrets of a Star-crossed Child in the Final Days of the American Century (2004)?

We have become a Nazi monster in the eyes of the whole world, a nation of bullies and bastards who would rather kill than live peacefully. We are not just Whores for power and oil, but killer whores with hate and fear in our hearts. We are human scum, and that is how history will judge us. No redeeming social value. Just whores. Get out of our way, or we'll kill you. Who does vote for these dishonest shitheads? Who among us can be happy and proud of having all this innocent blood on our hands? Who are these swine? These flag-sucking half-wits who get fleeced and fooled by stupid little rich kids like George Bush? They are the same ones who wanted to have Muhammad Ali locked up for refusing to kill gooks. They speak for all that is cruel and stupid and vicious in the American character. They are the racists and hate mongers among us; they are the Ku Klux Klan. I piss down the throats of these Nazis. And I am too old to worry about whether they like it or not. Fuck them."

"Fuck the South. Fuck 'em. We should have let them go when they wanted to leave. But no, we had to kill half a million people so they'd stay part of our special Union. Fighting for the right to keep slaves-- yeah, those are states we want to keep. And now what do we get? We're the fucking Arrogant Northeast Liberal Elite?

How about this for arrogant: the South is the Real America? The Authentic America. Really? Cause we fucking founded this country, assholes. Those Founding Fathers you keep going on and on about? All that bullshit about what you think they meant by the Second Amendment giving you the right to keep your assault weapons in the glove compartment because you didn't bother to read the first half of the fucking sentence? Who do you think those wig-wearing lacy-shirt sporting revolutionaries were? They were fucking blue-staters, dickhead.

Boston? Philadelphia? New York? Hello? Think there might be a reason all the fucking monuments are up here in our backyard?

No, No. Get the fuck out. We're not letting you visit the Liberty Bell and fucking Plymouth Rock anymore until you get over your real American selves and start respecting those other nine amendments. Who do you think those fucking stripes on the flag are for? Nine are for fucking blue states. And it would be 10 if those Vermonters had gotten their fucking Subarus together and broken off from New York a little earlier. Get it? We started this shit, so don't get all uppity about how real you are you Johnny-come-lately "Oooooh I've been a state for almost a hundred years" dickheads. Fuck off.

Arrogant? You wanna talk about us Northeasterners being fucking arrogant? What's more American than arrogance? Hmmm? Maybe horsies? I don't think so. Arrogance is the fucking cornerstone of what it means to be American. And I wouldn't be so fucking arrogant if I wasn't paying for your fucking bridges, bitch. All those Federal taxes you love to hate? It all comes from us and goes to you, so shut up and enjoy your fucking Tennessee Valley Authority electricity and your fancy highways that we paid for. And the next time Florida gets hit by a hurricane you can come crying to us if you want to, but you're the ones who built on a fucking swamp. "Let the Spanish keep it, it's a shithole," we said, but you had to have your fucking orange juice.

The next dickwad who says, "It's your money, not the government's money" is gonna get their ass kicked. Nine of the ten states that get the most federal fucking dollars and pay the least... can you guess? Go on, guess. That's right, motherfucker, they're red states. And eight of the ten states that receive the least and pay the most? It's too easy, asshole, they're blue states. It's not your money, assholes, it's fucking our money. What was that Real American Value you were spouting a minute ago? Self reliance? Try this for self reliance: buy your own fucking stop signs, assholes.

Let's talk about those values for a fucking minute. You and your Southern values can bite my ass because the blue states got the values over you fucking Real Americans every day of the goddamn week. Which state do you think has the lowest divorce rate you marriage-hyping dickwads? Well? Can you guess? It's fucking Massachusetts, the fucking center of the gay marriage universe. Yes, that's right, the state you love to tie around the neck of anyone to the left of Strom Thurmond has the lowest divorce rate in the fucking nation. Think that's just some aberration? How about this: 9 of the 10 lowest divorce rates are fucking blue states, asshole, and most are in the Northeast, where our values suck so bad. And where are the highest divorce rates? Care to fucking guess? 10 of the top 10 are fucking red-ass we're-so-fucking-moral states. And while Nevada is the worst, the Bible Belt is doing its fucking part.

But two guys making out is going to fucking ruin marriage for you? Yeah? Seems like you're ruining it pretty well on your own, you little bastards.

Oh, but that's ok because you go to church, right? I mean you do, right? Cause we fucking get to hear about it every goddamn year at election time. Yes, we're fascinated by how you get up every Sunday morning and sing, and then you're fucking towers of moral superiority. Yeah, that's a workable formula. Maybe us fucking Northerners don't talk about religion as much as you because we're not so busy sinning, hmmm? Ever think of that, you self-righteous assholes? No, you're too busy erecting giant stone tablets of the Ten Commandments in buildings paid for by the fucking Northeast Liberal Elite. And who has the highest murder rates in the nation? It ain't us up here in the North, assholes.

Well this gravy train is fucking over. Take your liberal-bashing, federal-tax-leaching, confederate-flag-waving, holier-than-thou, hypocritical bullshit and shove it up your ass. And no, you can't have your fucking convention in New York next time.

Fuck off.

That said, let's look at predictions for today from Washington Post columnist Henry Olsen. I see a landslide; he doesn't but he is clear that Biden "will win comfortably unless we experience the greatest polling failure in modern history. Democrats will also gain control of the Senate and expand their majority in the House." He believes that Trump will lose every state Hillary won and lose 7 states that he won in 2016-- Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin + NE-02 (but, according to him, not ME-02).

As far as the Senate goes, he's on the straight and narrow, predicting losses for Martha McSally (R-AZ), Cory Gardner (R-CO), Susan Collins (R-ME), Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Doug Jones (D-AL)... so the narrowest of Democratic Senate majorities, dependent on right-of-center Dems like Manchin, Sinema, Warner, Carper, Hickenlooper, Kelly, Cunningham... to do anything. In other words, the progressive agenda is going nowhere. Both Georgia's Senate seats will be decided in run-offs.

In the House he predicts 30 pickups and 10 losses. I actually wish he was right about the Democratic looses in the House-- Dems would be better off without them-- but he's wrong, probably on all ten! The ten seats he sees the Dems losing Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)-- the most likely to lose of any of them but I bet he hangs on-- TJ Cox (New Dem-CA), Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (New Dem-FL), Abby Finkenauer (de facto New Dem-IA), Xochitl Torres-Small (Blue Dog-NM), Max Rose (Blue Dog-NY), Anthony Brindisi (Blue Dog-NY), Kendra Horn (Blue Dog-OK), Joe Cunningham (Blue Dog-SC) and Ben McAdams (Blue Dog-UT). I hope he's right on some of them but if I had to bet, I'd bet they all are reelected and then lose in 2022.

The 30 districts he thinks are Democratic pick-ups start with the 2 gimmes: the two ungerryamndered North Carolina red seats, NC-02 and NC-06. Then (+ his predictions of new members):

• AK- Alyse Galvin
• AZ-06- Hiral Tipirneni
• AR-02- Joyce Elliott
• CA-25- Christy Smith
• CO-03- Diane Mitsch Bush
• GA-07- Carolyn Bourdeaux
• IL-13- Betsy Londrigan
• IN-05- Christina Hale
• MI-03- Hillary Scholten
• MI-06- Jon Hoadley
• MN-01- Dan Feehan
• MO-02- Jill Schupp
• MT- Kathleen Williams
• NE-02- Kara Eastman
• NJ-02- Amy Kennedy
• NY-02- Jackie Gordon
• NY-24- Dana Balter
• NC-08- Patricia Timmons
• NC-11- Moe Davis
• OH-01- Kate Schroder
• PA-01- Christina Finello
• PA-10- Eugene DePasquale
• TX-10- Mike Siegel
• TX-21- Wendy Davis
• TX-22- Sri Kulkarni
• TX-23- Gina Ortiz Jones
• TX-24- Candace Valenzuela
• VA-05- Cameron Webb

I want to compare two freshmen from Orange County, California-- Katie Porter and Harley Rouda. In 2018, Katie's district (CA-45) handed her a 158,906 (52.1%) to 146,383 (47.9%) win over incumbent Mimi Walters. Meanwhile Rouda beat the notorious Russian spy Dana Rohrabacher 157,837 (53.6) to 136,899 (46.4%). Rouda won bigger. But he joined the New Dems and has established himself as a do-nothing waste of a seat who is firmly ensconced as a pointless member the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. He's done exactly nothing and there is no reason to reelect him except that his Republican challenger is worse. Katie, on the other hands so beloved that the Republicans figured out she is unbeatable. She has distinguished herself in Congress as a total asset and she is untouchable.

