Also says Biden and Harris "refused to say what they would do if they got elected." You have to be very bubbled to think that. B/H had a platform and series of plans that Trump attacked during the campaign! Trump, meanwhile, had no platform.
This has been an ironic theme in pro-Trump media. The viewer didn't hear much about Biden/Harris's agenda bc coverage on these channels focused on Biden dodging or saying no to wedge issues. (Or on "Biden has dementia" and Hunter laptop stuff.)
It's a very weird take on things because the agenda matters! Industries and lobbyists are adjusting to the policy changes they're expecting from a Biden admin. They don't carer that he blew off "court packing" questions or whatever.
According to Pennsylvania record, 250,780 registered Dems requested but didn't return absentee ballots, compared to 167,470 Republicans. Like every election conspiracy theory, this is explainable unless you're dishonest.
John Solomon is wildly dishonest and keeps getting fired for it, which is important context here.
This story's also just sloppy. Matt Braynard is introduced, correctly, as a former Trump official. But the reference to his project gets the name wrong (Voter Integrity FUND - story says "project") and leaves out that he founded it *this month.* whyy.org/articles/forme…
By sitting back and letting lawyers handle it they've gone 28-1 in court (and the one Trump victory, if upheld, wouldn't affect the PA count), watched Rs rip each others' faces off in Georgia, watched an attempt to throw out Detroit's vote backfire on GOP/go viral.
Are they overconfident? Election officials say they aren't - see Benson in MI who sees no impediment to certifying the vote. Maybe on Earth-2 Biden is flying to Detroit to make the Wayne County stuff more infamous. But their instinct is: Don't swing at everything.
The question on the “defund the police” stuff is: Do Democrats continue quickly associating themselves with protest movements? They did so throughout the Trump years, and several times they ended up thinking protesters led them into a ditch. 1/2
They aligned themselves with protests against Trump’s zero tolerance border policies, then blanched when activists came up with “abolish ICE.” Same thing with BLM protests, which were popular — activists came up with “defund the police” and Rs launched it back at them. 2/2
*I should say “they were popular and then...” This player out very IRL in DC, where the mayor painted BLACK LIVES MATTER on 16th street and activists painted “Defund the Police” next to it.
I’m in Forsyth County, which went big for Trump but where Biden ran ahead of most modern Dem nominees. Two Voter Review Panelists at each table, R and D, reading out the presidential vote on each ballot.
There are a few observers behind the caution tape, alternating between watching the count and having a conversation about restaurants in Memphis.
Ossoff speaking at Atlanta car rally while some hecklers yell “Jon loves China!” and get escorted out
“Y’all know that Sen. Perdue lives behind three gates on a private island?”
After some momentum/Perdue-whacking applause lines, the Ossoffgenda: “Affordable housing, affordable health care, dignified work that pays a living wage, equal justice under the law, where every family breathes clean air and drinks clean water.”
This is why the simple case for “Medicare for All” that makes sense to me is — it’s easy to explain! Even if people hate your plan they know you have one.
That said, what makes the Dem infighting about messaging so absurd is that 1) the centrists are really, really bad at coming up with sticky messages, and 2) the left, seeing how bad the centrists are, keeps kicking own goals like the Green New Deal FAQ or "defund police."
The internal Dem arguments about which way to move are fascinating bc, after 2016, the apparent fluke nature of their loss prevented them from their usual response to defeat — apologetically moving right. washingtonpost.com/news/post-poli…
This is why I put my “ACTUALLY” hat on when people say they ran a centrist nominee. Sure, one who had been moved left by activists who dominated the party’s conversation. Biden 2020 ran to the left of Clinton 2016, who ran to the left of Obama 2008, and so on.
Trump won w/o the popular vote in 2016, and there was a widespread idea that Sanders, with his appeal to “blow up the system” voters, would have beaten them. Ironically, it’s after winning the presidency and getting ~51% of popular vote that the Ds will worry about moving left.
Cotton mentions Biden calling Russia our greatest adversary and how Obama dismissed Romney when he said same.
