SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

[The Romulan Republic]

Well, we appear to be in the final stages. Word is Biden's team expects to wrap up vetting around the 24th. Following that, Biden will do one on one interviews with each person on the shortlist, and make a final pick around early August.

[The Romulan Republic]

A fairly optimistic take from Robert Reich, but what the hell, we can all do with some optimism now and then:

https://theguardian.com/commentisfree/2 ... s-pandemic

Donald Trump is on the verge of accomplishing what no American president has ever achieved – a truly multi-racial, multi-class, bipartisan political coalition so encompassing it could realign US politics for years to come.

Unfortunately for Trump, that coalition has come into existence to prevent him from having another term in office.

Start with race. Rather than fuel his base, Trump’s hostility toward people protesting the police killing of George Floyd and systemic racism has pulled millions of white Americans closer to black Americans. More than half of whites now say they agree with the ideas expressed by the Black Lives Matter movement, and more white people support than oppose protests against police brutality. To a remarkable degree, the protests themselves have been biracial.

As John Lewis, the great civil rights hero who died on Friday, said last month near where Trump and William Barr, the attorney general, had set federal police in riot gear and wielding tear gas on peaceful protesters, “Mr President, the American people … have a right to protest. You cannot stop the people with all of the forces that you may have at your command.”

Even many former Trump voters are appalled by Trump’s racism, as well as his overall moral squalor. According to a recent New York Times/Sienna College poll, more than 80% of people who voted for Trump in 2016 but won’t back him again in 2020 think he “doesn’t behave the way a president ought to act” – a view shared by 75% of registered voters across battleground states which will make all the difference in November.

A second big unifier has been Trump’s attacks on our system of government. Americans don’t particularly like or trust government but almost all feel some loyalty toward the constitution and the principle that no person is above the law.

Trump’s politicization of the justice department, attacks on the rule of law, requests to other nations to help dig up dirt on his political opponents, and evident love of dictators – especially Vladimir Putin – have played badly even among diehard conservatives.

Refugees from the pre-Trump GOP along with “Never Trumper” Republicans who rejected him from the start are teaming up with groups such as Republican Voters Against Trump, Republicans for the Rule of Law, the Lincoln Project and 43 Alumni for Biden, which comprises former officials of George W Bush’s (the 43rd president) administration. The Lincoln Project has produced dozens of hard-hitting anti-Trump ads, many running on Fox News.

The third big unifier has been Trump’s catastrophic mishandling of the pandemic. Many who might have forgiven his personality defects and authoritarian impulses can’t abide his bungling of a public health crisis that threatens their lives and loved ones.

In a poll released last week, 62% said Trump was “hurting rather than helping” efforts to combat Covid-19. Fully 78% of those who supported him in 2016 but won’t vote for him again disapprove of his handling of the pandemic. Voters in swing states like Texas, Florida and Arizona – now feeling the brunt of the virus – are telling pollsters they won’t vote for Trump.

Although the reasons for joining the anti-Trump coalition have little to do with Joe Biden, Trump’s presumed challenger, the Democrat may still become a transformational president. That’s less because of his inherent skills than because Trump has readied America for transformation.

The tempting analogy is to the election of 1932, in the midst of another set of crises. The public barely knew Franklin D Roosevelt, whom critics called an aristocrat without a coherent theory of how to end the Great Depression. But after four years of Herbert Hoover, America was so desperate for coherent leadership it was eager to support FDR and follow wherever he led.

There are still more than 100 days until election day, and many things could derail the emerging anti-Trump coalition: impediments to voting during the pandemic, foreign hacking into election machines, Republican efforts to suppress votes, quirks of the electoral college, Trumpian dirty tricks and his likely challenge to any electoral loss.

Yet even now, the breadth of the anti-Trump coalition is a remarkable testament to Donald Trump’s capacity to inspire disgust.

Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley and the author of Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few and The Common Good. His new book, The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, is out now. He is a columnist for Guardian US

Donald Trump, the Great Uniter.

[The Romulan Republic]

Unconfirmed report that Biden has narrowed the VP list to five candidates: Senator Kamala Harris, Senator Tammy Duckworth, Representative Karen Bass, Governor Gretchen Whitmer, and Ambassador Susan Rice.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1285227568447148033

If this is true, I'm disappointed that Warren didn't make the cut, though still holding out hope that she'll get a cabinet post. I'm also baffled by the inclusion of Whitmer, a highly polarizing white Centrist. Personally, of this list I'm rooting for Karen Bass, although my gut tells me she's the least likely to get it.

[The Romulan Republic]

Other reports are now saying Joe's list include four black women so...

[The Romulan Republic]

Well, fuck. Polling has narrowed according to fivethirtyeight, Biden is just below fifty percent again (though still almost eight points ahead of Trump), and Michigan/Wisconsin/Pennsylvania have all narrowed, to 6.6 (which is about a three point drop in the last couple days I believe), 5.8, and 5.8 respectively.

Turns out a good chunk of the "undecideds" likes Secret Police, I guess.

Or maybe not. Trump's approval/disapproval rating is basically unchanged so far, though it hasn't been updated quite as recently. So it could be less that Trump is getting more popular, than that Biden is getting less popular. Has Joe done anything I've missed to piss a bunch of people off in the last few days?

[The Romulan Republic]

Democrats are also probably going to get some backlash over the vote on Bernie's bill to reduce military funding by 10%. A majority of Senate Democrats sided with Republicans to vote it down, and while its difficult to judge the motives of any individual member for their vote, there was an interesting split among Biden's prospective VP picks, with Harris and Duckworth voting against the bill, and Warren voting for it.

So yeah, picking Duckworth or Harris would definitely alienate a lot of Bernie people now.

I'm still rooting for Warren or Bass.

[The Romulan Republic]

Biden starting to inch up a little again. An absolutely brutal new Quinnipiac poll came in today, showing Biden up 51-38 (plus 13) in Florida. Definitely an outlier, but still, bad news for Trump.

[The Romulan Republic]

Good summary of Joe's plans for his first term:

https://apnews.com/2b31c3acef65d01cc90dd7aafe2c5867

WASHINGTON (AP) — Joe Biden wants to address health care disparities, toughen gun control, overhaul policing, provide free community college, erase student loan debt, invest in green energy and improve the nation’s infrastructure.

But that’s just the start. The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee has also proposed measures to help Americans buy their first homes, raise the federal minimum wage and boost taxes on the wealthy and corporations. That’s to say nothing of his massive plans tied to the coronavirus.

The reams of proposals reflect Biden’s belief that the nation faces immense challenges that require a far-reaching government response not seen since the New Deal. It marks a contrast with President Donald Trump, who has struggled to articulate his second-term plans and has sometimes said the coronavirus will simply go away. But such ambition may inevitably lead to disappointment.

ADVERTISEMENT
At a time of unprecedented gridlock, even some fellow Democrats warn Biden’s lengthy to-do list faces long odds in Congress.

“I think there is considerable bipartisan support for many of the principles,” said Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon. “The higher priority for the Republicans, should they be in the minority, is to prevent Biden from being an effective president.”

Democrats already control the House, but much of Biden’s agenda could come down to the Senate. If Democrats win the White House, they would need to pick up three seats in the Senate to retake the majority. Biden has predicted the party could end up with as many as 53 seats.

That’s still short of the 60 votes required to past most bills in the Senate. Merkley is a leading voice calling for the removal of that threshold, known as the filibuster, and instead pass legislation with a 51-vote majority.

As a 36-year veteran of the Senate, Biden has been reluctant to end its traditions. But he’s hinted his position may shift.

“You have to just take a look at it,” he told journalists this month, adding that his decision would depend on how “obstreperous” Republicans become.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has pointed to the prospect of a Democratic-run chamber to warn donors that it’s vital for the party maintain its majority.

Don Stewart, a former top aide to McConnell, said the GOP can still slow major legislation even if they’re in the minority. He pointed to President Barack Obama’s struggles during his first term as an example of the playbook Republicans will use.

Obama came into office with a significant House and Senate majority, and Democrats still underwent months of legislative wrangling — sometimes among themselves — to hammer out a health care bill that would clear the Senate.

“It’s so hard to get an agreement on something that big and broad, because of all the little things in it and all the little ways that minority can attack every little piece,” Stewart said. “Between Obamacare and the stimulus, by July of Obama’s first year, he went from walking on water to completely upside-down.”

Beyond the health care overhaul and the economic stimulus, Obama won passage of a new financial regulatory regime early in his administration. But other top first-term priorities, such as cap-and trade legislation and immigration reform, languished.

Biden’s aides say overlapping crises — the pandemic, the economic downturn and the demand for criminal justice reform — lend an urgency to reform that didn’t exist when Obama was in office.

