Monday, October 07, 2019

The Weekly Wrangle

With the round-up of the best of the left of Deep-In-The-Hearta from last week, the Texas Progressive Alliance wonders how many Trump administration members can fit under a bus (it's at least three, but we forget the third one).


Opening with the new names in the race to replace Big Suck-Up John Cornyn:


And for the general election ...


Tilove at the Statesman also profiled the candidates.


The article isn't as dismissive as the headline sounds.


Lots of Texas Congressional developments last week as well.

Kuff looked at the recent PPP poll of competitive Congressional districts.  Howie Klein at Down With Tyranny wondered if the DCCC would be helping or hurting the chances of turning Texas blue next year.  And with respect to the color palette, G. Elliott Morris, writing for The Economist, describes the Lone Star State as "magenta" rather than "purple", but says it's on the way there.


In statehouse races, SocraticGadfly looked at his state rep, Drew Springer, saw that he's NEVER faced a general election and says that if Democrats are serious about turning Texas blue, they need to challenge even candidates like him.


Before the verdict in the Botham Jean murder trial came in, Dan Solomon at Texas Monthly analyzed the problem with the "castle doctrine".  And after the verdict, Scott Henson at Grits for Breakfast offered his thoughts on the trial and the case as a whole.  Both pieces were written before the assassination of witness Joshua Brown.



PDiddie at Brains and Eggs posted the latest on the Democrats running for the White House in three updates -- one before and two after Bernie Sanders' heart attack -- and Noah M. Horwitz endorsed Elizabeth Warren for president.  Therese Odell at Foolish Watcher went to town on Day One of Impeachment Inquiry TV.

Taylor Goldenstein at the Chron wrote about the U of H research project examining Latino Republican voters and six myths about them.  Albert Morales at Latino Decisions, via Latino Rebels, points out the Texas-sized opportunities (Part 3B, with Parts 1, 2, and 3A linked there).


There were a handful of H-Town mayoral debates last week; PDiddie also blogged about the one that was televised, and there's another this Friday.



Speaking of Rick Perry ...


Christof Spieler at Trains, Buses, People ran through an autonomous vehicle thought exercise.



Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, October 06, 2019

Sunday "Two Scoops of Peach Mint" Funnies









Posted by at No comments:

Friday, October 04, 2019

The (now twice a week!) Twenty Twenty Update


Excerpting Markos again because blind hog, acorn.

The Elizabeth Warren-Bernie Sanders wing of the party continues to tally a combined total in the mid-50s [in the Daily Kos bi-weekly straw poll], just as it has for months. Joe Biden seems to have gotten a slight sympathy or rally-around-the-flag bump in some outside polling, but we don’t see much of that here. Everything else is pretty much on-the-dot from last week. The only somewhat notable difference is Andrew Yang, but all that means is that his fan club is getting better at spamming this poll.

Kindly observe that when anyone besides his chosen one so much as slightly improves, their supporters are "spamming" his poll.  When his favorite wins, it's a reflection of the intelligence of the online community he has built.

While 60,277 votes is a lot, and close to our record high, the static results to suggest a pause in analyzing the presidential field as Impeachment rages. It would make sense, while all these candidates are presumably out and about and campaigning, it’s hard to care overly much about it as the news out of DC is so relentless and meaningful. We are witnessing history in real-time, and there’s plenty of primary campaign left to wage. We can take a break from that and focus on the more immediate threat.

But the question then becomes, does this set the field down in stone, benefiting Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren, or is it temporary? Heck, we don’t even know for sure right now whether this is a Daily Kos-only phenomenon or one that is reflecting the outside world as well.

A glance at Real Clear Politics would answer this.

Yet, while we can’t answer all those questions just yet,

LOL.  From here I'll provide corrections in [brackets].

Yet, while we can’t answer all those questions just yet, it is clear that Warren has locked down about 2/5th of the vote on this straw poll, as she’s been at that level for two [three, actually] months now. Can something knock her down? That’s always within the realm of possibility, but she’s running a picture perfect campaign [thanks to MSNBC, CNN, and now her own Snopes]. Talking to campaigns, she has the best organization in Iowa and Nevada [debatable]. She’s got home field advantage in New Hampshire [false; essentially all three front-runners can make this claim, which is why the polling gyrates wildly]. She’s lagging in South Carolina, by quite a bit, but she has started to make inroads with the Black vote (her biggest weakness, by far) and in national polling, is approaching 20% of that vote.