“He said, the 80s called, and they want their foreign policy back. I guess the 80s called and they want their Democratic presidential candidate back.”
Cotton didn’t mention Hunter Biden, but one of the questions to former gov/ambassador to China Branstad is about it. Branstad says he doesn’t know the details, criticizes media outlets for suppressing allegations when they didn’t do that with Trump allegations.
Interesting moment when Branstad - ambassador to China for three years - hands the mic to Cotton to break down the intellectual property theft issue, which he does as a lot of heads nod
I'm at a Nikki Haley "Indian Voices for Trump" event, where @opinionbazaar is introducing some pro-Trump arguments I've not heard outside this setting: Trump "never once interjected himself into the Kashmir issue," and if Trump loses, China is more likely to go to war w India.
Haley's shorthand history of herself and Trump (understandably!) leaves out her 2016 criticism of him. She says she first interacted w him after her 2010 primary win: "He had sent a support check, it came in a big white envelope with gold trim, and it said: You’re a winner."
Interested to see if polls move at all bc of SCOTUS. What people forget is that Trump had a ton of slack with GOP voters in 2018 - he gained in final weeks bc loyal Republicans came home, partly bc of SCOTUS. His problem now: he's fully consolidated that base and it's not enough.
Without third parties (Greens aren't even on MI/PA ballot) and an unpopular opponent, getting every Republican vote in the Midwest still leaves Trump short. Stuff could happen in the fight that moves votes, but there wasn't a pro-Trump majority waiting around for a court fight.
I emphasize this because both liberals and conservatives tend to over-rate how conservative the electorate is; Trump won, ipso facto Republicans win when there's a vacancy. Trump had a very specific problem with reliable GOP voters that he's fixed for this year.
Two minutes into Trump's speech here: "If Biden wins, China wins. If Biden wins, the mob wins. If Biden wins, the rioters, arsonists, and flag burners win. But don't worry about it, because he's not going to win."
Trump drops a "Barack Hussein Obama" reference as he recounts his final Michigan rally in 2016. Also, a few minutes of praise for John James, which both parties are always happy to see.
Trump attacks Biden's pledge to let in more refugees: "He's promised to flood your state with refugees from terrorist hotspots like Syria and Yemen." (There are tons of Yemeni refugees in MI already.)
This has actually happened *twice* in MA since 2018 - weak left-wing candidates didn't back out of the race so the strongest left-wing candidate got clipped by a moderate who got less than 23% of vote.
The problem in MA04 wasn't so much Leckey (the Sanders wing candidate) taking voters from Mermel (the Pressley-backed candidate). It was two eventual Mermel endorsers waiting too late to drop out and a no-chance candidate (Linos) siphoning suburban left votes away.
My take after spending some time in the district was that Linos was decisive. She bit into Mermel's Brookline base and her "lead with the science" message was tailor-made for getting Women's March-y suburban voters, even though she had a weak campaign.
The reference to "eliminating air travel" reflects just how good the right is at *consistent* messaging. The Green New Deal FAQ of February 2019 now lives on the website of the Heartland Foundation, a climate skeptic think tank. heartland.org/publications-r…
It's all based on an ironic line about what the GND *wouldn't* do - net zero emissions, not no emissions whatsoever, bc "in 10 years, because we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast."
This hasn't really damaged Democrats bc "my opponent will ban cows" sounds/is bonkers. But one snarky staffer put that sentence in and it's been used to club Democrats over the head for 17 months.
Can see a wide path for Jake Auchincloss in #MA04, but this isn't a clear story of anybody spoiling anybody: Grossman was going for the same voters as him (from same base), Leckey and Linos going for the same voters as Mermell.
That said it reminds me a bit of those CA races last cycle where a couple candidates would have no strategy for victory but keep running anyway.
This Intercept piece touting Ihssane Leckey - who's heading for fifth place in #MA04 - used an internal Leckey poll to suggest that Mermell was stalled out. A better metric might have been $. Leckey mostly had to self-fund, as she raised a bit over $250k from donors.