#Missouri midterm results

[hacklong]

Missouri midterm results

MISSOURI MIDTERM RESULTS PLUS

Courtesy of The New York Times.Ī self-proclaimed “ constitutional conservative ,” Hawley has served as the Attorney General for Missouri since 2017 and has built a reputation as an advocate for religious liberty and reduced government. ET: This article has been updated to reflect that Kunce is the former, not the current, director of national security at the American Economic Liberties Project.Map of Senate election results in Missouri. The woman accused Greitens of bringing her to his basement, tying her up, removing her clothes and photographing her without consent.Ĭorrection Jat 1:08 p.m. In 2018, the Republican politician resigned in disgrace from being Missouri's governor after he was accused by a former mistress of sexual conduct during an affair. Sheena Greitens filed for divorce from her husband in 2020. I n March, the former Missouri governor was accused by his ex-wife in a court filing of committing acts of violence against her and their children. Despite previous scandals, however, the former Republican governor has remained the front runner in the GOP Senate primary. Whether the controversial campaign ad dampens Republican support for Greitens remains to be seen. GOP Senate Candidate Eric Greitens Rips McConnell: 'We Are Coming for You'.Eric Greitens Allegations Could Wreck GOP Chances of Taking Back Senate.Eric Greitens' 'RINO Hunting' Ad Condemned: This 'Gets People Killed'.Eric Greitens Slams Big Tech After Facebook Pulls 'RINO Hunting' Ad.Again, that represented a lead of 6 percent for the Republican contender. Up against Valentine, Greitens was at 43 percent compared with her 37 percent. The survey had Greitens at 42 percent against Kunce's 36 percent-a lead of 6 points for the GOP hopeful. However, the recent poll showed Greitens with a notable lead over Democratic candidates Beer heiress Trudy Busch Valentine and Lucas Kunce, the former director of national security at the American Economic Liberties Project. As Missouri's Democratic and Republican primaries won't be held until August 2-which candidates will ultimately face off in the general election remains uncertain. Polling data from KOAM-TV/Survey USA in May showed Greitens leading his potential Democratic challengers as well.

MISSOURI MIDTERM RESULTS PLUS

The poll included 1,065 likely voters with a margin of error of plus or minus 2.9 percent. That survey, conducted from May 16 to 18, showed Greitens at 26 percent, Hartlzer at 23 percent and Schmitt at 19 percent. Previously in mid-May, poll results form Trafalgar Group showed a closer race between Greitens and Hartzler, with Schmitt in third place. That poll surveyed 1,000 likely voters and had a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. The former Missouri governor had the support of 26 percent of likely GOP voters, compared with 20 percent for Schmitt and 16 percent for Hartzler. In the most recent survey, carried out from June 2 to 5 by The Hill/Emerson, Greitens leads his closets Republican rival by 6 points. Following Schmitt in third place is Representative Vicky Hartzler with the backing of about 18.3 percent. His closest GOP challenger is Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt at an average of 21.3 percent. The current Real Clear Politics average of recent polls for the Republican primary Senate race shows the former Missouri governor with the support of about 24.8 percent of likely voters. Above, Greitens, while governor, addresses the crowd at Chesed Shel Emeth Cemetery on Februin University City, Missouri. Former Missouri Governor Eric Greitens is currently the frontrunner for the GOP's Senate nomination in his state.

[cardiomains]

Missouri midterm results

To access the form, log in with your MyZou username and password. If you are a current student who wants to take a course at another institution and transfer credit back to Mizzou, fill out the Transfer Course Approval form. You will find out which credits meet your degree requirements when you meet with your adviser during transfer student orientation. Click on the drop-down menu in the Academics sectionĮach individual school or college determines which transfer credits meet the requirements for your intended degree.Once we receive your official transcript, we will review and post transfer credit on a first-come-first-serve basis.Ĭredit from one of our common feeder schools (see a list on ) is typically posted to your account and viewable in myZou within a few business days after we receive your official transcript. Credit from other schools might require faculty review, which could take several weeks. If you want to see how your courses will apply toward a degree at Mizzou, Transferology can help by: Transferology helps you explore your college transfer options. *unless specifically listed in a current articulation agreement. Advanced standing credit in a foreign languageĪn appeal process can be initiated at a student’s request.Courses from a non-accepted accredited institution.Courses intended for a terminal vocational degree or certificate program.Courses not intended for a baccalaureate degree.Technical*, vocational or remedial courses.The following types of credit will not transfer to Mizzou: Some programs might require grades of C or higher to satisfy certain degree requirements. Generally, any credit earned at an accepted accredited college will transfer to Mizzou if your coursework is geared toward a baccalaureate degree. This site has course equivalencies for most colleges and universities in Missouri as well as select out-of-state institutions. Visit our transfer course equivalencies site to get an idea of what courses will transfer to Mizzou. President Trump’s approval and disapproval ratings are almost evenly split in the state, with slightly more people saying they approve of the job he’s doing, according to Morning Consult.Transfer Credits Transfer Course Equivalency Daily Kos says Republicans are expected to hold onto both. When it comes to the state legislature, half of the state Senate and all of the House of Representatives are on the ballot. It would be a nice win for Democrats in their quest to flip the House. Ann Wagner is narrowly favored over Democrat Cort VanOstran. The race for the Second District is also worth watching, where Republican Rep. A tarnished Republican brand in the state could be a boon for McCaskill, though Hawley did fight hard to force Grietens out of office. Eric Greitens, a Republican forced to resign earlier this year over allegations of corruption and sexual misconduct. The other unavoidable topic is now-former Gov. Health care has been a significant issue, with McCaskill embracing Obamacare’s protections for preexisting conditions while Hawley toes an absurd line: He has joined a lawsuit to overturn the health care law in its entirety while also that claiming he supports protections for preexisting conditions. If Democrats have any hope of retaking the Senate in 2019, they will need McCaskill to hold onto her seat. The polling has shown her and Hawley neck and neck. She already unexpectedly survived one reelection bid in 2012, against the horrendously unpopular Todd Akin, but she looks much more endangered in 2018. 2024 Electoral College Map 2020 Presidential Election Results Latest Presidential Election Polls 2020 Polling Averages by State. After redistricting, all will be contested in the 2022 midterm elections. McCaskill is one of 10 Senate Democrats up for reelection in a state that Donald Trump won in 2016. all will be contested in the 2022 midterm elections. The Senate election between Democratic incumbent Claire McCaskill and Republican challenger Josh Hawley has dominated Missouri politics this year.