Warren's been cruising.  She made a punishing crackback block on Jacob Wohl yesterday on top of what has been a very good month of September.  So where are those fundraising numbers?

Sanders’ mid-teens here is the same mid-teens he’s seeing in national polling, a sort of frustrating purgatory for him. It’s enough to keep him in third place (and even some seconds here and there), but that number reflects his hardest-core base of support. He’s shed much of the 40-45% he had last cycle (and over 60% he had on Daily Kos!), with no real idea how to grow beyond that [laughably false]. Saying “I thought of that first!” isn’t a winning strategy. Because first of all, someone thought of it before him, inevitably (liberalism has been around for a long time), and second of all, most people care about the movement, not any one individual. [Tacky and incorrect.]

If Sanders was the best messenger and vehicle to enact those policies, he’d be doing better. It’s that simple. 

Most of this graf is spite, but there is no denying that Bernie engenders a lot of animosity, so Kos' remark at the end is, unfortunately, accurate.

Meanwhile, Biden doesn’t appear to be losing much of his Black support. His resilience with that vote has proven frustrating to a lagging Kamala Harris (who is retooling her campaign, one that, uh, didn’t have senior staff meetings until last month), But no one loves him or his campaign, he doesn’t draw crowds, his advisors keep him as hidden as possible to avoid the next inevitable gaffe, and his 1980s-era campaign and message are increasingly out of sync with modern today’s zeitgeist. A strong Harris [or Cory Booker] would’ve been a better bet to knock him down, taking his base of support away. Her inability to do that has given Biden extra life.

Here are three good reasons why Biden is no longer the front-runner.  It's really no mystery why the core Democratic vote, African Americans, has stuck with him so long; they roll with the establishment, always.  I saw this personally in 2008, when black Texas Democrats in the primary continued to favor Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama.  See if you think Perry Bacon at FiveThirtyEight explains it pretty well; I think he does.

Buttigieg can raise money ($19 million this last quarter), but it’s not translating to support. Not sure how it can, when he’s going around being a jackass and declaring himself the Next Joe Biden, as if that’s what anyone outside of Wall Street is clamoring for.

Boot Edge is by far the worst of the top five.  Beto has had enough of Petey's BS.


"I was really offended by those comments," O'Rourke told reporters after a gun control policy forum in Las Vegas on Wednesday. "And I think he represents a kind of politics that is focused on poll-testing and focus-group-driving and triangulating and listening to consultants, before you arrive at a position."

To this I might add: "Congressman Pot, please meet Mayor Kettle."

Let's move on to the debate next week in nine days, and the one in November.



We know already that the twelve above will appear together on one evening: Tuesday, October 15, live on CNN's various platforms.  That's too crowded.  This debate should have been split over two nights.  My feeling is that the DNC is trying to shield Biden from prolonged exposure.

(Rant: I find it ridiculous that a guy can raise $10 million fewer dollars -- using big-donor fundraisers -- than his third-place rival taking only small donations, have his eye spontaneously bleed during a debate with no one calling for him to drop out ... and still be considered the front-runner for the nomination.  "Because that's what the polls say"?  The polls that ask a few hundred people with landlines who answer their phones?  Those polls?

And this is the best way we have to survey American political opinion in 2019.  /rant)


Read ^^this Tweet thread^^ for more.

Now for some quick hits.


-- Once again, as of this morning:



-- Biden, still not getting it.

(Biden) telegraphing that he plans to attack his rivals on the debate stage for a lack of transparency into their finances. Biden is expected to go after Sen. Elizabeth Warren in particular, Bloomberg reported, for failing to disclose details of private income during the 1990s and 2000s from the types of companies that she now lambasts for “rigging the system.”

Warren, as a law professor, did consulting work for private companies that involved her bankruptcy expertise, including advising Dow Corning in 1995, involving a major settlement with women harmed by breast implants. Warren has released her tax returns dating back to 2008.