This year Katie raised $15 million to her opponent's $1,265,078. The DCCC quickly saw she needed no outside help and contributed $840 in independent money in her race, in other words, nothing. Rouda, on the other hand, does nothing but beg for money day in and day out has only been able to raise $5,426,654, slightly less than his opponent. Because he's been such a total waste and with nothing to offer to anyone (except her donors) the DCCC and Pelosi's SuperPAC had to rush to save his worthless hide by spending nearly $10 million on his race. He'll win-- and probably lose in 2022-- but is it really worth $10 million to keep him. Why not just recruit talented and dedicated leaders like Katie Porter instead of Republican-retreads like Harley Rouda?

Most of the DCCC recruits this cycle are as bad as-- or worse-- the Harley Rouda. Schumer's Senate recruits are generally even worse. I llooked over Olsen's predictions and bolded the names of the candidates who are more like Katie Porter and less like Harley Rouda. Keep it so you can check up on me in 2 years.

Asterisked-- The Worst President In History by Nancy Ohanian

There Are People In Congress Working On Sustainable Energy And Environmental Justice-- But We Need More Of Them

In its mission statement, Congress' Sustainable Energy & Environment Coalition lays out two overarching goals:

• Advance policies that promote clean energy innovation and domestic manufacturing, develop renewable energy resources, and create good green jobs across the economy and the country.
• Advance polices to address climate change, protect our nation’s clean air, water and natural environment, and promote environmental justice.

There are 67 members-- all Democrats-- who have joined the Caucus. This week, Blue America has been working with their SEEC PAC to help raise last minute campaign contributions for congressional candidates who have been endorsed by both groups, the men and women who will be helping to lead the group's future.

One member, Ted Lieu, was a California state Senator when I first got to know him. At a discussion, someone asked him whey he would want to move away from his life in balmy California to go to the DC snakepit. He immediately focused on what turns out to be the SEEC mission statement. It was all about leaving his two young children a livable world. Yesterday, now-Congressman and now-SEEC member Ted Lieu reminded us that "One of the main reasons I ran for Congress was to work on legislation to address climate change on the national level. But in order to make any meaningful progress, we need to elect more Members of Congress who want to expand sustainable energy and address our climate crisis. That is why I am so grateful that Blue America is partnering with SEEC PAC to help these great candidates."

SEEC was founded in 2009 by now-Governor Jay Inslee (D-WA) at the start of the 111th Congress and is now a key green voice in the Congress. Last Congress, the coalition introduced its Sustainable Infrastructure Proposal and has continued to call for an infrastructure bill that takes bold steps to address climate change. Through its advocacy efforts, SEEC has seen increased funding for clean energy programs at the Department of Energy and the inclusion of water sustainability policy in the Fiscal Year 2019 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). It also successfully opposed anti-environmental riders in the 2018 Farm Bill and focused early attention on the dangerous health consequences of Trump’s Clean Power Plan replacement. Another California SEEC member, Katie Porter told us today that "The climate crisis demands an all-hands-on-deck approach, and that includes strengthening our research in and use of green technology. We need allies in Congress who will fight for a more sustainable future and invest in the innovative clean energy we need to protect our planet."

Please consider helping elect new members of Congress who have prioritized the SEEC agenda in their campaigns and will be the kinds of allies Porter is talking about. Click on the thermometer on the right for the whole list-- and to contribute to the carefully and doubled-- vetted candidates, like Jon Hoadley, who is taking on Trump enabler and friend of polluters Fred Upton in southwest Michigan. Hoadley noted that "Michigan is the Great Lakes state, but we're still facing a drinking water crisis as a result of corporate pollution. We need to put an end to the large-scale contamination of our water and air we've seen from fossil fuel companies, and take bold action to preserve our climate for future generations."

Electing Kara Eastman to replace Trump puppet Donald Bacon in Omaha is a top priority for both SEEC PAC and Blue America. This morning she told us that "It's incredibly important to have the support of SEEC and Blue America because climate change is the number one national security threat to our country now, and it's the number one moral crisis facing America going forward. In Nebraska, we've fought against the Keystone XL Pipeline and successfully pushed our public power district to move to a carbon neutral plan. Let's turn up the heat on climate change together."

Mike Siegel's campaign has been almost an embodiment of the SEEC mission statement-- cleaning up the environment, ameliorating climate change and working with unions to guarantee good green jobs in the new economy. "I'm honored to have the support of SEEC and Blue America as we build a broad national coalition to combat climate change and build the renewable economy we need," he said this week. "As a Democrat running for Congress in the heart of Texas, I know how important it is that we take bold, courageous steps to address climate change and environmental degradation, even when those steps require difficult conversations with workers and businesses that depend on fossil fuel revenue. The Texas 10th Congressional District is already suffering from the impact of our fossil fuel economy. We have a coal plant in Fayette County that has been polluting the air and water for 40 years; we have widespread fracking operations that release chemicals into our groundwater and methane into our air; we have a Houston region that has suffered five 500-year flood events in five years; and we have Bastrop county, which was devastated by a massive wildfire nine years ago. These natural and unnatural disasters can all be traced to fossil fuel emissions. Even though Texas is built on a fossil fuel economy, we can't put our heads in the sand and pretend that change is not needed. I'm running for Congress to build an unparalleled coalition of unions, environmentalists, ranchers and farmers, progressives and activists of all types, to fight climate change, to create jobs in a renewable economy, and to address the legacy of pollution and environmental injustice. Thank you, SEEC and Blue America for your belief and support, and I look forward to joining with you in the days, months and years ahead, for the good of our planet, and for the good of our nation."

Audrey Denney is taking on Trumpist do-nothing Doug LaMalfa again in the northeast corner of California. She told us she's "honored to have the support of Congress' Sustainable Energy & Environment Coalition! Human induced climate change is already here and we are living through the consequences. We can’t grow cherries in Butte county because there aren’t enough chill hours. Fire season is almost year round and our fires are burning hotter than ever before. In some cases creating their own weather. Through our horrific fires of the last two years my district became the face of this crisis. As evidenced by politicians on both sides of the aisle using our devastation for photo ops. But this district can become the face of the solution. I’m talking about restoring our forests to health so they become carbon sinks not sources. We’re talking about ag policy that equips and trains farmers to use practices that sequester carbon-- that actually turn the dial back on climate change. I cannot wait to get to Congress and work with the members of the SEEC to push this policy agenda forward!


 


UPDATE: Nate McMurray (NY-27)

"Receiving the support from SEEC and Blue America is not just important for my campaign but also for the people of the NY-27. Climate change is the most pressing environmental challenge facing our planet and communities in the U.S. and around the globe are already experiencing its impacts. We feel the impact of increasingly extreme weather quite dramatically in Western New York, the NY-27, where we live alongside not one, but two of the Great Lakes-- Lake Erie and Lake Ontario. So Western New Yorkers see every day, in every season that effects of decades of bad environmental policies. And finally people see that we have an obligation to ourselves, our children, and the states and our neighbor to the north, to take immediate action to address climate change’s threats to our economy, health, and environment. In Congress the NY-27 and I as their representative, will have great partners in SEEC and Blue America in the fight for the region's environmental priorities, like supporting 100% transition to clean energy by 2050, access to clean air and water as well as regionally funded initiatives such as the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Plan 2014, more conservation-focused planning by the Great Lakes' International Joint Commission, and improved Farming and Conservation initiatives. I cannot thank SEEC and Blue America enough for their support and belief in my campaign. We are on the cusp of victory and making a Democratic supermajority in Congress a reality in 2020!"

