The 2016 US Election (Part IV)

[FireNexus]

There's talk of shortening the election. Could the Feds accomplish this like they did the national drinking age? By funding state primary elections, so long as they meet certain basic requirements. I'd go for a popular ballot (whether or not it is a beauty pageant or a binding primary) and no contests of any kind that award delegates between, say, May 1st and June 30th (because national primary day would kill you in Iowa and NH).

These elections are very long, and the Feds have limited power to control state election decisions, but a carrot approach is broadly constitutional. Would both parties go for it? They'd save a shitload of money and significantly reduce the future risk of getting Trumped like the Republicans did. And I could see popular support for shortening the election, except that GOP base voters would probably oppose anything a Dem president tried to do for no reason.

[Rhadamantus]

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 Drumpf 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.

But's she's getting that on average. Her underperformance in some states should be balanced out by overperformance in others, right?

[maraxus2]

But's she's getting that on average. Her underperformance in some states should be balanced out by overperformance in others, right?

Where would that be? She'll probably max out Dem gains in CA, NY, and FL, but the map gets tougher beyond a handful of states. OH is pretty much noncompetitive, thanks to the absurd Republican gerrymander out there. Same with NC, VA, and PA.

Don't get me wrong - there's always at least one Representative who gets caught napping and goes down to ignoble defeat. I would be shocked if that didn't happen to a GOP rep this time around, but you can't build a house majority on that.

[Rhadamantus]

But's she's getting that on average. Her underperformance in some states should be balanced out by overperformance in others, right?

Where would that be? She'll probably max out Dem gains in CA, NY, and FL, but the map gets tougher beyond a handful of states. OH is pretty much noncompetitive, thanks to the absurd Republican gerrymander out there. Same with NC, VA, and PA.

Don't get me wrong - there's always at least one Representative who gets caught napping and goes down to ignoble defeat. I would be shocked if that didn't happen to a GOP rep this time around, but you can't build a house majority on that.

I don't know about NC or VA, but I think a lot of PA seats are competive. Assuming that clinton wins by 6 points, the 6th, 7th, 8th, 15th, and 16th should flip, and the 11th would be a tie. That's 5 or 6 seats there alone, and the dems only need about 30.

[maraxus2]

I don't know about NC or VA, but I think a lot of PA seats are competive. Assuming that clinton wins by 6 points, the 6th, 7th, 8th, 15th, and 16th should flip, and the 11th would be a tie. That's 5 or 6 seats there alone, and the dems only need about 30.

I'd be skeptical about any of the PA seats except for the 8th and 16th, and they're both open seats. All of the reps mentioned are good candidates who drew no-name opponents. Obama won PA by about 5.5%, and the Dems didn't flip a single seat, even though the districts were brand new.

I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's just really tough to see the Dems washing in enough driftwood unless Hillary wins nationally by like 10 points or something.

[Rhadamantus]

I don't know about NC or VA, but I think a lot of PA seats are competive. Assuming that clinton wins by 6 points, the 6th, 7th, 8th, 15th, and 16th should flip, and the 11th would be a tie. That's 5 or 6 seats there alone, and the dems only need about 30.

I'd be skeptical about any of the PA seats except for the 8th and 16th, and they're both open seats. All of the reps mentioned are good candidates who drew no-name opponents. Obama won PA by about 5.5%, and the Dems didn't flip a single seat, even though the districts were brand new.

I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's just really tough to see the Dems washing in enough driftwood unless Hillary wins nationally by like 10 points or something.

I'd be astonished if fitzpatrick won, yes. But all of those I named had Cook PVI's below R+6 (which we should be even now)

[The Romulan Republic]

The candidates on space policy (a sadly oft-overlooked subject), courtesy of the Planetary Society:

http://www.planetary.org/get-involved/b ... trump.html

October 25th - Rally in Sanford, Florida

"I will free NASA from the restriction of serving primarily as a logistics agency for low-Earth orbit activity—big deal. Instead, we will refocus its mission on space exploration. Under a Trump Administration, Florida and America will lead the way into the stars."

"A cornerstone of my policy is we will substantially expand public private partnerships to maximize the amount of investment and funding that is available for space exploration and development. This means launching and operating major space assets, right here, that employ thousands and spur innovation and fuel economic growth."

