The 2016 US Election (Part IV)

[Knife]

Yeah, but I looked at all the polls he was using, they are all over the place from ties to Trump blow out to McMullian. It will also depend heavily on turn out; the Straight Laced Mormon men might go Trump, the women may say Trump to hubby but might go Dem, Libertarian, or McMullian. There is also a very large liberal and young group of voters in SLC who may tip the balance.

The nail bitter is going to be exactly how many votes McMullian pulls from Trump in the end. I was also at the Democratic Primary earlier this year and there hasn't been a turn out like that ... ever I think. So the GOPers are split and demoralized, and the Dems are motivated this year. I'm not saying it's in the bag, but it is as favorable a circumstance the Dems are going to get for some time.

[Napoleon the Clown]

I think McMullin's got better chances than Nate Silver is giving him, simply based off observing things around me. McMullin is way less shitty than Trump, especially for Mormons. And he's actually managed to get at least some degree of exposure, so that'll help his performance here.

I'd still be surprised if Utah managed to eek out blue this election, but I could see Trump being toxic enough for McMullin to take the electoral votes. Losing Utah would probably be one of the biggest insults a Republican can receive.

[Gaidin]

To really mess with McMullin's averages he'd have to change his algorithm and that's something Nate Silver said he's not going to do once he starts running it for the election.

[Q99]

Top GOP Pollster: "What we're seeing is Johnson and Stein trending down, and going to Clinton." -Tweet by John Harwood

[FireNexus]

I keep hearing about Joe Biden wanting to take Donald Trump behind the gym. And all I can think is that Joe Biden wants to fuck Donald Trump.

[Iroscato]

The more I hear about this goddamn election, the more I become convinced it's all going to end in a 25-way hatefuckathon on the lawns of Capitol Hill.

[FireNexus]

MSNBC is trying to spin the hell out of Trump being in the room when his boss (his dad) said the N word in the 1960s. Like, who cares? "Very explosive allegation!" No, "grab them by the pussy" is explosive. This is relatively meaningless.
For shame, Rachel.

[Gandalf]

MSNBC is trying to spin the hell out of Trump being in the room when his boss (his dad) said the N word in the 1960s. Like, who cares? "Very explosive allegation!" No, "grab them by the pussy" is explosive. This is relatively meaningless.
For shame, Rachel.

I've seen a few stories like that. Trump in a month provides more and bigger stories than most other politicians do in a year.

It's pretty abysmal when they have to go reaching like that.

[Vendetta]

I think McMullin's got better chances than Nate Silver is giving him, simply based off observing things around me. McMullin is way less shitty than Trump, especially for Mormons. And he's actually managed to get at least some degree of exposure, so that'll help his performance here.

That's possibly an effect of the questions being asked in the polls.

Polling in US elections is not well equipped to predict third party candidates, so the data feeding into fivethirtyeight may be underestimating McMullin's chances and overestimating Trump's. Unfortunately there's no way to confidently model the effect and correct for it other than by feel.

[SCRawl]

MSNBC is trying to spin the hell out of Trump being in the room when his boss (his dad) said the N word in the 1960s. Like, who cares? "Very explosive allegation!" No, "grab them by the pussy" is explosive. This is relatively meaningless.
For shame, Rachel.

I've seen a few stories like that. Trump in a month provides more and bigger stories than most other politicians do in a year.

It's pretty abysmal when they have to go reaching like that.

I listened to the podcast version of the Rachel Maddow Show when this was being discussed. I would describe the story as more about the Trump real estate company having a policy of discriminating against people of colour renting apartments in their buildings (and a very young Donald knowing all about it and being in agreement with the practice) than Fred Trump using inflammatory language within earshot of his son.

[FireNexus]

I listened to the podcast version of the Rachel Maddow Show when this was being discussed. I would describe the story as more about the Trump real estate company having a policy of discriminating against people of colour renting apartments in their buildings (and a very young Donald knowing all about it and being in agreement with the practice) than Fred Trump using inflammatory language within earshot of his son.

Sure, but none of that stuff is new and this doesn't really add anything of note to what is already common knowledge. And Trump agreeing with his dad (who, based on his son and grandsons, doesn't strike me as the kind that takes positively to independent thinking in the ranks) at 17... so what?