Orange County, This Coming November

Katie Porter-- a leader

There are some good politicians trying to do a good job through this. And then there are the nightmares like Trump and the Trumpists. Like Trump, governor Asa Hutchinson (R-AR), Kristi Noem (R-SD), Kevin Stitt (R-OK) and, especially, Ron DeSantis (R-FL) make everybody else look relatively good. There's a general consensus that DeSantis is the worst governor in the country, at least in terms of doing the most harm to the most people. Like Trump, who consistently-- even arrogantly-- ignored all warnings, DeSantis, reported the NY Times, helped infect the whole country due entirely to his political cowardice.

Weeks before Florida ordered people to stay at home, the coronavirus was well into its insidious spread in the state, infecting residents and visitors who days earlier had danced at beach parties and reveled in theme parks. Only now, as people have gotten sick and recovered from-- or succumbed to-- Covid-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus, has the costly toll of keeping Florida open during the spring break season started to become apparent.

Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, has blamed travelers from New York, Europe and other places for seeding the virus in the state. But the reverse was also true: People got sick in Florida and took the infection back home.

The exact number of people who returned from leisure trips to Florida with the coronavirus may never be known. Cases as far away as California and Massachusetts have been linked to the Winter Party Festival, a beachside dance party and fund-raiser for the L.G.B.T.Q. community held March 4-10. Another California man died after going to Orlando for a conference and then to a packed Disney World. Two people went to Disney and later got relatives sick in Florida and Georgia.

Slow action by Florida’s governor left local leaders scrambling to make their own closure decisions during one of the busiest and most profitable times of the year for a state with an $86 billion tourism economy. The result was that rules were often in conflict, with one city canceling a major event while a neighboring city allowed another event to continue.

DeSantis finally took action on April 1-- a full month too late. Florida has over 18,500 confirmed cases and nearly 500 deaths, with the epidemic still expanding in the state. Tectonix, a data analytics and visualization firm showed how cellphones that were on one Fort Lauderdale beach at the beginning of March spread across the country-- up the Eastern Seaboard and further West-- over the next two weeks. DeSantis is literally, along with Trump, the Typhoid Mary of this pandemic.

The Orange County in the headline, though, is not Orange County the Orlando, Florida Orange County-- which luckily for the people who live there, started moving in the right direction before DeSantis did. I have the other big Orange County in mind-- southern California's.

Orange County was once the heartland of the Republican Party-- long before Texas or the rest of the Deep South could be counted on. America can thank Orange County for the Nixon and Reagan presidencies. And then Trump happened. In 2016, primary day looked like this:

• Trump- 146,888
• Hillary- 123,723
• Bernie- 100,836
• Kasich- 21,285
• Cruz- 16,844

In November, Hillary beat Trump county-wide-- 556,544 (51.0%) to 472,669 (43.3%). That was the first time Orange County went for a Democrat since 1936-- FDR's first reelection. In 2012 Romney beat Obama 541,592 (53.0%) to 457,077 (44.8%). That was quite a turn-around! And 2 years later, in the 2018 midterms, all 4 Orange County red districts-- each of which Romney had won-- flipped blue.

• CA-39 (even PVI):

Gil Cisneros (New Dem/"ex"-GOP)- 126,002 (51.6%)
Young Kim (R)- 118,391 (48.4%)
[Cisneros narrowly lost the Orange County part of the district but made up for it by winning way ahead in the Los Angeles part of the district.]

• CA-45 (R+3):

Katie Porter (D)- 158,906 (52.1%)
Mimi Waters (R)- 146,383 (47.9%)

• CA-48 (R+4):

Harley Rouda (New Dem/"ex"-GOP)-157,837 (53.6%)
Dana Rohrabacher (R)- 136,899 (46.4%)

• CA-49 (R+1):

Mike Levin (D)- 166,453 (56.4%)
Diane Harkey (R)- 128,577 (43.6%)
[Levin lost the Orange Co. part of the district but cleaned up in the San Diego part.]

Last week Kyle Konik from Sabato's Crystal Ball took a look at the California general election races and changed the rating towards the GOP in 3 of them, declaring incumbents Devin Nunes and Tom McClinton (neither with a strong opponent) as "safe" from likely Republican, and putting the open Katie Hill seat (CA-25) from "leans" Dem to "toss-up."

I'm not going to get into those races here, although I do want to mention that the voters registration plus Trump on the top of the ticket should make the district relatively safe for a Democrat, despite the fact that the Democratic establishment picked an unimaginably bad candidate who will inspire absolutely no one but her friends and whoever happens to like corporate Democrats from the Republican wing of the party and who stand for nothing at all and have nothing to offer other than a "D" next to their name-- a "D" than will turn into an "F" score once she starts voting.

This is how they rate the reelection chances of the 4 Orange County Democratic incumbents we mentioned above:

• Cisneros- CA-39 leans D
• Porter- CA-45- likely D
• Rouda- CA-48- leans D
• Levin- CA-49- safe D

In explaining why the ratings fall this way Kondik uses irrelevant pundit-speak bullshit like this: "Republicans have never won a district where they won less than 50% of the two-party primary voting." What he doesn't do is take into account the jobs the incumbents have been doing. Cisneros and Rouda, the two conservative "ex"-Republicans, are just sitting and doing nothing at all but calling campaign contributors and asking for money. Each is a complete waste of a seat, back-benchers with nothing at all to offer anyone. Contrast that with Levin, who has a relatively decent voting record and an interest in several important policies. Or, better yet, contrast Rouda's and Cisneros' inertness with Katie Porter's activism and brilliance. She is widely considered one of the most worthwhile and accomplished freshmen from the 2018 class. Her constituents-- not the hardcore Trumpists of course, but everyone else-- have come to love her and respect her. Voters in Irvine, Tustin, Villa Park, Mission Viejo, Laguna Woods, Rancho Santa Margarita, Anaheim Hills and Lake Forest have something the others don't-- a member of Congress to actually be proud of.

As of the February 12 FEC filing deadline, Katie had raised $3,825,561, 29.79% from small grassroots donors. The three other OC freshmen:

Rouda- $2,339,456 (8.91%)
Levin $2,046,561 (12.68%)
Cisneros- $1,415,849 (9.04%)

Cisneros and Rouda may sit on the phone all day asking rich people and PAC executives for money, but by primarily doing an outstanding job, Porter has raised more (combined) and has raised gigantically more from small donors who appear to appreciate what she is doing for them, their families and the country. This isn't the kind of information that pundits use in their always-wrong ratings.

Mike Levin has two twitter accounts, one with 111,600 followers and one with 15,100 followers. Harley Rouda has two twitter accounts as well, one with 77,300 followers and one with 14,000 followers. Gil Cisneros also has two twitter accounts, one with 15,800 followers and one with 9,248 followers. So all together 243,048 followers between the 3 of them. And Katie? One account with 204,200 and one with 442,000-- a total of 642,200. Maybe an indication someone gives a damn about what she's doing in Congress?

Below is the third most-viewed Katie Porter YouTube clip-- with 843,000 views. There are 2 clips with over a million views each and 8 with over half a million. None are ads or about election campaigns. Harley Rouda has 3 videos with over 100,000 views-- all paid campaign ads. Almost all of his YouTubes are campaign clips and not many people have watched any of them. Cisneros-- the self-funding lottery winner-- is even worse, with no YouTubes more than just a handful of people have watched and, like Rouda, almost all just about campaigning.

We're On The Verge Of The Deepest Recession Of Our Lifetimes-- Are The Hack Politicians We've Elected To Serve As Our Leaders Up To The Task?

Stock markets reacted badly to the Fed's panicky decision to lower U.S. interest rates to zero over the weekend, due, at least in part, to Trump's blustering, threatening, hysterical demands that they do something to save his collapsing presidency. (Too late for that.) Trading was halted immediately after the opening bell yesterday when the Dow Jones crashed by 2,250 points (9.71%). Even before the crash the Financial Times' Rana Foroohar had written a piece, How coronavirus became a corporate credit run, warning that the Fed and other central bankers "are going to have to keep the money taps on."

It was only hours after U.S. president Donald Trump told us, in an address from the Oval Office last week, "this is not a financial crisis," when markets began acting very much as though it was.

Investors dumped assets resulting in the worst trading day since 1987. Bond markets seized up, putting pressure on banks, and the U.S. Federal Reserve swooped in with yet more emergency funding for short-term borrowing markets (known as repurchasing or repo markets), a tactic which suggests we may see quantitative easing to infinity-- and beyond.

