The New World-- Triage, Censorship, Iziki, Social Distancing... Conservative Self Extinction

The other day, I cooked up an old side dish I used to make when I was a chef in Amsterdam in the 1970s-- carrots, daikon and iziki. Except I had no iziki in the house and used nori as a substitute. It was delicious but it wasn't the same. So the next day, I suited up with the Base Camp N-99 mask I bought for hiking in the Himalayas a couple of years ago, along with the wrap-around shades Al Jourgenson gave me, and headed out for Erewhon, the health food supermarket, across town. Observations from my excursion: construction sites are still all open and functioning, many not-even-close-to-essential shops on Melrose were still open, like furniture stores, and most depressing, the people waiting on the long line in front of Erewhon was about one tenth masked. I didn't see a single masked employee inside the store either. And the shelves were largely bare of anything worthwhile and there wasn't only no iziki, there wasn't even any nori. Plenty of fresh fruits and veggies though. I have a feeling that a significant number of people don't know how to prepare anything that isn't in a can or box.

Writing for the Wall Street Journal this weekend, Holman Jenkins had some downright dire predictions about the efficacy of social distancing and the coming great shut down. That route, he wrote "is likely no cure at all. We might hold off an expected surge in coronavirus cases for two or three weeks with the kind of extraordinarily destructive economic lockdowns seen in California, New York and elsewhere. But unless warmer weather is coming to our rescue, [a crazy idea since COVID-19 has done just fine in Thailand's 90 degree weather] Americans probably won’t accept the social devastation that would be inflicted by a five-month or 18-month campaign of virus suppression of the sort promoted, variously, by the U.K.’s Imperial College London, Germany’s Robert Koch Institute and other public-health think tanks. Mandatory social distancing might well break down. (Look for speakeasies to re-emerge in New York and other shut-in cities.) The government might well face a choice of coercion or seeing its authority collapse. I’m not being alarmist. This is a lesson the World Health Organization’s Bruce Aylward brought back from Wuhan. People with flu-like symptoms had to be isolated in dormitories, hospitals and stadiums. Asking them to self-isolate voluntarily didn’t work."

Yet on Friday, a new Gallup poll seems to have indicated a rosier picture: Americans Rapidly Answering The Call To Isolate, Prepare. Linda Saad's toplines:

• After limited early adoption, majorities now avoiding routine interactions-- good, most people will live through this
• About half have stocked up on food, medical and household supplies-- again, good; an indication most people will survive
• Republicans still lag in social distancing-- best yet, the herd thinning will result in less disgusting, worthless, stupid conservatives

Saad wrote that "In the span of a week, Americans have gone from tepid adoption of social distancing to majorities engaging in nearly every major practice advocated by government and health officials as ways to contain community spread of the novel coronavirus. But there is a long way to go to approach full compliance. Gallup polling conducted March 13-15 and March 16-19 shows the biggest increases in social distancing occurring with those avoiding public places like grocery stores and restaurants (+24 percentage points to 54% doing this) and avoiding small social gatherings (+23 points to 46%). Majorities last weekend were already avoiding traveling by airplane or mass transit and avoiding events with large crowds out of concern for coronavirus. But with 20-point jumps in these behaviors this week, more than 70% of Americans are now on board with them... The trend shows Americans are moving less quickly to stockpile essential supplies, something that could be important in the event a household is quarantined due to illness, or if groceries and other supplies were to become scarce in the coming weeks and months. Just over half of Americans, 52%, say they have stocked up on food, medical or cleaning supplies as a safeguard from coronavirus disruption, up 13 points since the first polling period... [A]bout one in five are not considering stocking up on supplies."

The first response of one of my friends was to run out and buy a shotgun. I read that gun shops have long lines.

In the earlier survey 41% of respondents "described themselves as very likely to comply if public health officials recommend everyone stay home for a month should there be a serious outbreak of coronavirus in their community" and that rose to 51% in just a week-- even before Californians, New Yorkers and Illinoisans were ordered to shelter in place. Among the rebels: 14% said they were "somewhat unlikely" to comply in the first survey and 16% said they were "very unlikely" to comply. That changed in the second survey when 11% said "somewhat unlikely" and 12% said "very unlikely."

Saad interprets that to mean that "The country is approaching universal adherence to avoidance of large crowds and travel, with more than seven in 10 adults of all age groups, all political parties and regions saying they are already eschewing these activities. More variation is seen at the level of smaller interactions, including staying away from stores and restaurants and foregoing visits with friends and family. While more Americans across the societal spectrum are taking both precautions, women, residents of the Northeast, those living in high population density areas, and Democrats are more likely to be doing so than residents living in other regions, particularly the South and Midwest, in low-density areas, and Republicans."