Frankly, even if the story is true, it's not terribly meaningful. And if I were in a position to, I'd make up all kinds of shit about Trump in an effort to prevent his election. (Not making an accusation, just pointing out that it's a valid one on such a thin story.) Maddow didn't just report this, she called it "Explosive" more than once. She made a point that Trump "didn't make an effort to deny it" as if every presidential candidate should provide a soliloquy of denial regarding every accusation ever made in reference to them.

It's fifty year old hearsay about something that allegedly happened at an age where Clinton supporters like myself argue Clinton couldn't be faulted for supporting Goldwater. It would be hypocritical to hold Trump to the standard of being accountable for every failure to stand up to his father throughout his entire adolescence.

Maddow really wants him on video saying the N word, and I suspect this story was nothing more than a fishing expedition for just that last sort of lead. If I had the video, I'd go all "That's not a knife. THIS is a knife" on her. But it's just not a story, and especially not in the context of what we have on tape. Maybe if Trump was Bernie Sanders in terms of the amount of oppo that we had on him in the open, but questionably so even then.

This story is an example of MSNBC's mission to be a liberal counter to Fox News. Usually they don't get quite so deep into the partisan bullshit mud, but they did here. It's not a story. And it's absolutely not an "explosive" one.

[TimothyC]

And we now have a better idea of why nothing happened with the email server. (email links broken and phone number not copied from original)

Fwd: POTUS on HRC emails
From:cheryl.mills(AT)gmail.com
To: john.podesta(AT)gmail.com
Date: 2015-03-07 21:41
Subject: Fwd: POTUS on HRC emails

we need to clean this up - he has emails from her - they do not say state.gov
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Nick Merrill <nmerrill(AT)hrcoffice.com>
Date: Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 6:39 PM
Subject: Fwd: POTUS on HRC emails
To: Philippe Reines <pir(AT)hrcoffice.com>, Heather Samuelson <
hsamuelson(AT)cdmillsgroup.com>, Cheryl Mills <cheryl.mills(AT)gmail.com>


Begin forwarded message:

*From:* Josh Schwerin <joshschwerin(AT)gmail.com>
*Date:* March 7, 2015 at 6:33:44 PM EST
*To:* Jennifer Palmieri <jennifer.m.palmieri(AT)gmail.com>, Kristina Schake <
kristinakschake(AT)gmail.com>, Nick Merrill <nmerrill(AT)hrcoffice.com>, Jesse
Ferguson <jfferg(AT)gmail.com>
*Subject:* *POTUS on HRC emails*

https://twitter.com/katherinemiller/sta ... 29/photo/1

Jen you probably have more on this but it looks like POTUS just said he
found out HRC was using her personal email when he saw it in the news.

--
Josh Schwerin

What did the President know, and when did he know it?

[Simon_Jester]

Yes! That way we can track down the weapons Clinton illegally sold to Iran and the shady guerillas she funded in Latin American countries... presumably.

[maraxus2]

snip

Does it make you sad to know that the public doesn't give even a single shit about this "scandal"?

Meanwhile, in news that actually matters:

Trump stops holding high-dollar fundraisers that were raising big cash for the GOP

By Matea Gold October 25 at 5:58 PM
Why Trump has stopped holding high-dollar fundraisers
The Washington Post’s Matea Gold explains why Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has no plans to hold any more high-dollar fundraisers before Election Day. (Bastien Inzaurralde/The Washington Post)


Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has no further high-dollar fundraising events planned for the remainder of the campaign, dealing another serious blow to the GOP's effort to finance its get-out-the-vote operation before Election Day.

Steven Mnuchin, Trump's national finance chairman, said in an interview with The Washington Post on Tuesday that Trump Victory, a joint fundraising committee between the party and the campaign, held its last formal fundraiser on Oct. 19. The luncheon was in Las Vegas on the day of the final presidential debate.

“We’ve kind of wound down,” Mnuchin said, referring to formal fundraisers. “But the online fundraising continues to be strong.”

While Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton is headlining her last fundraiser Tuesday night in Miami, her campaign has scheduled 41 other events between now and Nov. 3 featuring high-profile surrogates such as her daughter, Chelsea, running mate Tim Kaine and the entertainer Cher, according to a schedule sent to donors this weekend.