[longlovely]

Missouri midterm results

So, bettors who are interested can view these midterm election markets: Senate Control. For direct links to Senate polling detail in each state, see this map. Updated 9:34 AM ET, Sat Febru(CNN) Voting ends in the first primaries for the 2022 midterm elections in a matter of days. The most recent polls for the 35 Senate elections taking place in 2022. Understand the 2022 Midterm Elections So Far After key races in Georgia, Pennsylvania and other states, here's what we've learned. The Texas 2022 Primary Election is Tuesday, March 1, 2022. on the last Tuesday in February before the primary election) * On February 11, 2022, the Maryland Court of Appeals extended the filing deadline from Feb. territories.Numerous other federal, state, and local elections, including the. states, as well as five non-voting delegates from the District of Columbia and four of the five inhabited U.S. Elections will be held to elect representatives from all 435 congressional districts across each of the 50 U.S. Why not let the 2022 midterm elections be a time to make some needed changes, to make history? Wisconsin 15. State Representative Doug Richey of Missouri, a. Gardner Eric Greitens Vicky Hartzler Rickey Joiner Dennis Lee Chilton Patrick Lewis Billy Long May 11, 2022: The state Senate approved congressional district boundaries by a vote of 22-11. Republicans' national tailwinds might not take them as far in the battle for the 50-50 Senate. Michigan Governor - Republican Primary - Target-Insyght/MIRS: Kelley 19 Dixon 9 Soldano 6 Rebandt 1. ** The Court of Appeals of Maryland changed the primary date from June 28 to July 19. House contests that will shape the future of Congress. Election 2022: Primaries shift focus to control of US House By THOMAS BEAUMONT 3 minutes ago DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) A midterm primary season that opened with elections testing former President Donald Trump's sway among Republicans enters a new phase this week with U.S. With pollsters already making early predictions, candidates announcing their. Features Editor Ishaan Rahman takes an early look at how the 2022 Midterm Elections are shaping up two months into Joe Biden's Presidency Believe it or not, many politically-engaged Americans are already taking a look at the 2022 U.S. Even a few Republican victories could tip the balance of power in Congress, hobbling President Bidens legislative options. Missouri midterm election results will be refreshed automatically every 30 seconds after polls close at 8 p. Click the dates below for additional information. The 2022 United States House of Representatives elections will be held on November 8, 2022. Democrats plan to place millions worth of ads in key media markets ahead of November's midterm elections. House districts, including the 7th Congressional District of Missouri, are holding elections in 2022. 2022 Generic Congressional Vote - Economist/YouGov: (R) 43 (D) 43. The general election is scheduled for Nov. For more information about the primaries in this election, click on the links below: With Joe Biden's control of the Senate at stake, the result of the 2022 midterm elections in these swing states. The 2022 United States Senate elections will be held on November 8, 2022, with 34 of the 100 seats in the Senate being contested in regular elections, the winners of which will serve six-year terms in the United States Congress from January 3, 2023, to January 3, 2029. 2022 Generic Congressional Vote 2020 Generic Vote | 2018 Generic Vote | 2016 Generic Vote | 2014 Generic Vote | 2012 Generic Vote | Latest Polls FILE - The chamber of the House of Representatives is seen at the Capitol in Washington, Monday, Feb.

[somethingusefulfromflorida]

I had confidence in the 2024 election because Democrats had a better than expected midterm (they only lost the House by a slim margin, gained a seat in the senate, and held all the improtant secretary of state and attorney general races), but going state by state it's much closer than I'm comfortable with.

Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming are solid red (127/438)

California, Colorado, Connecitcut, Delaware, DC, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington are solid blue (195/438)

Arizona is likely to flip red because Krysten Sinema is unpopular and will split the senate vote as an independent spoiler making the Democrats appear disorganized and distressed, very likely siphoning votes from the presidential candidate (138/438)

Florida is solid red no matter how you slice it. 60-40 if it's DeSantis, 55-45 if it's Trump (168/438)

Georgia could go either way, but I see Republicans flipping it back red because the state legislature will do everything in its power to disenfranchise black voters after they flipped it blue four times, once presidential, thrice senatorial (184/438)

Maine splits its electoral college votes by congressional district. I think three will go blue (198/438) and one red (185/438)

Michigan will probably go blue because Democrats made massive gains in 2022, flipping both houses of the state legislature and maintaining control over the important statewide positions (213/438)

Minnesota is the only state to vote against Ronald Reagan twice, having not gone red since 1972. Republicans made gains in the state legislature, but Democrats were able to flip it back in 2022, so I think the statewide race is solid blue for sure (223/438)

Nebraska, like Maine, splits its votes by district. Even though one district is nominally bluer than the others, I have a feeling all five Nebraska votes will go red (190/438)

Nevada could go either way. Democrats held the senate and secretary of state races but lost the governorship. I'd tentatively call it blue, but we won't know the results until a week or two after election day, so let's instead say it's undecided.

New Hampshire could go either way, but leans blue even though both houses of the legislature and the governorship went red. it's very small, so it's unlikely to play kingmaker one way or the other (227/438)

North Carolina is red. it'll be close, maybe 49-51, but close only counts in horseshoes. it has a blye governor, but the legislature is gerrymandered deep red and the regularly override his vetoes. The NC Supreme Court said its electoral maps were unconstitutional in 2022, but the legislature used them anyways, so not even the highest authority in the state could stop them from fucking over the people. It'll be red with very lower turnout (206/438)

Ohio is deep red, not even a contest. It's the worst of Florida and North Carolina, illegal maps, deep red gerrymander, total clusterfuck shitshow (223/438)

Pennsylvania will probably go blue because Democrats flipped the senate and one house of the legislature in 2022 (246/438)

Texas is red. See Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and Ohio (263/438)

Virginia is entirely up in the air. I can't make a prediction one way or the other until we see how the state legislature races go this fall. Democrats have a razor thin majority in the senate, Republicans have a razor thin majority in the house, so this November will decide who has the advantage going into 2024. They have a deep red governor, but two blue senators and a consistently blue presidential track record sine 2008. I don't know.

Wisconsin will probably go blue because Democrats managed to hold onto the secretary of state and attorney general seats in 2022, and flipped the state Supreme Court blue just a few months ago. Republicans have majorities in both houses due to gerrymandering, but statewide the Democrats have the advantage (256/438)

Oh dear. Neither party had 270 votes, and Nevada and Virginia are going to be the kingmakers.

If Dems win both, they win 275-263.

If Republicans win both, they win 282-256.

If Republicans win Virginia but not Nevada, they still win 276-262

If Democrats win Virginia but not Nevada, the electoral college is tied 269-269. It would be up to the House to pick a president in a contingent election, though there's no telling how many faithless electors would flip either way.

This is going to be a real nailbiter. No two presidential elections have ever gone the exact same way. There's no way it'll be a repeat of 2020; one or more state will flip, it's just a matter of which. If Dems can hold Arizona or Georgia, they're golden. That's really what it's gonna come down to, Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, and Virginia. Democrats could take back the House, but Republicans will almost certainly take back the Senate, which means Game Over no matter who wins the presidency.

If Biden wins, he gets no more judges, zero, zilch, nada.

If Trump or DeSantis win, God have mercy on us all.

[xtruss]

Bernie Sanders: We Must Raise The Minimum Wage To A Living Wage

In the richest country on earth, if you work 40 hours a week you shouldn’t have to live in poverty

— Opinion | Minimum Wage | Monday 17 April 2022

Demonstrators rally at New York’s City Hall Park to demand a higher minimum wage in November 2022. Photograph: Derek French/Rex/Shutterstock

Congress Can No Longer Ignore the needs of the working class of this country. At a time of massive and growing income and wealth inequality and record-breaking corporate profits, we must stand up for working families – many of whom are struggling every day to provide a minimal standard of living for their families.

One important way to do that is to raise the federal minimum wage to a living wage. In the year 2023, nobody in the US should be forced to work for starvation wages. It should be a basic truism that in the US, the richest country on earth, if you work 40 hours a week you do not live in poverty. Raising the minimum wage is not only the right thing to do morally. It is also good economics. Putting money into the hands of people who will spend it on basic needs is a strong economic stimulant.

“The federal minimum wage has lost over 27% of its purchasing power since it was last raised 14 years ago”

When over 60% of American workers are now living paycheck to paycheck, when the life expectancy of low-income Americans is in decline, when we have the highest rate of childhood poverty of almost any major country, we can no longer tolerate a federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour, a wage that has not been raised since 2009. Incredibly, the federal minimum wage has lost over 27% of its purchasing power since it was last raised 14 years ago. That is unacceptable. Millions of Americans cannot be allowed to fall further and further behind economically, unable to afford the housing, food, healthcare, childcare and education they desperately need in order to live in health and dignity.