Biden may be looking to hammer her for hypocrisy, but his charge of a lack of transparency is badly undercut by his own financial opacity -- not decades ago, but in the last two years. Since leaving the White House, Biden, long proud of his wealth ranking near the bottom of the U.S. Senate, began delivering high-dollar speeches to well-heeled clients and raked in book revenue that elevated him well into the upper class. He earned some $15.6 million in the last two years alone, according to financial disclosures released by his campaign.


-- One of the worst things about a truly bad Kamala Harris campaign is that the even more awful puppeteers manipulating her strings are soon going to have to pick another shitty candidate.  My bet is on Boot Edge.


-- A Heart Bern update.


Someone had Tweeted -- and I had reTweeted -- that he had been released yesterday from the Las Vegas hospital that performed his stent procedure.  That, reported by the Fox affiliate in that city, appears to be false, given the information above.


-- The Guardian profiles Mark Charles.
Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, October 03, 2019

Turner's challengers roast him in #HouMayor debate


Mayor Sylvester Turner’s opponents came out swinging at the first televised mayoral debate of the election, accusing him of mismanaging a pay dispute with Houston firefighters, slow-walking flood recovery and overseeing a culture of corruption at City Hall -- charges the mayor emphatically denied.

With his opponents criticizing him on nearly every question, Turner defended his approach to the firefighters’ push for pay parity with police and said the sluggish pace of Hurricane Harvey recovery largely stems from delays within the federal government.

On the corruption allegations, pushed most aggressively by Tony Buzbee, Turner said the millionaire lawyer and businessman -- who is self-funding his campaign -- is “trying to buy City Hall.”

The mayor then issued a fresh attack, criticizing Buzbee for an incident in which a federal judge removed Buzbee’s law firm from 85 cases involving a judge who maintained close ties with Buzbee and his law partners.

You can watch that exchange here:


Update: You can view the hour-long debate here.  For a few short video takes, see here.

I did not get the sense that Turner or Buzbee, the polling leaders, helped themselves last night.  Bill King and Sue Lovell looked and sounded more 'executive', shall I say.  And I'll posit that any Democrats inclined to consider not voting for Mayor Sly might feel better about a Dwight Boykins or a Lovell vote after watching ... unless they are of that scared variety of Donkey that doesn't want to see two Republicans in the runoff.

In other words, a vote for Turner being sorta like a vote for Joe Biden.

As for the remainders and their lawsuit ... *ahem*

Though 12 candidates are running for mayor, a moderator said the host networks -- ABC 13 and Univision 45 -- narrowed the field to the top five fundraisers: Turner, Buzbee, King, Boykins, and Lovell. The state of the race has recently come into sharper focus with a poll that found Turner leading the field with 37 percent of the vote, followed by Buzbee at 20 percent and King at 10.

As I mentioned back here, I'm still deciding between Lovell and Derrick Broze.  I have a few more weeks to choose.
Posted by at No comments:

Wednesday, October 02, 2019

"Sorry to disappoint..."



Posted by at No comments:

Twenty Twenty Update: Money Matters

The mother's milk of consultants, spinmeisters, pollsters, and those that love them has the punditocracy all squirming for a teat this week.

But maybe we should consider impeachment first?

Americans are about evenly split over impeaching President Donald Trump and removing him from office, as support for that move has risen among independents and Republicans, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS after the announcement of a formal impeachment inquiry by House Democrats last week.

About half, 47%, support impeaching the President and removing him from office, up from 41% who felt that way in a CNN poll in May. The current level matches the high point for impeaching Trump in previous CNN polling -- 47% said they felt that way in September 2018.

Indeed the tide and the sea has changed, quickly, and continues to do so even as this is blogged.  And we'll wait to see if the next debate spends too much time talking about it, at the expense of -- in my and Ted Rall's opinion -- more important topics.

-- With respect to Cory Booker and Julian Castro, the two candidates who threatened to leave us last week if they didn't meet their cash targets ...

(Booker) raised more than $6 million over the last three months, with a third of that coming in the past 10 days after he warned he would have to drop out of the Democratic presidential race if he didn't take in more cash by Monday's fundraising deadline.

Despite that flood of money, Booker says he still needs more. His campaign is pressing donors to contribute $3 million in the month of October alone to help cover a budget they predict will surpass $7 million for the final quarter of the year.

So the "Going Out of Business" sale will last at least another thirty days.


Psyche, all you Castro donors.

-- Something's Berning.


