The 2020 Election

Rad · Jun 01, 2020, 07:56 AM

No incumbent president has ever been in a weaker position than Trump: CNN polling analyst

on June 1, 2020
raw story
By Brad Reed

All recent polls suggest that President Donald Trump is losing to presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden, and CNN polling analyst Harry Enten argues that Trump's current position is unprecedentedly bad for an incumbent president.

In analyzing a new round of polls on the 2020 presidential race, Enten writes that Biden's lead over Trump has been stronger and steadier than any lead of a challenger over an incumbent president.

"There were more than 40 national public polls taken at least partially in the month of May that asked about the Biden-Trump matchup," he writes. "Biden led in every single one of them. He's the first challenger to be ahead of the incumbent in every May poll since Jimmy Carter did so in 1976."

Enten says that there's no mystery about why Trump is losing in poll after poll after poll: Most voters simply do not like him.

"Simply put, he remains unpopular," Enten writes. "His net approval rating (approval - disapproval) in the ABC News/Washington Post poll was -8 points. That's very close to the average of polls, which has it at about -10 points. At no point during the past three years has Trump ever had a positive net approval rating."

From a historical perspective, Enten notes that "the only other two presidents to have a net approval rating this low at this point in the campaign were Carter in 1980 and George H.W. Bush in 1992" - both of whom lost.

Rad · Jun 02, 2020, 06:50 AM

"˜Bill Barr is a liar': Trump AG floats new mail-vote conspiracy experts say "˜couldn't happen'

on June 2, 2020
By Igor Derysh, Salon

Attorney General Bill Barr has floated a new conspiracy theory that foreign actors could disrupt mail voting with counterfeit ballots. Voting experts quickly responded that it was nonsense.

"I haven't looked into that" theory, Barr told The New York Times, but without citing any evidence said it was "one of the issues that I'm real worried about."

"We've been talking about how, in terms of foreign influence, there are a number of foreign countries that could easily make counterfeit ballots, put names on them, send them in," Barr said. "And it'd be very hard to sort out what's happening."

Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr., D-N.J., said that Barr's claim was impossible since "mail ballots are bar-coded to prevent fraud."

"Bill Barr is a liar. Our nation's chief law enforcement officer is trying to burn down American democracy to prop up a corrupt impeached executive," he tweeted. "Barr's debasement of our justice system and his assaults on American democracy have been so relentless I've been calling for his impeachment and the revocation of his law licenses since last year."

Voting experts agreed that Barr's claim showed no understanding of how mail ballots work.

"Bless Bill Barr's heart - this just couldn't happen," said Michael Li, senior counsel for the Brennan Center of Justice Democracy Program at NYU School of Law. "In most states, your signature on the mail-ballot envelope is compared to the signature on file before a ballot is counted"¦ And the reality is that the states that will be potentially decisive in 2020 all already allow no-excuse vote by mail."

"It's hard to see Barr's comments as something other than laying the groundwork for casting doubt about the election after November," Li added. "That's why it's important that we all push back."

Though most states already allow anyone to vote by mail for any reason, Trump has fomented baseless conspiracy theories alleging that mail voting is rife with fraud. There is no data to suggest that there ever has been any significant fraud related to mail voting, or in-person voting either, for that matter. That hasn't stopped Trump from blatantly lying and inventing hypothetical crimes, drawing a rare fact-check from Twitter. Last week, the president suggested that children might "raid the mailboxes" to steal ballots.

"Which is happening - they grab the ballots," Trump said. "You don't think that happens?"

No. It doesn't happen.

"What we know can be boiled down to this: Voting fraud in the United States is rare, less rare is fraud using mail ballots," Charles Stewart, en elections expert at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, told The New York Times.

"Election fraud in the United States is very rare, but the most common type of such fraud in the United States involves absentee ballots," agreed Rick Hasen, an elections expert at the University of California, Irvine. "Sensible rules for handling of absentee ballots make sense, not only to minimize the risk of ballot tampering but to ensure that voters cast valid ballots."

Barr's conspiracy theory is likewise "pure BS," argued Michael McDonald, an elections expert at the University of Florida.

"You can't just print out a single ballot for the entire U.S. No two localities have the same ballot because local offices appearing on it are different," he explained. "What if you want to target a single precinct, since district lines cut [across] cities and counties? You'd need to hijack a ballot and be able to mass print the ballot and two return envelopes (the return envelope and the inner privacy envelope)."

"It is easy for election officials to detect ham-handed attempts like making ballot copies," McDonald added. "All the while, the post office, which works with election officials to process ballots, will have to be oblivious to fake ballots moving through their system. If someone dumps a bunch at a single location, that will be suspicious. Certainly if they are [coming from] overseas addresses."

Despite the Trump administration's attempts to cast doubt on the legitimacy of mail voting, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany, White House adviser Kellyanne Conway and Trump himself have all voted by mail. Trump has yet to point to a single example of widespread voter fraud, but has publicly complained that he thinks Republicans are likely to lose if voting is expanded.

"This all comes from fear by Trump and like Republicans that more people voting means more non-white voters," Stuart Stevens, a Republican consultant who worked on Mitt Romney and George W. Bush's presidential campaigns, told HuffPost.

These attacks from the administration could backfire. Pennsylvania, for example, has seen more than twice as many requests for absentee ballots from Democrats than Republicans.

"I must tell you that locally, in my county, we're not advocating and we're not pushing the mail-in voting," Lee Snover, the chair of the Northampton County Republican Party, told the Philadelphia Inquirer. "We're concerned about fraud. We're not happy with the process. Trump has sent the message out there that he's concerned about it as well."

The county is one of three in the state that flipped from Obama to Trump in 2016.

"Our county kind of is a Trump county. We're kind of listening to Trump on this. He's spoken about it. He's tweeted about it. He doesn't want us to do it," Snover said, adding that "more than one person" has told her that "Trump doesn't want us mailing in, [so] I'm not mailing it in."

Rad · Jun 03, 2020, 08:08 AM

Amid pandemic, White House race becomes digital dogfight

on June 3, 2020
By Agence France-Presse

The 2020 US presidential race is becoming a digital-first campaign as the coronavirus pandemic cuts candidates off from traditional organizing and in-person events.

On the surface, President Donald Trump has the edge over Democrat Joe Biden because of the incumbent's extensive digital infrastructure and large social media following.

But Biden has been stepping up his digital presence and is getting a boost from a handful of outside organizations seeking to counter Trump's messaging on social platforms.

Both sides agree that digital will play a critical role in the 2020 White House race as social media have taken the place of rallies and door-to-door campaigning.

"The digital campaign has always been important. What has changed now is that it's the only show in town," said Republican digital strategist Eric Wilson, who has no direct role in the Trump campaign.

Wilson said the Trump campaign's experience since 2016 means it has a head start while Biden has been slow to embrace a digital strategy.

"Voters are consuming politics as entertainment and Biden doesn't seem to grasp his role as a social media influencer and doesn't see any interest in changing that," Wilson said.

Trump has some 81 million Twitter followers compared with 5.8 million for Biden, and similar advantages on Facebook and other platforms.

But Biden and an array of progressive organizations have been working to flood the internet with messages to neutralize Trump and his supporters.

- "˜Air cover' for Biden -

Digital advertising for the 2020 election is expected to reach $1.8 billion, according to research firm Advertising Analytics, which boosted its estimates by 13.5 percent due to the pandemic.

The progressive policy group Acronym and its political action committee Pacronym have pledged a $75 million digital campaign to bring out voters for Biden.

"Since last August we started to counter what we knew would be a sophisticated digital operation by President Trump," said Acronym founder Tara McGowan.