Whether they are greeting us at Walmart, serving us hamburgers at McDonald’s, providing childcare for our kids or waiting on our table at a diner in rural America, there are too many Americans trying to survive and raise families on $9, $10 or $12 an hour. It cannot be done. This injustice must end. Low-income workers need a pay raise and the American people want them to get that raise.

Bernie (Bernard) Sanders

“Cities and states all across the country are taking the low-wage crisis into their own hands and raising their minimum wage”

That was then. Now is now. And things are changing. As a result of years of congressional inaction, cities and states all across the country are taking the low-wage crisis into their own hands and raising their minimum wage. Some are doing it through legislative action. Others are doing it through ballot initiatives.

Since 2013, the people of 12 states – New Jersey, South Dakota, Arkansas (twice), Alaska, Washington, Maine, Colorado, Arizona, Missouri, Florida, Nevada and Nebraska (twice) – have voted on ballot initiatives to raise their state’s minimum wage. Every single one of these initiatives passed, none with less than 55% of the vote. And these are not just strong “blue states” voting for economic justice. In the recent November 2022 midterm election, two states that voted in Republican governors, Nebraska and Nevada, voted to raise the minimum wage. In 2020, the citizens of Florida, with a Republican governor and two Republican senators, also voted to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour.

The MIT living wage calculator estimates a living wage as a salary that is adequate enough to support a family without luxuries. For two working adults and one child, a living hourly wage for each adult would be $18.69 in West Virginia, $17.55 in South Carolina, $21.57 in Maryland, $20.01 in Utah and $19.33 in Wisconsin. Even in my own state of Vermont, the living wage is $19.58, more than $6 above the current state minimum wage.

But there are many families that do not have two working adults and rely on single moms who are raising their children on their own. In that case, the required living wage is much higher. As an example, a single mother in West Virginia would need to make $33.39 an hour to support herself and one child.

So it is not radical to suggest that raising the minimum wage to $17 an hour over a period of several years is the right thing to do. In fact, had my 2015 bill to increase the minimum wage to $15 an hour that was indexed to median wages became law, the federal minimum wage this January would be at least $17.40 an hour. And while we deal with the minimum wage, we must also address the scandal of the tipped wage, which has been stuck at an abysmally low $2.13 an hour for more than 30 years thanks, in large part, to the powerful restaurant lobby which has spent millions in campaign contributions and lobbying expenses since 1991 to keep workers in poverty.

Together, these two proposals would provide an increase in pay for tens of millions of desperate Americans – disproportionately women and people of color. It would also be a huge boost to single moms. Let us not forget that these are the essential workers who kept the economy going during the worst of the Covid pandemic. At that time we called them heroes and heroines. Well, rhetorical praise is nice. A livable paycheck is better. Let’s do it.

— Bernie Sanders is a US Senator From Vermont and the Chair of the Senate zcommittee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions

[day0one]

Fox Host Blames ‘My Pillowization’ Of Republicans That Led To Cartoon Character Candidates

Fox News is not holding back their anger over the poor showing of Republicans in the midterms, and one host went as far as to blame Mike Lindell and, as he put it, the "My Pillowization" of the Republican Party that led to cartoon characters being on the ballot. He's not wrong, as fringe figures like Lindell have become stalwarts of today's GOP.

*This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.

Fox News, of course, is still trying to make sense of what happened to the Republican Party in last week's midterm elections. But later in the week, once more results started coming in that were even worse for Republicans than election night, one individual on Fox News decided to take the time to point out to the other hosts on that set exactly what happened to the Republican Party. And I have to say, his analysis is absolutely spot on. So take a look at this analysis of what has gone wrong with the Republican Party. And by the way, who is really to blame? Here it is

In the air. Republicans continue to make gains in the House, hopes of a red wave never reached the shoreline. The Senate also a toss-up as some critics blame poor candidates and they blame a former president, uh, Doug High, former NC Coms director Carly Cooperman, Democratic Pollster, and CEO of Shown Cooperman Research. Nice to see you both and great to have you. Uh, Doug, first to you, Carl Rove writes today, Wall Street Journal, a number of pieces of the journal editorial pace, talking about, uh, Donald Trump talking about the results. Here's Rob's take with no red wave. Trump is out at sea. The g o p fielded too many novices who struggled with crafting a message raising funds and waging effective campaigns. Some were also knuckleheads with strange beliefs and closets full of problems. Many of these remarkably weak candidates came courtesy of Donald Trump who did not vet his endorsements. Do you agree with that point?

Uh, yes. And you know, we could go back to 2010 and 2012 where we saw a lot of these terrible first-time candidates that caused Senate races to fall by the wayside in Nevada, uh, Delaware, Indiana, Missouri. Uh, and this is why Mitch McConnell was warning well in advance that we have a candidate quality problem. But what we've seen is a real intensification of this problem from top to bottom. Not just Senate candidates, but house candidates, Secretary of State candidates and governors and the like. And it's what, you know, what I call the MyPillow of the Republican Party, is we've attracted these more cartoon characters. And if somebody speaking at a rally with a president or a presidential candidate is best known as a pillow salesman, run to high heaven because you're going to see more of these cartoon characters who are trying to make money off of the party, become Instagram influencers and celebrities more than they are about being serious legislators. There's a reason Madison Callthorne lost his primary in North Carolina. He telegraphed and said, Clearly, I'm not serious.