From survey one to survey two these were the partisan changes among the percentage of Americans reporting they are avoiding public places such as stores and restaurants (before restaurants were shut down in several states, counties and cities):

• Democrats went from 41% complying to 65% complying, an increase of 24 points
• Independents went from 27% complying to 54% complying, an increase of 27 points
• Republicans went from 21% complying to 43% complying, an increase of 22 points

And where are people least likely to comply? The South, of course. Just 48%. If I were a mathematician I would try to figure out how long it would take for Southern Republicans to make themselves extinct.

Triage is coming to American hospitals. Doctors should probably take this demographic information when they are forced to decide who lives and who... doesn't get treatment. After all, older Republican men in the South seem determined to make themselves and this around them sick. Why should hospitals forced to chose who to use scare sources on waste it on them? Women, Democrats and Independents, younger people, non-Southerners are the people who are willing to accept societal restrictions to save themselves and those around them (and the country and species). Shouldn't they be saved first? Wouldn't the world be better off with fewer old, male, selfish Republican Southerners? Hard to admit... but you know it's true. Karen Weise and Mike Baker, reporting for the NY Times:

Medical leaders in Washington State, which has the highest number of coronavirus deaths in the country, have quietly begun preparing a bleak triage strategy to determine which patients may have to be denied complete medical care in the event that the health system becomes overwhelmed by the coronavirus in the coming weeks.

Fearing a critical shortage of supplies, including the ventilators needed to help the most seriously ill patients breathe, state officials and hospital leaders held a conference call on Wednesday night to discuss the plans, according to several people involved in the talks. The triage document, still under consideration, will assess factors such as age, health and likelihood of survival in determining who will get access to full care and who will merely be provided comfort care, with the expectation that they will die.

The effort is statewide so individual doctors and hospitals will not be left to make such decisions, said Cassie Sauer, chief executive of the Washington State Hospital Association, one of the groups convening the call.

“It’s protecting the clinicians so you don’t have one person who’s kind of playing God,” she said, adding, “It is chilling, and it should not happen in America.”

Ms. Sauer stressed that several things, including more hospital beds and equipment, could reduce the need to make such decisions. “This country has resources,” she said.

The state has been urgently seeking ventilators for patients and protective masks for health care workers, including from the Strategic National Stockpile, a repository of critical medical supplies for public health emergencies. Officials have also been looking to have the U.S. Navy hospital ship Mercy, which has 80 intensive care beds, dock near Seattle to handle seriously ill patients other than those who have contracted Covid-19, the disease caused by the virus.

In the meantime, officials in King County have begun building a field hospital on a soccer field north of Seattle. One large hospital system based in the area has started making masks and face shields by hand. Hospitals have already postponed elective surgeries to preserve resources.

Dr. Chris Spitters, the interim health officer for the Snohomish Health District, where the nation’s first coronavirus case was diagnosed, was part of the group that discussed the rationing proposals this week. He said that while the crisis strategies were not something anyone wants to anticipate, it would be worse not to be ready in the event they were needed.

I saw my oncologist last week. She was distressed when she told me the hospital had been approached-- she didn't say by who-- about beginning to think about cutting off care in "the future" to elderly cancer patients. Hopefully it won't be so then can provide care to male Southern Republicans drunk on Corona beer and mumbling about the pandemic being a hoax.

A corollary: a friend of mine living in China predicted this morning that there is likely to be "domestic deployments of troops that will probably be focused on protecting hospitals and vital supplies from rogue citizens." He also called my attention to the early stages of censorship starting up-- innocently-- right now. The intensified censorship of Internet 'misinformation' (let's all keep in mind the "infallibility" of official sources) could become more permanent, with relatively small pullbacks after the pandemic burns out, because such censorship is a relatively cheap and an efficient way to perform what the National Security State sees as a core function of Internet gatekeepers."

Twitter is among the major internet companies that have stepped up to play an active role in countering “misinformation” about the risks of and response to the coronavirus, although critics fear the measures it has announced could do more harm than good.

This week, the social media platform announced that it’s taking a “wide range of actions on potentially abusive and manipulative content” related to the subject, and to that end it is broadening his definition of “harmful” content.

Content that may be removed includes “denial of global or local health authority recommendations” (such as discouraging people from engaging in “social distancing”); descriptions of “ineffective” treatment or prevention methods, “even if made in jest”; “denial of established scientific facts” from “global and local health authorities”; urging people to go out to local businesses in defiance of government mandates; statements such as “ignore news about COVID-19, it’s just an attempt to destroy capitalism by crashing the stock market”; “unverified” claims that could “incite people to action and cause widespread panic”; impersonation of official government bodies, including parody accounts; and more.

While some of these rules are fairly straightforward, the language about humorous content can be seen as overreach, particularly if it affects obvious satire or jokes that, while potentially in poor taste, are obviously not meant to be taken as real information.

Twitter’s language also could potentially cross the line from halting the spread of misinformation into stifling legitimate debate about the wisdom of government’s response as well as the true threat of the virus, a relatively new and evolving situation on which the experts themselves are not of one mind.