“The acuteness of the elements of this crisis just creates a different set of political winds, and we think those winds blow in the direction of fast, decisive action,” said Biden senior campaign adviser Jake Sullivan.

Still, Biden may face a simple time pressure. New presidents typically have just 12 to 18 months to pass legislation before political considerations of the midterm elections take over. After that, attention quickly turns to the president’s own reelection.

That dynamic will be especially intense for the 77-year-old Biden, who has faced questions about whether he would seek a second term because of his age.

More fundamentally, Biden would face resistance from most Republicans — and some Democrats — because of the steep cost of his proposals.

This month alone, Biden has rolled out plans that include a $700 billion investment in research and development in U.S. tech firms and purchasing American goods, $2 trillion on a green energy jobs and infrastructure plan and $775 billion in spending on care for children, older people and those with disabilities.

While Biden and other Democrats frequently point out that Republican tax cuts have blown a hole in the nation’s deficit, and typically noisy Republican deficit hawks are notably silent with Trump in the White House, that won’t likely be the case if Democrats take back control of Washington.

Biden’s aides believe his decades of experience on Capitol Hill and reputation as a deal maker will help him broker compromises and build coalitions. But Biden will face the same challenge within his own caucus that complicated and sometimes sunk many of Obama’s legislative pursuits: competing pressure from progressives and moderates.

Progressives like Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have been outspoken in pressuring Biden on key issues such as climate change and education.

But moderates, like West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, could hold the real key to passing legislation. The red-state Democrat has routinely been a key swing vote in major legislative negotiations and said he expects to be in a “great position for common sense” in the next Congress.

“I’ve never been a blank check for anyone,” he said in an interview. “I’ve always said if I can’t go home and explain it, I’m not going to vote for it.”

Manchin is already hitting the brakes on two of Biden’s major campaign promises — his support for a federally funded health care option and Biden’s proposal to eliminate carbon pollution from the energy sector by 2035.

But Manchin did give Biden some credit.

“The one thing I know about Joe Biden, he’s always been willing to sit down and negotiate,” Manchin said. “That type of a person I know I can work with, which is all I can ask for in today’s toxic environment.”

Okay, first of all, fuck Manchin. If there's one Democrat I wouldn't be sorry to see lose their seat its him. If any of you need motivation to turn out and vote, consider the very real possibility of a 50-50 Senate where Manchin holds an effective veto over all legislation and appointments.

And of course the Republicans are already planning to mindlessly obstruct Biden. Because fuck government, fuck the people, every bit of power they can spitefully cling to is all that matters. I am glad to hear that Biden is somewhat flexible on the question of the filibuster. If we do take the Senate, that could be a very effective tactic- hold the threat of abolishing the filibuster over the Republicans if they get too obstructive. Of course, that works best if he and Senate leadership are actually willing to follow through on the threat, which remains to be seen.

[The Romulan Republic]

The Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute asks the Trump campaign to stop fundraising by using Reagan's name and likeness:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... ns-legacy/

The Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute, which runs the 40th president’s library near Los Angeles, has demanded that President Trump and the Republican National Committee (RNC) quit raising campaign money by using Ronald Reagan’s name and likeness.

“It was simply handled with a phone call mid-last week to the RNC, and they agreed to stop,” Reagan Foundation chief marketing officer Melissa Giller said in an email Saturday.

What came to the foundation’s attention — and compelled officials there to complain — was a fundraising email that went out July 19 with “Donald J. Trump” identified as the sender and a subject line that read: “Ronald Reagan and Yours Truly.”

The solicitation offered, for a donation of $45 or more, a “limited edition” commemorative set featuring two gold-colored coins, one each with an image of Reagan and Trump. The coins were mounted with a 1987 photograph of Reagan and Trump shaking hands in a White House receiving line — the type of fleeting contact that presidents have with thousands of people a year.

“Friend,” the fundraising email purportedly from Trump said, “I just saw our new Trump-Reagan Commemorative Coin Sets and WOW, these coins are beautiful - I took one look and immediately knew that I wanted YOU to have a set. These aren’t any ordinary coins. They symbolize an important time in our Nation. This year, in addition to being re-elected as YOUR President, it also marks the 40th anniversary of our Nation’s 40th President, Ronald Reagan. Unfortunately, we already sold out of the first batch we had in stock. But I liked these coins so much that I asked my team to rush order another batch for my TOP SUPPORTERS ONLY.”

It cautioned: “I’ve authorized a very limited production of these iconic coins, which is why I’m ONLY offering them to our top supporters, like YOU. This offer is NOT available to the general public, so please, do NOT share this email with anyone.”

Proceeds from the coin sales went to the Trump Make America Great Again Committee, a joint fundraising operation that benefits both the Trump campaign and the RNC.

The joint committee website, where the coins were for sale, noted: “The President only authorized the production of 5,000 sets of these iconic coins, which is why we’re ONLY offering them to our TOP supporters.”

In the 1990s, both Reagan and his wife Nancy signed legal documents that granted the foundation sole rights to their names, likenesses and images. Of course, there are countless photos and videos of Reagan that are in the public domain. But the foundation claims power to block them from being used for commercial purposes and political endorsements. When Reagan Foundation officials were made aware of the Trump email solicitation, they decided “within seconds” to put a stop to it, said Giller.

Athough the RNC accepted the foundation’s demand regarding the fundraising emails, “we still have a lot of additional work,” Giller said. The foundation is looking into how many people might have seen the email and how many of the coin sets were sold, and may still decide to get lawyers involved, she added.

Frederick J. Ryan Jr., who chairs the Reagan Foundation board, is also publisher and CEO of The Washington Post. He declined to offer a comment for this column.

This isn’t the first time the 45th president has traded on the name or likeness of the 40th, who is revered among conservatives, for his own purposes. In July 2019, he shared as “Cute!” a fake quote by Reagan that was making its way around social media. According to the apocryphal story, Reagan upon meeting Trump supposedly said: “For the life of me, and I’ll never know how to explain it, when I met that young man, I felt like I was the one shaking hands with the president.”

Trump continued to spread the made-up quote, even though Joanne Drake, the chief administrative officer of the Reagan Foundation, had already told the fact-checking website PolitiFact that Reagan “did not ever say that about Donald Trump.”

Relations between the Trump family and the Reagan Foundation have generally been cordial. Last November, Donald Trump Jr. appeared for a lecture and book-signing at the Reagan Library, for which the foundation charged admission. The event sold out.

“President Reagan was a proud Republican and supporter of a party that has carried on his fight for conservative principles of economic opportunity and limited government. His likeness is used by thousands of Republicans each year who gather around the country for ‘Reagan Dinners,’ and his library regularly hosts debates for our presidential candidates," RNC communications director Michael Ahrens said in an emailed statement. "Given that the Reagan Foundation just recently hosted the Trump family to raise money for its organization and has not objected to us using President Reagan’s likeness before, their objection came as a surprise. Even though we believe our use of the image was appropriate, we will stop emailing this fundraising solicitation as a courtesy.”

As of Saturday afternoon, it appeared that the coin sets were still available on the joint fundraising committee website.

Nancy Reagan, who died in 2016, was leery of those who invoked her husband’s name, even in efforts to pay tribute to him. In 2003, for instance, she publicly opposed a push by conservative House Republicans to replace Franklin D. Roosevelt’s profile on the dime with an image of Reagan, who by then was nearing the end of his battle with Alzheimer’s disease.

“While I can understand the intentions of those seeking to place my husband’s face on the dime, I do not support this proposal and I am certain Ronnie would not,” the former first lady said. “When our country chooses to honor a great president such as Franklin Roosevelt by placing his likeness on our currency, it would be wrong to remove him and replace him with another.”

Nancy Reagan understood that a president’s place in history is precious, unique and vulnerable to the opportunism of those who claim to follow in his footsteps. It is not hard to imagine what she would have thought of the “iconic” coins that Trump has been hawking.

Considering what a massive piece of shit Reagan was, this is kind of like the Devil saying "I'm concerned that associating with you will damage my reputation".

[The Romulan Republic]

Trump is suing news stations for airing campaign adds against him. There's no way under the law that he wins these cases, but the prospect of massive legal fees may intimidate smaller stations into not airing them:

https://propublica.org/article/2020-tru ... -wisconsin

Stay up to date with email updates about WNYC and ProPublica’s investigations into the president’s business practices.

This story is co-published with WNYC.

This year, President Donald Trump’s reelection campaign filed defamation lawsuits against three of the country’s most prominent news outlets: The New York Times, The Washington Post and CNN. Then it filed another suit against a somewhat lower-profile news organization: northern Wisconsin’s WJFW-TV, which serves the 134th-largest market in the country.