The MyPillow of the Republican Party. And then of course, he proceeds to say like Mike Lindell is kind of the ringleader of this freak show that has given us these cartoon character candidates on the right. And again, he's not wrong. Now, I think it is unfair to, uh, probably a little, you know, too much to blame Mike Linde for everything that's wrong with the Republican Party today. But he of course, much like Trump himself, is just the natural evolution of the Republican Party. It's an evolution that was taking place long before Donald Trump. Of course, Trump put it on steroids accelerated that D evolution really is what it is. And now we end up with freaks like Mike Linde, who are not only loud voices in the Republican party, but they're looked upon as leaders of the Republican party. Mike Lindell gets invited to all the big events.

[usnewsrank]

Missouri Election Results Midterms 2022

Missouri Election Results Midterms 2022

(NewsNation) — Missouri voters head to the polls Tuesday to cast their ballots in some important races in the 2022 midterm elections.  Missouri voters will weigh in on several important elections, including retiring Sen. Roy Blunt’s seat. Among those vying for it: Republican Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, Democrat and Anheuser-Busch heiress Trudy Busch Valentine, Libertarian Jonathan…

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

A group of former Republican and Democratic officials are forming a new political party called Forward, in an attempt to appeal to what they call the "moderate, common-sense majority."

"Political extremism is ripping our nation apart, and the two major parties have failed to remedy the crisis," David Jolly, Christine Todd Whitman and Andrew Yang wrote in a Washington Post op-ed published Wednesday. "Today's outdated parties have failed by catering to the fringes. As a result, most Americans feel they aren't represented."

Jolly is a former Republican congressman from Florida, Whitman a former Republican Governor of New Jersey and Yang is a former Democratic presidential and New York mayoral candidate. The three will merge their political organizations into the new party, whose launch was first reported by Reuters.

The group cites issues including guns, climate change and abortion as those that could benefit from a moderate approach. The new party will also advocate ranked-choice voting and open primaries, the end of gerrymandering, and nationwide protection for voting rights.

"Sixty-two percent of Americans now want a third party, a record high, because they can see that our leaders aren't getting it done," Yang told CNN's Brianna Keilar on "New Day" on Thursday in a joint appearance with Whitman. "And when you ask about the policy goals, the fact is the majority of Americans actually agree on really even divisive issues. The most divisive issues of the day like abortion or firearms -- there's actually a commonsense coalition position on these issues and just about every other issue under the sun."

Forward is planning a national convention next summer and will soon seek ballot access to run candidates in 2024, according to the Post op-ed.

The party said in a news release that it would launch "a national building tour this fall to hear from voters and begin laying the groundwork for expanded state-by-state party registration and ballot access, relying on the combined nationwide network of the three organizations." It plans to gain legal recognition "in 15 states by the end of 2022, twice that number in 2023, and in almost all U.S. states by the end of 2024."

While Forward won't be running its own candidates in this year's midterm elections, it will "support select candidates in November who stand up for our democracy, even if they come from outside the new party," according to the news release.

Jolly, Whitman and Yang acknowledged the clear lack of success third parties have had in the United States previously, writing in their op-ed, "Most third parties in U.S. history failed to take off, either because they were ideologically too narrow or the population was uninterested." But they said that "voters are calling for a new party now more than ever," citing a Gallup poll from last year.

"Americans of all stripes -- Democrats, Republicans and independents -- are invited to be a part of the process, without abandoning their existing political affiliations, by joining us to discuss building an optimistic and inclusive home for the politically homeless majority," Jolly, Whitman and Yang wrote.

Asked by Keilar on Thursday why they believe their effort to create a third party would work, Whitman said, "We're in a different time."

"When you have 50% of the American people saying that they are registered independent ... people are sick and tired of what they're seeing in Washington and the fact that nothing major is getting done is frustrating them. We have big problems and we want to see them resolved," she said.

A few independent candidates have earned national attention in their races this cycle. In Utah, Evan McMullin, who ran for president in 2016 as an anti-Trump conservative, is challenging GOP Sen. Mike Lee and has the backing of the state Democratic Party. In Missouri, John Wood, a former senior investigator for the House Select Committee investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, is running as a "commonsense alternative" to the field of Republican and Democratic candidates for the state's open US Senate seat. And in Oregon, former state Sen. Betsy Johnson, who left the Democratic Party last year, is a top contender in the open governor's race.

[beardedmrbean]

(Reuters) - Kansas voters on Tuesday rejected an effort to remove abortion protections from the state's constitution, a resounding win for the abortion rights movement in the first statewide electoral test since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.

The amendment's failure in the conservative state lifted Democrats' hopes that the issue of abortion rights will draw voters to the party in November's midterm elections even as they worry about surging inflation.