"We wanted to provide air cover for whoever the Democratic nominee would be since we knew the nominee would have a time and resources deficit."

Research by the group found a 3.6 percentage point drop in Trump's approval rating among "persuadable voters" who have seen Pacronym's digital ads.

Acronym's analysis of online ad spending showed Trump has spent over $62 million on Facebook and Google advertising since the 2018 midterm elections, compared with $21.9 million for Biden.

But the analysis showed Biden and progressive groups began outspending Trump and his backers in early May on Facebook, and narrowed the gap on Google.

"I don't think the candidates themselves need to be as comfortable on social media as much as they need to hire experienced digital staffers," McGowan said.

"We've seen the Biden campaign make leaps and bounds in their digital strategy."

- The digital battleground -

Other groups are also active: the large Democratic party organization Priorities USA is pledging to spend $150 million to defeat Trump, with at least $40 million in digital.

The newly formed political action group Defeat Disinfo plans to use paid influencers on social media and counter misinformation before it goes viral.

"My experience is that the total share of volume of conversation about a candidate is driven not by the campaigns themselves but by media, activists and other organizations," said Alan Rosenblatt, a Democrat-aligned digital strategist with Unfiltered Media and an adjunct professor at George Washington University.

"That's where the battlefield is and these groups can have a tremendous impact."

Rosenblatt added that Biden "has a lot of headroom to grow" on social media while Trump has probably maxed out with a social media army which has a considerable number of automated accounts or "bots."

- Targeting, manipulation -

Both campaigns will be testing the limits of online platforms' policies on manipulation and microtargeting, as Trump ramps up his war of words against Silicon Valley platforms.

"The shift to a digital focus in the 2020 election means online disinformation and propaganda will become more widespread and more potent," said University of Texas professor Samuel Woolley, who researches computational propaganda.

Woolley's research suggests campaigns are increasing their use of geolocation tools which can surreptitiously gather information about voters using their smartphones.

"Campaigns can find out which people are going to a gun range, to church or to Planned Parenthood, and they can turn that into actionable information," Woolley said.

"They might send messages out to try to get people to vote, or to discourage people from voting."

Jeffrey Chester of the Center for Digital Democracy warned of privacy concerns as political campaigns adopt technologies from digital marketers using location data and predictive analytics.

These targeting tools raise the same issues as the Cambridge Analytica scandal over private data being used to fashion psychological voter profiles.

"You are going to see artificial intelligence and machine learning used to make predictions about voters," Chester said.

"The campaigns are using all the latest tools to influence voters under the radar, and it's completely unregulated."

soleil · Jun 03, 2020, 02:11 PM

Excerpts from:

Trump said in 2014 riots would fix economic crash and return country to "˜when we were great'
Gino Spocchia
Independent
June 2, 2020

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-riots-fox-news-obamacare-putin-economy-us-coronavirus-george-floyd-a9544491.html

In damning comments made on television in 2014, Donald Trump told Fox News that "total hell" would make America "great" again.

The then TV host made an appearance on Fox & Friends in February 2014 to condemn Obamacare and Americans who were not in work, whilst backing Vladimir Putin's Russia.

"You know what solves it? When the economy crashes, when the economy goes to total hell and everything is a disaster"..."Then you'll have, you know, you'll have riots to go back to where we were when we were great".

Rad · Jun 06, 2020, 08:49 AM

TAKE HEART AMERICANS...

We are witnessing the birth of a movement - and the downfall of a president

on June 6, 2020
By Lucian K. Truscott IV, Salon
- Commentary

They almost always begin to right wrongs: illegitimate wars; decades of discrimination on the grounds of gender or racial or sexual identity; killings of innocents by police or gun-toting lunatics; oppression by governments wielding unequal laws; the deeply embedded legacy of centuries of racism.

They are imperfect. Arising out of rage, they can be unfocused, inchoate, contradictory. Protesting violence, they often involve violence. Protesting oppression, they sometimes oppress by destroying public spaces, small businesses, even entire neighborhoods.

But sometimes they are large enough and powerful enough and righteous enough to bend the arc of history. We are in such a moment. There has been a turning. A protest against the murder of a black man by police in Minneapolis has become a movement. Demonstrations, which began almost two weeks ago, are ongoing. They are huge. They are nationwide. They are peaceful. They show no signs of stopping.

Among the extraordinary things about this moment is the fact that every single person who has taken to the streets to demonstrate is risking his or her life. People who only days ago were huddled inside their homes, afraid of a virus that has taken in excess of 110,000 lives in this country, are putting on their face masks and gathering by the tens or even hundreds of thousands, unafraid of the virus or the forces arrayed on the streets against them. They are protesting the death of a man who should not have had to die, and they are protesting the man who seemingly gave permission for him to be murdered by the intolerance and racism he has openly promoted for more than four years.

If we had any doubts that our fellow citizens would turn out to vote in November because they would be afraid of the virus or intimidated by attempts to block their votes, we have our answer. More people will turn out to vote, not less, and this has Trump very, very worried.

The show of courage on the streets has frightened Trump and his allies in the Republican Party. If you have any doubts, all you have to do is watch the scene of Republican senators scurrying away from MSNBC reporter Kasie Hunt on Capitol Hill when she asked them to comment on Trump's disgusting and disreputable photo-op at St. John's Church on Monday.

Trump has turned Washington into an armed camp. He has built a three-mile-long wall around the White House and cowered in a basement bunker as protests grew on the streets outside. But Trump's threat to use active-duty soldiers to suppress dissent has encountered some profound pushback from an unexpected source: the United States military.

It began with a statement by former Secretary of Defense James Mattis in reaction to the use of force, including National Guard soldiers, to clear peaceful demonstrators from a street near the White House so Trump could make his now-infamous "walk" to St. John's Church for his Bible-waving photo-op. "I have watched this week's unfolding events, angry and appalled," Mattis wrote in The Atlantic:

When I joined the military, some 50 years ago, I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the Constitutional rights of their fellow citizens - much less to provide a bizarre photo op for the elected commander-in-chief, with military leadership standing alongside. The protests are defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values - our values as people and our values as a nation. We do not need to militarize our response to protests. We need to unite around a common purpose. And it starts by guaranteeing that all of us are equal before the law.

And then something extraordinary happened. Mattis' clarion call was joined by more senior military figures, beginning with Secretary of Defense Mark Esper, who had been the object of strong criticism for standing next to Trump during his Bible photo-op. Esper held a press conference at the Pentagon on Wednesday and announced that he was against invoking the Insurrection Act, which would (hypothetically) authorize the deployment of active-duty military on the streets of America. Trump is said to be very, very unhappy with Esper and reversed his order for elements of the 82nd Airborne Division to return to their base in North Carolina. By week's end, however, Esper had prevailed, and the 82nd was on the way home.

Retired Adm. Mike Mullen, who served as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Barack Obama, was next. He wrote a piece for The Atlantic entitled, "I cannot remain silent."

"t sickened me yesterday to see security personnel - including members of the National Guard - forcibly and violently clear a path through Lafayette Square to accommodate the president's visit outside St. John's Church. I have to date been reticent to speak out on issues surrounding President Trump's leadership, but we are at an inflection point, and the events of the past few weeks have made it impossible to remain silent.

Whatever Trump's goal in conducting his visit, he laid bare his disdain for the rights of peaceful protest in this country, gave succor to the leaders of other countries who take comfort in our domestic strife, and risked further politicizing the men and women of our armed forces."

Retired General John R. Allen weighed in next, writing ominously in Foreign Policy magazine, "The slide of the United States into illiberalism may well have begun on June 1, 2020. Remember the date. It may well signal the beginning of the end of the American experiment."