Trump's campaign is continuing to bring in donations that will boost the party, but the lack of a formal fundraising schedule effectively turns off one of the main spigots to the Republican National Committee. The national party collected $40 million through Trump Victory as of Sept. 30. The RNC has relied on the funds to help pay for hundreds of field staffers deployed across the country as part of its national ground operation, which is working to turn out voters to support the entire Republican ticket.

RNC officials said that party leaders, including Chairman Reince Priebus, are continuing to bring in resources for the party. “The RNC continues to fundraise for the entire GOP ticket,” said spokeswoman Lindsay Walters.

New York financier Lew Eisenberg, the top fundraiser for the RNC and chairman of Trump Victory, said that he has been working "in a united effort" with Mnuchin to "continue to raise money from major donors" through phone calls and impromptu events.


"Unlike the period from June 1 to today, we have no organized calendar of events for the next 14 days," Eisenberg said. "Rather, when the opportunity presents itself, we will have ad hoc fundraisers" with Trump and his running mate, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence. In addition, he said, "our state finance chairs will continuing to be raising major donor money for the foreseeable future."

Mnuchin said the Trump campaign decided to keep the candidate's final weeks focused on taking his message to the voters in person rather than on raising money. The GOP candidate held a small Trump Victory event in Florida this week, and there may be a handful of more high-dollar fundraisers in coming days featuring Trump surrogates, including his son Donald Jr., according to people familiar with the internal discussions. But Mnuchin said “there is virtually nothing planned.”

“We have minimized his fundraising schedule over the last month to emphasize his focus on political [events],” Mnuchin said. “Unlike Hillary, who has been fundraising and not out and about, he has constantly been out and about.”

Mnuchin noted that the Trump campaign continues to help bring in donations for the party from individual donors who are writing big checks, as well as through online contributions. “We continue to do fundraising with the party,” he said.

Mnuchin said Trump does not need high-dollar fundraisers, because his campaign is being buoyed by online donations, which he said are on track to hit a record in October.

“We couldn’t be more pleased with how the fundraising has gone,” he said, adding: “We have big media buys, we have a terrific ground game.”

But the RNC gets only 20 percent of the money that Trump raises online in conjunction with the party, while the vast majority of the big checks contributed to Trump Victory are routed to the party.

Trump, who did not begin fundraising in earnest until late May, has lagged far behind his Democratic rival. As of Sept. 30, his campaign had raised $219 million to Clinton's $499 million.

Still, Mnuchin said, “we couldn’t be happier with the resources.” He said that the campaign held a series of high-dollar events earlier this month and followed up after the Las Vegas debate with a day of phone calls to major donors to secure contributions.


Trump has also boosted his bid with his own resources. But while the businessman has repeatedly vowed to put $100 million into the effort, campaign finance reports show that he has given just $56 million so far.

Mnuchin declined to comment on when — or if — Trump intends to put in the remaining $44 million. “He has been very supportive of the campaign with his contributions,” Mnuchin said.

Matea Gold is a national political reporter for The Washington Post, covering money and influence. Follow @mateagold

Link

[FireNexus]

Maraxus, what are your thoughts on the House? Clearly the DCCC shit the bed this year on recruiting candidates, but I'm sure the associated resources being spread thin by a recruitment bash would have bit them in the ass if it was closer.

Does Trump's such lack of care that it is a seemingly intentional effort to crash the GOP put the House further in play than is being admitted? Or is it still a big-time longshot regardless?

Also, what would the RNC have to do to not get blamed for racist poll-watching from Trump supporters and have the consent decree extended? I feel like this has huge implications for the midterms and 2020.

[Thanas]

snip

Does it make you sad to know that the public doesn't give even a single shit about this "scandal"?

Meh it is not nothing but considering we got at worst a misuse of gov. resources and security breaches compared to a guy who is accused of multiple sexual assaults and statutory rape....

[K. A. Pital]

The problem with Clinton isn't the e-mails. I don't get all the fuss about these e-mails anyway.

It's her banker buddies at Goldman.

[MKSheppard]

The problem with Clinton isn't the e-mails. I don't get all the fuss about these e-mails anyway.

It's her banker buddies at Goldman.