The result also will prevent Kansas' Republican-led legislature from passing severe abortion restrictions in the state, which has become a key abortion access point for America's heartland.

"This should be a real wake-up call for abortion opponents," said Neal Allen, a political science professor at Wichita State University. "When a total ban looks like a possibility, then you're going to get a lot of people to turn out and you're going to lose a lot of the more moderate supporters of abortion restrictions."

Political analysts had expected the Kansas amendment to pass, given that Republicans typically turn out in greater numbers for the state's primary elections than Democrats and independents.

But Tuesday's vote drew higher-than-expected turnout. With 98% of the vote counted, 59% of voters favored preserving abortion rights compared to nearly 41% who supported removing abortion protections from the state constitution, according to Edison Research.

"This is a titanic result for Kansas politics," said Allen.

Kansas' ballot initiative is the first of several that will ask U.S. voters to weigh in on abortion rights this year. Kentucky, California, Vermont and possibly Michigan will have abortion on the ballot this fall.

The successful "vote no" campaign in Kansas could offer a blueprint to abortion rights groups looking to harness voter energy in the wake of Roe's reversal, Allen said.

U.S. President Joe Biden joined Democrats across the country in applauding the results on Tuesday.

"This vote makes clear what we know: The majority of Americans agree that women should have access to abortion and should have the right to make their own health care decisions," Biden said in a statement.

A statewide survey released by the Docking Institute of Public Affairs at Fort Hays State University in February showed most Kansas residents did not support a total abortion ban.

Sixty percent disagreed that abortion should be completely illegal, and 50.5% said, "The Kansas government should not place any regulations on the circumstances under which women can get abortions."

Kansas Republicans had been pushing for a state constitutional amendment to eliminate abortion rights since 2019, when the Kansas Supreme Court ruled the state constitution protected the right to abortion.

As a result of the ruling, Kansas has maintained more lenient policies than other conservative neighbors. The state allows abortion up to 22 weeks of pregnancy with several restrictions, including a mandatory 24-hour waiting period and mandatory parental consent for minors.

HIGH STAKES IN NOVEMBER

Patients travel to Kansas for abortions from Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri and other states that have banned the procedure almost entirely since the Supreme Court in June overturned Roe, the 1973 decision that legalized abortion nationwide.

A spokesperson for the Trust Women abortion clinic in Wichita said 60% of their abortion patients are from out of state.

Tuesday's referendum drew national attention and money. The Value Them Both Association, which supported the amendment, raised about $4.7 million this year, about two-thirds of that from regional Catholic dioceses, according to campaign finance data.

Kansans for Constitutional Freedom, the main coalition opposing the amendment, raised about $6.5 million, including more than $1 million from Planned Parenthood groups.

Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, a national anti-abortion group, said it spent $1.4 million to promote the amendment and canvassed 250,000 homes in Kansas.

“Tonight’s loss is a huge disappointment for pro-life Kansans and Americans nationwide,” said Mallory Carroll, a spokesperson for the group. "The stakes for the pro-life movement in the upcoming midterm elections could not be higher."

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

July 22, 2021

Heather Cox Richardson

The backdrop of everything political these days is the 2022 midterm election.

The most immediate story in the country is that coronavirus infections are rising rapidly. The seven-day average of Covid-19 cases is rising about 37,700 cases per day, and the seven-day average of hospital admissions is about 35,000 per day. The seven-day average of daily deaths has also increased to 237 per day, about 19 percent higher than it was in the previous seven-day period.

The vast majority of these hospitalizations and deaths are among the unvaccinated as the new, highly contagious Delta variant spreads. Today, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, warned that the Delta variant “is one of the most infectious respiratory viruses we know of and that I have seen in my 20-year career.”

Three states with lower vaccination rates, Florida, Texas, and Missouri, had 40 percent of all the nation’s cases. At a White House press conference, Jeff Zients, the White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator, noted, “For the second week in a row, one in five of all cases [occurred] in Florida alone.”

Republican lawmakers and right-wing pundits have cast doubt on the vaccines and hardened opposition to them as part of the stoking of a culture war, but now, quite suddenly, many of them are urging their supporters and listeners to get vaccinated. They have not offered their reasoning for the about-face, and perhaps they are suddenly concerned about coronavirus deaths.

But as news outlets repeat that hospitalizations and deaths are overwhelmingly among the unvaccinated, Republican lawmakers must also realize that their voters will at some point resent the anti-vaccine advice that is singling them out for death.

Republicans seem to be trying to rewrite their past attacks on the vaccine by now blaming the people who refused the vaccines for their reluctance to get it. Today, for example, Alabama Governor Kay Ivey, who has been a strong Trump supporter, blamed the unvaccinated for the spike. “Folks are supposed to have common sense. But it’s time to start blaming the unvaccinated folks, not the vaccinated folks. It’s the unvaccinated folks that are letting us down,” she said.

The Republicans have another problem, too. Candidates vying to win Republican primaries are trying to pick up the Trump base by sticking closely to him and to the lie that he won the 2020 election. But the same stances that will win primary voters will alienate voters in the general election.