More retired generals weighed in later in the week, including two former chairs of the Joint Chiefs, Martin Dempsey and Richard Meyers. Both were critical of Trump's handling of protests and opposed the use of the military to suppress dissent.

But even more extraordinary than the retired officers who spoke out was the letter from the current chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Mark A. Milley, which was leaked to conservative pundit Bill Kristol on Thursday. Milley is said to have had a contentious meeting with Trump in the Oval Office on Monday before joining him in his infamous "walk" down the street cleared by police and National Guard soldiers. According to David Ignatius of the Washington Post, Milley, "whose temper can match Trump's"¦was vocal in reiterating his advice to the president against mobilizing troops, according to three knowledgeable sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity." That is Washington-speak for "they were yelling at each other."

Sent to all of the other chiefs of staff for the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Coast Guard, National Guard and commanders of combatant commands, Milley's letter is unlike anything I have seen, and I've been around the military since I was born in an Army field hospital in occupied Japan in 1947.

He reminded everyone in uniform of their oath to support and defend the Constitution. I've never seen that done before. All service members take the same oath, but they don't go around reminding each other about it. Milley wrote of the Constitution, "This document is founded on the essential principles that all men and women are born free and equal, and should be treated with respect and dignity. It also gives Americans the right to freedom of speech and peaceful assembly. We in uniform - all branches, all components, all ranks - remain committed to our national values and principles embedded in the Constitution." He went on to note specifically that the National Guard "is operating under the authority of state governors."

For a military man, this comes close to a call for insurrection. Milley's message is written in a code that everyone in uniform will understand implicitly. By reminding every member of the military that the soldiers currently deployed on the street around the country are not there under the authority of the president, and by reminding them of their oath to the Constitution, he is telling them that the military will not be carrying out any un-American orders issued by Donald Trump. Late Friday, Secretary of Defense Esper disarmed the National Guard doing riot duty in Washington, ordering them to turn in their weapons and ammunition. He also ordered all active duty troops amassed outside the capital earlier in the week by the White House to be sent home. He issued both orders without consulting the White House.

These generals are not politicians, but all their statements are as political as any I've ever seen by senior officers, retired or active duty. It's the equivalent of lining up howitzers on Pennsylvania Avenue and aiming at the White House.

I'll bet Trump rues the day he appointed "Mad Dog" Mattis as secretary of defense. They don't go out and make statements like this without talking to one another. Mullen and Mattis were said to have been aware of Milley's confrontation with the president at the time they wrote their articles on Tuesday and Wednesday. Milley and his fellow generals and admirals are giving a clear sign that the military leaders are turning against Trump. Colin Powell will reportedly be next, in an appearance on one of the Sunday morning shows.

The military is the most reliably conservative institution this country has. But inside the military establishment, the signals are being sent. They have announced that they are more reliable as defenders of the rights of their fellow citizens than the police. Without stepping over the line into insubordination, they have made it as clear as they can that their loyalty isn't to the president. It's to the Constitution.

I don't think we have to worry about the military following illegal orders from Trump. At least for now, they're on our side.

Rad · Jun 06, 2020, 09:00 AM

"˜A coward and a commander': New Lincoln Project ad contrasts Trump with James Mattis

on June 6, 2020
Raw Story
By Matthew Chapman

On Friday, the conservative anti-Trump group The Lincoln Project released a new attack ad against President Donald Trump - this time using the criticism of his former Defense Secretary James Mattis, and comparing and contrasting their leadership ability.

"This is the story of a coward and a commander," said the ad's narrator. "The coward Trump dodged the draft. Jim Mattis led American troops for forty years. While a frightened Trump hides from protesters in a deep bunker firing off tweets, Jim Mattis does what he's always done: Leads. While Donald Trump angrily attacks, General Mattis' words deserve to be heard by every American."

"Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people - does not even pretend to try. Instead he tries to divide us," said the ad, quoting Mattis' words in The Atlantic. "Militarizing our response, as we saw in Washington, D.C., sets up a conflict - a false conflict - between the military and civilian society," continued the ad. "It erodes the moral ground that ensures a trusted bond between men and women in uniform and the society they are sworn to protect."
Defend democracy. Click to invest in courageous progressive journalism today.

"Who do you trust?" the ad concluded. "The coward, or the commander?"

Watch the ad below:

"Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people-does not even pretend to try. Instead, he tries to divide us." -General James Mattis pic.twitter.com/4OHA4FbSDh

- The Lincoln Project (@ProjectLincoln) June 5, 2020

Watch: https://twitter.com/ProjectLincoln/status/1269013225804357634

**********

Mattis Accuses Trump of Dividing the Nation in a Time of Crisis

He "does not even pretend to try" to unite Americans, the former defense secretary said, breaking his long public silence on the president amid protests across the nation.

By Eric Schmitt and Helene Cooper
NY Times
6/4/2020

WASHINGTON - Former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, breaking months of public silence on President Trump since resigning in protest in December 2018, on Wednesday offered a withering critique of the president's leadership amid growing protests across the country.

"Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people - does not even pretend to try," Mr. Mattis wrote in a statement issued late Wednesday. "Instead he tries to divide us. We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership."

Mr. Mattis, a retired four-star Marine Corps general, also criticized comments by the current defense secretary, Mark T. Esper, who in recent days has described protest sites across the nation as a "battle space" to be cleared.

"We must reject any thinking of our cities as a "˜battle space' that our uniformed military is called upon to "˜dominate,'" Mr. Mattis wrote. "At home, we should use our military only when requested to do so, on very rare occasions, by state governors. Militarizing our response, as we witnessed in Washington, D.C., sets up a conflict - a false conflict - between the military and civilian society."

Mr. Trump fired back on Twitter. "Probably the only thing Barack Obama & I have in common is that we both had the honor of firing Jim Mattis, the world's most overrated General," he said, although Mr. Mattis quit.

In 2013, Mr. Mattis was pushed out of his job as head of the military's U.S. Central Command because he was viewed as too much of a hawk on Iran policy during the Obama administration.

In his tweet, the president added: "His primary strength was not military, but rather personal public relations. I gave him a new life, things to do, and battles to win, but he seldom "˜brought home the bacon'. I didn't like his "˜leadership' style or much else about him, and many others agree. Glad he is gone!"

Mr. Mattis's condemnation carries huge weight in military circles, where he remains highly influential. In the insular world of Marines, he has an almost cultlike status. But that influence extends far beyond just the military to include much of the national security establishment, members of Congress, foreign dignitaries and defense contractors.

For instance, at the Reagan National Defense Forum in Simi Valley, Calif., last December, Mr. Mattis, gliding through a reception of influential national security thinkers from government and the private sector, was stopped constantly by people who wanted to shake his hand and take photos with him. A crowd of people trailed him as he made his way through the hall, amid excited murmurs of, "Hey, Mattis is here."

But his refusal to publicly denounce Mr. Trump since his resignation - over the president's decision to withdraw troops from Syria - earned him criticism even from some longtime admirers. He repeatedly told reporters who sought comment from him or engaged him during a tour of his best-selling book that he did not want to criticize a sitting commander in chief.

But the events of Monday night, in which Mr. Trump put peaceful American protesters squarely in the cross hairs of the American military that is sworn to protect the Constitution, was a step too far for Mr. Mattis, people who have spoken to him say.

"When I joined the military, some 50 years ago, I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution," Mr. Mattis wrote. "Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the constitutional rights of their fellow citizens - much less to provide a bizarre photo op for the elected commander in chief, with military leadership standing alongside."