Per “social distancing” recommendations, Twitter is taking on this task with reduced manpower, meaning it will be increasing its reliance on “machine learning and automation” to monitor and remove objectionable content. The company acknowledges that artificial systems “can sometimes lack the context that our teams bring, and this may result in us making mistakes,” so it will not be suspending any of the accounts whose content is removed by these systems.

Twitter is part of a joint effort by tech giants including Google, Facebook, LinkedIn, Microsoft, and Reddit to fight “fraud and misinformation about the virus” while “elevating authoritative content on our platforms, and sharing critical updates in coordination with government healthcare agencies around the world.”

Google’s own efforts in that regard have already produced some hiccups, such as inadvertently blocking legitimate news apps and even the U.S. Centers for Disease Control from appearing in certain searches on the Google Play store.

GOP Triage-- Blame Game, Name Game

This time it's the Republicans' turn to play the blame game-- Shirley Ellis' 1964 "Name Game" version, not the one Trumpist asshole Kanye stole from Apex Twin. Steve Peoples covered it for the AP. "Republicans," he wrote, "have begun to concede defeat in the evolving fight to preserve the House majority. The party’s candidates may not go quietly, but from the Arizona mountains to suburban Denver to the cornfields of Iowa, the GOP’s most powerful players this midterm season are actively shifting resources away from vulnerable Republican House candidates deemed too far gone and toward those thought to have a better chance of political survival. And as they initiate a painful and strategic triage, the early Republican-on-Republican blame game has begun as well."

It would be tragic if some loathsome House Republican-- say Iowa lunatic Rod Blum, for example-- sneaks a 3-D printed gun into the Capitol and shoots Paul Ryan between the eyes, wouldn't it? My thoughts and prayers are already welling up inside me.

GOP operatives connected to several vulnerable candidates complain that the committee responsible for electing House Republicans has failed to deliver on its promise to invest $62 million in political advertising across 11 states this fall, a promise detailed in a September memo that declared, “The cavalry is coming.”

The operatives spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid retribution; vulnerable Republican candidates still hope to receive additional financial support over the three weeks before Election Day.

But if the cavalry is coming, it’s not coming for everyone.

Already, the Republican operatives and spending patterns by both sides indicate GOP defeat in as many as a dozen House races-- halfway to the number Democrats need to seize the House majority this fall. Dozens more seats are in play.

“We’re starting to hone in on what are the races we can actually win. Sometime that requires a hard conversation,” said House Speaker Paul Ryan’s fundraising chief, Spencer Zwick.

Even after a burst of enthusiasm that helped Republican Senate candidates in several states following the recent Supreme Court debate, some Republicans closely following the more complicated House battlefield fear the party may have already lost Congress’ lower chamber. With 22 days to go, they’re working furiously in an expanding political battlefield to limit their losses.

Fundraising challenges make it harder.

As of Friday, the National Republican Congressional Committee has spent or reserved $44.8 million of television advertising in competitive House races since the end of July, according to spending records obtained by The Associated Press. That’s significantly less than the $62 million promised in last month’s memo... A separate memo, circulated to donors in recent days by the super PAC associated with Ryan, noted that it’s been forced to carry the bulk of this year’s financial burden given weak fundraising by the Republican candidates themselves.

Of more than 30 races considered pure toss-ups, the memo states, Ryan’s super PAC is the sole spender in 14.

“The GOP is now facing a green wave,” wrote Corry Bliss, who leads the group, known as the Congressional Leadership Fund. “Democratic candidates are outspending Republican candidates in key races by $50 million.”

Indeed, Democratic candidates have outspent their Republican counterparts $116 million to $66 million across almost 80 competitive House districts since July, according to Friday’s spending records. The Congressional Leadership Fund has helped make up the difference, having invested $93 million over the same period, backed by massive donations from Republican mega-donor Sheldon Adelson.

“This is going to be a devastating election for Republicans across the ballot,” said Republican strategist Terry Sullivan, who called the party’s fundraising issues a symptom of the GOP’s broader challenge this fall.

“Republican donors are smart folks,” he said. “They’re not going to give money to a losing cause.”

The Republican triage has been shaped by geography and demographics as much as by the candidates themselves.

The GOP has a decent chance of preserving any House district that features a cornfield, pollsters and strategists say, pointing to less-educated rural voters who make up a significant portion of the Republican base. But where education and incomes are higher in suburban areas, Republicans are growing increasingly pessimistic.

The NRCC in recent days has canceled plans to help at least three vulnerable Republican candidates: Rep. Kevin Yoder in suburban Kansas, Rep. Keith Rothfus in suburban Pittsburgh and businesswoman Lea Marquez Peterson in Tucson, Arizona. GOP strategists fear three open seats in the Pennsylvania suburbs and two more in suburban New Jersey are slipping away if they’re not lost already.