The Trump campaign sued the station over what it claims is a false and defamatory ad WJFW aired that showed Trump downplaying the threat of the coronavirus as a line tracking new COVID-19 infections ticks up and up on the screen.

Dozens of stations ran the ad. But the Trump campaign chose to sue just NBC-affiliate WJFW, which is owned by a relatively small company that only has two other local TV stations, both in Bangor, Maine. The campaign did not initially sue the political organization that produced the ad. That group later joined the case as a defendant.

The curious lawsuit is part of a larger, aggressive and exceedingly expensive legal operation by the Trump campaign that’s the focus of our latest “Trump, Inc.” podcast.

Listen to the Episode

The campaign has spent over $16 million on litigation and other legal costs — more than any past presidential campaign and more than 10 times what presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden has spent on legal services, according to disclosures.

Trump has long boasted about his penchant for filing lawsuits. The president and his businesses have reportedly filed over 2,000 lawsuits. After losing a 2006 defamation lawsuit against the journalist Tim O’Brien, Trump told the Post that he knew he couldn’t win, but he sued anyway. “I spent a couple of bucks on legal fees, and they spent a whole lot more,” Trump said. “I did it to make his life miserable, which I’m happy about.”

As with other areas, Trump has taken his approach to running his personal life and business to the presidency.

Multiple media law experts told us that the suit against tiny WJFW has little chance of succeeding. Susan Seager, a media defense lawyer and adjunct professor at The University of California, Irvine, School of Law, said, “The courts are very deferential and very protective of opinions about public figures and political issues.”

So if Trump isn’t likely to win, what might he be trying to do? Matthew Sanderson, who served as counsel for Sens. John McCain and Mitt Romney, said he thinks the Trump campaign is “engaging in scare tactics.”

“The reason in my opinion that the Trump campaign is filing these types of lawsuits is not necessarily to punish the Wisconsin station — they’re not going to be successful,” Sanderson said. “The reason they’re doing this is to send a message to the rest of the stations to be careful” about running anti-Trump ads.

Unlike many other states, Wisconsin doesn’t have a law that makes complainants pay for defendants’ legal costs if a defamation suit ends up being dismissed as frivolous.

Get Our Top Investigations
Subscribe to the Big Story newsletter.

Enter your email
Email address This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Seager estimates that fighting a defamation lawsuit brought by a high-profile group like the Trump campaign could cost anywhere from $100,000 to $250,000, just to go through the process of getting it dismissed.

We asked the Trump campaign and its lawyers about the suit and why they chose WJFW. They did not respond.

The TV station commented, through a lawyer, that “WJFW has no choice but to fight the Trump campaign’s attempt to bully a small-market broadcaster into surrendering its First Amendment rights. The public counts on local broadcasters, especially in an election year, to remain free to air criticisms of public officials.”

Of course, one critical difference between lawsuits Trump used to file in his business dealings and the ones his campaign is filing is that Trump no longer has to use his own money. His donors are picking up the tab.

Trump’s disclosures show his campaign has paid about $200,000 to the firm handling the Wisconsin case.

The campaign has also paid $3.3 million to the firm of attorney Charles Harder, who specializes in high-profile reputation defense lawsuits. Harder is representing the Trump campaign in the three other defamation suits against media organizations. Harder is perhaps best known as the lawyer who successfully sued Gawker into bankruptcy on Hulk Hogan’s behalf while being surreptitiously funded by venture capitalist Peter Thiel.

Another set of expenses in the disclosures is also interesting. It shows the Trump campaign spent $95,161 on “legal & IT consulting” paid to … “The Trump Corporation.” Neither the campaign nor Trump’s company responded to questions about those charges.

Contact Us

And I think now is a good time to re-post John Oliver's episode on SLAPP Suits (of which he was also a victim, courtesy of coal CEO and Trump buddy Bob Murray):

https://youtube.com/watch?v=UN8bJb8biZU

[The Romulan Republic]

Quick update, even if I'm a couple days behind the times here, but Trump finally bowed to reality and cancelled the RNC convention in Florida.

[The Romulan Republic]

New polls in, Joe's polling average is back up to 50%, Trump's has started to dip again. His approval rating is hovering right above 40%- every day I hope that this'll be the one where it dips under 40: https://fivethirtyeight.com

I'm particularly pleased to see Joe's numbers creeping back up in Arizona. I'll be very disappointed if we don't flip at least one traditionally red state this election, and Arizona is probably our best shot at it.

Also damn, Texas is razor-close right now. As in, the polling average has Trump and Biden tied at 46.2% Which means nationally, Republicans are pretty fucked.

Even more striking in a way, though, is Utah- the single most Republican state in 2012 (though that might have just been the Romney effect), went to Donald by nearly 20 points... and is now single digits. Oh, he'll almost certainly win it (though one poll from May did have it at only Trump plus-3), but the words "Trump leads by single digits in Utah" should fill every Republican heart with fear. It shows that even in safe Red states, his support has seriously eroded.

Bigger picture- little ups and downs aside, Biden's strong lead has been pretty consistent for weeks now. It hasn't grown much in the last few weeks, but it hasn't dropped much, either, and when it did briefly dip down, it came back up again before too long. With covid and protests ongoing, and the economy likely to get worse, I'm struggling to see what could happen that could cause a Trump surge or Biden drop big enough to make it really close. If anyone gets a boost this month it'll likely be Biden, with the VP announcement- nobody seems likely to get a big convention boost since they've both pretty much cancelled the live conventions now.

So unless Trump can cheat by a good 6-7+ points in several states... he's probably fucked.

Of course, there's the possibility that he could cheat by that much, and there's also the possibility that covid will severely skew the results. Turnout is also key to ensure flipping the Senate.

[The Romulan Republic]

Some more polling nuggets: They only list two from Alaska this year, but they're Trump +3 and Trump +1 respectively. Missouri's pretty close, and one June poll even had Biden up +2. What little polling they have for Nebraska shows every chance of the Dems taking one of Nebraska's electors too (which IIRC we haven't since Obama's 2008 win), with NE-2 polling at Biden +11 in May and Biden +7 in July. The sole pole for Arkansas, from June, has Trump up +2.

There are still some solidly red states, mostly in the South and plains, but they are seemingly dwindling in number.

[The Romulan Republic]

Biden to announce VP in the first week of August:

https://reuters.com/article/us-usa-elec ... SKCN24T2R8

[The Romulan Republic]

Well, it looks like Harris's odds have gone from "favorite" to "near-certainty":

https://cnn.com/2020/07/28/politics/bid ... index.html

(CNN)Presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden on Tuesday was photographed holding handwritten notes with Sen. Kamala Harris' name at the top along with a set of talking points about her, fueling fresh speculation about the California Democrat's standing as a vice presidential running mate.

The notes, which were photographed at a speech in Wilmington, Delaware, feature Harris' name followed by five talking points: "Do not hold grudges," "Campaigned with me & Jill," "Talented," "Great help to campaign" and "Great respect for her."

The Biden campaign declined to comment to CNN on Tuesday night.

The prominence of Harris on Biden's notes follows a Politico story in which former Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut, a member of Biden's team vetting potential vice presidential picks, is reported as being critical of her.

His criticism stems from Harris' attack on the former vice president in a June 2019 Democratic primary debate. She criticized Biden for having touted his "civil" working relationship with segregationist senators, and launched a scathing and personal attack on his opposition to federally mandated school desegregation busing.

"Vice President Biden, I do not believe you are a racist, and I agree with you, when you commit yourself to the importance of finding common ground," Harris had said on the debate stage. "But I also believe -- and it's personal -- it was actually hurtful to hear you talk about the reputations of two United States senators who built their reputations and career on the segregation of race in this country."

"It was not only that ... ," she continued. "There was a little girl in California who was part of the second class to integrate her public schools and she was bused to school every day. That little girl was me."

Her attack stunned Biden, who noted that she'd had a good relationship with his son, former Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden, before he'd died. And it rocked the Democratic race, sending Harris into the primary's top tier of contenders and damaging Biden. Harris could not sustain that momentum, and she dropped out before the Iowa caucuses.

But with Harris now widely seen as a top contender for the vice presidential nomination, one key question is whether the wounds from that attack have healed.

Dodd, according to Politico's account, reportedly told a longtime Biden supporter that when he asked Harris about that debate-stage attack, "She laughed and said, 'That's politics.' She had no remorse."

Biden said after his speech in Wilmington on Tuesday that he will choose his vice presidential running mate next week.
Asked by CNN whether he will meet in person with finalists for the role, Biden said, "We'll see."

If this is the case, I'm in much the same position as with Biden himself- disappointed, but keenly aware that their were much worse options. Klobuchar (before she pulled out) or Whitmer would be much worse.