During a long and tense Monday night, protesters in Lafayette Square near the White House were forcibly removed so Mr. Trump could walk to a nearby church - with the Mr. Esper and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark A. Milley - for a photo op.

"We must not be distracted by a small number of lawbreakers," Mr. Mattis said. "The protests are defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values - our values as people and our values as a nation."

Citing James Madison's Federalist Paper 14, Mr. Mattis said: "We do not need to militarize our response to protests. We need to unite around a common purpose. And it starts by guaranteeing that all of us are equal before the law."

Reached by phone at his home in Washington State on Wednesday night, Mr. Mattis declined to comment.

In Mr. Mattis's early days as defense secretary, he often ate dinner with the president in the White House residence. Over hamburgers, and with the help of briefing folders, Mr. Mattis explained to Mr. Trump key points about the United States' relationships with allies - a bedrock principle for the former general turned secretary.

But Mr. Mattis also quietly slow-walked many of Mr. Trump's proposals, including banning transgender troops, starting a Space Force and putting on a costly military parade in the capital. In each case, he went through the motions of acquiescing to the White House - and then buried the plans in Defense Department red tape.

By late 2018, the relationship between Mr. Mattis and Mr. Trump had deteriorated badly. The widely accepted narrative that Mr. Mattis was the adult in the room, an anchor of reason in a stormy White House, came to annoy the president.

Even as his influence with Mr. Trump waned, however, Mr. Mattis repeatedly told friends and aides that he viewed his responsibility to protect the United States' 1.3 million active-duty troops as worth the concessions necessary as defense secretary to a mercurial president.

But Mr. Trump's abrupt decision in late December 2018 to withdraw roughly 2,000 American troops from eastern Syria without consulting allies was a step too far for Mr. Mattis, and he resigned. Mr. Mattis's letter of resignation condemned Mr. Trump's approach to the world as destructive to American influence and power.

In his statement on Wednesday, Mr. Mattis sounded a call to arms of a different sort than have resounded in the streets near the White House, and across the country.

"We know that we are better than the abuse of executive authority that we witnessed in Lafayette Square," Mr. Mattis said. "We must reject and hold accountable those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution."

************

Colin Powell buries "˜birther and liar' Trump in CNN interview - and vows to vote for Biden

on June 7, 2020
Raw Story
By Tom Boggioni

In a highly candid interview with CNN's Jake Tapper, former Secretary of State Colin Powell went all in attacking Donald Trump, saying he didn't like him in 2016 when he was running as a "birther" and he dislikes the president even more now because he is a "liar."

Speaking with the "State of the Union" host, the normally reserved Powell became very animated.

After explaining his opposition to Trump in 2016 because of his flood of insults and racist remarks, the retired general then went on a tirade about Trump.

"When I heard some of the things he was saying, he made it clear to me I could not vote for this individual," Powell recalled. "The first thing that troubled me is the whole birther movement. The birther's movement had to do with the fact that the president of the united states, President Obama, was a black man. that was part of it. And then I was deeply troubled by the way in which he was going around insulting everybody - insulting Gold Star mothers, insulting John McCain, insulting immigrants and I'm a son of immigrants. Insulting anybody who dared to speak against him."

"That is dangerous for our democracy, it is dangerous for our country, and I think what we're seeing now, those massive protest movements I have ever seen in my life. I think this suggests the country is getting wise to this and we're not going to put up with it anymore," he stated before calling the president "a liar."

Later in the interview he was asked if he would support Biden's presidential, bid, he answered in the affirmative before adding he would be casting his vote for the former vice president.

Watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p03cX9E4hhI&feature=emb_title

Rad · Jun 06, 2020, 11:53 AM

All,

Joe Biden: It's in some of our darkest moments of despair that we've made some of our greatest progress - and we have that chance once again. We're not just going to rebuild this nation - we're going to transform it. There is nothing we can't do if we do it together.

https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1268264439565807617?s=20

dollydaydream · Jun 06, 2020, 09:21 PM

yes

soleil · Jun 07, 2020, 12:44 AM

Hi Rad and all,

Thank you, Rad, for posting the Lucian Truscott piece. Favorite part:

"If we had any doubts that our fellow citizens would turn out to vote in November because they would be afraid of the virus or intimidated by attempts to block their votes, we have our answer. More people will turn out to vote, not less, and this has Trump very, very worried."

The protests are inspiring. I hope they continue all the way to election day.

Peace + blessings,

Soleil

Rad · Jun 08, 2020, 07:59 AM

Trump needs to "˜run the table' in key states to have any chance of being re-elected: NYT reporter

on June 8, 2020
Raw Story
By Tom Boggioni

Appearing on MSNBC on Sunday afternoon with host Alex Witt, New York Times White House correspondent Peter Baker said Donald Trump's chances of being re-elected are getting worse by the day as voters in normally reliable Republican states are turning on the president.

Addressing former Secretary of State Colin Powell's endorsement of Joe Biden for president during an appearance on CNN, host Witt asked about the president's declining fortunes.

"What the president has done throughout his presidency is stick to his core constituency; the voters who got him there in the first place. He has done nothing to reach out beyond his core constituency,'" Baker explained. "For the most part, he has catered to the core constituency with the idea that, if he maximized turnout by them in the right states, he can duplicate what he pulled off in 2016 which was an electoral college win."

"That's going to be a tough road this time," he continued. "What we're seeing now is these swing states are really competitive races. Not just in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, the states pretty key to President Trump beating Hillary Clinton four years ago, but even the states like Florida, North Carolina and there's a Texas poll showing President Trump and Joe Biden virtually tied there. If those states are in play, states that were not thought to be competitive, that makes President Trump's job that much harder."

"In other words, he has to run the table," he predicted. "He not only has to win back the states he won last time, but hold on to these states that he is in danger of losing. Now again, as early as five months out, polls have been wrong before but I think even within President Trump's campaign right now there is a great deal of concern."

Watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaW-8iV7Zag&feature=emb_title

**********

Trump's team is "˜scrambling' after weekend filled with devastating poll numbers: MSNBC's Morning Joe

on June 8, 2020
Raw Story
By Travis Gettys

President Donald Trump's poll numbers continue to plummet, and MSNBC's Joe Scarborough doesn't see a way for him to turn that trend around.

The president is down 5 percentage points against Joe Biden, but Americans overwhelmingly trust the former vice president over Trump and strongly back the nationwide protests against police brutality.

"These numbers, top-to-bottom, looking very bad for the president," said the "Morning Joe" host. "Do they have a plan moving forward to turn the page?"

Associated Press reporter Jonathan Lemire said the president's team knows they're losing, and they're increasingly concerned that the protests will energize young voters.

"If that energy Democrats hope can translate to November, the White House and re-election team knows they're in trouble," Lemire said. "The president, they are sort of scrambling for response. They are looking for new slogans, yes, but more than that they are looking for a new approach. They are going to go negative again on Joe Biden."

The re-election campaign will attempt to smear Biden while also trying to hype any economic gains made after the coronavirus wiped out the market and destroyed millions of jobs, but Lemire said the president may also try to crack down on the demonstrations.

"I want to flag one more thing," Lemire said. "The only thing on the White House schedule today, we know he's having a meeting with law enforcement, but it's unclear what the topic is going to be. Certainly, Attorney General [William] Barr and others, it doesn't seem necessarily about police reform but rather getting a handle on the protests. That may be a moment the president may miss an opportunity to speak to those who throngs in the nation's streets. Will they be able to change the tenor, have a meaningful dialogue with the protesters remains to be seen."

Watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqLcgGaezM8&feature=emb_title

**********

Prominent Republicans serving notice they won't support Trump's re-election: report

on June 8, 2020
Raw Story
By Tom Boggioni

According to a report from the New York Times, prominent Republicans are making it clear to Donald Trump that he won't be receiving their votes or support as he runs for re-election - and they may endorse his presumptive opponent Joe Biden.

With one conservative commentator writing that some GOP lawmakers see the writing on the wall that the president won't be re-elected and may soon start distancing themselves from the embattled president, the Times reports that a few have already made their intentions clear that they won't back the 2020 Republican presidential nominee.

Noting that many of the top Republicans stayed away from Trump in 2016, figuring incorrectly that he couldn't win, the power of incumbency and having a Republican in the White House is still not enough to make them change their mind in 2020.

"It was one thing in 2016 for top Republicans to take a stand against Donald J. Trump for president: He wasn't likely to win anyway, the thinking went, and there was no ongoing conservative governing agenda that would be endangered," the Times' Jonathan Martin wrote. "The 2020 campaign is different: Opposing the sitting president of your own party means putting policy priorities at risk, in this case appointing conservative judges, sustaining business-friendly regulations and cutting taxes - as well as incurring the volcanic wrath of Mr. Trump."

With that in mind, Martin explained, GOP lawmakers past and still in office are making it known they want nothing to do with the volatile Trump.

"˜Far sooner than they expected, growing numbers of prominent Republicans are debating how far to go in revealing that they won't back his re-election - or might even vote for Joseph R. Biden Jr., the presumptive Democratic nominee," the report states. "They're feeling a fresh urgency because of Mr. Trump's incendiary response to the protests of police brutality, atop his mishandling of the coronavirus pandemic, according to people who spoke on the condition of anonymity to disclose private discussions."

At the top of the list is former President George W. Bush, who still has his supporters within the Republican Party.

"Former President George W. Bush won't support the re-election of Mr. Trump, and Jeb Bush isn't sure how he'll vote, say people familiar with their thinking. Senator Mitt Romney of Utah won't back Mr. Trump and is deliberating whether to again write in his wife, Ann, or cast another ballot this November," Martin reports. "And Cindy McCain, the widow of Senator John McCain, is almost certain to support Mr. Biden but is unsure how public to be about it because one of her sons is eying a run for office."

Writing, "Former Republican leaders like the former Speakers Paul D. Ryan and John A. Boehner won't say how they will vote, and some Republicans who are already disinclined to support Mr. Trump are weighing whether to go beyond backing a third-party contender to openly endorse Mr. Biden," Martin added, "Former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis's blistering criticism of Mr. Trump and the admission this week by Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska that she is "˜struggling' with whether to vote for the sitting president of her own party have intensified the soul-searching taking place, forcing a number of officials to reckon with an act that they have long avoided: stating out loud that Mr. Trump is unfit for office."

"Mr. Trump won election in 2016, of course, in spite of a parade of Republicans and retired military officers who refused to support him. Far more current G.O.P. elected officials are publicly backing Mr. Trump than did four years ago. Among his unwavering supporters are Republican leaders like Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, and past foes like Senators Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham," the reports states, before adding a caveat.

"Yet it would be a sharp rebuke for former Trump administration officials and well-known Republicans to buck their own standard-bearer. Individually, they may not sway many votes - particularly at a time of deep polarization. But their collective opposition, or even resounding silence, could offer something of a permission structure for Trump-skeptical Republicans to put party loyalty aside," Martin explained.

Darja · Jun 11, 2020, 06:20 AM

Des Moines' top newspaper slams Iowa GOP's "˜egregious' voter suppression campaign

on June 11, 2020
By Alex Henderson, AlterNet

Iowa is among the swing states that could help determine whether President Donald Trump spends another four years in the White House or is voted out of office. It's also a state in which the GOP has been waging a sleazy voter suppression campaign, and the Des Moines Register's editorial board calls Iowa Republicans out for it in a blistering editorial published on June 10.

"Republican state lawmakers are on a mission: make it as difficult as possible for Iowans to vote," the editorial warns. "Their latest effort to fulfill this mission came in the form of a last-minute 30-page amendment to a previously simple, noncontroversial bill. Sen. Roby Smith, R-Davenport, said the new legislation - passed along party lines after a contentious late-night debate - is intended to support "˜safe, secure and reliable elections.' It is not."

The editorial goes on to stress that Iowa already has "safe, secure and reliable elections" - and that the obvious goal of Iowa Republicans is "voter suppression."

"The bill, among other things, prohibits the secretary of state from mailing absentee ballot requests to Iowans without a written voter request," the Register's editorial explains. "In other words, it would prevent the current secretary, Republican Paul Pate, from doing exactly what he recently did. To promote voting by mail during the coronavirus pandemic, he sent mail-in ballot request forms for the June 2 primary to all registered voters in the state."

In that June 2 primary, the Register notes, Iowa enjoyed "record voter turnout, largely due to absentee voting."

"Participation by more people in our democracy is a success," the Register stresses. "But that's not how legislative Republicans see it. Unfortunately, that should come as no surprise by now."

The Register's editorial also slams Iowa Republicans for discouraging absentee voting at a time when the United States continues to be battered by the coronavirus pandemic - which, according to researchers at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, had killed more than 112,000 people in the U.S. and over 411,800 people worldwide as of early Wednesday morning, June 10.

Iowa Republicans, according to the Register, are doing everything they can to "ensure Iowans have to do more work to obtain an absentee ballot - a particularly egregious stunt considering we are in the midst of an infectious disease pandemic."

"The novel coronavirus will still be circulating during the November general election," the editorial warns. "To reduce transmission of the virus, Iowa needs to expand early and absentee voting. We will need more no-contact ballot drop-off sites. Because of increased early voting and difficulty in recruiting poll workers, counties should reduce the number of polling places, which the legislation also limits."

The editorial concludes by noting Republicans' obvious motivation for making it harder to Iowa residents to vote.

"Perhaps they fear being voted out of office if more people cast ballots," the Register asserts. "Which, for engineers of voter suppression, is exactly what needs to happen."

******

Georgia election disaster condemned as result of deliberate GOP voter suppression: "˜This is by design'

on June 11, 2020
By Common Dreams

Photos of would-be Georgia voters standing-and, in some cases, sitting-in long lines after 11 pm to cast their ballots in the state's primary on Tuesday encapsulated what rights groups and lawmakers decried as a disastrous day for democracy and an entirely predictable result of years of deliberate voter suppression efforts by Republican lawmakers and the U.S. Supreme Court.

The myriad issues that plagued Georgia's primary Tuesday-malfunctioning new voting machines, an insufficient number of paper ballots, too-few poll workers, polling places opening late-are hardly unheard of in the state, given that similar problems threw the 2018 midterm contests into chaos, sparking calls for better preparation and stronger protections against disenfranchisement.
Defend democracy. Click to invest in courageous progressive journalism today.

The coronavirus pandemic added another layer of hurdles, and provided Republicans with additional opportunities to limit ballot access.

"The ACLU warned that insufficient resources were allocated for polling places, machines, in-person election staff, and staff to process absentee ballots and that this would result in the disenfranchisement of voters in 2020," Andrea Young, executive director of the ACLU of Georgia, said in a statement. "It gives us no pleasure to be proven right."

"Whether it is incompetence or intentional voter suppression," Young added, "the result is the same-Georgians denied their rights as citizens in this democracy."

In response to drone footage showing long lines outside of a polling place in Atlanta, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) suggested it's more of the latter, writing, "This is by design, and it's their test run for November."