Somebodies don't like it.





Have we had enough of that?


-- That's enough obsessing over filthy lucre for me, but let's note this.


Also note that all these people are Jewish, and we're in the middle of the High Holy Days.


I just don't have any words.

-- Happening today:


Note that the times listed are Pacific.  Underneath this is a tweet from Mark Charles requesting inclusion, and another listing the Libertarian potential nominees.  I'll leave that to your discovery.

-- Should we be surprised?


Another update on Friday, with more on the next debate.
Posted by at No comments:

Monday, September 30, 2019

The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance has a 'perfect' roundup of the best blog posts, Tweets, and news about and around Texas from last week ... as you can see from the transcripts.


The Texas Tribune held their annual #TribFest, gathering every establishment politician, politico, and talking head, along with insiders, geeks, groupies and wannabes from across the country.  There was lots of sitting, talking, chatting, Tweeting, rumor-mongering, pontificating, scoffing, laughing, eating of tacos, and drinking of spirits ... followed by more guffaws and snorts.

Everybody who is allegedly anybody was supposedly there.

With so many of the state's political elites on both sides playing power glad-handing and ass-grabbing games (perhaps less of the latter than in years past), there was little for their reporters to cover beyond the relentless self-promotion and 'brand-building'.  But the Wrangle ropes the dopes anyway.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and DCCC chair Cheri Bustos circled the wagons around Henry Cuellar.

During appearances this weekend in Austin, including at The Texas Tribune Festival, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Cheri Bustos, the head of the House Democrats' campaign arm, lavished praise on Cuellar, and Bustos said more than once that she was not concerned about his reelection prospects.

"Henry Cuellar knows that district like the back of his hand," Bustos said Saturday at a briefing for reporters. "I completely support him. ... He has very good relationships with the vast majority of his colleagues -- who are supportive of him -- and I think he'll be fine."

Cuellar is being challenged by Laredo attorney Jessica Cisneros, who has the backing of Justice Democrats, the progressive group well-known for helping elect freshman U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York. Cisneros is arguing Cuellar is too moderate [sic] for the 28th District, calling him President Donald "Trump's favorite Democrat." Cuellar is denouncing the challenge as meddling by out-of-state partisans who do not truly understand the district.

Speaking hours after Bustos at the festival, Pelosi was unequivocal in her support for Cuellar, who was in the audience.

"Absolutely, absolutely, absolutely, absolutely," she said, drawing scattered boos. "I'm very, very proud of Henry's work in the Congress and I'm proud to support him -- even if I didn't have a policy of endorsing incumbents."


In other Republican incumbent news, Mac Thornberry becomes the sixth member of the US House of Representatives to join the #Texodus.

The district (TX13) contains much of SD31, currently held by Sen. Kel Seliger (R-Amarillo) and all or significant portions of HD68, held by Rep. Drew Springer (R-Muenster); HD69, held by Rep. James Frank (R-Wichita Falls); HD86, held by Rep. John Smithee (R-Amarillo); and HD87, held by Rep. Four Price (R-Amarillo); and half of HD88, held by Rep. Ken King (R-Canadian).

John Cornyn draws another primary challenger.


From the Dallas Morning News:

The self-described Ronald Reagan Republican said he's uniquely qualified to bring a business perspective to Washington.

"Given the many challenges that America currently faces, this is the right time for a business leader to serve Texas and the country, rather than a career politician," Yancey said in news release. "Senator Cornyn has little support from conservatives across Texas. Senator Cornyn has frequently disappointed Texans with his strong alignment with both Mitch McConnell and [President Donald] Trump. He has shown repeatedly that he is a follower and a compromiser on the wrong side of an issue rather than a leader. ..."

Yancey is the chairman and CEO of Attacca International, an independent, privately held mergers and acquisitions boutique firm based in Dallas. He is the former co-owner of the Dallas Wings of the Women's National Basketball Association. ...

The banner of Yancey's news release describes him as a "moderate Republican," even as he claims that conservative Texans don't like Cornyn. A moderate Republican is likely to face an uphill battle in a primary dominated by conservatives.