>>> Additional comments at SpacePolicyOnline

October 20th - Senior Policy Advisers for the Trump Campaign writing in SpaceNews

"NASA should be focused primarily on deep space activities rather than Earth-centric work that is better handled by other agencies. Human exploration of our entire solar system by the end of this century should be NASA’s focus and goal. Developing the technologies to meet that goal would severely challenge our present knowledge base, but that should be a reason for exploration and science."

"It makes little sense for numerous launch vehicles to be developed at taxpayer cost, all with essentially the same technology and payload capacity. Coordinated policy would end such duplication of effort and quickly determine where there are private sector solutions that do not necessarily require government investment."

>>> Read the full op-ed at SpaceNews

October 10th - Written answers to questions posed by SpaceNews

"My administration will examine spending priorities and will make adjustments as necessary. However, as a businessman, I am mindful of the many benefits, inventions and scientific breakthroughs that would not have been possible without the space program, and that has to be thrown into the calculus, as well."

"Our civilian space program should reflect the scientific priorities and aspirations of our society. Congress will be a full partner in shaping those priorities as the people’s representatives."

On the Mars goal for human spaceflight: "After taking office, we will have a comprehensive review of our plans for space, and will work with Congress to set both priorities and mission."

>>> Read the full set of answers at SpaceNews

September 20th - Written answer to a question posed by ScienceDebate

"Space exploration has given so much to America, including tremendous pride in our scientific and engineering prowess. A strong space program will encourage our children to seek STEM educational outcomes and will bring millions of jobs and trillions of dollars in investment to this country. The cascading effects of a vibrant space program are legion and can have a positive, constructive impact on the pride and direction of this country. Observation from space and exploring beyond our own space neighborhood should be priorities. We should also seek global partners, because space is not the sole property of America. All humankind benefits from reaching into the stars."

August 3rd, 2016 - Rally in Daytona Beach, Florida

"Look at your space program. Look at what’s going on there. Somebody just asked me back stage, ‘Mr. Trump, will you get involved in the space program?' Look what’s happened with your employment. Look what’s happened with our whole history of space and leadership. Look what’s going on folks. We’re like a third-world nation."

July 28th, 2016 - Reddit "Ask Me Anything" Response

Q: "What role should NASA play in helping to Make America Great Again?"

A: "Honestly I think NASA is wonderful! America has always led the world in space exploration."

July 20th, 2016 - Official Facebook Post

"47 years ago our nation did something that NOBODY thought we could do - we were the first to put a man on the moon. It is time to be number one, again! Believe me, as President, we will once again, Make America First Again!"

May 2016 - Aerospace America Questionnaire

"NASA has been one of the most important agencies in the United States government for most of my lifetime. It should remain so. NASA should focus on stretching the envelope of space exploration for we have so much to discover and to date we have only scratched the surface."

On whether Mars should be the goal for NASA: "A lot of what my administration would recommend depends on our economic state. If we are growing with all of our people employed and our military readiness back to acceptable levels, then we can take a look at the timeline for sending more people into space."

Feb 28th, 2016 - Campaign rally in Alabama

Donald Trump, speaking at a rally now near Huntsville, Ala., says he’ll keep the space program “going” as president.

— Jeff Foust (@jeff_foust) February 28, 2016
Trump suggests he would make budget cuts in other areas, but not the space program. He did not elaborate (so far) in his speech.

— Jeff Foust (@jeff_foust) February 28, 2016
Nov 11, 2015 - Washington Post

"In the old days, it [NASA] was great. Right now, we have bigger problems, you understand that. We have to fix our potholes. We don't exactly have a lot of money."

"You know, space is actually being taken over privately, which is great. It's being taken over, a lot of private companies going up into space. I like that maybe even better."