Still, while she's undoubtably qualified, has "star power" and can probably walk all over Pence in the VP debate, picking Harris feels like it would be a missed opportunity to shore up bridges with the progressives. Bass would be a stronger choice on that score- a woman of color who is palatable to Centrists, but also appeals to progressives.

[MKSheppard]

looks like Joe's doubling down

https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/

THE BIDEN PLAN TO END OUR GUN VIOLENCE EPIDEMIC

Joe Biden knows that gun violence is a public health epidemic. Almost 40,000 people die as a result of firearm injuries every year in the United States, and many more are wounded. Some of these deaths and injuries are the result of mass shootings that make national headlines. Others are the result of daily acts of gun violence or suicides that may not make national headlines, but are just as devastating to the families and communities left behind.

Joe Biden has taken on the National Rifle Association (NRA) on the national stage and won – twice. In 1993, he shepherded through Congress the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, which established the background check system that has since kept more than 3 million firearms out of dangerous hands. In 1994, Biden – along with Senator Dianne Feinstein – secured the passage of 10-year bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. As president, Joe Biden will defeat the NRA again.

Joe Biden also knows how to make progress on reducing gun violence using executive action. After the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, President Obama tasked Vice President Biden with developing both legislative proposals and executive actions to make our communities safer. As a result of this effort, the Obama-Biden Administration took more than two dozen actions, including narrowing the so-called “gun show loophole,” increasing the number of records in the background check system, and expanding funding for mental health services.

It’s within our grasp to end our gun violence epidemic and respect the Second Amendment, which is limited. As president, Biden will pursue constitutional, common-sense gun safety policies. Biden will:

Hold gun manufacturers accountable. In 2005, then-Senator Biden voted against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, but gun manufacturers successfully lobbied Congress to secure its passage. This law protects these manufacturers from being held civilly liable for their products – a protection granted to no other industry. Biden will prioritize repealing this protection.

Get weapons of war off our streets. The bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines that Biden, along with Senator Feinstein, secured in 1994 reduced the lethality of mass shootings. But, in order to secure the passage of the bans, they had to agree to a 10-year sunset provision and when the time came, the Bush Administration failed to extend them. As president, Biden will:

Ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Federal law prevents hunters from hunting migratory game birds with more than three shells in their shotgun. That means our federal law does more to protect ducks than children. It’s wrong. Joe Biden will enact legislation to once again ban assault weapons. This time, the bans will be designed based on lessons learned from the 1994 bans. For example, the ban on assault weapons will be designed to prevent manufacturers from circumventing the law by making minor changes that don’t limit the weapon’s lethality. While working to pass this legislation, Biden will also use his executive authority to ban the importation of assault weapons.

Regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act. Currently, the National Firearms Act requires individuals possessing machine-guns, silencers, and short-barreled rifles to undergo a background check and register those weapons with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Due to these requirements, such weapons are rarely used in crimes. As president, Biden will pursue legislation to regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act.

Buy back the assault weapons and high-capacity magazines already in our communities. Biden will also institute a program to buy back weapons of war currently on our streets. This will give individuals who now possess assault weapons or high-capacity magazines two options: sell the weapons to the government, or register them under the National Firearms Act.

Reduce stockpiling of weapons. In order to reduce the stockpiling of firearms, Biden supports legislation restricting the number of firearms an individual may purchase per month to one.

Keep guns out of dangerous hands. The federal background check system (the National Instant Criminal Background Check System) is one of the best tools we have to prevent gun violence, but it’s only effective when it’s used. Biden will enact universal background check legislation and close other loopholes that allow people who should be prohibited from purchasing firearms from making those purchases. Specifically, he will:

Require background checks for all gun sales. Today, an estimated 1 in 5 firearms are sold or transferred without a background check. Biden will enact universal background check legislation, requiring a background check for all gun sales with very limited exceptions, such as gifts between close family members. This will close the so-called “gun show and online sales loophole” that the Obama-Biden Administration narrowed, but which cannot be fully closed by executive action alone.

Close other loopholes in the federal background check system. In addition to closing the “boyfriend loophole” highlighted below, Biden will:

Reinstate the Obama-Biden policy to keep guns out of the hands of certain people unable to manage their affairs for mental reasons, which President Trump reversed. In 2016, the Obama-Biden Administration finalized a rule to make sure the Social Security Administration (SSA) sends to the background check system records that it holds of individuals who are prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms because they have been adjudicated by the SSA as unable to manage their affairs for mental reasons. But one of the first actions Donald Trump took as president was to reverse this rule. President Biden will enact legislation to codify this policy.

Close the “hate crime loophole.” Biden will enact legislation prohibiting an individual “who has been convicted of a misdemeanor hate crime, or received an enhanced sentence for a misdemeanor because of hate or bias in its commission” from purchasing or possessing a firearm.

Close the “Charleston loophole.” The Charleston loophole allows people to complete a firearms purchase if their background check is not completed within three business days. Biden supports the proposal in the Enhanced Background Checks Act of 2019, which extends the timeline from three to 10 business days. Biden will also direct the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to put on his desk within his first 100 days as president a report detailing the cases in which background checks are not completed within 10 business days and steps the federal government can take to reduce or eliminate this occurrence.

Close the “fugitive from justice” loophole created by the Trump Administration. Because of actions by the Trump Administration, records of almost 500,000 fugitives from justice who are prohibited from purchasing firearms were deleted from the background check system. The Biden Administration will restore these records, and enact legislation to make clear that people facing arrest warrants are prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms.

End the online sale of firearms and ammunitions. Biden will enact legislation to prohibit all online sales of firearms, ammunition, kits, and gun parts.

Create an effective program to ensure individuals who become prohibited from possessing firearms relinquish their weapons. Federal law defines categories of individuals who are prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms, and the federal background check system is an effective tool for ensuring prohibited persons cannot purchase firearms. But we lack any serious tool to ensure that when someone becomes newly prohibited – for example, because they commit a violent crime – they relinquish possession of their firearms. There are some promising models for how this could be enforced. For example, California has a mandatory process for ensuring relinquishment by any individual newly subject to a domestic violence restraining order. As president, Biden will direct the FBI and ATF to outline a model relinquishment process, enact any necessary legislation to ensure relinquishment when individuals newly fall under one of the federal prohibitions, and then provide technical and financial assistance to state and local governments to establish effective relinquishment processes on their own.

Incentivize state “extreme risk” laws. Extreme risk laws, also called “red flag” laws, enable family members or law enforcement officials to temporarily remove an individual’s access to firearms when that individual is in crisis and poses a danger to themselves or others. Biden will incentivize the adoption of these laws by giving states funds to implement them. And, he’ll direct the U.S. Department of Justice to issue best practices and offer technical assistance to states interested in enacting an extreme risk law.

Give states incentives to set up gun licensing programs. Biden will enact legislation to give states and local governments grants to require individuals to obtain a license prior to purchasing a gun.

Adequately fund the background check system. President Obama and Vice President Biden expanded incentives for states to submit records of prohibited persons into the background checks system. As president, Biden will continue to prioritize that funding and ensure that the FBI is adequately funded to accurately and efficiently handle the NICS system.

ADDRESSING THE DEADLY COMBINATION OF GUNS AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
The statistics tell a devastating and overwhelming story. The likelihood that a woman in a domestic violence situation will be killed increases by a factor of five if a gun is nearby. Half of mass shootings involve an individual shooting a family member or former intimate partner. This deadly connection tragically impacts children as well: 86% of children killed in shootings with four or more victims were involved in domestic or family violence.

Biden recognizes that the gun violence and domestic violence epidemics are linked and cannot be solved in isolation. Addressing the interconnectedness of these challenges will be a core focus of Biden’s anti-violence work as president.

The Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2019, which Leader McConnell refuses to bring to the floor for a vote, includes a number of reforms to keep firearms out of the hands of abusers. Senator McConnell should ensure this legislation gets passed long before President Biden would take the oath of office. But if McConnell refuses to act, Biden will enact legislation to close the so-called “boyfriend loophole” and “stalking loophole” by prohibiting all individuals convicted of assault, battery, or stalking from purchasing or possessing firearms, regardless of their connection to the victim. This proposal is modeled after existing laws in California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Nevada, New York, and Pennsylvania. Biden also supports enacting the proposal to prohibit anyone under a temporary restraining order from purchasing or possessing a firearm before their hearing.