Candidates are staking out their pro-Trump ground in part because they are holding out hope that the former president will choose to pour money into their campaigns; however, news broke today that Trump has taken in about $75 million in the first half of 2021 on the promise that he is fighting the results of the 2020 election but has spent none of that money on those challenges.

At the same time that news about House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s picks for the January 6 commission put a spotlight on the possible involvement of Trump Republicans in that insurrection, Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) is using the Senate Rules Committee, which she chairs, to highlight the voter restrictions that legislatures in Republican-dominated states are imposing on their citizens. The committee is holding field hearings this week in Georgia.

There, Georgia State Senator Sally Harrell (D) told the committee about begging for copies of voting rights bills so she could read them before voting, about bills being switched at the last minute, and of not being able to stop the Republicans from undermining voting rights. Harrell told the committee that state lawmakers need the help of the federal For the People Act to protect voting rights.

Mounting pressure on Republican lawmakers to try to shore up their voters showed in the July 20 Senate vote on the VOCA Fix to Sustain the Crime Victims Fund Act, which President Joe Biden signed into law today. Originally passed in 1984, the measure gathers fines and penalties paid by convicted federal criminals into a fund that spreads money to organizations helping the victims of crimes. But the amount of money in the fund has dropped 92% since 2017, as “non-prosecutorial agreements” and “deferred prosecution agreements” kept money from going into the fund.

This measure is vital for domestic abuse survivors and their children, and the new bill directs money from those agreements into the fund to replenish it. The Senate, which generally opposes social welfare legislation, backed it 100–0 in what looks like an attempt to reach out to the suburban women Republicans need to win in 2022 and 2024.

—-

Notes:

https://www.cbs42.com/news/local/its-time-to-start-blaming-the-unvaccinated-gov-ivey-on-rise-in-covid-19-cases-low-vaccination-rate/

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/22/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html

​​https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/18/us/politics/amy-klobuchar-rules-committee-voting.html

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/georgia-democrat-voting-laws-republicans

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-pac-ballot-reviews/2021/07/22/d451fcaa-e596-11eb-934f-7e6c1927f261_story.html

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/07/22/remarks-by-president-biden-at-signing-of-h-r-1642-the-voca-fix-to-sustain-the-crime-victims-fund-act-of-2021/

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2021/07/22/press-briefing-by-white-house-covid-19-response-team-and-public-health-officials-46/

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[mars-the-4th-planet]

Final election prediction map:

Explanation time. Going from left to right.

Nevada: this state is known for overestimating republican support in the polls. Even republican-biased pollsters like Trafalgar(R) think Biden is going to win here. Regular polls tend to give Biden about a six point lead. So I think 4-8% is the most likely margin for this state.

Arizona: A very close state. It voted for Trump last time by a margin of three percent, and Biden generally leads in the polls here from 2% or 4% depending on which polling group most recently posted. Discounting obviously biased polls like Trafalgar, CNN, and Rasmussen, it is most likely that Biden will narrowly win Arizona. FiveThirtyEight and RealClearPolitics agree on this and so do I.

Alaska and Montana: States that would normally be more decisively red but aren't this time around. Still, trump is leading in these two by enough that it won't matter. Just something to keep in mind, that Biden has moved republican states more towards the democrats.

Colorado: Used to be a swing state, but now is about at the same level of closeness as in Montana. RealClearPolitics says Biden is leading by ten percent, FiveThirtyEight says by fourteen percent, predicting that they will vote within a 7-11% range is a modest estimate not Democrat bias. Not only that but like Nevada and Texas, it voted more blue than expected in 2016.

New Mexico: Republicans have been trying to get this state but it's just not happening. They have a 15% poll lead for Biden on my most recent map. Even if the polls are off some, in Trump's favor, Biden still wins by double digits.

Nebraska: Both the main state and the first district are going to Trump, no real question there. But the second district has held some polls and they all lean towards Joe Biden winning. It's just one extra electoral vote though.

Texas: A state that has been all over the place lately with large amounts of early voting (which favors dems) and a court that denied throwing out a hundred thousand ballots. It's not out of reach that democrats could win Texas, but if I'm being wholly honest with myself, what I want to happen is not necessarily what will happen. The polls do lean in Trump's favor. And Republican support is still large in Texas. Worst of all, there is only one early voting drop off box per county in Texas. I think it's going to the reds this time around, although at a narrower margin than 2016.

Minnesota: This one I can't be too sure about to be honest. On one hand, the police brutality there and protests (mainly the government's response to the protests) will likely mean more dem turnout. But at the same time, people protesting racism and the authoritarian gov? Also means more Republican turnout for Trump. But Republicans already turn out to vote regularly, so it's not so much that they can expand from here and more than they can try and use the protests as a means to convince people to not vote got Biden. Still, Biden's campaign has generally brought in more support to the democrats than Hillary's across the nation and Minnesota went to her last time. And 4-8% does match up pretty well with polling data which ranges around a 6% to 7% lead for Biden.

Iowa: Sometimes leans Biden, other times it leans Trump, but in general it's a pretty close state. But Trump had a 9% margin of victory in 2016 and I think that is going to be very hard to overcome. Of course Biden has moved the country towards the democrats, but probably not by the ten percent margin it would take to win Iowa. It just has a lot of conservative support, and unless something is drastically off in my analysis, Trump is going to win Iowa by a few percentage points.