So when exactly does a coronavirus-triggered corporate market meltdown officially turn into a full-blown financial crisis? That's a question many market participants, and banks in particular, must be asking themselves.

If there has been any silver lining to the current market shock and the recession that is likely to follow, it is that it hasn't been a 2008-style banking crisis-- of the kind that jumps like a virus between highly leveraged global financial institutions and causes them to bleed dry. The Dodd-Frank and Basel III regulations that followed in the wake of the subprime crisis were designed to mitigate that risk. Banks, required to hold larger quantities of high-quality assets, were made to do less trading, and more traditional lending.

That worked, up to a point. The virus-induced brake on consumer activity and labour markets, which has in turn triggered a corporate credit run, is what caused the market panic this time, rather than risky trading on the part of global banks.

Today, it is not Wall Street financial institutions, but companies in a variety of industries that are stressed, as a simultaneous supply and demand shock means they need to tap credit lines to pay their bills. With flights halted, supply chains disrupted and the consumer economy gutted, companies are trying to stockpile cash, whether they need it immediately or not.

It's one thing for the aircraft manufacturer Boeing to draw down its entire $13.8bn credit line. It's another for multiple big corporations to draw theirs at the same time. Still, as a recent Credit Suisse report pointed out, "we now have a global banking system where all major banks have to pre-fund 30-day outflows" with high-quality liquid asset portfolios. This is one important reason why these corporate funding stresses haven't caused a real time banking crisis in the way that the 2008 subprime crisis did. Another reason is that the Fed is backstopping the banking system with its repo operations, as banks exchange Treasury bills for cash.

All of this underscores a fundamental truth-- regulators usually tend to fight the last war. The dollar deposits that corporations are currently drawing down are one of the highest-quality types of funding for banks, the same kind that the Basel III rules stipulate they should keep on hand.

Nobody assumed that a pandemic would result in huge credit drawdowns by many companies all at once. Losing these deposits so quickly threatens the liquidity profile and regulatory compliance of banks themselves. And that is before we start to see the spike in corporate downgrades and defaults that will create even more funding pressure.

The fact is that the banking system has already been pulled into the corporate credit crisis that many people predicted would be the cause of the next big market downturn. It's all too easy to see how the problems of individual companies-- technology firms, retailers, airlines and insurance companies-- could be passed to individual banks and then to countrywide banking systems. Ultimately, they could spread throughout the global financial system, leaving central bankers once again the lender of last resort, standing between us and another global financial crisis.

That is pretty much what is already happening, and we haven't even seen the next phase of falling dominoes-- the meltdown of passive and algorithmic investing, the unwinding of exchange traded funds, and the sale of even the highest quality assets by people who are desperate to raise cash in the midst of a liquidity crisis. All this means that central bankers will have to keep the money taps on, and probably increase the variety of assets that they are buying or backstopping.

We shouldn't mistake all that easy money for a cure. As Credit Suisse managing director Zoltan Pozsar points out, "QE isn't a vaccine for this outbreak." Even if the Fed can offset pressures within the banking system, that doesn't replace the loss of private-sector spending. What's needed is something more akin to a wartime fiscal stimulus programme, in which the government replaces lost consumer demand, ideally with a major public health spending programme. We might start by bolstering the number of available hospital beds in the U.S., which is woefully behind other developed countries. Sadly, the only wartime reference in Mr Trump's ill-advised speech was to the U.S. "fighting a foreign virus."

Covid-19 is, of course, an equal opportunity pandemic. Being asymptomatic doesn't mean you aren't contagious. The corporate crisis roiling the markets has already infected the banking system.

Whether unlimited central bank injections of liquidity are enough to keep it healthy over the next few weeks and months, as both the pandemic and the market crisis plays out, remains to be seen.

Goliath: The Hundred Year War Between Monopoly Power and Democracy, author Matt Stoller tried making sensing of this for his Twitter followers with a tweet storm I've put in narrative form below. Earlier, after reading the Financial Times piece he had written that "It's clear that a massive Coronavirus Bailout is coming. As Rana Foroohar noted there's significant corporate debt distress. What is the shape of that bailout? What kinds of conditions will the government put on corporate handouts?"

We are going to bail out big corporations not just because of the virus but because Wall Street thinned out their ability to handle risk. That's what the buybacks, mergers, etc were all about. Stripping out resiliency. If we're going to inject public money let's stop that.

There should be five restrictions on any bailout terms. One, no bailouts for shareholders. Two, no stock buybacks. Three, strict exec comp limits. Four, no more lobbying. Five, no mergers or acquisitions for five years.

During the immediate viral transmission period, we may need to hit pause on any corporate bankruptcies and extend an emergency debtor-in-possession financing, which is basically loans to companies in bankruptcy to keep them functioning. After that period, there will be a bunch of corporations on the hook to the government. That's when the restructuring to put these corporations through a quick resolution process should happen.

I have not thought through what it means to cram down equity holders when private equity predators own lots of the debt, so it's critical to put real constraints on the kind of corporate control debt holders get out of the process. No financialization and asset stripping.

Same terms should not apply to small and medium sized businesses, because they have not been subjected to the same load 'em up with debt style financial games. Financialization and private equity is about loading up corporations with hidden risk. We cannot afford that anymore.

Last point. I'm hearing Wall Street analysts talk about how this market downturn is a tremendous buying opportunity. That was true in 2008-2009, and the taxpayers financed it but didn't benefit.

If it's public money doing the buying, let's use our leverage this time.

The other day we made a big point-- as did some of her colleagues-- that Orange County Rep, Katie Porter is one of the sharpest members Congress. Luckily for all of us, she's putting her brain-power behind trying to ameliorate the catastrophe Trump has bumbled into with his non-response to the COVID-19 pandemic, currently overwhelming not just medical treatment centers but financial markets as well. "Many American families are already financially insecure," she said in a quick interview. "We see that in data on 20% of people delaying treatment for a serious medical condition and the estimated 40% of households that could pay deal with a $400 unexpected expense without borrowing. The coronavirus pandemic preys not just on the health of Americans but on their financial wellbeing. Closed schools impose new childcare costs; shuttered businesses mean lost wages. We need to put money immediately (within the next week) into the hands of American workers. I support a $1,000 per worker now, with the potential of more to come as necessary. Note: Mitt Romney supports this too! While many Democratic colleagues are identifying problems with constituents such as concern about utility shut offs or inability to pay rent, the reality is the households know best what bills they need to pay. And if we do not do this cash payment immediately, before the big industry and corporate bailouts start, then families will pile on credit card and predatory debt just to make ends meet. Speaker Nancy Pelosi is talkings about refundable tax credits; that is not nearly immediate enough. It misses the reality of the vast majority of American households, who are facing increased expenses and decreased wages this week. They cannot wait for long appropriations battles about social programs. The Treasury should cut these checks before April 1 when many bills will come due."

Andy Levin (D-MI) has the single best voting record of any member of the House. Yesterday he told us that "Trump made the conscious decision to tie his success to the economy, and more specifically, the stock market. When you own the rise, you own the fall. In more ways than one, the downturn we're faced with now is because of this president's foolishness. While he couldn't prevent the initial outbreak of the coronavirus, President Trump could have done much more to prepare for it. For starters, he should not have fired the White House's pandemic response team in 2018. He also should have taken the threat of the disease seriously instead of misleading the public about its disastrous potential.

But before there was coronavirus, we were still facing a manufacturing recession. Workers' wages weren't going up and wealth inequality continued to balloon out of control. All the while, the president touted a stock market while half of Americans don't even own stock.

Thanks to hardworking medical professionals, the sacrifices made by working people and sincere efforts to practice good public health, I believe we will overcome this pandemic having learned some valuable lessons.  But never forget that many of the billions of dollars lost during the outbreak stem from a president who is able to manage neither a public health crisis nor a just economy."