Which we would never know about without REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE RUSSIANS RUSSIANS RUSSIANS RUSSIANS RUSSIANS RUSSIANS RUSSIANS HACKERS NUCLEAR WAR

[maraxus2]

Maraxus, what are your thoughts on the House? Clearly the DCCC shit the bed this year on recruiting candidates, but I'm sure the associated resources being spread thin by a recruitment bash would have bit them in the ass if it was closer.

Does Trump's such lack of care that it is a seemingly intentional effort to crash the GOP put the House further in play than is being admitted? Or is it still a big-time longshot regardless?

Also, what would the RNC have to do to not get blamed for racist poll-watching from Trump supporters and have the consent decree extended? I feel like this has huge implications for the midterms and 2020.

It's possible if Clinton crushes Trump by double digits, but by no means likely. Dem candidate quality is pretty awful, but that doesn't matter very much if Trump is getting wrecked. Lots of candidates would get dragged across the finish line, most of whom would probably lose in 2018.

Unfortunately, I think most of the gains will be pretty localized. The CAGOP is probably going to get thoroughly owned out here in California, where they stand to lose four congressional seats, eight Assembly seats, and three Senate seats. But California is seeing a huge Dem voter registration surge against a historically weak Republican candidate. That's not likely to repeat itself outside of other Blue strongholds like IL and NY.

What would they have to do to not get blamed for it? Nothing? Few people outside of the Dem voters care much about that story, unfortunately, and the state GOPs aren't bound to the consent decree. We'd need to extend it to state and local parties before we'd legally be able to make a fuss about it.

Meh it is not nothing but considering we got at worst a misuse of gov. resources and security breaches compared to a guy who is accused of multiple sexual assaults and statutory rape....

It's a symbolic indicator of Clinton's perceived criminality. It's a huge nothingburger since: A. vocal email truthers only seem to give a shit about proper online security protocols when Hillary Clinton's involved, and B. Clinton didn't do anything criminal. Stupid and woolly-headed? Sure. But not criminal.

[maraxus2]

The problem with Clinton isn't the e-mails. I don't get all the fuss about these e-mails anyway.

It's her banker buddies at Goldman.

Which we would never know about without REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE RUSSIANS RUSSIANS RUSSIANS RUSSIANS RUSSIANS RUSSIANS RUSSIANS HACKERS NUCLEAR WAR

Sure. Not like Bernie spent the entire primary talking about those speeches or anything.

[MKSheppard]

Sure. Not like Bernie spent the entire primary talking about those speeches or anything.

There's a difference between someone shit talking about it in generalities and the near-exact verbal transcripts of said speeches being available.

[Lost Soal]

So the GOP has apparently gone full on voter suppression.

Think Progress

Indiana officials are trying to block almost 45,000 black citizens from voting
Police raided the largest voter registration drive in the state with the lowest voter turnout in the country.
Voters line-up to register and cast their early votes at the City-County Building Monday, Nov. 5, 2012, in Indianapolis. CREDIT: AP Photo/Darron Cummings

Roughly 45,000 newly registered voters in Indiana — almost all of whom are black — may not be allowed to vote next month after state police targeted the state’s largest voter registration drive, forcing it to shut down its operation.

Police raided the Indiana Voter Registration Project (IVRP) offices on October 4, seizing documents and equipment and forcing the group to cease its get-out-the-vote efforts one week before the end of the state’s registration period. Bill Buck, a spokesperson for the liberal nonprofit Patriot Majority USA which runs the IVRP, told ThinkProgress that IVRP could have registered about 5,000 more voters in that additional week.

The IVRP is still unsure whether the 45,000 people it registered will be permitted to vote this year, or how the state will handle their applications while the police investigation is ongoing. Bill Bursten, chief public information officer for the Indiana State Police, told ThinkProgress that law enforcement is investigating whether IVRP violating fraud and forgery laws.

“It will be up to each prosecutor to review the completed investigation and take whatever action they, as the local prosecuting authority, deem appropriate,” Bursten said. “Investigations of this nature are complicated and can take an extended period of time to complete.”

Secretary of State Connie Lawson (R)’s office declined to comment, and Buck said IVRP is still unclear what law it violated or why it’s being aggressively targeted by election officials and police.