In addition, President Biden will:

Establish a new Task Force on Online Harassment and Abuse to focus on the connection between mass shootings, online harassment, extremism, and violence against women. As President, Joe Biden will convene a national Task Force with federal agencies, state leaders, advocates, law enforcement, and technology experts to study rampant online sexual harassment, stalking, and threats, including revenge porn and deepfakes — and the connection between this harassment, mass shootings, extremism and violence against women. The Task Force will be charged with developing cutting-edge strategies and recommendations for how federal and state governments, social media companies, schools, and other public and private entities can tackle this unique challenge. The Task Force will consider platform accountability, transparent reporting requirements for incidents of harassment and response, and best practices.
Expand the use of evidence-based lethality assessments by law enforcement in cases of domestic violence. Lethality assessments, sometimes called “risk” or “danger” assessments, are a proven strategy to help law enforcement officers identify domestic violence survivors who are at high risk of being killed by their abusers. These survivors are then connected with social service programs that can offer services and safety planning. An evaluation of the Lethality Assessment Program (LEP) created by the Maryland Network Against Domestic Violence showed promising results. Increased federal funding will incentivize jurisdictions to take advantage of implementing these programs more widely.
Make sure firearm owners take on the responsibility of ensuring their weapons are used safely.

Put America on the path to ensuring that 100% of firearms sold in America are smart guns. Today, we have the technology to allow only authorized users to fire a gun. For example, existing smart gun technology requires a fingerprint match before use. Biden believes we should work to eventually require that 100% of firearms sold in the U.S. are smart guns. But, right now the NRA and gun manufacturers are bullying firearms dealers who try to sell these guns. Biden will stand up against these bullying tactics and issue a call to action for gun manufacturers, dealers, and other public and private entities to take steps to accelerate our transition to smart guns.
Hold adults accountable for giving minors access to firearms. Biden supports legislation holding adults criminally and civilly liable for directly or negligently giving a minor access to a firearm, regardless of whether the minor actually gains possession of the firearm.
Require gun owners to safely store their weapons. Biden will pass legislation requiring firearm owners to store weapons safely in their homes.
Empower law enforcement to effectively enforce our gun laws.

Prioritize prosecution of straw purchasers. “Straw purchasers” buy a firearm on behalf of an individual who cannot pass a background check. Biden will end those loopholes by enacting a law to make all straw purchases a serious federal crime and ensure the U.S. Justice Department has sufficient resources to prioritize their prosecution.
Notify law enforcement when a potential firearms purchaser fails a background check. Too often, when prohibited persons attempting to buy a firearm fail a background check, state and local law enforcement is never informed of the attempt. As president, Biden will direct the FBI to set up a process to ensure timely notification of denials to state and local law enforcement, and he’ll support legislation to codify this process. This empowers law enforcement to follow up and ensure prohibited persons do not attempt to acquire firearms through other means.
Require firearms owners to report if their weapon is lost or stolen. Responsible gun owners have a responsibility to inform law enforcement if their weapon is lost or stolen. Biden will enact legislation to make this the law of the land.
Stop “ghost guns.” One way people who cannot legally obtain a gun may gain access to a weapon is by assembling a one on their own, either by buying a kit of disassembled gun parts or 3D printing a working firearm. Biden will stop the proliferation of these so-called “ghost guns” by passing legislation requiring that purchasers of gun kits or 3D printing code pass a federal background check. Additionally, Biden will ensure that the authority for firearms exports stays with the State Department, and if needed reverse a proposed rule by President Trump. This will ensure the State Department continues to block the code used to 3D print firearms from being made available on the Internet.
Reform, fund, and empower the U.S. Justice Department to enforce our gun laws. Biden will direct his Attorney General to deliver to him within his first 100 days a set of recommendations for restructuring the ATF and related Justice Department agencies to most effectively enforce our gun laws. Biden will then work to secure sufficient funds for the Justice Department to effectively enforce our existing gun laws, increase the frequency of inspections of firearms dealers, and repeal riders that get in the way of that work.
Direct the ATF to issue an annual report on firearms trafficking. This report will provide officials with critical information to better identify strategies for curbing firearms trafficking.
TACKLE URBAN GUN VIOLENCE WITH TARGETED, EVIDENCE-BASED COMMUNITY INTERVENTIONS
Daily acts of gun violence in our communities may not make national headlines, but are just as devastating to survivors and victims’ families as gun violence that does make the front page. And, these daily acts of gun violence disproportionately impact communities of color. But there is reason to be optimistic. There are proven strategies for reducing gun violence in urban communities without turning to incarceration. For example, Group Violence Intervention organizes community leaders to work with individuals most likely to commit acts of gun violence, express the community’s demand that the gun violence stop, and connect individuals who may be likely perpetrators with social and economic support services that may deter violent behavior. These types of interventions have reduced homicides by as much as 60%. Hospital-Based Violence Intervention engages young people who have been injured by gun violence while they are still in the hospital, connecting them to social and economic services that may decrease the likelihood they engage in or are victims of gun violence in the future. Biden will create a $900 million, eight-year initiative to fund these and other types of evidence-based interventions in 40 cities across the country – the 20 cities with the highest number of homicides, and 20 cities with the highest number of homicides per capita. This proposal is estimated to save more than 12,000 lives over the eight-year program.

Dedicate the brightest scientific minds to solving the gun violence public health epidemic. In 2013, President Obama issued a memorandum clarifying that a longstanding appropriations rider that prohibited the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and other federal scientific agencies from using federal dollars to “advocate or promote gun control” does not prohibit those agencies from researching the causes and prevention of gun violence. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) subsequently embarked on funding some of this research, though Republican leadership in Congress refused to appropriate any funds to the CDC for this work. Biden will call for Congress to appropriate $50 million to accelerate this research at the CDC and NIH.

Prohibit the use of federal funds to arm or train educators to discharge firearms. We should be passing rational gun laws, not requiring educators who already have too much on their plates to also protect the safety of their students. Biden supports barring states from using federal dollars to arm or train educators to discharge firearms.

Address the epidemic of suicides by firearms. Biden believes any plan to address the gun violence epidemic must address suicides by firearms, which account for 6 in 10 gun-related deaths but are often left out of the conversation. Many of the policies noted above – including safe storage requirements and extreme risk protection orders – will have a serious impact on efforts to reduce gun violence. But there’s so much more we need to do to support people experiencing suicidal ideation. In the months ahead, Biden will put forward a comprehensive plan to improve access to mental health services.

SUPPORTING SURVIVORS OF VIOLENCE AND THEIR COMMUNITIES
Violence causes ripples of trauma throughout our communities, impacting not just the victims of violence but also their communities and first responders. Fear of school shootings is having a noticeable impact on the mental health of Gen Z. Intimate partner violence is linked to depression, post-traumatic stress, and other mental health challenges among survivors. And, this trauma can be intergenerational. Science now shows that young children who witness violence – including in their home – literally alters the parts of their brains that affect “reasoning, planning, and behavioral control.”

We need to reduce violence to prevent trauma from happening in the first place. But we also must treat the resulting trauma as a serious crisis in its own right.

As president, Biden will:

Make federal programs more trauma-informed. During his first 100 days, Biden will direct his Cabinet to conduct a review of all federal programs that directly serve communities likely to experience violence and identify reforms to make sure those programs effectively address resulting trauma. Biden will then invest significant federal funds in expanding and improving the federal government’s support for trauma-informed and culturally responsive care.
Create a network of trauma care centers. Biden will bring together offices within the federal government to establish specialized trauma care centers for survivors of violence, with a special focus on survivors of domestic and sexual violence. Domestic violence services are focused on meeting the emergency needs of survivors, including safety planning and crisis intervention. As a result, frontline providers lack the resources they need to offer therapeutic services to help survivors heal from trauma. These trauma care centers will be flexible in meeting the needs of communities, and could be housed at rape crisis centers, domestic violence programs, universities, and existing mental health centers.
Train health care and other service providers in trauma-centered care. To prevent revictimization and secondary trauma, Biden will align training efforts throughout relevant federal programs to include a focus on understanding the traumatic effects of violence, providing appropriate care to avoid furthering the trauma, linking survivors with evidence-based trauma therapies, and reducing myths about domestic and sexual violence. This will be accomplished through agency directives, policy guidance, and special conditions for grantees and contractors.

[The Romulan Republic]

Good for Joe.

[The Romulan Republic]

Republicans are getting desperate, and starting to turn on each other. Moscow Mitch has given Senate Republicans the go-ahead to distance themselves from Trump if necessary to save their seats:

https://cnn.com/2020/07/31/politics/sen ... index.html

Washington (CNN)Sen. Mitch McConnell is allowing Republican Senate candidates to do whatever it takes to salvage their campaigns ahead of what Republicans increasingly fear could be a devastating election for their party.

In recent weeks, the Senate majority leader has become so concerned over Republicans losing control of the Senate that he has signaled to vulnerable GOP senators in tough races that they could distance themselves from the President if they feel it is necessary, according to multiple senior Republicans including a source close to McConnell.