Not too long ago in a conservative galaxy far, far away, Yancey would be the perfect GOP senatorial candidate.  But these are Trump's Republicans now, and Cornyn -- who just a few short years ago was the embodiment of all that Yancey claims to be -- is today nothing more than a lickspittle to the powers that be.  Together with a pending Pat Fallon challenge from his right, we may finally see the depth of loyalty Texas Republican primary voters have to Big (SuckUp) John.

John Coby at Bay Area Houston reported from a protest near state Rep. Briscoe "Little Baby" Cain's home.  The TSTA Blog reminded that voters -- mostly independents and those not aligned with the two-party duopoly -- will have the last word on Trump's fate.  And Sanford Nowlin at the San Antonio Current examined the effects of impeachment on San Antonio-area Congressional races.


With the first polling of Houston residents in the mayor's race now released, KHOU and HPM's Bob Stein break down the results.


Kuff discussed what he perceived to be the motives behind several Texas counties' plans to raise property tax rates.  Tory Gattis at Houston Strategies answers the question as to whether one should vote in favor of the MetroNext 2040 referendum.


PDiddie at Brains and Eggs posted about the opening impeachment gambit and its impact on the Democrats' race for the White House, and also on the latest developments regarding the campaigns of Tulsi Gabbard, Julian Castro, and Elizabeth Warren.

Texas Rural Voices explains the Mueller report and why it's still important.




And with that, we'll move on to some lighter, non-political postings.


SocraticGadfly dips into academia and says that conspiracy thinking is a new form of Gnosticism, an ancient religious movement that crossed Jewish, early Christian and pagan boundaries.





Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, September 29, 2019

Sunday Funnies










Posted by at No comments:

Friday, September 27, 2019

Twenty Twenty Update: Gabbard, Castro, Warren

Impeachment broke on Wednesday; updates in the Twitter feed.

-- Bag-eyed Gadfly should be pleased to learn I'm no longer "twerking for Tulsi".  If she's backing away from Medicare for All, I'm off the bandwagon.


Her overly generous welcome to Indian PM Narendra Modi last weekend knocked the legs out of any support I could continue to give for her foreign policy.

I'm still glad she ruined Kamala Harris, and I hope she's planning on doing the same to Liz Warren in a couple of weeks ...


... but I won't be anywhere near her corner otherwise.

-- Julian Castro joins Cory Booker in the 'help me or I'm over' camp.


I'm with Jim Zogby here.


Nobody on the DNC seems to have learned a cotton-picking thing from having rigged the nomination for Hillary Clinton in 2016.

-- Warren doesn't just have issues; she's got subscriptions.




Let me underscore that facts are not attacks.  My biggest problem with Warren isn't her foreign policy, or her being a Republican until 1996, or even her 'capitalist to my bones' remark.


It's that she's also moving right on M4A.


Very much looking forward to the October debate.  Aren't you?

-- Plebis Project has a lengthy interview with Green Party presidential candidate Ian Schlakman, on YouTube, posted.

Posted by at No comments:

Wednesday, September 25, 2019

Twenty Twenty Update: Impeachment Begins


Well, sort of.

Pelosi’s announcement came after months of infighting on the topic within the caucus, which split largely between those in safe districts and those who helped hand the House to the Democrats in November, with Pelosi siding with the latter group throughout. However, north of two dozen House Democrats have come out in support of an inquiry since news emerged that Trump allegedly pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden (The Hill).

Opening an inquiry was as far as Pelosi would go on Tuesday. According to three House Democrats, she would not promise a floor vote on impeachment, a step some House Democrats have sought.

The polling is still not supportive ...

According to a Monmouth University poll taken in August, 59 percent of voters were against impeaching Trump, with 35 percent in favor of doing so. However, the poll was taken well before the Ukraine information came to light and in the aftermath of former special counsel Robert Mueller’s testimony in late July.

And this Reuters poll, fresh out of the oven, shows public interest in impeachment falling: 37% support the Congressional inquiry, 47% against.  Forty-four percent say they have heard little or nothing about the Ukraine story.

There won't be regular reports here on this topic.  This blog don't play like that.  Plenty of others do, and I link to them in the right hand column.  I will say this:

The path to ejecting Cheetolini is laced with landmines for Team Donkey, which is why Pelosi has been so reticent to undertake it.  Republicans, starting at the top, seem to believe it's their road to victory next year, and this would be evidence of that (to me).


Senate Democrats, on the other hand, are a bit divided.