Tom Winter is a progressive state legislator from western Montana running for the state's at-large congressional seat. "It's clear," he told us, "that the U.S. preparedness and response to this global pandemic has been bumbled from the get-go. Now, due to a complete lack of leadership from the top of our government we are on the verge of at the very least an economic recession, and at the very worst a financial collapse. While the federal government and politicians focus on saving Wall St. and the Big Banks, there's still a vast majority of working families in this country that were already struggling through this great stock-market run. So, my concern in the midst of this pandemic and national emergency lockdown is with the workers that aren't in line for bail outs or massive infusions of capital from the federal government. Yet, they're the ones that are getting laid off from work and still having to pay the bills. That's why, as a state legislator and U.S. Congressional candidate, I will be pushing for proactive protections for working families. Such as suspension of disconnections for non-payment from all utilities, paid sick leave extended to all workers, extension of unemployment benefits to workers laid off, pausing all evictions, making sure insurers follow through with the President's promise to make all COVID-19 testing and treatments free of any out-of-pocket expenses, and anything else that will dampen the effects felt by workers. We can not let the response and recovery of this crisis be like every other in recent memory, with all the focus, attention, and resources going to those with wealth and power."

UPDATE: From Goldman Sachs

Some of this is interesting and some of it is wishful thinking, but it's worth knowing what these big firms are thinking-- even if they're mostly off base. This is from their big investee call yesterday (with 1,500 firms dialing in):

50% of Americans will contract the virus (150 million people, give or take) as it's very communicable. This is on a par with the common cold (Rhinovirus) of which there are about 200 strains and which the majority of Americans will get 2-4 per year.

70% of Germany will contract it (58 million people). This is the next most relevant industrial economy to be effected.

Peak-virus is expected over the next eight weeks, declining thereafter.

The virus appears to be concentrated in a band between 30-50 degrees north latitude, meaning that like the common cold and flu, it prefers cold weather. The coming summer in the northern hemisphere should help. This is to say that the virus is likely seasonal.

Of those impacted 80% will be early-stage, 15% mid-stage and 5% critical-stage. Early-stage symptoms are like the common cold and mid-stage symptoms are like the flu; these are stay at home for two weeks and rest. 5% will be critical and highly weighted towards the elderly. [ASIDE: my doctor-- who has extremely important medical connections in China-- told me yesterday that 61.5% of those in critical care in the best hospitals have died.]

Mortality rate on average of up to 2%, heavily weight towards the elderly and immunocompromised; meaning up to 3 million people. In the US about 3 million/yr die mostly due to old age and disease, those two being highly correlated (as a percent very few from accidents). There will be significant overlap, so this does not mean 3 million new deaths from the virus, it means elderly people dying sooner due to respiratory issues. This may however stress the healthcare system.

There is a debate as to how to address the virus pre-vaccine. The US is tending towards quarantine. The UK is tending towards allowing it to spread so that the population can develop a natural immunity. Quarantine is likely to be ineffective and result in significant economic damage but will slow the rate of transmission giving the healthcare system more time to deal with the case load.

China’s economy has been largely impacted which has affected raw materials and the global supply chain. It may take up to six months for it to recover.

Global GDP growth rate will be the lowest in 30 years at around 2%.

S&P 500 will see a negative growth rate of -15% to -20% for 2020 overall.

There will be economic damage from the virus itself, but the real damage is driven mostly by market psychology. Viruses have been with us forever. Stock markets should fully recover in the 2nd half of the year.

In the past week there has been a conflating of the impact of the virus with the developing oil price war between Saudi Arabia and Russia. While reduced energy prices are generally good for industrial economies, the US is now a large energy exporter, so there has been a negative impact on the valuation of the domestic energy sector. This will continue for some time as the Russians are attempting to economically squeeze the American shale producers and the Saudi’s are caught in the middle and do not want to further cede market share to Russia or the US.

Technically the market generally has been looking for a reason to reset after the longest bull market in history.

There is NO systemic risk. No one is even talking about that. Governments are intervening in the markets to stabilize them, and the private banking sector is very well capitalized. It feels more like 9/11 than it does like 2008.

Are There Too Many Multimillionaires In Congress-- Out Of Touch With Ordinary Americans' Concerns?

Almost nothing passes unanimously in the House. I was surprised that H.R. 4695, the bill imposing sanctions on Turkey over the invasion of Syria-- which did pass yesterday with a 403 to 16 veto-proof majority still had 15 die-hard Trumpists-- like Andy Biggs (R-AZ), Doug LaMalfa (R-CA), Paul Gosar (R-AZ), Barry Loudermilk (R-GA) and Pence's brother (R-IN)-- willing to vote know to please Señor Trumpanzee.

But that same day, the House managed to pass a bill-- a significant, consequential and important one-- unanimously. Katie Porter (D-CA) of Orange County wrote the Help America Run Act. When it becomes law, it will make it easier for working parents to run for federal office, clarifying that candidates are permitted to use campaign contributions to pay for child care, elder care, dependent care, and healthcare premiums and passed the House with unanimous, bipartisan support.

House Administration Committee Chairperson Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) said "The Help America Run Act is a simple, cost-free, commonsense measure to make America’s representatives look more like the everyday Americans we are here to represent. Americans caring for their children or parents today must weigh the option of running for office to serve the nation against the risk of losing coverage. It is precisely those everyday Americans that I want to see join us at the decision-making table. I’m proud to join Representative Katie Porter, the very first single mother of young children ever to serve in U.S. Congress, in supporting this important legislation. The ranking Republican on the committee, Rodney Davis (D-IL), agreed and urged, successfully, his party to back it. Though the NRCC is targeting Katie Porter as one of the top 5 democratic freshmen they want to replace, Davis publicly said that "I commend my colleague, Rep. Katie Porter, for this important legislation that I believe will allow more hardworking Americans to run for Congress. Strong candidates should not be limited by their circumstances to the point that it prevents them from representing their communities in Congress. Representatives of this body should come from all backgrounds to allow for equal representation of all who make up this great nation."

Katie, one of the most active of the freshman class, said "As a single working mom myself, I am acutely aware of the challenge it can be to balance running for office and taking care of a family. I’m proud to be a member of a historic freshman class that more closely reflects the diversity of the people we represent, but there’s still more work to be done. I’m pleased that a large number of my colleagues from both sides of the aisle have come together to help break down the barriers for Americans who want to serve their communities in federal office."

One of the big problems in Congress is that few working class candidates can afford to run. That has a lot to do with how many millionaires there are in Congress. And remembers, millionaires tend to be more conservative than normal people. Here are a bunch of the richest members of the House:

• Gil Cisneros (New Dem-CA)- $266 million
• Mitt Romney (R-UT)- 250 million
• Rick Scott (R-FL)- $232 million
• Greg Gianforte (R-MT)- $135.7 million
• Michael McCaul (R-TX)- $113.0 million
• Mark Warner (D-VA)- $90.2 million
• Dean Phillips (New Dem-MN)- $77 million
• Vern Buchanan (R-FL)- $73.9 million
• Kevin Hern (R-OK)- $36-$92 million
• Mike Braun (R-IN)- between $35- $96 million
• Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)- $70.0 million
• Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)- $58.5 million
• Trey Hollingsworth (R-IN)- $50.1 million
• Paul Mitchell (R-MI)- $37.7 million
• Scott Peters (New Dem)- $32.0 million
• Don Beyer (New Dem-VA)- $31.2 million
• Suzan DelBene (New Dem-WA)- $28.4 million
• Roger Williams (R-TX)- $27.7 million

In 2012 the Center for Responsive Politics reported that, for there first time more than half the 534 members of Congress had an average net worth of $1 million or more (268 of them). The median net worth for the members of Congress was $1 million. They have different problems and experiences of life than the vast majority of Americans do.

Illinois single mom Rachel Ventura is very much the kind of working citizen-candidate Katie Porter's bill is meant to assist. She's running for a Chicagoland seat occupied by a wealthy New Dei, Bill Foster, who represents the interests of other wealthy people, not of working families. This morning, Rachel told us that "It's a sad day when you look up and realize that your congressman is worth $10 million dollars and that he is not the richest one. Sadly, he is only the 34th richest member of Congress and it should scare people that 33 others have accrued more wealth than he has. Running for office as a single mother is not easy and I am glad to see that Katie Porter is proposing some modest solutions. I applaud these efforts, but honestly, we need to overturn Citizens United with a constitutional amendment and pass serious campaign finance reform that makes it easier for qualified candidates to run. Creating a system where our representatives can reflect what the country's make up in gender and race is, will create a government of shared values and diverse policy. In contrasts, how in the world can a multi-millionaire identify with working people who are living paycheck to paycheck, and why would we ever trust the super wealthy to do what is in our best interest when they are padding their campaign coffers with corporate cash?"