That could mean breaking with Trump on the administration's response to the coronavirus pandemic and the continued efforts by the President to paint an optimistic picture despite rising cases and deaths across parts of the country, especially in many Republican states in the South and Midwest.

While this may give some senators the flexibility to draw a distinction between themselves and the President, it also forces them to walk a tightrope. Trump remains enormously popular with the Republican base, and any attempts to undercut him risks alienating those voters.

"These vulnerable senators can't afford to explicitly repudiate Trump," said one senior Republican on Capitol Hill. "They just need to show they are independent on issues important in their states."

Still, Trump continues to give GOP senators ways to make their break with him easier.

The President's sustained assault on mail-in voting lacks GOP allies. And his suggestion on Thursday morning to delay the election drew open rebukes from many top Republicans, including multiple senators up for reelection, as well as McConnell.

"Never in the history of the country, through wars, depressions and the Civil War, have we ever not had a federally scheduled election on time. We'll find a way to do that again this November 3rd," the majority leader said in an interview with WNKY.

Republicans currently have a three-seat majority and at least six incumbent senators who face serious Democratic challengers. Senior Republicans say the most vulnerable are Sens. Martha McSally of Arizona, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Cory Gardner of Colorado. Despite polls showing a tight race in Maine, GOP sources in recent weeks have sounded more optimistic about Sen. Susan Collins, long a target of Democrats and liberal interest groups.

Sens. Joni Ernst of Iowa and Steve Daines of Montana are also of concern. While some Republicans believe they are both in good shape, other GOP sources tell CNN those races are exceedingly tight and that both candidates' fortunes may ultimately depend on how Trump does on Election Day in both states. The senior Capitol Hill Republican even expressed caution about Sen. Dan Sullivan, the first-term Alaska Republican otherwise thought to be relatively safe.

With Republican nominee Tommy Tuberville expected to defeat Alabama Democratic Sen. Doug Jones in November, McConnell can afford to lose up to three of those endangered seats and still keep a slim majority.

But the size of a net defeat for the GOP matters. Even if they lose control of the majority, Senate Republicans can effectively play defense against Democratic legislation with a large enough minority and a handful of moderate Democratic defectors. But if GOP losses in the Senate are too great, their ability to use the filibuster to force a supermajority vote to proceed on legislation will be rendered meaningless.

"Even if we lose the majority, it matters that we have 49 seats," said the senior Republican on the Hill. "If we have 45, we can't stop (with) the filibuster. Every seat counts."

And the trajectory of the presidential race -- Joe Biden leads Trump by 14 points nationally in the most recent CNN poll -- and the persistence of the coronavirus pandemic have made the project of protecting the GOP's margin even more urgent.

"GOP major donors are redirecting money to the Senate races," said Fred Zeidman, a Republican donor from Texas. "The Senate is the firewall. We have got to make sure that we hold the Senate no matter who is elected president."

Early signs of distance

There are a few signs Republicans are already beginning to differentiate themselves in subtle ways from Trump. Publicly, McConnell has embraced and promoted mask-wearing as the "single most important thing" people can do -- days and weeks before Trump finally tweeted his support for mask-wearing. A new Collins ad shows a photo of her surrounded by Democratic colleagues as she claims to be "bipartisan" and "effective" for Maine, while Gardner has emphasized his environmental conservation bona fides.

"They are being elected to represent a state, so they ought to have the freedom to represent the people who are voting for them," said Zeidman. "And if that means taking positions that are not totally approved of or consistent with the White House, that's what a democracy is about."

Getting reelected as a Republican in 2020, however, is largely about changing the subject from Trump and his response to the pandemic.

Endangered GOP senators have turned to touting their own positive acts, from individual line items in the first pandemic economic stimulus bill to extra efforts to solve testing problems in their home states. Tillis' campaign points to a letter the North Carolina Republican wrote to Vice President Mike Pence in March asking for more coronavirus tests. And in his first campaign ad this year Gardner highlighted local news reports on his successful efforts to import masks and Covid test kits from East Asia to Colorado.

Last week Gardner joined three of his colleagues in tough races -- Tillis, Collins, and McSally -- to sign a public letter encouraging McConnell to include spending on clean energy projects in the latest round of stimulus spending.

Liam Donovan, a Republican strategist, said this kind of negotiating by endangered GOP senators in the stimulus bill "tells you everything you need to know" about the state of the election and the expectation that Trump is heading toward defeat.

"Vulnerable members desperately need something to get done while their ambitious colleagues in safe seats are writing off 2020 and thinking about how what they do and say now will look in 2024," said Donovan.

Caught in a bind

Still, most Republican Senate candidates are sticking closely to the President. It's unlikely McConnell or Republican Senate candidates will rebuke Trump directly, even if the President continues to trail Biden. However toxic it may be with suburban moderates, the Trump brand remains a key connection for GOP senators to the party's base. Last week, for example, Gardner appeared alongside presidential daughter and White House adviser Ivanka Trump at an official event on childcare in Colorado.

For other candidates, distance between themselves and Trump isn't even an option. Republican operatives say that in places like North Carolina and Arizona, the fate of incumbent GOP senators will be irrevocably tied to Trump.

That puts endangered GOP senators in a dilemma. There's little incentive for Republicans to break with the President and risk losing support from his base, who make up a critical part of the GOP coalition. But drawing any contrast with the President, at least on Covid, opens up the door to winning over those swing voters who will vote against Trump and would otherwise oppose the President's down-ballot allies.

McSally, who trails her Democratic challenger Mark Kelly in nearly every recent poll, finds herself caught in this bind.

One recent CNN poll of Arizona registered voters found 60% disapprove of Trump's handling of the coronavirus, suggesting there could be an opening to criticize the President, or at least distinguish herself from him. But McSally's path to victory requires every Trump voter to also pull the lever for her. Any distance McSally tries to put between herself and Trump risks making things worse. Multiple Republican sources told CNN they believe McSally is the most vulnerable and is likely to lose.

The campaigns of both McSally and Tillis say their focus will be on drawing a contrast between themselves and their Democratic opponents on which party will be best positioned to reignite the economy. But their overall focus is off Trump -- a strong indication that there's not much more to be gained from an association with the President.

Follow the money

Republican money may begin to also gravitate most heavily to the Senate side of the ledger. In June, GOP megadonors Sheldon and Miriam Adelson donated $25 million to McConnell's Senate Leadership Fund, giving the super PAC $97 million in the bank at the end of the second quarter. (During the same period, the Democratic counterpart to SLF, Senate Majority PAC, raised $30 million and by the end of June had $87 million in cash.)

The National Republican Senatorial Committee, meanwhile, has spent through the first half of the year between $4 and 6 million in North Carolina, Colorado and Iowa, while spending a little more than $3.5 million in that same time in Maine (where outside super PACs on both sides have spent a great deal) and in Arizona.

That tracks with where super PACs on both sides have been prioritizing their spending in recent weeks. According to Kantar Media, TV and digital ad spending for Senate races during the month of July was the highest in North Carolina, Iowa and Colorado (along with Kansas, which has a competitive GOP Senate primary in August).

There are some in Washington who are less dire about the circumstances for the GOP. Scott Reed, the veteran Republican strategist who runs the Chamber of Commerce's political arm, sounded a hopeful note about the ability for first-term GOP senators like Gardner and Tillis to close the deal on reelection.

"The Presidential race will tighten and this Senate class of 2014 is sharp, strong and well versed at winning," said Reed, who echoed other Republicans in giving Collins the best shot of the four vulnerable GOP senators of winning reelection.

One senior Republican who spoke to CNN was more distraught about where Trump has put the party fewer than 100 days before the election. "Where can we play offense? Zero places," said this Republican. "Where is he playing defense? All the places he shouldn't have to worry about."

CNN's David Wright contributed to this story.

No honour among thieves, clearly.

[The Romulan Republic]

Its possible that Der Fuhrer might have finally crossed the line, if there still is a line, by floating the postponement of elections. Steven Calabresi, the co-Founder of the far Right Federalist Society who denounced the Mueller probe as unconstitutional, just wrote an op-ed in the New York Times describing Trump's call as "fascistic and... itself grounds for the President's immediate impeachment", and the removal from office of any member of Congress who fails to repudiate it:

https://nytimes.com/2020/07/30/opinion/ ... virus.html

I have voted Republican in every presidential election since 1980, including voting for Donald Trump in 2016. I wrote op-eds and a law review article protesting what I believe was an unconstitutional investigation by Robert Mueller. I also wrote an op-ed opposing President Trump’s impeachment.