"Republicans don't want vote by mail because it chips away at their ability to do exactly this: target and disenfranchise black voters and people of color," Ocasio-Cortez wrote. "These scenes are specifically happening in black communities, not white ones."

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, echoed Ocasio-Cortez. "This is no accident," Jayapal said. "Black and brown people have been kept out of our elections-100% on purpose and by design. We must end racist voter suppression efforts, restore, and expand voting rights, and build a democracy that ensures every voice is heard."

This drone footage shows a long line of voters waiting to cast ballots in Atlanta on Tuesday. Georgia election officials, poll workers and voters have reported major trouble with voting in Atlanta and elsewhere.

Read the latest. https://t.co/wRnW8f5tng pic.twitter.com/BVU9J9CF79

- The New York Times (@nytimes) June 9, 2020

As Ari Berman of Mother Jones noted late Tuesday, Georgia-which is poised to play a major role in the 2020 presidential election in November-"closed 214 polling places after the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act" in 2013.

"There were 80 fewer polling places for the June primary in metro Atlanta, where a majority of black voters live," Berman tweeted. "Mitch McConnell is blocking legislation passed by House Dems to restore the VRA."

Georgia's Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who ignored repeated warnings that the state's new voting system would not be ready by 2020, was quick to point fingers at individual counties-particularly DeKalb and Fulton, which both have large black populations-for the voting problems, vowing to in a statement to launch an investigation to "determine what these counties need to do to resolve these issues before November's election."

Michael Thurmond, Chief Executive Officer of DeKalb County, fired back. "It is the Secretary of State's responsibility to train, prepare, and equip election staff throughout the state to ensure fair and equal access to the ballot box."

"Those Georgians who have been disenfranchised by the statewide chaos that has affected the voting system today in numerous DeKalb precincts and throughout the state of Georgia deserve answer," Thurmond added.

Y'all it's 10pm in Georgia and Black folk are STILL in line waiting to vote!!!!! Here are photos taken by @cliff_notes 5 minutes ago. ðŸ˜¡ðŸ˜¡@angela_rye @sunny pic.twitter.com/hqc1eGJ36t

- LaTosha Brown (@MsLaToshaBrown) June 10, 2020

Just a reminder that Georgia is on eastern time and IT'S PAST 11PM AND PEOPLE ARE STILL WAITING TO VOTE !!!!! https://t.co/Db73uBffx1

- Mary Ibarra (@MaryIbarra_11) June 10, 2020

With the results of the statewide primary contests still rolling in, Common Cause Georgia executive director Aunna Dennis said in a statement that "the obstacles that Georgia's voters have faced in this election are simply unacceptable."

"It's also unacceptable that the officials entrusted with administering the elections have spent the day dodging blame, rather than accepting responsibility," said Dennis. "Today's problems were avoidable-and they disenfranchised voters. That must not be allowed to happen again."

Rad · Jun 11, 2020, 12:12 PM

Biden predicts military will intervene if Trump refuses to accept election loss

Biden says biggest fear is Trump will "˜try to steal the election'
Democratic challenger leads president in opinion polls

Oliver Milman in New York
Guardian
Thu 11 Jun 2020 11.30 EDT

Joe Biden has predicted the military will escort Donald Trump from the White House should the president lose November's election but refuse to leave office.

Biden, speaking to the Daily Show's Trevor Noah, said that his single greatest concern is that Trump will "try to steal this election".

The Democratic presidential nominee cited Trump's baseless linking of mail-in ballots to voter fraud, even though he has used this method of voting himself, and his accusations, without evidence, that Democrats are trying to rig the election.

Before the 2016 election Trump claimed the poll was rigged against him and even after he triumphed over Hillary Clinton he asserted, again with no evidence, that millions of people voted illegally against him. He estimated this cohort to consist of 3 million votes. This was the number Clinton beat him by in the popular vote, as opposed to the electoral college system that determines who ascends to the White House.

Biden told Noah that he has thought about a scenario where Trump would refuse to relinquish power after losing the election but said he was confident top military figures would intervene. "I am absolutely convinced they will escort him from the White House with great dispatch," Biden said.

Trump is trailing Biden in most opinion polls, with the president's election campaign demanding that CNN retract a "stunt and phony" poll that found the incumbent is trailing his challenger by 14%. CNN has said it stands by its poll.

Rad · Jun 13, 2020, 12:27 PM

States that expanded mail voting already seeing a "˜turnout' spike

on June 13, 2020
By Igor Derysh, Salon

At least half of the states that held primaries last week saw increased turnout after expanding their mail-in voting systems - despite President Donald Trump's efforts to discourage other states from doing the same.

At least four of the eight states that held primary elections last Tuesday saw higher turnout than they did in the 2016 primaries, with most of the votes being cast by mail, according to an analysis of state data by The Hill. Each of the four states sent absentee ballot applications to every registered voter earlier this year.

Iowa's turnout reached 24% last week, a 15% increase from the 2016 primaries and the highest turnout the state has ever seen for a primary. About 411,000 of the 524,000 votes cast were by absentee ballot, a nearly 1000% increase from 2016.

Montana, which held an all-mail primary this year, saw turnout surge to 55%, a 45% increase from 2016.

South Dakota saw a 28% turnout, a slight increase from 22% in 2016. About 89,000 of the 154,000 ballots cast were by mail, a massive increase from the 19,000 absentee ballots requested ahead of the 2016 primary.

New Mexico also saw turnout increase from 34% in 2016 to 40% last week. About 270,000 of the 400,000 votes cast were by mail.

"The June 2 primaries proved what we already knew - access to absentee ballots increases voter turnout," Tom Ridge, a Republican who served as the Homeland Security secretary under George W. Bush and now chairs the bipartisan group VoteSafe, told The Hill. "That's especially good news for someone like me who does not believe voting is a privilege, but rather a responsibility of citizenship. Voters should have options to demonstrate that responsibility safely and securely during this pandemic."

Not all states saw turnout increases, however. Indiana, which allowed anyone to vote by mail but did not mail applications to every voter, saw a dip in turnout. Turnout in Washington D.C., which also did not mail applications to every voter and struggled to get absentee ballots out in time, only saw a 1% increase in turnout.

The numbers could encourage other states to follow suit and mail absentee ballot applications to every voter amid concerns about in-person voting due to the coronavirus. A growing number of states have seen cases spike since Memorial Day.

Trump has led the charge against mail ballots, pushing a number of baseless conspiracy theories alleging it could lead to increased instances of fraud, despite ample evidence refuting the claim.

A Washington Post analysis of data collected by three vote-by-mail states found just 372 possible cases of "double voting or voting on behalf of deceased people" out of about 14.6 million votes cast in the 2016 and 2018 general elections - a minuscule rate of 0.0025%.

There are also numerous other safeguards in place to prevent fraud and those who are caught are prosecuted.

Trump has also baselessly argued that mail voting gives Democrats an advantage.

But a study published by the National Academy of Sciences found that universal vote-by-mail does not favor any one party.

"We find that universal vote-by-mail does not affect either party's share of turnout or either party's vote share," the authors wrote. "These conclusions support the conventional wisdom of election administration experts and contradict many popular claims in the media. Our results imply that the partisan outcomes of vote-by-mail elections closely resemble in-person elections, at least in normal times."

Trump's complaints fly in the face of the facts. Five states - Colorado, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Hawaii - already conduct their elections almost entirely by mail.

"In my state, I'll bet 90 percent of us vote by mail. It works very, very well and it's a very Republican state," Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, told reporters last month.

California and Montana rely heavily on mail-in ballots and 27 other states already allowed anyone to vote by mail before the coronavirus hit. In the 2018 midterms, about 25% of all votes were cast by mail.