Aug 15, 2015 - Space Policy Online

[On sending humans to Mars] "Honestly, I think it's wonderful. I want to rebuild our infrastructure first. OK? I think it's wonderful." video source

August 27, 2012 - Twitter

It is very sad to see what @BarackObama has done with NASA. He has gutted the program and made us dependent on the Russians.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 27, 2012

http://www.planetary.org/get-involved/b ... inton.html

October 25th, 2016 - Op-ed, "Hillary will expand our space potential" in SpaceNews

"Secretary Clinton understands that to ensure continued U.S leadership in space, it is critical that NASA have the resources and predictable funding necessary to achieve its goals and missions. As president, she will support the key public investments that help drive advances in science and technology, both in space science and in Earth science, and deepen support for strong public-private partnerships that create jobs and improve lives throughout our country and around the world. Further, her administration will work with Congress to ensure that NASA has the right leadership and funding. And, to solve problems more effectively and expeditiously, she will elevate executive branch coordination of federal agency space initiatives and accelerate the development of advanced new technologies."

>>> Read the full op-ed at SpaceNews



October 10th, 2016 - Written responses to questions posed by SpaceNews

"If elected, I will support NASA’s efforts to drive innovation and advance the technology that expands our understanding of the Earth, the solar system and the universe, and provides global leadership that enables humanity to explore beyond our home planet. NASA’s missions must both bring scientific, economic and educational value to our country and capture our imaginations."

"Since the success of Apollo, NASA has not focused on a singular goal, but has involved instead to serve a wide range of national functions. We must increase investments in science, technology and infrastructure, in STEM education, and in public outreach to ensure that NASA continues to capture our imaginations, contribute to our economy, and drive human understanding forward."

"I have always been an enthusiastic supporter of human space flight. My administration will continue to invest in this worthwhile endeavor. Mars is a consensus horizon goal, though to send humans safely, we still need to advance the technologies required to mitigate the effects of long-duration, deep-space flight."

>>> Read the full set of answers at SpaceNews

September 20th, 2016 - Written answer to a question posed by ScienceDebate

"As president, my administration will build on this progress, promote innovation, and advance inspirational, achievable, and affordable space initiatives. We must maintain our nation’s leadership in space with a program that balances science, technology and exploration; protect our security and the future of the planet through international collaboration and Earth systems monitoring; expand our robotic presence in the solar system; and maximize the impact of our R&D and other space program investments by promoting stronger coordination across federal agencies, and cooperation with industry. I will work with Congress to ensure that NASA has the leadership, funding and operational flexibility necessary to work in new ways with industry, placing emphasis on inventing and employing new technologies and efficiencies to get more bang for the buck while creating jobs and growing the American economy.

"Today, thanks to a series of successful American robotic explorers, we know more about the Red Planet than ever before. A goal of my administration will be to expand this knowledge even further and advance our ability to make human exploration of Mars a reality."

July 16, 2015 - Space Policy Online

“I really, really do support the space program,”

“One of the great advantages we have had in the 50, 60, 70 years vis a vis the rest of the world is the investment we’ve made in science and research of all kinds. It is a huge economic boom.”

“We have also had lots of businesses spin off from NASA research. We have had the benefit of that research going into the public domain so that it could be used not just for academic research purposes but for commercial research purposes. I believe it is one of America’s advantages.”

“I would like to see us continue explore space.”

“On a security basis we should be mapping [NEOs] that everyone is worrying about.”

“I don’t have an objection to partnering with commercial partners, but they are more in the applied science arena, not the discovery science arena which only the government can support.”
video source

March 20, 2012 - The Washington Post

“Now, some of you may know that when I was a little girl growing up in Illinois, I was interested in all kinds of stories about women. And my mother … actually told me about Amelia Earhart. And then when we decided, under President Kennedy’s leadership, that our nation was going to go to the moon and we were going to have an astronaut program, I wanted to be an astronaut. So when I was about 13, I wrote to NASA and asked what I needed to do to try to be an astronaut. And of course, there weren’t any women astronauts, and NASA wrote me back and said there would not be any women astronauts. And I was just crestfallen. But then I realized I couldn’t see very well, and I wasn’t all that athletic, so probably, I wouldn’t be the first woman astronaut anyway.”

[Khaat]

Q: "What role should NASA play in helping to Make America Great Again?"

A: "Honestly I think NASA is wonderful! America has always led the world in space exploration."

I really don't understand why his supporters don't understand that this isn't an answer to the question. It isn't even the answer to any other question posed at that time. Is he deaf? Did he not hear the question? Does he know that it was a question, and not just a brief intermission before he gets to talk again?

I honestly hope Trump's bid for the US Presidency is all an elaborate, unfunny, Andy Kaufman-style prank on the US. Bonus points if Trump pulls of the mask and is Andy Kaufman underneath.