But I am frankly appalled by the president’s recent tweet seeking to postpone the November election. Until recently, I had taken as political hyperbole the Democrats’ assertion that President Trump is a fascist. But this latest tweet is fascistic and is itself grounds for the president’s immediate impeachment again by the House of Representatives and his removal from office by the Senate.

Here is what President Trump tweeted:

With Universal Mail-In Voting (not Absentee Voting, which is good), 2020 will be the most INACCURATE & FRAUDULENT Election in history. It will be a great embarrassment to the USA. Delay the Election until people can properly, securely and safely vote???

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 30, 2020
The nation has faced grave challenges before, just as it does today with the spread of the coronavirus. But it has never canceled or delayed a presidential election. Not in 1864, when President Abraham Lincoln was expected to lose and the South looked as if it might defeat the North. Not in 1932 in the depths of the Great Depression. Not in 1944 during World War II.

So we certainly should not even consider canceling this fall’s election because of the president’s concern about mail-in voting, which is likely to increase because of fears about Covid-19. It is up to each of the 50 states whether to allow universal mail-in voting for presidential elections, and Article II of the Constitution explicitly gives the states total power over the selection of presidential electors.

Election Day was fixed by a federal law passed in 1845, and the Constitution itself in the 20th Amendment specifies that the newly elected Congress meet at noon on Jan. 3, 2021, and that the terms of the president and vice president end at noon on Jan. 20, 2021. Even if President Trump disputed an election he lost, his term would still be over on that day. And if no newly elected president is available, the speaker of the House of Representatives becomes acting president.

President Trump needs to be told by every Republican in Congress that he cannot postpone the federal election. Doing so would be illegal, unconstitutional and without precedent in American history. Anyone who says otherwise should never be elected to Congress again.

Steven G. Calabresi is a co-founder of the Federalist Society and a professor at Northwestern University’s Pritzker School of Law.

Polling and approval rating averages on fivethirtyeight are actually moving slightly in Trump's favor right now, but I'm betting that we'll see a swing the other way once we've had another couple days for polls taken after that statement by Trump to come in.

[Agent Sorchus]

TRR there is one and only one thing about your posts that drive me up a wall; when you post an already posted article. In the case of the above article TimothyC posted that to the internal politics thread yesterday. Yes it has more to with the election then internal policy, but I have seen you post an already posted article in the same thread.

It just shows a complette disregard for the integrity of the discussion when you do this.

[The Romulan Republic]

As you yourself noted, this one is directly relevant to the election thread. As to the other, I don't know what you're talking about. I certainly didn't intentionally post something already posted.

I'm sorry if it annoyed you, but to be frank, I'm not the only person here who's ever posted something that was posted before. This is the kind of thing that largely goes unremarked on when other posters do it, but is suddenly a big deal when I do it.

[The Romulan Republic]

A group of Academic experts and former officials held "war games" exercises simulating possible catastrophic or chaotic outcomes to the election. Obviously this is somewhat speculative, and as the article notes, is specifically playing out worst-case scenarios. But the results are... bad.

https://theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2 ... ng/614842/

On the same morning that the United States government reported the steepest economic collapse in U.S. history, President Donald Trump mused on Twitter about postponing the 2020 election. Trump is getting desperate, more desperate by the day. What might he do? What should Americans fear?

Earlier this summer, 67 former government officials and academic students of government gathered over four sessions of the nonpartisan Transition Integrity Project to analyze those questions. They included Michael Steele, a former chair of the Republican National Committee; John Podesta, the former White House chief of staff who chaired Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign; former Republican members of Congress; and a host of former elected officials, government staffers, consultants, and even journalists. I joined two of the sessions.

The sessions began with scenarios of what might happen on Election Day—a big Biden win, a narrow Biden win, a Trump win in the Electoral College coupled with a loss in the popular vote—and then played war games to ponder what might follow. The goal was not to make predictions, but rather to test scenarios and identify potential weak points in the system. The approach is common in the national-security world, but has not often before been applied to domestic politics.

The organizers of the event will in time produce a formal report on the results. But in light of the president’s ominous tweet yesterday, it’s worth summarizing some of what we found, while respecting the rules under which the event was held—which allowed for the disclosure of the substance of the exercise, but not what individual participants said.

The good news is that Trump cannot postpone the election or the next presidential inauguration; he has no means to do either of those things. Those dates are set by law or in the text of the Constitution.

Nor can Trump somehow cling to power after Inauguration Day once the electoral vote is certified against him. If the Electoral College certifies Joe Biden the winner when its votes are counted in Washington, D.C., on January 6, then at noon on January 20, Donald Trump ceases to be president. His signature loses all legal effect, the officer carrying the nuclear football walks away, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff does not take his call.

The bottom line: There do exist outer legal boundaries to the mischief that can be done by even the most corrupt president.

The bad news is that there is a lot of mischief that can be done within the legal boundaries by a determined president, especially with the compliance of the attorney general and enough political allies in the state capitals.

The worst news is that, faced with presidential lawlessness, few of the participants at the Transition Integrity Project found effective responses. The courts offered only slow, weak, and unreliable remedies. Street protests were difficult to mobilize and often proved counterproductive. Republican elected officials cowered even in the face of the most outrageous Trump acts. Democratic elected officials lacked the tools and clout to make much difference. Many of the games turned on who made the first bold move. Time after time, that first mover was Trump.

And even in the scenarios in which Biden’s team eventually won—that is, secured possession of the White House at noon on Inauguration Day, 2021—Team Trump by then had thoroughly poisoned the political system.

It diverted public resources to Trump personally.

It preemptively pardoned Trump associates and family members, and tried to pardon Trump himself from criminal charges including money laundering and tax evasion.

It intentionally tried to cause long-term economic damage so as to prevent early economic recovery—and boost Republican chances in the 2022 elections.

It destroyed, hid, or privatized public records.

It tried to sabotage the census to favor Republican redistricting after 2020.

It refused to cooperate with the incoming administration during the transition period, in ways that aggravated both the pandemic response and economic recovery.

And it sowed pervasive mistrust in the integrity of U.S. elections in ways that would polarize and embitter U.S. politics long after 2020.

Despite the president’s personal unpopularity as measured by polls, Trump’s side possessed—and used—important tactical advantages.

Those advantages start with the institutional powers of the presidency, notably the power to federalize the National Guard and take military control of state voting sites. They include also the asymmetry of the U.S. party system, and especially the fiercer team-mindedness of Trump loyalists and pro-Trump media.

The most persistent and powerful advantage, however, was the overconfidence of the legally minded Biden team that the Trump team would respect some norms and limits on its behavior. That expectation was again and again refuted by experience.

All of this, again, was just a tabletop exercise, specifically designed to test extreme scenarios—not a prediction of how things will play out. Perhaps everything will go smoothly. But as the president suggests postponing the election, it’s important to understand the hazards ahead, and the timelines and decision points that may prove crucial.

The voting period

The days of early voting, Election Day itself, and then the period of vote-counting that will follow offer fruitful possibilities for mischief.

In one of our scenarios, the attorney general sent federal marshals backed by the National Guard to seize vote-by-mail ballots, triggering a constitutional catastrophe that delayed the outcome of the count for weeks.

Local Republican officeholders have wide scope to burden voting by what they deem undesirable voters, especially ethnic minorities. The Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department has more or less entirely abandoned the field of voting rights. In the Trump era, the division has shifted its effort toward litigating in support of claims of religious discrimination.

In the exercises, when the vote went against Trump, his team tried to convince his supporters that they had been robbed—and that they were therefore entitled to take extreme, even violent, actions. In our exercises, however, the game-winning strategy was to goad the other side into violence. This was particularly true for Team Trump, whose supporters already fear violence from anarchists and antifa.

The meeting of electors in the states

Under current law, all disputes over vote-counting are supposed to be resolved by December 8, 2020. The electors are supposed to convene on December 14 in their state capitals, where they will sign their electoral ballots. The days from December 8 to December 14 offer Team Trump the last clear chance to alter the outcome.

In some of our scenarios, local Republican officeholders sowed enough confusion to justify sending two slates of electors to Washington to be adjudicated. That was a high-risk tactic that did not usually pay off, but could tempt some pro-Trump state governments.

The meeting of electors in Washington, D.C.

This normally ceremonial event is scheduled for January 6, 2021. It will be presided over by the incumbent vice president, Mike Pence. We tested what might happen in a close result—one in which the Republicans hold on to the Senate and Trump falls short of an Electoral College majority by just a single state’s vote—if Pence somehow tried to insist that the pro-Trump slate of electors was valid.

This did not usually work. Pence was a weak link in the Trump team, too concerned about his own future and his own reputation to go all-out in the way the core Trump team wanted.