Since the coronavirus pandemic began, a dozen states have loosened restrictions to allow any registered voter to cast an absentee ballot due to concerns about the coronavirus.

Only four states - Texas, Tennessee, Louisiana, and Mississippi - are still fighting efforts to allow all voters to cast absentee ballots.

The Texas Supreme Court ruled last week that concerns about the virus do not qualify as a "disability" under state law, rejecting a lawsuit seeking to expand eligibility. Voters can still self-identify as disabled without having to produce evidence but Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has threatened to bring criminal charges against voting groups that promote mail voting for those who are not disabled.

In Tennessee, a judge ruled on Thursday that the state violated a previous court order to make absentee ballots available to all voters. The judge ordered the state to comply and threatened officials with the "specter of criminal contempt" if they continue to disregard the ruling. The state is expected to appeal the decision.

The Louisiana House of Representatives rejected a bill that would have allowed anyone to vote by mail last month. The League of Women Voters of Louisiana filed a federal lawsuit after the vote, seeking to expand absentee ballot access.

"With its high transmission and mortality rates, COVID-19 poses a significant risk to in-person voters, especially to those voters at higher risk of severe complications from COVID-19," the lawsuit says. "The pandemic has decimated voter registration drive activity, makes it unreasonably dangerous and burdensome to comply with certain requirements for mail-in absentee voting, and threatens massive withdrawals by volunteer poll workers who justifiably fear contracting the disease."

In Mississippi, Republican Secretary of State Michael Watson has argued it would be "impossible" to implement a mail voting system by November even though other states have not had major issues with their expansions.

For the few states still opposing mail voting, the disastrous primaries in Wisconsin and Georgia could serve as a wake-up call.

Wisconsin's controversial in-person primary in April, which has been linked to an increase in coronavirus infections, saw polling places in Milwaukee slashed from 180 to just five as the state had to call in the National Guard to address a severe staff shortage.

Multiple state and local officials are now investigating the voting issues that caused hourslong lines at Georgia's polling places amid the pandemic. Though the state's new voting machines played a big role, one of the key reasons for the lines was understaffing and a lack of polling places (the state has systemically shuttered more than 200 polling places since the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013).

But Georgia should serve as a warning to absentee ballot advocates as well. A huge increase in absentee ballots overwhelmed officials and many voters did not receive their ballots, according to Reuters.

"The vast expansion of vote-by-mail and absentee-ballot voting was not enough to offset the drastic reduction in polling locations in many states," The New York Times reported. "In cities around the country, including Atlanta, Baltimore, Philadelphia and Washington, D.C., voters waited in Election Day lines for hours, even as every city experienced exponential increases in vote-by-mail."

"You have states out there in the West that do ballot by mail professionally; their elections are almost exclusively by mail," Richard Barron, the elections director of Fulton County, which includes Atlanta, told the outlet. "What we were asked to do is do absentee by mail, and we still had to do our full complement of Election Day infrastructure."

Stacey Abrams, who ran for governor in Georgia in 2018, said "the good idea to encourage people to use absentee ballots" quickly became "a disaster."

"You have absentee ballots that never reached a number of voters, you have absentee ballots that were submitted but voters have no idea if they're going to be counted," Abrams said.

Other states have experienced issues too. The deadlines to get absentee ballots in Pennsylvania were too short, officials told The Times. Maryland had 20,000 ballots returned because of outdated voter registration lists. In Wisconsin, some mail-in ballots were found undelivered at the Post Office.

Expanding mail voting is crucial to ensuring that anyone who wants to vote can but states have very little time to shore up their systems before November.

"I can't fathom given all that's going on in America right now that anybody would have the gall to stall out and not fix this," Rev. Kobi Little, the head of the NAACP chapter in Baltimore, told The Times. "America can't say "˜we're the champions of democracy,' and then not deliver democracy."

Rad · Jun 14, 2020, 06:28 AM

Trump's re-election odds tumble as number of female voters fleeing him takes a huge jump: polling analyst

on June 14, 2020
Raw Story
By Tom Boggioni

According to polling analyst Harry Enten, Donald Trump's chances of being re-elected in November are growing worse every day as women increasingly say they won't vote for him.

Writing for CNN, Enten said the president is on the verge of losing the female vote by a "historic margin."

After reviewing polling over the last 70 years, the pollster wrote, "Joe Biden is leading among female registered voters by 59% to 35%, a 25-point margin when the numbers aren't rounded. That's a significant increase from his 19-point advantage earlier this year and the 14-point lead Hillary Clinton had in the final 2016 preelection polls of registered voters. Clinton had a 13-point edge with likely female voters."

Enten notes that - should those numbers hold up - Biden would beat the high watermark voting totals achieved by both former Preside t Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon.

"The only year that comes close to what we see in the polls right now is 1964. That year, Democrat Lyndon Johnson won nationally by 23 points overall, and Gallup had him taking the women's vote by 24 points," he wrote. "Biden's doing a point better than Johnson did among female voters, even as he is doing 13 points worse overall. In no other year since 1952 did the Democratic nominee win among female voters by more than 15 points. (If we look at Republican nominees as well, Richard Nixon won the women's vote by 24 points in 1972 as he won nationally by 23 points.)"

What keeps Biden's numbers against Trump from being overwhelming is the fact that president still does better with men, with the pollster writing, "Perhaps what makes Biden more impressive with women is how weak he is with men. He's seen only a 2-point climb with them from earlier this year and is still losing them to Trump by 6 points. That's about how Clinton did with them in the final 2016 preelection polling. Clinton trailed by 5 and 7 points among registered voters and likely male voters, respectively."

As Enten notes, Biden's strength with women has an extra benefit o in that female turnout is traditionally larger on election day.

"Still, you'd rather have women on your side than men for the simple reason that they make up a slightly larger share of voters. Biden's overall advantage would be about a point less if women and men made up an equal share of the electorate. That doesn't matter at this moment, but it could if the polls tighten up," he wrote before concluding, "For now, all we can say is if this election were just left up to men, we'd be talking about a clear Trump lead instead of what it is in reality: a big Biden advantage."

***********

"˜They're cooked': Team Trump "˜terrified' because voters are no longer buying GOP's racist "˜hoodoo juice'

on June 14, 2020
Raw Story
By Tom Boggioni

In a column for the Daily Beast, longtime political observer Michael Tomasky wrote that Donald Trump and Republicans hoping to ride their coded language and veiled racist rhetoric to victory in November are starting to realize it is no longer working on voters and they are "terrified."

With the public in an uproar over the murder of George Floyd - among others Black Americans - at the hands of police, the columnist suggested that we have possibly entered into a new era where one of the Republicans major talking points come election time are falling on deaf ears as voters increasingly reject racist appeals for their votes.

Noting the Republicans and the president likely "hate" the change in attitude, Tomasky points out that their future as a governing party hangs in the balance if they don't adapt to evolving attitudes in a country that is rapidly becoming more diverse.

The columnists notes that for years Republicans have been known to "Cheat black people of their proper political representation. Curtail their civil rights. Slash programs that help minority businesses and poor people. Invent phrases like "˜race-neutral' to hang a veil over rank discrimination," using racist "˜dog-whistling' to reach their base.

Now, he notes, it is no longer working.

"What's happening now terrifies them because they all know one simple thing, which they'll never admit: If the white middle class rejects en masse racially discriminatory behavior and racially coded messages, they're cooked," he wrote before adding, "Mind you, as heartening as these last few weeks have been, that's still a big "˜if.' Let's not declare victory here. But we are seeing historic breakthroughs. Polls suggest a good two-thirds of the country will not buy that GOP hoodoo juice anymore."