“They saw that there was a very successful voter registration drive happening, and this was an attempt to shut it down.”

The IVRP launched in April of this year to improve voter participation in Indiana, particularly in African American neighborhoods in Indianapolis and the Chicago suburbs. In 2014, Indiana had the worst voter turnout rate in the country.

But Lawson, a Republican secretary of state, decided not to address her state’s abysmal participation levels (as a legislator, she cosponsored the state’s strict voter ID law). Instead, she went after voter registration groups. In September, she sent a letter to state elections officials warning them about groups like IVRP.

“Unfortunately, it has recently come to my attention that nefarious actors are operating here in Indiana,” she wrote. “A group by the name of the Indiana Voter Registration Project has forged voter registrations… If you receive one of these applications, please contact the Indiana State Police Special Investigations.”

Buck said that at the time, they had no evidence that IVRP was intentionally submitting forged or fraudulent applications. While Republicans claim otherwise, voter fraud is exceedingly rare.

Almost three weeks later, as IVRP was planning for one final week of its registration efforts, police entered the group’s offices with a search warrant and seized equipment and paperwork.
Indiana Gov. Mike Pence speaks during a campaign event, Friday, Oct. 21, 2016, in Exeter, N.H. CREDIT: AP Photo/Elise Amendola

Patriot Majority alleges the investigation and raid were political moves, and that Lawson worked closely with Gov. Mike Pence (R), who has pushed the “voter fraud” conspiracy on the campaign trail alongside Donald Trump.

“We’ve seen nothing but partisan activity from the secretary of state, and even from the police,” Buck said. “They saw that there was a very successful voter registration drive happening, and this was an attempt to shut it down.”

“It’s clear that the governor or the governor’s staff are very aware and involved in what’s happening,” he continued. “It fits into the Trump/Pence narrative that in certain neighborhoods, you have to watch how many times people show up to vote and how things happen.”
Political police

State elections officials have also enlisted the help of the Indiana State Police to push the “voter fraud” myth. Superintendent Doug Carter, who was chosen for the position by Pence, has been on television and was interviewed on right-wing radio Tuesday morning about the ongoing investigation.

On conservative talk radio, Carter said that “the notion that there is voter registration fraud is very real,” but denied that the investigation is “driven by politics.”

He accused the IVRP of forging signatures and making up people’s names. “To what purpose? We don’t know,” he told radio host Tony Katz. “That’s the purpose of the investigation. Were these acts of gross negligence? Were they acts of intent? That’s what we don’t know, and we don’t want to speculate.”

He added that police are going through thousands of registrations to make sure that nothing nefarious occurred.

“While I’ve been blamed by some of intentionally disenfranchising voters, nothing could be further from the truth,” he said.

On TV, Carter also called it “unconscionable” that anyone would imply that Pence ordered the raid, while also indicating his close relationship with the governor.

“I wish people could know Mike Pence like I do,” he said. “He has never ever tried to influence me with a decision that I had to make within the state police as we protect the citizens of this state.”

Buck called it “completely bizarre” that the police have become spokespeople for Indiana’s electoral system.
Aggressive tactics

Before raiding IVRP’s offices, police were already using aggressive tactics during their investigation of the group.

According to the New Republic, “police detectives arrived unannounced at the homes of get-out-the-vote activists to interrogate them about their voter registration work.”

Lydia Garrett, a 57-year-old voter registration worker, told the New Republic that police came to her home and repeatedly asked her if the group illegally sets quotas for canvassers.

“That’s what they kept on asking me: ‘How many did they tell you to get? How many did they tell you to get?’” she told a reporter. “And I said: ‘Sir, you can come back with two or three [registrations] and you’re still paid. I don’t understand what you’re saying.’”

Garrett claims that investigators kept questioning her, trying to get her to “say something negative.” She said police even asked her if she would be willing to submit to a polygraph test about her registration work.

Neither the police nor the secretary of state’s office would not comment on their tactics.

Local news also reported that police seized at least 250 voter registrations, but state officials only informed IVRP of about ten problematic applications, none of which show a fraudulent intent.

Under Indiana law, the project is required to submit all voter registration forms, regardless of how they are filled out or if there are imperfections, Buck said.