And Republicans haven’t invested at all in a handful of other would-be competitive races, including Southern California’s open seat to replace retiring Republican Rep. Darrell Issa and the seat of Iowa Republican incumbent Rep. Rod Blum, whose district features the state’s northern suburbs and more than a dozen college campuses.

Democrats canceled their advertising reserves in GOP Rep. Barbara Comstock’s suburban Virginia district, a sign of confidence in light of public and private polling that gives the Republican incumbent little chance of winning. That’s despite the NRCC spending nearly $5 million in the district since July.

At the same time, the Republican super PAC has shifted money away from at least two other vulnerable Republicans, including suburban Denver Rep. Mike Coffman and Michigan Rep. Steve Bishop.

And potential Ryan murderer Rod Blum, where the corn fields grow. And Mimi Walters and Dana Rohrabacher, from Orange County, where no corn fields grow. One Republican House staffer, on condition of anonymity, blamed Ryan for their boss' impending doom. "He's spending so much money to defeat Randy Bryce in his own district [in Wisconsin] that he's sacrificing 3 or 4 incumbents who have a better chance of winning than Bryan Steil who looks like a clone." Yeah... Go Randy!

Paul Ryan Gives Up On 2 More Orange County Incumbents— Mimi And Dana Pushed Overboard

Maybe it’s too early to congratulation progressive Democrat Katie Porter and New Dem Harley Rouda, but yesterday’s L.A. Times reported that Mimi Walters (CA-45) and Dana Rohrabacher (CA-48) are no longer seen as viable candidates by Ryan’s shady, Adelson-funded SuperPAC. Both have been cut off and left on the side of the road to die, politically speaking. What the Times reported is that the omission of Rohrabacher and Walters from TV advertising by Ryan’s Congressional Leadership Fund “comes at a crucial inflection point in the midterm election when the two parties begin assessing their likely winners and losers.”

Walters and Rohrabacher join a dozen other Republican incumbents who have been left for dead like Barbara Comstock (VA), Mike Coffman (CO), Mike Bishop (MI), Kevin Yoder (KS), Rod Blum (IA)... This is especially odd and unexpected for Walters and Rohrabacher because just last week Ryan’s PAC spent $337,839 savaging Katie Porter and $324,105 smearing Harley Rouda.

Candidates in California, where more than half a dozen seats are being seriously contested, are at particular risk of being cut off financially because of the state’s exorbitant advertising costs. Money saved in the costly Los Angeles media market can be spread over several contests in other states that may be considered more winnable.

The Congressional Leadership Fund, which collects multi-million-dollar checks from the Republican Party’s biggest donors, says it is spending nearly $12 million on cable television ads in four House contests in Southern California.

On Friday, the super PAC launched an additional $5-million ad campaign on the main broadcast stations in Los Angeles, the nation’s second most expensive media market after New York.

But the fund’s opening broadcast ads support only two of the four Republican candidates in the Southland’s hardest-fought races: Rep. Steve Knight of Palmdale and Young Kim of Fullerton, relegating its Rohrabacher and Walters ads to cable channels with fewer viewers.

The fund is free to add Walters and Rohrabacher to its broadcast lineup later. But millions of Californians have already received their ballots by mail, so immediate advertising is crucial to the fate of the two lawmakers, who are each facing their most serious challenges ever.

Rohrabacher has served 15 terms in Congress and Walters is bidding to win her third term.

Their Democratic challengers are already spending heavily on broadcast television ads. Walters has aired some broadcast commercials too, but Rohrabacher has not.

Nationwide, Democratic candidates have raised far more money than Republicans. As a result, GOP candidates are counting on outside groups like the Congressional Leadership Fund to come to the rescue.

But those groups must pay as much as quadruple the rates that television stations are required by law to offer to candidates, so the Democratic dollars are buying far more ad time. And those dollars are expanding the political battlefield, pressuring Republican strategists to make hard decisions on where to commit precious resources and which candidates to let go.

“While most people talk constantly about whether [Democratic enthusiasm] will translate into turnout, it’s definitely translating into dollars,” said Rob Stutzman, a veteran Republican strategist in Sacramento. “Dollars aren’t decisive always, but it’s always a big advantage.

“When you’re these national committees and you’ve got problems in the suburbs of Dallas, Kansas City, Chicago, Philadelphia, you’ve got to start making decisions on where you can most effectively spend,” Stutzman said.

For Knight, facing a formidable fundraiser in Democratic challenger Katie Hill, the new boost from the Congressional Leadership Fund came as a big relief. “We’re happy to have the help,” Knight strategist Matt Rexroad said.

Kim, the other Republican getting broadcast ads from the fund, is battling Democrat Gil Cisneros to succeed Rep. Ed Royce of Fullerton.

A Rohrabacher spokesman did not return a call for comment.

Dave Gilliard, a strategist for Walters, warned against reading too much into the latest machinations.

“There’s a lot of head fakes and games of chicken that occur between various outside spending groups in all these congressional districts,” he said. “Everybody’s trying to head-fake the other side to get them to spend money where they don’t need it.”

A spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee said the GOP’s congressional campaign arm is now broadcasting a spot supporting Walters and attacking her challenger, Katie Porter.

But he declined to say whether the committee would step up its advertising in either Orange County district if the Congressional Leadership Fund keeps Rohrabacher and Walters limited to cable.

The DCCC is doing something very similar. Remember, triage is bi-partisan-- and always favors conservatives (because of who exactly makes the decisions).They sent out a toxic memo Friday urging institutional donors and the suckers who still contribute to them instead of giving directly to candidates to concentrate on the corrupt conservatives the DCCC is pushing and stop giving money to the progressive candidates whose campaigns the DCCC is trying to destroy. They specifically asked donors to earmark money for New Dem candidates who are way ahead, while cutting back on all candidates associated with Bernie and with the policies he espouses and which are popular with Democratic voters. It’s ironic because the only way the anti-Red wave could possible turn into a Blue Wave would be for the DCCC to embrace ideas like Medicare-For-All, free state colleges, $15 minimum wage, Job Guarantee and other progressive ideas. The DCCC and their bag of Republican-lite candidates would rather run on bullshit talking points and conservative policies like PayGo.

GOP Triage Continues Apace

Trump's a liar and a fraud. If you took a nap for a decade, watch the video above would help you understand what he's all about. Will that hurt the Republicans' chances next month? Maybe... but there are plenty of other things that should do that as well. As we've been reporting, the GOP has continued pulling the plug on their own incumbents, leaving them on the side of the road to die alone-- well, not quite along... there are dozens of Republican non-incumbent candidates to keep them company. Once-prominent recruits like Diane Harkey (CA-49), Janice Arnold-Jones (NM), Jay Webber (NJ), Pearl Kim (PA), Greg McCauley (PA), Marty Nothstein (PA), Lena Epstein (MI), Steve Watkins (KS) and Lea Marquez-Peterson (AZ) have all been written off. The latest incumbent to be told the party's over was Kevin Yoder in Kansas City, whose race is still rated a toss-up but who Paul Ryan judges a waste of resources anyway.

Before Yoder, other Republicans who were told their careers in the House were done included Barbara Comstock (VA), Mike Coffman (CO), Mike Bishop (MI), Rod Blum (IA), Erik Paulsen (MN), Chris Collins (NY), Jason Lewis (MN) and Keith Rothfus (PA). After Yoder, likely next victims include Leonard Lance (NJ), Duncan Hunter (CA), Jeff Denham (CA), Dana Rohrabacher (CA), Dave Young (IA), Carlos Curbelo (FL) Claudia Tenney (NY), Steve Knight (CA), Mimi Walters (CA), Bruce Poliquin (ME), Dave Brat (VA), John Faso (NY) and Andy Barr (KY). It appears that Ryan has also given up on all the open red seats in Pennsylvania.

Meanwhile, yesterday Bloomberg News reported that Democratic House Candidates Are Seeing ‘Unprecedented’ Fundraising. Ben Ray Lujan told them that 60 Democrats raised more than $1 million each, half of whom had raised more than $2 million each and eight more than $2 million. Embarrassingly for Lujan, one of the three Democrats who raised over $3 million was Devin Nunes opponent Andrew Janz, who the DCCC doesn't even support.

More Sad; More Triage

Paul Ryan's corporately-funded SuperPAC, the Congressional Leadership Fund has poured $1.8 million into WI-01 to defeat Randy Bryce with a campaign of vicious personal smears-- please help us respond here at IronStache Fund-- but because they are so obsessed with @IronStache and a handful of other progressives they want to keep out of Congress-- they no longer have the funds to help some of their own most vulnerable incumbents. As we pointed out in recent weeks, they've been practicing the art of triage on walking dead incumbents Keith Rothfus (PA), Chris Collins (NY), Barbara Comstock (VA), Erik Paulsen (MN), Jason Lewis (MN), and Rod Blum (IA), among others.

Late Friday, Alex Isenstadt added two more to the growing list of GOP incumbents Ryan is writing off as goners: Mike Coffman (CO) and Mike Bishop (MI). Bishop was a bit of a surprise, since Trump beat Hillary in his district 50.6% to 43.9% and the PVI is a fairly comfortable R+4. Bishop has been a loyal Trump rubber-stamp and the 538 forecaster still shows a 49.3-47.6% race.

Coffman is a different story, of course. He's in a blue district (PVI D+2) that Trump lost by 9 points. Coffman's only hope is that the Democratic nominee, Jason Crow is so terrible that Coffman could weather the wave. As bad a candidate as Crow is, polling shows him being swept into Congress by the wave anyway. Coffman is forecasted to have just a 1 in 5 shot to win. Maybe he shouldn't have been a devoted Trump ass-kisser.

Istenstadt reported that Ryan's PAC "will cancel its planned TV advertising for both members, a move that comes as the party refocuses its funds on races that leaders feel confident they can win-- and away from those it sees as out of reach. The organization had $1 million in TV advertising reserved for Coffman and $2.1 million for Bishop, dollars that will now be redistributed elsewhere. Party officials say both incumbents are trailing Democratic challengers ahead of the midterm elections, and both are expected to be significantly outspent during the final weeks of their campaigns."

Among the seats that the party feels increasingly pessimistic about are those held by Minnesota Reps. Erik Paulsen and Jason Lewis, Virginia Rep. Barbara Comstock, and Iowa Rep. Rod Blum.

Party officials say additional incumbents will likely need to be cut off in the weeks to come.

The decision to cut off Bishop in particular, however, caught some by surprise. The second-term lawmaker represents an exurban Detroit-area district that was carried by Donald Trump in 2016 and Mitt Romney four years earlier. Bishop, a former leader in the Michigan state legislature, won reelection in 2016 by 17 percentage points. This year, he is running against Democrat Elissa Slotkin, who was a defense official in the Obama administration.

Bishop aides pushed back on the notion their race was lost. On Friday afternoon, following the super PAC’s announcement that it was withdrawing, Bishop’s campaign released a memo claiming that recent polling showed the incumbent with a small lead over his Democratic opponent. The internal poll conducted last week showed Bishop with a slim 2-point edge over Slotkin, 45 percent to 43 percent.

“Our internals show us leading and we feel confident Mike Bishop will be re-elected," said Stu Sandler, a Bishop adviser.

A poll conducted for Slotkin's campaign the same week showed her with a 4-point advantage over Bishop, 47 percent to 43 percent.

Democrats appear especially confident in their prospects of defeating Coffman, a fifth-term political survivor who represents a Denver-area swing district. Earlier this week, the Democratic super PAC House Majority PAC canceled nearly $800,000 in planned TV advertising in the district.

CLF's move is the latest Republican move to pull money out of districts that are starting to look unwinnable. Last week, the National Republican Congressional Committee canceled all of its ad reservations in Rep. Keith Rothfus' (R-Pa.) district, as he faces an uphill battle for reelection against Democratic Rep. Conor Lamb.

The Ryan's PAC and the NRCC have also started going back on promises which were made when luring Republicans into House races. They recently wrote off Diane Harkey (CA-49), Janice Arnold-Jones (NM), Jay Webber (NJ), Pearl Kim (PA), Greg McCauley (PA), Marty Nothstein (PA), Lena Epstein (MI), Steve Watkins (KS) and Lea Marquez-Peterson (AZ) for dead. Trump had promised support, for example, to Danny Tarkanian in a Las Vegas-metro district but the GOP has now jettisoned him and left him to die out in the desert... alone.

Incumbents on the next round triage watch-list include Drunken Hunter (CA), Dana Rohrabacher (CA), Jeff Denham (CA), Carlos Curbelo (FL), Claudia Tenney (NY) and Leonard Lance (NJ).

Sad Headline: Republicans Start To Pull Plug On Members

The DCCC and NRCC both have decisions to make about NY-27

It must be horrible for Paul Ryan and NRCC chair Steve Stivers to have to tell colleagues that their reelection efforts are hopeless and that the GOP can't flush any more money down the drain trying to rescue them. It's horrible. I mean, they all deserve all the worst, but it's horrible. I'm a progressive; I have empathy. Melanie Zanona reported on Republican congressional triage yesterday for The Hill. As we reported Sunday, Keith Rothfus has been told, his seat is going to Democrat Conor Lamb and the GOP isn't wasting any more money on him.

It’s grim news for Rothfus, who has largely been seen as a dead man walking since redistricting left him with a Democratic-leaning district and a difficult opponent in Lamb.

For the GOP, it’s likely a sign of things to come as the party seeks to target its money toward the races most likely to save its majority. Democrats need 23 seats to take back control of the House, and the GOP is defending dozens of seats that are seen as vulnerable.

...Besides Rothfus, the GOP incumbents who are locked in competitive races tilted in Democrats’ favor include Reps. Barbara Comstock (VA), Erik Paulsen (MN), Jason Lewis (MN) and Rod Blum (IA), according to the nonpartisan Cook Political Report.

“Any time you cut bait, especially on a member of Congress, it’s a hard decision-- but one that has to be made,” the former staffer added. “It’s always a stab in the back whenever that happens to a campaign.”

The DCCC is deciding whether to pull out of races where they feel confident and whether they should start funneling resources to districts that could now be in play, like the districts of indicted Reps. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) and Chris Collins  (R-NY).

This week the Buffalo News reported that Steve Stivers announced that Collins shouldn't expect any financial help from the NRCC. Jerry Zremski wrote that Stivers "didn't sound particularly thrilled with Collins' decision last week to reverse himself and run again in New York's 27th congressional district... 'I don't plan to spend a thing in that race.'... Collins faces a spirited but underfunded challenge from Democrat Nathan McMurray, the Grand Island town supervisor. There's also a Reform Party candidate in the race: West Seneca businessman Larry Piegza, who has been pledging allegiance to President Trump and who could siphon votes from Collins."

McMurray: "Wow. The National Republican Party is running away from Chris Collins. Every day I find more and more voters in NY-27 who are doing the same."

Federal prosecutors in New York charged Collins on Aug. 8 with fraud, conspiracy and lying to a federal agent. Prosecutors say Collins, his son Cameron and Cameron's prospective father-in-law engaged in an insider trading scheme to dump stock in an obscure Australian biotech company based on inside information the congressman got from the firm's CEO. Collins has maintained that he is innocent, as have Cameron Collins and the prospective father-in-law, Stephen Zarsky of New Jersey.

Collins dropped out of his race for re-election on Aug. 11, and Republican leaders in the district then hoped to replace him on the ballot with another candidate.

But Collins' lawyers objected, saying they saw no way to remove him from the ballot, prompting the third-term Republican congressman to resume campaigning.

Stivers said the Clarence Republican still has some political strengths despite the indictment.

"I think he has a record to run on," Stivers said. "I think he's good for his district, I think he has a relationship with his voters and he think he'll win that race."

I asked Nate McMurray about Stivers' assertion. He told me that "the record Mr. Collins can run on-- aside from his arrest record-- is voting nearly 50 times to take healthcare away from people who live here. The New York State Alliance Of Retired Persons gave him a zero rating-- ZERO-- for failure to do anything to protect Social Security and Medicare. His record is abysmal." Although the New York State establishment backed Hillary to the hilt in 2016, Bernie crushed her in the NY-27 primary, Nate being part of the majority with most of his neighbors. Anyway, you see that thermometer on the right, right? It's the Blue America Medicare-For-All thermometer. Nate is campaigning on Medicare-For-All-- it's one of his top issues-- and he's eager to sign on as a co-sponsor to the legislation once he gets sworn in in January. Please consider giving his very grassroots campaign a hand with a contribution if you can by clicking on the thermometer.

Pennsylvania Doesn't Look Good For The Party Of Trump (fka- The GOP)

Triage-- another one bites, another one bites, another one bites the dust. The NRCC, looking to toss dead-weight overboard, pulled all their remains broadcast ads for incumbent Keith Rothfus in PA-17. Under the newly drawn boundaries the district has an R+3 PVI and Obama would have lost it both times. Trump beat Hillary in those boundaries 49.4% to 46.8%. But district polling shows virtually no path to victory for incumbent Keith Rothfus, a Trump rubber-stamp and enabler at a time when it isn't viable to be a Trump rubber-stamp and enabler. The last public poll of the district, by Monmouth, game Conor Lamb a 12-point lead over Rothfus. A Republican Hill chief of staff told me, on condition of anonymity, that "if they're already pulling the plug on incumbents in R+3 districts that Trump won by 3 points, we are so fucking doomed... I don't want to think about how many seats we're going to lose in Pennsylvania. By Halloween they'll be pulling the plug on Smucker and Perry too.

"I'm glad he raised that question, because it's just where I wanted to take this tonight. Yesterday, the Allentown Morning Call released a statewide poll of likely voters by Muhlenberg College. Here are the top line results:

• With less than two months remaining before the much anticipated 2018 elections Democratic candidates are in strong positions across an array of races within Pennsylvania.
• Incumbent Governor Tom Wolf has retained a solid leads over State Senator Scott Wagner in his bid to win a second term as the Commonwealth’s chief executive, with the Democrat maintaining a 55%-36% lead over his Republican challenger.
• In the United States Senate race in Pennsylvania Democrat incumbent Bob Casey Jr. maintains a substantial 53%-35% lead over his Republican challenger Congressman Lou Barletta.
• In a generic ballot in the midterm congressional elections in Pennsylvania the state’s voters continue to favor Democrats over Republican candidates with 50% of voters preferring the Democrat in their district compared with 39% supporting a Republican.
• President Trump’s job approval among likely voters in the Commonwealth appears to be a drag on Republicans on the November ballot with a majority (55%) disapproving of his performance as President.

Unexpectedly, Trump didn't do badly in Pennsylvania. If Russia monkeyed with voting machines in precincts in a few targeted counties in a few targeted states last cycle, Pennsylvania was certainly one. He beat Hillary 2,970,733 (48.18%) to 2,926,441 (47.46%). Right now Pennsylvania's congressional delegation has 12 Republicans and 6 Democrats. That's going to change very drastically in January when the new Congress is sworn in. My predictions (if the election were held today):

• PA-01 toss-up Brian Fitzpatrick (R)- Scott Wallace (D)
• PA-02 Brendan Boyle (D)
• PA-03 Dwight Evans (D)
• PA-04 Madeleine Dean (D)
• PA-05 Mary Scanlon (D)
• PA-06 Chrissy Houlahan (D)
• PA-07 Susan Wild (D)
• PA-08 Matt Cartwright (D)
• PA-09 Dan Meuser (R)
• PA-10 toss-up Scott Perry (R)- George Scott (D)
• PA-11 toss-up Lloyd Smucker (R)- Jess King (D)
• PA-12 Tom Marino (R)
• PA-13 John Joyce (R)
• PA-14 Guy Reschenthaler (R)
• PA-15 Glenn Thompson (R)
• PA-16 Mike Kelly (R)
• PA-17 Conor Lamb (D)
• PA-18 Mike Doyle (D)

So right nw it looks like 9 Democrats and 6 Republicans plus 3 toss-ups, one in blue-leaning territory, which I'm tempted to say Democrat Scott Wallace can win and two in red territory that may well split-- Jess King (D) and Scott Perry (R). These are the statewide generic congressional results:

Republican Triage Hits Nevada

Two weeks ago we took a quick peak at how the NRCC had begun the triage process. I completely forgot serial loser Danny Tarkanian. Tarkanaian started running for office in 2004, when he ran for state Senate. He lost. Two years later he ran for Secretary of State. He lost. Then it was U.S. Senate in 2010, He lost. He ran for Congress in 2012 (and again in 2016). He lost both times. He ran for the state Education System in 2014. He lost. This year he decided to challenge Republican incumbent Dean Heller for the GOP Senate nomination. But, when polling showed him losing-- and when Trump told him not to run against Heller-- he pulled out and decided to run for the open congressional seat in NV-03. The last time he ran in the 3rd, this is what happened:

• Jacky Rosen- 146,869 (47.23%)
• Danny Tarkanian- 142,926 (45.96%)

On that same day Trump beat Hillary in that district by a full point.



His opponent in the R+2 district is New Dem and socialite Susie Lee, a really heinous, dreadful candidate, though perhaps not as heinous and dreadful as Tarkanian. As of June 30 she had raised $2,129,227 to his $1,186,612. They both won their June 12 primaries convincingly, Lee with 25,475 votes (66.9%) and Tarkanian with 15,257 votes (44.1%). 38,073 Democrats voted in the primary-- primarily because Trump had endorsed him-- but just 34,572 Republicans showed up. And that brings us to Jon Ralston's report that the NRCC had decided, despite Trump's backing to Tarkanian-- to toss him overboard. Aware they're going to lose their House majority, the NRCC wants to preserve their resources for candidates who can win. In their view, that doesn't include Tarkanian. They're putting their Nevada resources behind Cresent Hardy in his NV-04 race instead. In that re-run of the 2012 election, former Congressman Steve Horsford has raised $682,449 and former Congressman Cresent Hardy has raised $415,967. Unions have already spent $695,078 supporting Horsford and the NRCC is well aware they're going to have to drop millions of dollars into the district and feel they can't spend it in both the 3rd and the 4th.

Ralston found the decision to drop Tarkanian and stick with Hardy odd, "considering the difference in district demographics: In CD-04, where Hardy is trying to reclaim his old seat from the man he defeated four years ago, Steven Horsford, Democrats have a 9 percentage-point lead. In CD-03, where Tarkanian is taking on Democrat Susie Lee, Democrats have only a 2 percentage-point edge."

What this decision means practically is that whatever ad reservations and money already has been laid down in the market by the NRCC will not be split between the two districts but funnelled into the CD-04 race-- and all future investment will be to help Hardy.

Of course, if polling warrants, this decision is not irrevocable. But this withdrawal of support is a devastating blow to Tarkanian, who already is in a huge financial hole to Lee and needs outside help to be competitive monetarily and on the airwaves.

I’m told the NRCC has polling that shows both races close and thus could have made sound arguments for investing solely in either one. But this decision is a clear sign that the NRCC believes in Hardy and also has data that indicates:

1. Tarkanian, who has never won a race, is…Tarkanian; and 2. Horsford has identifiable vulnerabilities, some of which were exploited when Hardy beat him in 2014 in one of the biggest upsets in Nevada annals.

This will become evident in mid-September when the airwave ad glut takes hold here and elsewhere. House GOP strategists are optimistic that control could come down to a handful of seats, and Nevada is one of the few places they can play offense instead of defense (two open Democratic seats) so naturally they want to focus all of their energies and resources on one race so as to not dilute their efforts.

Clearly the NRCC wasn't just looking at the odds. 2 in 7 (27.4%) is pretty piss poor odds to gamble on:

But 1 in 7 (15.2%  is far worse:

In the other big Nevada races, a new Suffolk poll shows Democrat Steve Sisolak with a 2 point lead over Nevada Attorney General Adam Laxalt in the governor's race, and conservative Democrat Jacky Rosen leading incumbent Dean Heller (R) by less than a percentage point in the Senate race. Trump's statewide approval/disapproval rating is 46/50%.