Joe Biden -- and his son, Hunter -- are at the heart of this matter.  Previous reporting had suggested that Biden used improper influence to remove a Ukrainian official who was -- allegedly -- investigating the company Hunter Biden was working for.  The problem for Biden is that there is video of him bragging about it (transcript here).  A variety of media sources say that while this is 'unsavory', it's just business as usual in DC.  The problem for Trump is that he tried -- via Rudy Giuliani -- to make something out of it, and Trump's call to the Ukrainian president, his actions beforehand, and the person who blew the whistle are now the focus of the impeachment inquiry.

So as Trump likes to say: "we'll see what happens".

Biden's opponents in the primary are treading carefully.  They don't want to defend him for somewhat obvious reasons and they don't want to attack him over this -- yet -- either.

Aides to 10 Democratic candidates acknowledged the internal strain in interviews with POLITICO, stressing they need to avert a repeat of 2016, when Trump capitalized on Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server. Several expressed sensitivities around the candidates saying anything that could be construed as helping advance Trump and his allies’ story lines. Yet the candidates and their aides have mostly tried to turn the conversation back toward Trump’s actions, rather than speaking up for Biden.

[...]

Part of the tension stems from the reality that much of the field needs Biden’s campaign to collapse. But it would be poor form -- and could come off as un-American -- for a rival campaign to look like they’re capitalizing on Trump’s gambit. Warnings have come from some unlikely quarters: The Intercept, a liberal publication that's been critical of Biden’s campaign, carried a column by the writer Robert Mackey under the headline: “Reporters should stop helping Donald Trump spread lies about Joe Biden and Ukraine.”

So ... as Trump likes to say: "we'll see what happens".

Mainstream media is excited about Liz Warren getting a leg up on Bernie Sanders -- and Biden. The Hill's Reid Wilson gives us takeaways from last weekend's Steak Fry in the Hawkeye State.

A new Des Moines Register-CNN poll conducted by Iowa polling guru Ann Selzer shows Sen. Elizabeth Warren leading the Democratic presidential primary field, the first time one of Selzer's polls has shown anyone ahead of former Vice President Joe Biden.

But Warren is more than just the front-runner in the Iowa Democratic caucuses. She's positioned to be the front-runner in the whole race for the Democratic presidential nomination.

What made Warren the leading contender in Iowa, even before Selzer's poll, was her slow and steady rise -- and the room she has left to grow. Momentum matters in politics, and Warren has spent nine uninterrupted months building hers.

Look beyond the top-line numbers, which have Warren leading Biden by a statistically insignificant 2 percentage point margin: Seventy-one percent of Iowa Democrats say Warren is either their first or second choice or that they are actively considering supporting her. That's 11 points higher than Biden, 16 points higher than Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Kamala Harris, and, crucially, 21 points higher than Sen. Bernie Sanders, Warren's biggest rival in the progressive lane.

Selzer calls that combination -- first choice, second choice plus actively considering -- the "candidate footprint," a way to measure support that reflects the fluid nature of a caucus in which voters can pick different candidates in different rounds. That Warren has the largest footprint is important at this stage of the race, she said.

"The footprint signals upside potential," Selzer said in an email.

It might seem premature to call Warren the race's overall front-runner, but history is on her side. The last four winners of the Iowa Democratic caucuses won the party's presidential nomination.

High revolution spin, usually reserved for Bernie-haters like Nate Silver and Harry Enten.

Harris has joked about moving to Iowa. Montana Gov. Steve Bullock pretty much has moved there. Former Rep. John Delaney has camped out there for more than a year.

For all the talk of a nationalized election and a long, drawn-out fight for the Democratic nomination, Iowa is becoming a make-or-break state for a significant number of candidates.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar has to do something in her neighboring state. Sen. Michael Bennet has already spent much of his campaign's funds on television spots in Iowa, apparently to little effect. And Bullock is clear his chances rest on a strong Iowa showing.

Iowa can launch a president. It can also end a bunch of dreams. This year, more than any previous year, Iowans are going to severely narrow a record-size Democratic field.

[...]

Selzer's poll showed Warren is seen favorably by 75 percent of the Democratic electorate, a larger slice than anyone else in the field. Almost 70 percent see Buttigieg in a favorable light, two-thirds see Biden favorably, and both Harris and Sen. Cory Booker crack the 60 percent mark.