Generally, once we got past the December 8 date, the Trump team’s options for keeping power dwindled to zero. What was left then was scorched-earth self-enrichment, self-protection, and spite.

The transition of power

The Obama administration took office amid a national crisis in January 2009, after what is generally regarded by experts as the smoothest and most successful transition in presidential history. The outgoing Bush team kept the Obama team closely informed about decision making after the financial crisis struck in October 2008—and the incoming Obama team scrupulously followed the “one president at a time” rule of crisis management.

Nothing like that can be expected this winter. Instead, we are likely to see a recurrence of 1932–33, when the defeated Herbert Hoover tried to sabotage the incoming Roosevelt administration in hopes of preparing his own comeback in 1936. Trump will soon be fantasizing about running again in 2024. If his health does not permit it, his children may envision a dynasty of their own. These are not realistic plans. The Trump brand will be toxic in U.S. politics after the catastrophes of 2020. But the Trump inner circle will not believe that—and its members may hope that if they can cause Biden to stumble out of the gate, they will benefit.

The Bush administration helped the Obama administration to be ready on day one. The Trump administration may not return that courtesy. In one of our scenarios, Trump moved permanently to Mar-a-Lago the day after the election and never returned to the White House again. The whole government had to operate around a lame-duck president who simply refused to do any work at all.

But we also discussed whether Trump’s need to satisfy his ego and his desire for money might not cause him to foment a transition-season crisis—especially one that would gain him some credit with Russia or the oil states. Postpresidential Trump will face extreme legal and business troubles, including the ruin of the hospitality industry. The flow of payments to his businesses from U.S. taxpayers, from Republican campaigns, from favor-seeking corporations, and from foreign governments will all cease.

What would Trump do to maximize his cash flow before it stops? As lurid as our imaginations were over the four days of disaster planning, on this question, at least, we probably underestimated the dangerous possibilities.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.


DAVID FRUM is a staff writer at The Atlantic and the author of Trumpocalypse: Restoring American Democracy (2020). In 2001 and 2002, he was a speechwriter for President George W. Bush.

Some highlights:

The good news is that Trump cannot postpone the election or the next presidential inauguration; he has no means to do either of those things. Those dates are set by law or in the text of the Constitution.

Nor can Trump somehow cling to power after Inauguration Day once the electoral vote is certified against him. If the Electoral College certifies Joe Biden the winner when its votes are counted in Washington, D.C., on January 6, then at noon on January 20, Donald Trump ceases to be president. His signature loses all legal effect, the officer carrying the nuclear football walks away, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff does not take his call.

I mean, assuming he doesn't outright say "fuck the law" and try to maintain power by force of arms, but its doubtful that most of the military would back him in that, to put it mildly.

The worst news is that, faced with presidential lawlessness, few of the participants at the Transition Integrity Project found effective responses. The courts offered only slow, weak, and unreliable remedies. Street protests were difficult to mobilize and often proved counterproductive. Republican elected officials cowered even in the face of the most outrageous Trump acts. Democratic elected officials lacked the tools and clout to make much difference. Many of the games turned on who made the first bold move. Time after time, that first mover was Trump.

And even in the scenarios in which Biden’s team eventually won—that is, secured possession of the White House at noon on Inauguration Day, 2021—Team Trump by then had thoroughly poisoned the political system.

Despite the president’s personal unpopularity as measured by polls, Trump’s side possessed—and used—important tactical advantages.

Those advantages start with the institutional powers of the presidency, notably the power to federalize the National Guard and take military control of state voting sites. They include also the asymmetry of the U.S. party system, and especially the fiercer team-mindedness of Trump loyalists and pro-Trump media.

The most persistent and powerful advantage, however, was the overconfidence of the legally minded Biden team that the Trump team would respect some norms and limits on its behavior. That expectation was again and again refuted by experience.

I really hope someone has sent Biden a copy of these results. This part in particular.

In the exercises, when the vote went against Trump, his team tried to convince his supporters that they had been robbed—and that they were therefore entitled to take extreme, even violent, actions. In our exercises, however, the game-winning strategy was to goad the other side into violence. This was particularly true for Team Trump, whose supporters already fear violence from anarchists and antifa.

You hear that, Leftist accelerationists? You shooting first is what the Trumpers want.

Pence was a weak link in the Trump team, too concerned about his own future and his own reputation to go all-out in the way the core Trump team wanted.

Generally, once we got past the December 8 date, the Trump team’s options for keeping power dwindled to zero. What was left then was scorched-earth self-enrichment, self-protection, and spite.

So Dec. 8th is the day to watch.

NY Times columnist Ben Smith also claimed on Twitter that in one scenario, John Podesta, roleplaying Joe Biden, shocked the games' organizers by refusing to concede a 2016-like election, saying "he felt his party wouldn't let him concede." The scenario devolved into Wisconsin and Michigan's governors being persuaded to send Biden Electors, the whole West Coast threatening to secede, the House and Senate splitting over who the lawful President was, and it ultimately boiling down to who the military backed. No word yet on who the military backed in this cluster fuck of a scenario.

https://twitter.com/benyt/status/1290048084857065472

Expect Republicans to use this as "proof" that the Democrats are plotting a coup/civil war, to justify their own attempts to do so. Expect Hillary to be named as the ringleader, especially given its Podesta.

[The Romulan Republic]

In other news, Karen Bass might have dropped a bit in the VP race, after a story about her praising the Church of Scientology surfaced:

https://politico.com/news/2020/08/01/ka ... ogy-390077

Rep. Karen Bass, a top-tier contender to be Joe Biden’s running mate, on Saturday sought to clarify remarks she made in 2010 praising the Church of Scientology.

Video emerged on Friday of the California Democrat speaking at a ceremony for a renovated Scientology church in Los Angeles when she served as speaker of the California State Assembly. The Daily Caller first reported the video’s existence.

In her remarks, Bass called on treating humans with respect and fighting oppression, but also spoke highly of the controversial group and its founder, L. Ron Hubbard.

“The Church of Scientology, I know, has made a difference, because your creed is a universal creed and one that speaks to all people everywhere,” Bass said before an audience of some 6,000 attendees. “That is why the words are exciting of your Founder L. Ron Hubbard, in the creed of the Church of Scientology: That all people of whatever race, color or creed are created with equal rights.”

Bass said in a statement she was trying to find an “area of agreement” with the church, which has faced allegations from former members of abuse, human trafficking and intimidation.

“Back in 2010, I attended the event knowing I was going to address a group of people with beliefs very different than my own, and spoke briefly about things I think most of us agree with, and on those things — respect for different views, equality, and fighting oppression — my views have not changed,” Bass tweeted. “Since then, published first-hand accounts in books, interviews and documentaries have exposed this group.”

While Bass did not say in her statement what she thinks about the church, she mentioned that “everyone is now aware” of the allegations against it. The Congressional Black Caucus chair also stated that she’s not a Scientologist, underscoring that she worships at a Baptist church in Los Angeles.

Bass’s record has increasingly come under scrutiny as she has moved toward the top of presumptive Democratic nominee Biden's vice presidential short list after lobbying by fellow House Democrats.

She has also come under fire from President Donald Trump’s re-election campaign after The Atlantic reported Friday that Bass worked in Cuba in the 1970s with a group aligned with Fidel Castro’s government.

“She was always pro-Castro & later mourned his death,” Trump campaign spokesman Tim Murtaugh tweeted Saturday. “Whether Biden picks her or not, he's written off Cuban-American voters just by considering her.”

On a call organized by the Trump campaign, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) ripped Bass for “showing a stunning amount of interest in the Cuban Revolution," according to the Palm Beach Post.

“She will be the highest ranking Castro sympathizer in the United States government,” Rubio said about Bass if she’s selected to be Biden’s running mate.

Bass has sought to address the Cuban controversy in recent media appearances.

God damn it, and Bass was so promising.

[The Romulan Republic]

Some good news: Joe has gutted Trump's lead among Rust Belt white voters (the ones who put him over the top in 2016), with polling averages showing him narrowly winning whites in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania:

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/08/02/poli ... index.html

[The Romulan Republic]

Reports Joe has narrowed his list to two Black women, believed to be Harris and Rice:

https://thegrio.com/2020/08/06/biden-vp ... ack-women/

Not a lot of sources backing this up yet, though, and other sources from earlier in the day depict a more open race, with even (ugg) Whitmer still being in contention. So we'll see.

If it is Harris or Rice, I'll root for Harris. Rice has never run for or held elected office, and while the Republicans will lie and spin conspiracy theories about any nominee, I'm not thrilled at the thought of 2020 becoming another round of Benghazi bullshit. Moreover, picking Rice very much signals this is going to be Obama administration term three, and I don't know if that's a good thing to double down on.