Voter registration drives across the country follow similar protocol, without being subject to investigations. A Huffington Post investigation reported that “it seems the extraordinary investigation is likely to find no more than potential technical violations of obscure regulations for third-party voter registration groups.”

Two days after the police raid, the IVRP asked the Voting Section of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division to initiate an investigation.

“We’ve never had the state police involved in any voter registration project,” Buck said. “It’s pretty unprecedented for this to happen.”

[Rhadamantus]

Maraxus, what are your thoughts on the House? Clearly the DCCC shit the bed this year on recruiting candidates, but I'm sure the associated resources being spread thin by a recruitment bash would have bit them in the ass if it was closer.

Does Drumpf's such lack of care that it is a seemingly intentional effort to crash the GOP put the House further in play than is being admitted? Or is it still a big-time longshot regardless?

Also, what would the RNC have to do to not get blamed for racist poll-watching from Drumpf supporters and have the consent decree extended? I feel like this has huge implications for the midterms and 2020.

It's possible if Clinton crushes Drumpf by double digits, but by no means likely. Dem candidate quality is pretty awful, but that doesn't matter very much if Drumpf is getting wrecked. Lots of candidates would get dragged across the finish line, most of whom would probably lose in 2018.

Unfortunately, I think most of the gains will be pretty localized. The CAGOP is probably going to get thoroughly owned out here in California, where they stand to lose four congressional seats, eight Assembly seats, and three Senate seats. But California is seeing a huge Dem voter registration surge against a historically weak Republican candidate. That's not likely to repeat itself outside of other Blue strongholds like IL and NY.

What would they have to do to not get blamed for it? Nothing? Few people outside of the Dem voters care much about that story, unfortunately, and the state GOPs aren't bound to the consent decree. We'd need to extend it to state and local parties before we'd legally be able to make a fuss about it.

Meh it is not nothing but considering we got at worst a misuse of gov. resources and security breaches compared to a guy who is accused of multiple sexual assaults and statutory rape....

It's a symbolic indicator of Clinton's perceived criminality. It's a huge nothingburger since: A. vocal email truthers only seem to give a shit about proper online security protocols when Hillary Clinton's involved, and B. Clinton didn't do anything criminal. Stupid and woolly-headed? Sure. But not criminal.

At D+6, it should be even. Clinton is currently polling up there. http://www.vox.com/2016/10/8/13211858/house-math-trump

[Q99]

Oh snap, the Yale Record does not endorse Hillary Clinton:

In its 144-year history, The Yale Record has never endorsed a Democratic candidate for president. In fact, we have never endorsed any candidate for president. This is, in part, due to our strong commitment to being a tax-exempt 501(c)3 organization, which mandates that we are “absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office.”

This year’s presidential election is highly unusual, but ultimately no different: The Yale Record believes both candidates to be equally un-endorsable, due to our faithful compliance with the tax code.

In particular, we do not endorse Hillary Clinton’s exemplary leadership during her 30 years in the public eye. We do not support her impressive commitment to serving and improving this country—a commitment to which she has dedicated her entire professional career. Because of unambiguous tax law, we do not encourage you to support the most qualified presidential candidate in modern American history, nor do we encourage all citizens to shatter the glass ceiling once and for all by electing Secretary Clinton on November 8.

The Yale Record has no opinion whatsoever on Dr. Jill Stein.

—The Editorial Board of The Yale Record

[maraxus2]

At D+6, it should be even. Clinton is currently polling up there. http://www.vox.com/2016/10/8/13211858/house-math-trump

But she's not pulling that universally across the states. The Dems need to win by big margins across a bunch of states. She might pick up seats out here in California, but might also win an historically large majority out here. Not so for other states like Arizona, where we need to beat a first-term incumbent to pick up the House. Or Florida, where she's averaging +3 in the polls. We need to win four seats out there to take the house. Three of them have incumbents, and the other is open in an R-leaning seat.

Taking back the House means racking up big margins in swingy states like FL, PA, and VA. It also means racking up huge margins in blue states, like CA and NY. She'll probably do the latter, and may do the former.

Donald Trump visiting Wisconsin, a state that Republicans haven't won since 1988, pretty much just to talk shit to Paul Ryan, is improving her odds though.