[maraxus2]

I'd be astonished if fitzpatrick won, yes. But all of those I named had Cook PVI's below R+6 (which we should be even now)

True, but those seats are "sticky" in that the voters in Bucks County and the other Philly suburbs still have a tendency to split their ticket. Granted, they're the kind of voters who would show up to vote specifically against Trump, or wouldn't vote in the first place.

I just think there are lots of reasons to be skeptical about taking back the house. It's certainly possible, given how badly Trump is shitting the bed, but by no means likely.

[FireNexus]

As someone from Bucks County, Bucks Republican incumbents getting voted out, even in the year of Trump, is not very likely.

[Rhadamantus]

As someone from Bucks County, Bucks Republican incumbents getting voted out, even in the year of Drumpf, is not very likely.

He's getting hit pretty hard by ads, and it's not a very partisan district. Additionally, republican turnout among those local republicans will probably be down.

[bilateralrope]

Donald Trump declares election irrelevant: 'What are we even having it for, just give it to Trump'

US presidential hopeful Donald Trump is convinced he deserves the top job: "We should just cancel the election and just give it to Trump ... What are we even having it for?"

Trump says he is so clearly the superior candidate that he should be crowned the winner without a contest - even though polls show him behind.

Trump joked that he's been thinking: "We should just cancel the election and just give it to Trump, right? Her policies are so bad!"

The Republican nominee had been talking this morning about rival Hillary Clinton's tax policies and making the case to a Toledo, Ohio audience that his undefined proposals are much better.

He's also joking about the how successful of one of his new catchphrases "Drain the swamp!" has become at his rallies. Trump compared himself to singer Frank Sinatra embracing a song he wasn't a huge fan of at first. Trump says he thought the saying was "terrible," but "now it's become one of the hottest phrases anywhere in the world" and he likes it.

But, jokes aside, Trump has continued his attack on Clinton as being a creature of a corrupt political system. Trump seized on newly public emails in which longtime Bill Clinton aide Doug Band describes overlapping relationships of the Clintons' global philanthropy and the family's private enrichment.

The emails were among thousands stolen from the private account of a top Clinton aide, part of a hacking the Democratic campaign has blamed on the Russians.

"Mr. Band called the arrangement 'unorthodox.' The rest of us call it outright corrupt," Trump declared during a rally in Ohio.

Clinton made no mention of the emails as she campaigned alongside Mrs. Obama, their first joint appearance of the campaign. The first lady has emerged as one of Clinton's most powerful surrogates, passionately touting her experience and denouncing Trump as too divisive and thin-skinned for the White House.

Mrs Obama accused Trump's campaign of trying to depress voter turnout and panned his provocative assertion that the results of the November 8 contest may be rigged.

"Just for the record, in this country, the United States of America, the voters decide elections," the first lady said. "They've always decided."

He's probably joking. But this is not the kind of thing a candidate should be joking about.

[The Romulan Republic]

Indeed not.

Its another sign of his contempt for, and efforts to undermine, legitimate democracy.

[Civil War Man]

Donald Trump declares election irrelevant: 'What are we even having it for, just give it to Trump'

Well, if nothing else, Keith Olbermann's next video's going to be interesting.

[maraxus2]

Indeed not.

Its another sign of his contempt for, and efforts to undermine, legitimate democracy.

Or, and maybe this is crazy on my part, this is just Trump running out of things to say. Maybe he's just throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks at this point. Give his utter failure to campaign for anything else at this point, this seems likely.

[bilateralrope]

Maybe he's given up on the presidency and is focused on what he's going to do after the election. Because his personal brand is in trouble

Once upon a time, Donald Trump had a vision for the Upper West Side of Manhattan.

He'd build a huge development that would be called "Trump City," a collection of high-rise apartment buildings set back from the Hudson River behind the West Side Highway with a skyscraper at the southern end.

As so often happens with Trump's plans, that's not exactly what happened. Trump ended up getting sidelined, thanks in part to the public's objections to him personally. (An attendee at a 1992 discussion of the project "suggested he be tarred and feathered," according to the New York Times.) Under new developers, the apartment buildings were built and now bear his name: Trump Place.