UPDATE: Montana

State Rep. Tom Winter is the progressive Democrat running for Montana's at-large open congressional seat this cycle. "Our Congress," he told me, "is now older and richer than ever before. Is it surprising that working people haven’t gotten a raise since before I was born when the people running things look like Greg Gianforte-- old enough to be my grandfather, and rich enough to be his boss? I get asked all the time: How can a young Democrat really relate to a voter from Glendive, Montana? And I always turn it around: Has anybody ever even tried? They’ve done it the easy way with all this fake cowboy posturing from our rich elected officials-- Gianforte, Rosendale, the whole political establishment in this state. Their clean boots get us nowhere, and their trophy ranches don’t relate to those of us who work for a living.  Our working communities deserve representatives who will work for them. That’s what Democrats used to do-- work for working people. That’s what I’ll do in Congress."

Congress Needs More Members In The Squad But That Isn't The Only Way To Make A Valuable Contribution: Katie Porter

The CNN.com headline yesterday, Katie Porter isn't part of 'The Squad.' But the freshman House Democrat is stirring up trouble for Trump, was... meh. True, Katie Porter isn't part of The Squad. And true, Katie is "stirring up trouble for Trump." But... there's a lot more to it. Each member of The Squad can boast a ProgressivePunch crucial vote record of "A"-- three of them, perfect 100% scores, in fact. Katie's ProgressivePunch crucial vote score isn't as robust. And instead of their A, hers is F. Here are their raw scores plus the PVI of their districts:

• Ayanna Pressley- 100 (D+34)
• Rashida Tlaib- 100 (D+33)
• AOC- 100 (D+29)
• Ilhan Omar- 97.50 (D+26)
• Katie Porter- 72.50 (R+3)

Let's put that another way. Republicans didn't bother running candidates against Ayanna or Rashida. AOC beat Republican Anthony Pappas 110,318 (78.2%) to 19,202 (13.6%). Ilhan beat Republican Jennifer Zielinski 267,703 (78.0%) to 74,440 (21.7%). Katie had a more series problem. She ran against entrenched Republican incumbent Mimi Walters (after beating a DCCC-preferred New Dem in the primary). Walters spent $5,244,605 (+ $7,758,258 town in against Porter by Republican outside groups). In the end-- Porter managed to beat Walters 158,906 (52.1%) to 146,383 (47.9%). Trump did badly in all 5 districts-- 11.9% in Ayanna's, 18.1% in Rashida's, 18.5% in Ilhan's, 19.8% in AOC's... and 44.4% in Katie's. I'm not making an excuses for her voting record, but it's a lot easier to vote straight down the line progressive in a district where only 12% of the people back Trump that in one where 44% do.

On the other hand, few freshmen have been as valuable in their committees as Porter has been in the House Financial Services Committee, where she has used her expertise to hold banksters' and Trump appointed regulators' feet to the fire. And, as Katie Lobosco, the CNN.com reporter put it, "she's emerged as a viral star when it comes to how banks and the government treat the working poor and puncturing Trump's claims about the economy. She's carving out a Warren-esque role for herself that's included asking top officials do basic math under oath. Her targets so far have included major Wall Street players like JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, Equifax CEO Mark Begor and now-former Wells Fargo CEO Tim Sloan."

It was March when Porter grilled Sloan-- who was already facing calls from Warren and others to step down-- at a House Financial Services Committee hearing about Wells Fargo's numerous scandals over fake accounts, inappropriate mortgage fees, and charging borrowers for auto insurance they didn't need.

When it came her turn, Porter began by asking why the public should trust Sloan's promises that Wells Fargo was changing its ways. Then, she ducked under the table to bring up a poster board printed with huge text, displaying what Wells Fargo attorneys had said in court.

"Why Mr. Sloan, if you don't mind me asking, are your lawyers in federal court arguing that those exact statements I read are quote 'paradigmatic examples of non-actionable corporate puffery, on which no reliable investor could rely,'" she asked.

"I don't know why our lawyers are arguing that," Sloan responded.

Porter kept going.

"It's convenient for your lawyers to deflect blame in court, and say your rebranding campaign can be ignored as hyperbolic marketing, but when then you come to Congress, you want us to take you at your word," she said. "And I think that's the disconnect, that's why the American public has trouble trusting Wells Fargo."

Two weeks later, Wells Fargo announced Sloan was out.

Porter has targeted top Trump administration officials, too. She whipped out a copy of the text book she wrote, "Modern Consumer Law," to quiz Consumer Financial Protection Bureau chief Kathy Kraninger. She then posed a hypothetical math problem: A single mom takes out a two-week $200 payday loan with an origination fee of $20, at a rate of 10%. What is the APR? One of Porter's aides handed Kraninger a calculator.

She didn't do the math, even after Porter repeated the question, asking her to ballpark the calculation.

"I understand where you're getting. At the end of the day, the issue is certainly: When you actually are able to repay that loan and whether or not you take out an additional loan," Kraninger said.

"This is not a math exercise, though. This is a policy conversation," she added.

This week, in her office, Porter said she hopes the video clip gets people thinking about the issue.

"Like, what does it mean that calculating the APR is so hard that the vast majority of us can't do it? I guess it means that those disclosures that do it for you are pretty useful," she said.

In June, Porter asked Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson why the Federal Housing Administration is "lousy at servicing mortgages." When Carson said he had not had any discussions about that issue but that he would "look it up," Porter pushed further, asking him to explain the rate of foreclosures among those with mortgages backed by his department. She used the term REO-- which stands for real estate-owned, and refers to properties owned by a lender after an unsuccessful foreclosure-- an acronym she didn't expect to stump the head of the agency tasked with monitoring them.

"Do you know what an REO is?" Porter asked Carson.

Carson replied, "An Oreo?"

"No, not an Oreo," Porter said. "An R-E-O. REO."




Video of the exchange went viral and Carson attempted to laugh it off by sending the Congresswoman a box of the cookies.

Porter says her goal isn't to highlight incompetence, but instead to make esoteric topics more accessible-- like she did in the consumer finance law classes she taught at the University of California, Irvine.

"What I did as a professor is not that different than what I do in hearings," Porter said this week.

An average voter might not be able to articulate their position on payday loans, she said, "but when you start talking about that hypothetical exchange I had with Kraninger, people began to engage."

Like Warren, she believes that debates about protecting the ability to make a living, buy a home, and afford college are really conversations about the "heart and soul of America."

Her back-and-forth with Dimon, she said, was meant to highlight the issue of CEO pay disparity. Porter ran through a hypothetical Chase bank employee's budget, this time with a white board.

"She's short $567, what would you suggest she do?" asked the bank CEO.

"I don't know, I'd have to think about that," Dimon said.

Whether or not the professor-turned-congresswoman can turn her unique way of questioning government officials and Wall Street executives into making real legislative change remains to be seen. A bicameral bill she brought forth with Democratic Sens. Warren, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, and Tom Udall of New Mexico would bolster the power of the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau so that it could oversee student loan servicers. Porter has also introduced legislation with Harris that would strengthen the power of state attorneys general to monitor banks.

So far none of these bills have major support from Republicans. But a bill she introduced that would raise the civil penalties assessed to security law violators was marked up by committee last week and a similar Senate bill is cosponsored by Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley. Two of her other bills-- one on mental health and the other addressing homecare for seniors-- have some support from across the aisle.

The Democrat could be vulnerable in her reelection bid. When she won in 2018, it was the first time her Southern California district had gone blue since its creation in 1983. That was in part because two-term incumbent Republican Mimi Walters was consistently voting in line with Trump in a district Clinton won by five percentage points.

But last month, Porter became one of the first Democrats who won Republican districts in 2018 to come out in support of impeaching Trump. The move seemed to win her some support. Her campaign brought in more than $1 million in the second quarter, out-fundraising many other vulnerable Democrats.

Porter said she is working to be a voice for families concerned about how they're going to pay the bills, something she believes Trump's candidacy also tapped into.