But Warren was one of the few candidates who saw her favorable ratings rise, up 12 points since March.

Biden's favorable ratings have dropped 15 points since March, when he first announced his campaign. The number of Iowa Democrats who see him unfavorably has doubled to 29 percent.

Sanders has fallen too, from a 70 percent favorable rating in June to 58 percent today. His unfavorable ratings, 36 percent, are the highest numbers of any of the top-tier candidates.

Several contenders haven't seen their reputations grow over the crucial summer months. Harris, Bullock, former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Juliรกn Castro, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, and former Rep. Beto O'Rourke all saw little movement in their favorable ratings over the summer.

My feeling is that the debates are doing more to winnow the field than the primaries.

Some hot shots:

-- The fourth debate -- on October 15 in Westerville, Ohio, and sponsored by CNN and the NYT -- now has twelve participants, with Tulsi Gabbard qualifying.

Other candidates have until Oct. 1 to qualify for the event.

Only one other candidate, best-selling author Marianne Williamson, is relatively close to qualifying for the fourth debate. She has already surpassed the 130,000-donor threshold but needs to register at 2 percent or higher in at least three more qualifying polls.

It’s still unclear whether the debate will be held on a single night or split between two nights like the first two debates in June and July.

The DNC has said that it will make that decision after the Oct. 1 deadline.

-- The fifth debate, slated for November, will have tougher thresholds, and there is speculation that second-tier candidates like Castro, Klobuchar, Steyer, Gabbard, and others won't clear the bar.

-- Bullock is raising money in Dallas tomorrow and Houston on Friday.

-- You can be excused for barely noticing that Bill deBlasio removed himself from contention.

New York Mayor Bill de Blasio ended his 2020 bid (last) Friday, saying the party’s rules for qualifying for televised debates had made it hard for him to continue. He failed to qualify for a Sept. 12 debate that featured the 10 leading candidates for the party’s nomination.

[...]

"I think this gets to the reality of the debates, first and foremost for me," de Blasio said on MSNBC's 'Morning Joe' Friday morning. "But the bar is so high, so early, that for a lot of us -- clearly some of my fellow chief executives, governors, couldn't make that cut -- its clear to me that's a high bar, and that's one I'm not going to be able to meet. And I think that's the central reason."

-- Cory Booker says he'll be out in a week if he can't get a cash infusion.


-- Did you watch the Republican candidates debate yesterday?  Maybe you missed it because there was something else going on.


President Donald Trump's Republican primary contenders set the tone right out of the gate: the 2020 race isn't about electing someone else, it's about not electing Trump.

Former Illinois Rep. Joe Walsh and former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld took the stage at Tuesday's Business Insider GOP debate, where both argued that Trump is a threat to national security and American values and deserves to be removed from office.

"This is about Trump," Walsh said. "This is about that guy in the White House. I'm not debating Bill Weld. I've got all the respect in the world for Bill Weld."

He added: "It's not about issues, it's about Trump."

The president "deserves to be impeached and everybody should keep their boots on top of" Republicans in Congress "so that they follow their constitutional duty," Walsh said.

Weld struck a similar chord.

"We simply can't sit still for this guy, who's a disgrace to this office," he said, adding that Trump engaged in "some combination of treason, bribery, and high crimes and misdemeanors."

It's not the first time Weld has accused the president of treason. Earlier this week, he said Trump's push for Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden ahead of the 2020 election constitutes treason and specifically noted that the crime carries the death penalty.

He backed off from repeating that during Tuesday's debate but pointed out that his time in office during the Watergate scandal in the 1970s contributed to his support for Trump's impeachment.

The president declined an invitation to participate in the debate, and former South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, who is also challenging Trump for the nomination, couldn't attend because of a scheduling conflict.

-- Here, courtesy Independent Political Report, is last Friday's Green Party presidential candidates debate -- attended by Howie Hawkins, Dario Hunter, Ian Schlakman, Dennis Lambert, David Rolde, and Chad Wilson -- in its 2-hour, 45-minute entirety.

-- Hawkins has been vocal in recent days about Net Neutrality and supporting striking GM workers.

Updates here or in a Friday post, relative to their importance.
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)