But only on the outside, and only because there's a legal agreement that they do so. The Times reported this week that other mentions of Trump's name in the complex will be removed at the behest of residents. The floor mats in the lobby will go from reading "Trump Place" to identifying the building's street address, and "the doormen and concierges have been measured for new uniforms that will no longer carry the Trump name," the Times' Charles Bagli writes.

Travel Weekly reports that the Trump backlash is not limited to those who've bought property in his buildings. A majority of travel agents told the magazine that they were recommending Trump hotels and resorts less than they did before Trump began his campaign; half also said that their clients have said they don't want to stay at Trump properties. After the publication of the Access Hollywood tape in which Trump casually mentions committing sexual assault, travel agents reported an uptick in aversion to Trump. In August, the travel site Hipmunk noted that bookings at Trump properties had dropped 58 per cent, year-over-year.

The most visible sense of this blowback came in a report this week that a new hotel chain owned by Trump wouldn't use the name Trump. Instead, the chain will be called Scion, a decision that a company representative said was because they "didn't want to confuse consumers between the two brands". One can read that as suggesting that the company would rather people not think "Trump" when they see "Scion."

Today, with 13 days until the last votes are cast in the presidential race, Trump swung by the nation's capital to cut the ribbon at his newest hotel, located on Pennsylvania Avenue, a few blocks southwest of the White House.

It probably doesn't need to be mentioned that it's a weird decision to direct media attention at something non-campaign-related in a non-swing-state in the final 325 hours of a months-long race.

Sure, Trump can ostensibly use the moment to remind voters that he's a businessman who does business, man - but it also won't hurt Trump's personal bottom line to plug the new facility at a moment when he has cameras following him around everywhere.

The DC hotel is also where he called that odd news conference shortly before the first debate to give the media a tour of the facility and - oh, right - to say that President Barack Obama was indeed born in the United States. It's a reminder that Trump's visited his own properties with some regularity over the course of the campaign. NBC crunched the numbers and figured that Trump's held 32 events at Trump properties since the campaign began.

Those are just campaign events. It doesn't include his frequent media appearances from Trump Tower, a location that has certainly received more airtime since June 2015 than Trump's wife. (It's not clear if the event at the hotel today is technically related to the campaign. Reporters were told it isn't, but it's on his campaign schedule.)

Josh Barro ✔ @jbarro
The thing about Trump I'm most looking forward to over the next few years is the disintegration of his hotel business.

Josh Barro ✔ @jbarro
Trump's hotel business is doomed. But the real estate itself is okay. The way to fix it will be to take his name off everything. Humiliating

There's a sense in which the campaign has been very lucrative for Trump.

According to campaign filings with the Federal Election Commission, the campaign has spent more than US$9.2 million on businesses and properties owned by Trump or his immediate family. That includes US$6.7 million on TAG Air, the company that owns Trump's private planes and US$1.2 million spent renting space at Trump Tower to house the campaign. (Needless to say, there are cheaper places to rent office space than on Fifth Avenue in Manhattan.) He's spent more than US$400,000 at Mar-A-Lago to host campaign events that the Huffington Post's S.V. Date points out could have been held at nearby venues for a 10th of the cost. And this doesn't include the amounts that media have spent to stay in Trump properties while on the campaign trail.

Trump seems to be looking ahead to November 10. Unless something dramatic shifts in the presidential race, Trump will not be decamping from the penthouse of Trump Tower to the White House.

When he announced his candidacy and released a document outlining his net worth, a third of the US$10 billion he said he was worth was thanks to his personal brand, a vague figure and descriptor that attempted to encapsulate the value of the word "Trump." If what's happening to his hotels and apartments is any guide, that value has plummeted - and even leveraging the final days of media ubiquity to draw attention to his properties may not be enough to save it.

Trump will almost certainly leave the presidential race much poorer than he entered, by his own standard. He will leave the race diminished.

Unless, through some stunning development, he wins.

[houser2112]

But's she's getting that on average. Her underperformance in some states should be balanced out by overperformance in others, right?

Where would that be? She'll probably max out Dem gains in CA, NY, and FL, but the map gets tougher beyond a handful of states. OH is pretty much noncompetitive, thanks to the absurd Republican gerrymander out there. Same with NC, VA, and PA.