"The financial instability and sometimes insecurity that families feel, deeply motivates how they respond politically," Porter said last week.

"I think one thing he (Trump) played into was fear about 'Am I going to be able to make ends meet, and is there going be a job for my kids?' Those are real concerns, and as a mom I have them, too."

So far Katie has half a dozen GOP opponents running against her in the open primary, alphabetically Deputy District Attorney Ray Gennawey, Yorba Linda City Councilor and Deputy Attorney General Peggy Huang, random person Julie Proctor, Mission Viejo City Councilman Greg Raths, Laguna Hills City Councilman Don Sedgwick, Orange County Board of Education Member Lisa Sparks ad a second random person, Brenton Woolworth. And some of them are raising real money:

• Don Sedgwick: $621,120
• Peggy Huang (self-funder)- $263,791
• Greg Raths (self funder)- $209,770
• Lisa Sparks Triggers- $151,251
• Ray Gennawey- $73,210
• Brenton Woolworth- $8,845

But, speaking of The Squad, with the Republican Party having nothing to run on, they've decided to take their racism and xenophobia and turn it into an issue, an issue that shows the public exactly who and what they are. This is from the Illinois Republican Party. I have a feeling the California GOP is going to back away from using it, but... who really knows for sure. It looks like the kind of thing that Don Sedgwick and Greg Rath would absolutely love.

Pelosi Still Didn't Condemn Trump, Just His Tweets-- What Will It Take?

Auschwitz Revisited by Nancy Ohanian

Last night the House voted on this Resolution of Disapproval, condemning Trump's racist comments (though not condemning Señor Trumpanzee himself-- nor even referring to him as a racist-- since Pelosi is still absolutely determined to continue protecting him from any such thing):

RESOLUTION Condemning President Trump’s racist comments directed at Members of Congress.

Whereas the Founders conceived America as a haven of refuge for people fleeing from religious and political persecution, and Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison all emphasized that the Nation gained as it attracted new people in search of freedom and livelihood for their families;

Whereas the Declaration of Independence defined America as a covenant based on equality, the unalienable Rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and government by the consent of the people;

Whereas Benjamin Franklin said at the Constitutional convention, "When foreigners after looking about for some other Country in which they can obtain more happiness, give a preference to ours, it is a proof of attachment which ought to excite our confidence and affection";

Whereas President Franklin D. Roosevelt said, "Remember, remember always, that all of us, and you and I especially, are descended from immigrants and revolutionists";

Whereas immigration of people from all over the Earth has defined every stage of American history and propelled our social, economic, political, scientific, cultural, artistic and technological progress as a people, and all Americans, except for the descendants of Native people and enslaved African-Americans, are immigrants or descendants of immigrants;

Whereas the commitment to immigration and asylum has been not a partisan cause but a powerful national value that has infused the work of many Presidents;

Whereas American patriotism is defined not by race or ethnicity but by devotion to the Constitutional ideals of equality, liberty, inclusion, and democracy and by service to our communities and struggle for the common good;

Whereas President John F. Kennedy, whose family came to the United States from Ireland, stated in his 1958 book A Nation of Immigrants that "The contribution of immigrants can be seen in every aspect of our national life. We see it in religion, in politics, in business, in the arts, in education, even in athletics and entertainment. There is no part of our nation that has not been touched by our immigrant background. Everywhere immigrants have enriched and strengthened the fabric of American life.";

Whereas President Ronald Reagan in his last speech as President conveyed "An observation about a country which I love";

Whereas as President Reagan observed, the torch of Lady Liberty symbolizes our freedom and represents our heritage, the compact with our parents, our grandparents, and our ancestors, and it is the Statue of Liberty and its values that give us our great and special place in the world;

Whereas other countries may seek to compete with us, but in one vital area, as "a beacon of freedom and opportunity that draws the people of the world, no country on Earth comes close";

Whereas it is the great life force of "each generation of new Americans that guarantees that America’s triumph shall continue unsurpassed" through the 21st century and beyond and is part of the "magical, intoxicating power of America";

Whereas this is "one of the most important sources of America’s greatness: we lead the world because, unique among nations, we draw our people-- our strength-- from every country and every corner of the world, and by doing so we continuously renew and enrich our nation";

Whereas "thanks to each wave of new arrivals to this land of opportunity, we’re a nation forever young, forever bursting with energy and new ideas, and always on the cutting edge", always leading the world to the next frontier;

Whereas this openness is vital to our future as a Nation, and "if we ever closed the door to new Americans, our leadership in the world would soon be lost"; and

Whereas President Donald Trump’s racist comments have legitimized fear and hatred of new Americans and people of color: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the House of Representatives

(1) believes that immigrants and their descendants have made America stronger, and that those who take the oath of citizenship are every bit as American as those whose families have lived in the United States for many generations;

(2) is committed to keeping America open to those lawfully seeking refuge and asylum from violence and oppression, and those who are willing to work hard to live the American Dream, no matter their race, ethnicity, faith, or country of origin; and

(3) strongly condemns President Donald Trump’s racist comments that have legitimized and increased fear and hatred of new Americans and people of color by saying that our fellow Americans who are immigrants, and those who may look to the President like immigrants, should "go back" to other countries, by referring to immigrants and asylum seekers as "invaders," and by saying that Members of Congress who are immigrants (or those of our colleagues who are wrongly assumed to be immigrants) do not belong in Congress or in the United States of America.

Yesterday, before the vote, Pig-Man-Enraged went on another racist tweet-storm as soon as he woke up:

As Politico's morning team wrote yesterday, "Republicans now have to vote on whether they approve of Trump's comments. Most are likely to stick with Trump, even while they say privately he’s a boor for thinking and voicing these thoughts. It will be very instructive to see whether Republicans like Rep. Paul Mitchell (MI), a member of House GOP leadership who has criticized Trump over the tweets, end up voting with Democrats. Monday evening, senior Republicans told us they expected 10 or fewer Republicans would vote to condemn Trump. A question for Republicans to ponder: What would you tell your child if they sent those tweets? Would you say it was OK?." Noting the packed press conference AOC, Ayanna Pressley, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib-- all of whom pop up on that Worthy Incumbents thermometer on the right-- he'd Monday afternoon, Politico pointed out that they "found a way to explain succinctly why they believe Trump is a racist and why he should be impeached. They were able to tie this incident to a set of immigration policies that Democrats of all stripes believe are wrongheaded and criminal. They also highlighted, perhaps unintentionally, what the Republican Party has become on Capitol Hill: a bastion of mostly white men who are unable or unwilling to criticize a white president who has targeted brown and black women."

So the resolution passed 240-187, primarily along party lines. Every single Democrat voted for it, even the worst of the Blue Dogs and New Dems who hate and fear AOC and Ilhan and wish them both all the worst.

Four Republicans voted with the Democrats-- Susan Brooks, who is retiring, Brian Fitzpatrick, who represents a swingy Philly-area district and often votes with the Democrats, Will Hurd, the Republicans' only black member and who represents a 70% Latino swing district in south Texas, and Fred Upton, who's represents a swing district in the southwest part of Michigan and senses he's all but doomed this cycle-- as did Independent Justin Amash. 6 Republicans didn't vote, including some who were in the room.

CNN analyst Ron Brownstein tried explaining why Republicans don't worry much about Trump's overt racism. The acceptance of Trump's Know Nothing approach to race and immigration "underscores his transformation of the Republican Party into a coalition centered on the voters and places in America most hostile to immigration in particular and demographic change in general."

This latest flurry of activity continues the drive by Trump and other Republicans elected mostly from the parts of America least touched by immigration to impose a restrictionist agenda on migration over the nearly undivided opposition of Democrats elected by the areas where most immigrants, both undocumented and legal, actually live. Though greeted without complaint by Republicans in Congress, Trump's promised raids provoked astoundingly open resistance from the mayors of virtually every large American city, from New York and Los Angeles to Chicago and Houston.

Trump's divisive tweets opened an equally imposing divide between the parties. Democrats were unvarnished and united in flatly describing Trump's tweets as racist and nativist, words that elected officials have rarely applied so unabashedly to the remarks of a sitting president. Only a tiny trickle of Republicans that widened slightly as Monday progressed raised objections and the vast majority tried to avoid comment altogether. Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina obliquely suggested Trump "should aim higher" but then compounded the President's slur by calling the Democrats "communists" who "hate our own country" and are "anti-America."