With that in mind, the columnist suggested that Trump, who is still cheering on police attacking anti-police brutality protesters led by Black Lives Matter movement is coming apart at the seams over what is happening.

"He is really and truly losing it. You can see it. He's unraveling, like Queeg on the witness stand. "˜The black people" stole those strawberries! Send in the troops! Fred McMurray, fetch my Bible!'" he wrote before adding that it is not just the president - the entire Republican Party has feeding on racist tropes for years - and now it is coming him to roost.

"It's not just Trump. It's never just Trump. It's the party. Yes, Trump made the racism more flagrant and open. But ask yourself why the party embraced an open racist to begin with. It was because so many predecessors made that road by walking it before Trump came along," he explained before suggesting voters may see the first inklings of change coming in an upcoming bill in the Senate led by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY)

"We sit at such an inspiring turning point. I am grateful to be alive to see it. Remember how in the '60s they sang "˜we shall overcome someday'?" He wrote before concluding, "Well, someday may finally be approaching, a reality made all the sweeter by the knowledge that its enemies, stupid and vindictive and embarrassing finally even to NASCAR officials and Clemson University, helped hasten its arrival."

********

"˜Awful news for Republican Senate candidates': Odds of GOP holding Senate collapsing over support for Trump

By Tom Boggioni
Raw Story
6/14/2020

According to an analysis by Politico's Jeff Greenfield, recent voting trends combined with Donald Trump's unpopularity with the electorate will likely see Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) lose his power following the November election.

First proposing, "It's a question as obvious as it is critical: How will the trio of crises-the pandemic, the economy, the demands for racial justice-affect the 2020 race for the White House," the columnist said it will be a major factor this election cycle and that is not good news for Republicans.

"History has some powerful answers to this question-and they leave Republican partisans with a strong case of agita," he wrote. "As a general proposition, when the nation is in a state of crisis, things do not go well for the President's party. When a war becomes a quagmire (Korea in '52, Vietnam in '68), when the economy craters (1980, 2008), voters look for a different leader. Far from a "˜retreat to safety' or a "˜rally round the flag' sentiment, there is an instinct to show the people in charge the way to the exit."
Defend democracy. Click to invest in courageous progressive journalism today.

As Greenfield notes, the Republican Party won't be an exception in 2020.

"This year, the Senate Republicans hold a majority, again making them vulnerable to any vote to toss out the status quo. But don't voters make different choices when they vote for a President and then a Senator? Once upon a time, yes," he explained. "The potentially awful news for Republican Senate candidates is another historical trend: the increasing link between votes cast for a Presidential contender and votes cast for senators, which makes it harder to create distance from an unpopular incumbent."

"Turn to the Senate map, and it's clear how these factors combine to produce a migraine for any strategist looking to hold the Senate for the Republicans. Not that long ago, Republicans were a good bet to hold the Senate even though they held 23 of the 35 contested seats. Only two-Cory Gardner of Colorado and Susan Collins of Maine-were in states that Hillary Clinton carried in 2016. Even with Arizona and North Carolina as potential Presidential battlegrounds, that left at most four vulnerable Republicans," he continued. "And with Alabama Democrat Doug Jones a very likely loser, there was little breathing room for Democrats to pick up the three net seats they'd need to capture the Senate, assuming Biden wins in November."

Greenfield goes on to point out that handful of Senate seats in normally GOP strongholds may also be in play - in part because of Republican senator's support for the unpopular president.

"Now-at least measured by polls-a passel of states now seem within Biden's reach, many of them with incumbent Republican senators up for re-election, " he elaborated. "He's even in Georgia, where both incumbent Republican senators will be on the ballot; he's even in Iowa, where Joni Ernst is up for re-election. And if Biden is going to make a real fight in Georgia and Iowa, that means a get-out-the-vote effort that will bring a lot of Democrats to the polls there."

Equally important, he notes, is that it is difficult for incumbents to distance themselves from Trump over fears he will turn his base against them - meaning they are in a trap of their own making.

"Now put yourself in the position of one of these endangered incumbents, especially in states where Trump is particularly unpopular, like Colorado or Maine. If you're tempted to create some distance from President Trump, to assert your independence, you're facing one pesky obstacle: The Republican Party is effectively now a wholly owned subsidiary of Trumpworld, and independence from the President is a trait that all but guarantees instant and massive pushback from your own party," he explained. "You have only to gaze around the Senate chamber, where ex-Senator Dean Heller, ex-Senator Jeff Flake, and ex-Senator Bob Corker sat, to see what happened to colleagues who did not tug the forelock with sufficient enthusiasm. If you're Gardner, or Collins, the temptation to confront the President's behavior has to be weighed against the likely outrage from the party apparatus whose help you need in an election, to say nothing of the populist media that animates your rank-and-file voters."

"˜If you are playing the percentages, the odds say that if the President cannot persuade a rattled, fretful electorate to stay with him, he will take the Republican Senate down with him," Greenfield concluded.

Rad · Jun 14, 2020, 08:26 AM

Trump aides scrambling to hide his "˜dumpster fire' poll numbers to keep him from "˜flying into a rage': report

on June 14, 2020
RAW STORY
By Tom Boggioni

According to a report from the Daily Beast, aides to Donald Trump are doing their best to keep him in the dark about his terrible poll numbers prior to November's selection out of fear of his wrath.

With the president's poll numbers plummeting in a match-up with presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, White House staffers and campaign officials are trying to keep the president calm while at the same time working to turn around a re-election campaign that is floundering.

Case in point, criticism of a recent poll that showed the president headed to defeat that had the campaign asking for a retraction.

"In a cease-and-desist letter dated June 9, 2020, the president's re-election staff demanded that CNN retract and apologize for a recently released poll that had presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden leading Trump by 14 points," The Beast reports, while also noting that the demand was widely ridiculed - and rightly so with one senior administration official calling it the "dumbest thing I've read in a long time."

"In one respect, it was just the latest effort by the president's aides to attempt to satisfy the boss' appetite for retribution. But it also revealed an element of the Trump political operation that has increasingly demanded time, money, and attention-mainly, the task of convincing Trump that the electoral landscape and polling deficits he faces aren't as dire as he's been hearing," the Beast's report states.

According to one White House official who has been part of meeting with the president about his re-election prospects, "This helps keep the president from flying into a rage as much as he otherwise would."

The report notes that aides are assuring the president that there is a lack of "enthusiasm" for his opponent and that the polling could be wrong.

"A chunk of the re-election team focuses on proving to the president that his "˜dumpster-fire numbers' aren't as bad as they seem, or reinforcing Trump's conviction that pollsters get it wrong "˜all the time,'" the Beast reports, adding that " "¦several key advisers making personal entreaties to Trump in the past few weeks to try to convince him that he should not brush off the numbers, even unpleasant ones that comes from news organizations such as CNN."

The report notes that two officials think the president, when confronted with the poor numbers, isn't taking them seriously - and that may be because officials are softening the blow when speaking with the president.

According to noted pollster Frank Luntz, Trump may be a victim of ""¦ pollsters who are bought and paid for, and they will tell you the client what you want to hear."

"I don't envy those who have to tell Donald Trump what he doesn't want to hear," Luntz continued. "I've met him several times, I've met Biden several times. I would rather present bad [polling] information to Biden than Donald Trump. Presenting bad information or tough information to Joe Biden, you'll break his heart, if you present tough information to Donald Trump, he breaks your arm."

You can read more here: https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-advisers-tell-him-his-poll-numbers-arent-a-dumpster-fire-while-other-aides-say-they-are?ref=home