Don't get me wrong - there's always at least one Representative who gets caught napping and goes down to ignoble defeat. I would be shocked if that didn't happen to a GOP rep this time around, but you can't build a house majority on that.

I don't know about NC or VA, but I think a lot of PA seats are competive. Assuming that clinton wins by 6 points, the 6th, 7th, 8th, 15th, and 16th should flip, and the 11th would be a tie. That's 5 or 6 seats there alone, and the dems only need about 30.

I don't know anything about the demographics of NC, but there was a lawsuit about the extreme gerrymandering of its House districts that forced the state GOP to redraw them.

https://ballotpedia.org/Redistricting_in_North_Carolina

[FireNexus]

As someone from Bucks County, Bucks Republican incumbents getting voted out, even in the year of Trump, is not very likely.

He's getting hit pretty hard by ads, and it's not a very partisan district. Additionally, republican turnout among those local republicans will probably be down.

I'd appreciate it if you not change his name to John Oliver's meme when quoting me directly. I do not participate in that because I believe it to be a contributor to the exact kind of immigrant-shaming it is attempting to discredit.

If you're going to quote me directly, quote me exactly. Thank you.

[Rhadamantus]

As someone from Bucks County, Bucks Republican incumbents getting voted out, even in the year of Trump, is not very likely.

He's getting hit pretty hard by ads, and it's not a very partisan district. Additionally, republican turnout among those local republicans will probably be down.

I'd appreciate it if you not change his name to John Oliver's meme when quoting me directly. I do not participate in that because I believe it to be a contributor to the exact kind of immigrant-shaming it is attempting to discredit.

If you're going to quote me directly, quote me exactly. Thank you.

Sorry, the plug-in did it automatically.

[FireNexus]

No problem. I thought it was you being too cute by half, this the bitching.

[Thanas]

This is a good column to follow.

[Eternal_Freedom]

With regards to that space-policy post: has Trump said something I actually like? Sure, manned exploration of the entire solar system by 2100 may not be feasible, but still, it's interesting to hear/read an enthusiastic answer from him that is about something non-terrible. Even if it probably is just his ego talking.

[Elheru Aran]

With regards to that space-policy post: has Trump said something I actually like? Sure, manned exploration of the entire solar system by 2100 may not be feasible, but still, it's interesting to hear/read an enthusiastic answer from him that is about something non-terrible. Even if it probably is just his ego talking.

The problem is he's not saying *anything* substantive. "It's great, it's wonderful, I want us to be first again"... *nothing* about HOW he'll do it. Just a plethora of useless adjectives.

[Eternal_Freedom]

With regards to that space-policy post: has Trump said something I actually like? Sure, manned exploration of the entire solar system by 2100 may not be feasible, but still, it's interesting to hear/read an enthusiastic answer from him that is about something non-terrible. Even if it probably is just his ego talking.

The problem is he's not saying *anything* substantive. "It's great, it's wonderful, I want us to be first again"... *nothing* about HOW he'll do it. Just a plethora of useless adjectives.

True...but its considerably more appealing non-substantive adjectives than the usual spiel.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

The FBI is reopening an investigation into e-mails sent by Hillary Clinton via a personal server, its director has announced.

The FBI had announced in July that its investigation into the Democrat presidential candidate's private e-mails server had concluded.

Director James Comey criticised Mrs Clinton as "careless", but said no charges should be brought.

But in a letter sent to government officials, Mr Comey said new e-mails had been discovered in a different case - and while it does not necessarily mean a reopening of the criminal investigation, it will involve "additional work" by investigation.

In connection with an unrelated case, the FBI has learned of the existence of e-mails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation …

I agreed that the FBI should take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails to determine whether they contain classified information, as well as to assess their importance to our investigation.

– James Comey, FBI director

He went on to say that there is no indication yet as to whether the material would prove "significant", and does not know how long the additional scrutiny will take.

In response, the Senate judiciary committee said it was not expecting the announcement, and it had not been in response to any question from Republican party members on the committee.

Judiciary committee Republican spokesman Taylor Foy said they have no additional information concerning to what e-mails Mr Comey's letter was referring.

“We’re interested know what else they’re going to be looking at,” he said.

Meanwhile, the Clinton campaign reportedly has "no idea" what the investigation is about.

Source.