...[A]ttitudes toward demographic, cultural and economic change have become the central fault line between the parties. Republicans mobilize what I've called a "coalition of restoration" centered on older, blue-collar, evangelical and non-urban whites who polls show are uneasy or frightened about the fundamental demographic, cultural and even economic trends reshaping America in the 21st century.

Democrats counter with a competing "coalition of transformation" revolving around the groups-- young adults, minorities, singles, secular voters, and college-educated whites, mostly concentrated in large metropolitan areas-- who are most comfortable with the change.

"Clearly we're headed down a path where there is one party for older white Americans and then there's another party for people of color and immigrants," says Carlos Curbelo, a former Republican US representative who was defeated last fall in a heavily diverse Miami-area district. "And this is very dangerous. It divides our society in a dangerous way. It paralyzes our political system."

These trends trace their roots back all the way to the civil rights revolution in the 1960s and have significantly accelerated since the closely divided election of 2000. But Trump's open appeal to the portions of white America most uneasy about cultural and social change, from immigration to gay and transgender rights and the changing role of women, have elevated these trends to an entirely new level.

The result is that hardly any Republicans at any level now represent urban constituencies with the large immigrant populations that Trump has threatened with intensified ICE enforcement or demeaned with his calls for four liberal House Democratic women, three of whom were actually born in the US, to"go back" to where they came from before criticizing America.

"I don't see any serious plan or strategy to grow the party in urban America," said Curbelo, who was one of the few House Republicans to represent a seat with large populations of immigrant and non-white voters. "And I see very limited effort to grow the party among the Hispanic community which was a major priority during the George W. Bush years and even afterwards during the Obama presidency. That is now virtually non-existent."

Instead, Curbelo said, Trump "uses cities to intensify the culture war and agitate his base."

Trump's victory in 2016, and his consistent support in polls from about 40-45% of the population, shows there is a significant audience for his hard-edged message on immigration and demographic change more broadly. But there is also a clear cost. In effect, Trump's bruising racially-infused nationalism is forcing the GOP to trade support among younger voters for older ones; secular voters for the most religiously conservative, especially evangelical Christians; diverse voters for whites; white collar whites for blue-collar whites; and metro areas for non-metro areas.

Since Trump's emergence Republicans have consolidated their control of small-town, exurban and rural communities. But that has come with significant losses for the GOP inside metropolitan areas even in red states, like Texas and Georgia.

The trade Trump is imposing on the GOP was apparent in 2016 and enormously intensified in 2018.

In 2016, Trump lost 16 of the 20 states where foreign-born residents constituted the largest share of the population and won 26 of the 30 states where they represent the smallest shares. Even in the relatively more diverse states he won, he lost the vast majority of the big urban centers where immigrants and other minorities generally concentrate. Overall, Trump lost 87 of the 100 largest US counties to Hillary Clinton by a combined margin of over 15 million votes, according to calculations by the Pew Research Center. Trump offset these losses by amassing the largest margins for Republicans in decades in small-town, exurban and rural areas.

In 2018 House races, Republicans suffered only very modest losses outside of metropolitan area districts. And they gained three Senate seats in states with large populations of white voters who are rural, blue-collar, or evangelical Christians: North Dakota, Indiana and Missouri. But the party was routed in metropolitan House seats that contained significant populations of minorities, immigrants, singles, college-educated white voters, or all of the above. After sweeping losses in suburban districts from coast to coast, the GOP under Trump has been almost completely exiled from the dynamic metropolitan areas that account for the nation's vast majority of job growth and economic output.

Democrats now hold over four-fifths of the House seats where minorities exceed their share of the national population and nearly 9 in 10 of the House seats with more foreign-born residents than average, according to a CNN analysis of census data. In the Senate, Democrats partially offset the Republican gains in older and rural Midwestern states by adding seats in the diverse, younger, rapidly growing Sunbelt battlegrounds of Arizona and Nevada. The result is that after the 2018 election, Democrats now hold 32 of the 40 Senate seats in the 20 states with the highest share of immigrants in their population while Republicans hold 45 of the 60 in the 30 states with the fewest. In 2020, the top two Democratic Senate pick-up opportuntiies are among the top 20 immigration states -- Arizona and Colorado, with Georgia, another high-ranking state, presenting a more difficult chance. Democrats are also targeting about a dozen of the GOP House members remaining in high-immigrant seats.

Because undocumented immigrants tend to flow largely toward communities with large existing immigrant communities, that means the places most threatened by Trump's threat to increase ICE enforcement are almost all places that have already demonstrated hostility to him and the party he is reshaping in his image.

The non-partisan Migration Policy Institute estimates that there are at least 70,000 undocumented immigrants in 34 US counties; cumulatively those counties account for about 5.6 million undocumented immigrants, about half of the estimated US total. (The top 10 counties alone, all of them major metropolitan areas, account for nearly one-third of the total undocumented population.) In 2016, Trump lost 31 of those 34 counties and in 2018 two of those he carried-- Maricopa, around Phoenix in Arizona, and Tarrant, centered on Fort Worth in Texas-- broke for the Democrats in Senate races.

...Trump "has been able to convince folks that their way of life has been impacted primarily by the presence of undocumented immigrants in this country and I think that that message resonates more than anywhere else with the communities that just don't have close contact with them," Elorza said. "I personally live in a community where I know for a fact there are undocumented immigrants around. I see them. And if you get to know them you see they are not a threat to you. When you are not exposed to them you are more susceptible to buying this (negative) narrative, because you have the President of the United States telling you this is the case."

Conversely, Curbelo says he sees signs that too many Democrats are abandoning the hope of forging connections in less diverse, less urban areas generally more skeptical of immigrants. "Obviously Republicans are not doing enough to change (the divide) and frankly Democrats aren't either," he says. "You hear some Democrats say we don't want a white presidential candidate; that's just as improper and scandalous. The bases of each respective party have too much of a gravitational pull."

Trump's unrelentingly divisive agenda and language-- and the sharp Democratic response it has generated-- seems guaranteed in the 2020 election to widen the chasm between diverse, white-collar, immigrant-friendly urban America, where opposition to the President is centered, and his strongholds in preponderantly white, blue-collar, heavily Christian, non-urban America.

This week's repeated use of openly racist language from the White House-- like the new policy battles over ICE enforcement and asylum seekers, and the earlier struggles over Trump proposals to measure citizenship on the census, build a border wall, separate children from parents at the border, punish "sanctuary cities," and slash legal immigration by the largest amounts since the 1920s-- show how committed the President is to mobilizing his "coalition of restoration" even at the price of inflaming the Democrats' "coalition of transformation" and potentially alienating swing voters.

The racially incendiary conflicts of the past few days have provided perhaps the clearest preview yet of what's approaching as the places that represent what America is becoming square off against the places that reflect what it has been in next year's epic struggle for control of the nation's direction.

The Republicans are trying to redefine the Democratic Party as "socialism," AOC and Ilhan and Trump's tweets reinforce that. Virtually every e-mail from Republican groups and candidates mention socialism, AOC and Ilhan. Here's one I got yesterday from some douche bag mayor of Laguna Hills campaign against Katie Porter.Republicans hate Porter because she is effective in holding banksters accountable but most CA-45 voters would agree with her on that, so instead...

We are running against an extreme AOC-backed, self-described Elizabeth Warren protege who doesn’t just whisper about being a radical liberal, she embraces it. While Porter’s campaign is stuffed with socialist cash from members like Ilhan Omar, Sedgwick’s campaign is people-powered from everyday Americans who believe in family values, capitalism and the American Dream.

"People-powered" if corporate PACs are people and "family values" if those values have been redefined as racism, xenophobia and the total trashing of Jesus' message to mankind-- with children in cages and Trump and his cronies raping children. Meanwhile, if you can stomach it, here are the clueless congressional leaders of the American Nazi Party doing a press conference yesterday before the vote, apparently trying to rally their troops and their racist base. Note the venom dripping out of the Cheney daughter's mouth: