About half of the respondents here think Trump will need 48% in the tipping point states to win. Another ~1/4 said 49% or more. Just 27% think he could sneak by with less. Something to keep in mind as we focus on margins over vote share/undecideds.
As a refresher, Trump won each of these with pluralities--third party share in (). Top 3 normal enough. The rest had some extraordinary dynamics lowering the threshold for victory.
NC 49.8 (4)
FL 48.6 (4)
PA 48.2 (4.4)
AZ 48.1 (7.4)
MI 47.3 (5.8)
WI 47.2 (6.3)
UT 45.1 (27.8!!)
Even more stark if you compare to other recent cycles
Worthwhile piece from @amyewalter from way back in June making the case for focusing on share, not margin when assessing Trump's position down the stretch:
"If Trump is sitting at 42-45% in state polls this fall, it's almost impossible for him to get to 50%, especially when we know that undecided voters tend to break against an incumbent."
RCP has him at 45% in the battlegrounds, buoyed by 47% in FL/NC.
Here's an issue that is totally unknown to all but the true sickos, a situation that stands to turn tens of millions of Americans into unwitting felons in the next 90 days. And now it's showing up in OHSEN.
Classic case of a well-intentioned (or at least well-named) law that no one in the federal govt has bothered to inform the citizenry of, despite creating affirmative new requirements on any owner/partner/officer of a small business, for profit or non-profit alike, effective 1/1.
Realizing how insane it would be to let this law go into effect with no possibility of compliance--and w/ CTA itself facing constitutionality questions--the House actually passed a one year filing reprieve more then ten months ago, 420-1 (you read that right.)
First time I have seen this tactic. Pennsylvania Values is a super pac funded almost entirely by the building trades that was most active in 2018 the last time Casey was up, spending $1.1M against Barletta. Spent another $285k in 2020 against Trump.
Most of DC is increasingly inured to a Trump win and it's a GOP House that's unthinkable. Lotta compartmentalization.
People aren't ready to hear this, but if the polls are to be believed, the mode outcome is a GOP trifecta. If they're not, it's a Biden win with a Dem House and GOP Senate. Trump presiding over divided govt is a non-zero--and fascinating!--but relatively unlikely scenario.
Because this seems to be CW at this point, let's be clear--there's nothing easy about pulling together permitting reform language that both parties can support in the immediate term. Spending side is far simpler (and more necessary) to resolve.
Otoh, this is an interesting flag to plant. If the bar is simply not spending more than FY23 that's the best deal Ds were ever going to get regardless. And it's the most open acknowledgement yet that nobody is prepared for a rollback borne entirely by NDD.
Permitting for Rs: NEPA reform, 401, lands, oil & gas leasing
Permitting for Ds: Transmission, federal role in siting, cost allocation
Hard to imagine Ds allowing any of column A w/o any of column B, and both aren't happening at this juncture. At best you get a deal to do a deal
A deal isn't done until it's done, nor passed until it's passed, but this thinking betrays a misunderstanding of the dynamics at play, and a failure to adjust to what happened on and since Jan 7.
I really should write this up, because too few people grok this, but I got into it in my discussion with @MichaelRWarren a few weeks back.