The policy stakes of DA elections are always so obscure. This year, I got to work with @SamMellins & @akashvmehta on putting out a series on how the Manhattan DA race could change the city — what candidates are saying EXACTLY & why it matters.
It's been a great ride. A thread:
1️⃣ Turns out the Manhattan DA's office has a ton of discretion on the power & resources of a citywide office that's fueled the war on drugs, the Special Narcotics Prosecutor.
A great opportunity to look at how local institutions work, & space for change.
On the Special Narcotics Prosecutor's office, the candidates were very split on what should be done: especially when it comes to the power-move the DA's office could pull: withdraw staff it lends.
3️⃣ Activists in NY have been working to decriminalize sex work. And there's a striking amount of consensus in the DA race around supporting that, testifying to broad momentum for this effort.
4️⃣ Reform candidates have been looking at the huge share of people serving life sentences. (See the latest from New Orleans! theappeal.org/politicalrepor…)
It's striking to see candidates for DA say they'd never seek LWOP sentences, for instance, or that they'd never jump in to oppose an parole application (which is different than actually supporting it).
5️⃣ Evverywhere, prosecutors routinely keep using the testimony of police officers who're caught lying, or even framing defendants. There's finally more attention to this—and demands for DA candidates to sideline such officers, & go further in oversight. theappeal.org/politicalrepor…
Here again, plenty of policy divides between the DA candidates -- their powers are so crucial.
One issue that's very important is how DA candidates would go back and address *other cases* when misconduct in one case emerges. theappeal.org/politicalrepor…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Moment of instability today again in France (not that the crisis ever stopped since Macron called snap elections), which may lead the new conservative government to fall. That'd pretty much leave the country in uncharted territory, again.
Quick thread to explain:
1. The (unnecessary) July snap elections resulted in a wildly fragmented Assembly — as you'll know well if you were following me.
The Left coalition got roughly 190 seats. The Macronist parties got roughly 170. The far-right (RN) got roughly 140. Conservatives got roughly 40.
2. In French, coalition that controls the Assembly gets to be Prime Minister — & effectively govern the country with little input from the president (if the PM + president are in different camps).
But no election in current regime had never resulted in such a fragmented chamber.
Pam Bondi was Florida's attorney general during Trump's first campaign & some of his first first term—and that generated plenty of stories on her legal decisions.
Here's just a slice of what you should know, featuring great reporting from the mid-2010s:
1—As Florida AG, Bondi nixed suing Trump over Trump U after she solicited a contribution from him & he gave $25,000: floridapolitics.com/archives/21237…
2—Bondi's office justified nixing Trump U suit by saying she'd only receiving only one customer complaint, but the AP found this: jacksonville.com/story/news/201…
Abortion is big in the presidential race, of course, & there are many referendums on it.
But there's more: there are many races that are too overlooked where abortion rights is a key issue, for downballot offices that really matter to abortion policy.
My thread of the top 5: ⬇️
1️⃣ I have to start with Arizona's judicial elections.
Two things simultaneously: 1. Two of the 4 justices who voted to revive a near-total abortion ban this spring are up for retention. 2. GOP has advanced a measure to nullify these judicial elections. boltsmag.org/proposition-13…
2️⃣ DeSantis removed Tampa's elected prosecutor from office, citing in part the prosecutor's decision to sign a letter saying he wouldn't prosecute abortion. cases. (DeSantis has signed strict restrictions.)
Harris is up 47% to 44%.
(Not a typo. Last DMR poll had Trump up 47/43 in September.)
In 2016 & 2020, Selzer’s final poll looked like an outlier in opposite direction; days after, we learned it was actually not off, & had foreshadowed polling error in Rust Belt.
This, again, is just one poll; we’ll see soon enough whether it captured something no one else did.
Other details in poll:
—Poll was this Monday through Thursday.
—Margin is within MoE of 3.4%, of course (though this is a looooot more off from expectations).
—Harris up 28% among independent women, though Trump up among men.
—RFK at 3%
Here's what I'd say about why people care about the Selzer poll, besides the mythologizing. In final days of both 2016 & 2020, as polling had Dems in strong shape (well, esp. in 2020), it was the rare sign that something could be amiss in other polling. (1/3)
Extent to which Rust Belt white voters swung to Trump was just not understood before we saw results in 2016, tho Selzer gave a preview. (She also was first to capture IA changed in 2014.) There was this idea in 2020 that had swung back; her poll was clearest cold shower.
But of course: IT'S JUST ONE POLL! It's subject to the same margin of error, can be off in any direction, and in the moment it wasn't clear what they meant.
Same today: IT'S JUST ONE POLL.
But that gets to other thing about Selzer poll: it's clearly uninterested in herding.