Missouri: Like a couple other states already mentioned, it's strange that it isn't automatically safe. RealClearPolitics even considered Missouri a toss up state at one point. Based on the polling data involving this state and how it's voted previously, I think it's going to Republicans by a margin of 6-10%.

Wisconsin: Oh boy. The one state who's polling data was well outside the margin of error in 2016. It was seven percent off. And current polls for the state range from a slight one or two point win for trump to a seventeen point landslide for Biden. It's a bit absurd how hard this state is to predict. But, I think it is landing on the Biden side of the aisle and will vote Democrat by about the same amount as Iowa votes Republican. Biden is more liked there than Hillary Clinton, and that is true for the whole Midwest. Not only that but most Midwestern states including Wisconsin voted more democratic in the 2018 midterms. Less biased polls put Biden at a six percent lead in Wisconsin. Which is roughly the same as Clinton's state. In most states Biden is doing better than Clinton was, but I suppose some really biased towards dems polls came out for Clinton in Wisconsin right before the election as it's the only logical explanation. Several polls also have shown Biden winning in double digits in Wisconsin, hopefully these are the ones that are exaggerating democratic support and not the more average polls. Assuming the more biased polls are the ones that could be seven points off in Republicans favor, Biden wins by a few percent.

Michigan: Without Trafalgar(R) and Rasmussen, Michigan looks as decisive for Biden as South Carolina is for Trump. It's polling average on RCP had Biden nine points up. In a state that just barely went to Trump in 2016. Michigan is almost certainly going to Biden if everyone who prefers Biden actually turns out to vote for him. Many polls show Biden up in double digits there. Trump has personally hurt his reputation in Michigan. Largely due to personally refusing them covid aid while the state run by democrats was handling the pandemic better than any other state according to a covid response study. Which is bound to increase their approval of democrats and decrease it of Trump. His supporters even tried to kidnap the governor to do god knows what to her, and Biden won Michigan in the primaries over Sanders, who beat Clinton there in the 2016 primaries. It's very likely that Biden will see a win in Michigan, and by fairly strong margins assuming all the votes get counted in time. Whether you look at the polls, how they voted in the midterms, the margin at which Trump won in 2016, other factors that could effect the vote, Biden is set to win the state of Michigan. A voting margin of 4-8% is a rather modest prediction all things considered. Even some conservative biased polls have shown Biden winning by a percent or two. Polling groups like Trafalgar(R) voted about two points to the right of the final results in the rust belt states.

Indiana: Not a whole lot to say here. Much like Missouri and Montana, it's closer than it should be and that's a bad sign for Republicans in neighboring swing states.

Ohio: This state has voted 8 points in favor of the Republicans in 2016, and the polls have gone back and forth between the candidates recently. But they are very close. I think Trump will take the state by at least one point though. And no more than five. Going to be as close as Iowa at least, maybe a little closer, but Biden will be hard pressed to flip the state completely.

Virginia: Polling shows Biden possibly leading in double digits and Clinton won fairly decisively here. Even the most narrow recent Virginia polls show Biden eight points ahead. It's barely competitive, luckily for Biden.

North Carolina: Like Arizona, this state is a hard call because of how close it is. I wouldnt be surprised if either won. But Biden does have the overall edge and is more likely to take the state by a close margin.

South Carolina: Usually a solid red state. But this time around, it got fairly close in the polls. Closer than some traditional blue leaning swing states. Still almost definitely going to Trump, but, it did vote in a new Democrat in 2018 and if this momentum keeps up who knows, South Carolina could end up more like Iowa. A red leaning swing state. Probably not tomorrow though. It's going to have a pretty solid margin of victory for Trump.

Georgia: Very similar story as Texas but a little more towards dems. Biden does narrowly lead in the polls, but republican support in this state is historically usually strong and racial voter surpression could unfortunately have an effect by a percent or two. It's certainly possible for Democrats to win here, but it's probably not going to happen this election. Trump will likely have a pretty close lead of two to six percent. Like Texas, it's sort of a "What if dems get a landslide" scenario. It would certainly be closer if there wasn't so much concern about voter surpression and gerrymandered voting districts. I would say Biden has about as much chance of winning in Georgia as Trump does of winning Pennsylvania.

Florida: It is very close in every election. The best and least biased polls put it at a Biden win though. A narrow one, but with strong turnout it's more likely dems take this state. If GOP does take Florida it will be by a hair margin. Less than one percent. But I think it will land on Biden's side of the aisle due to factors such as the Coronavirus mainly effecting the elderly the worst and Florida being an older state, Florida voting more blue in 2018 like several other states, and the only polls showing Trump winning there are the ones with biased weights and faulty methods of polling. Biden is also a favorite in Florida, as they elected him decisively during the primary. And he was on the twice winning Obama/Biden ticket.

Pennsylvania: Like Wisconsin, I estimated a 2-6% margin of victory and this state has been fairly consistently showing a five point lead for Biden in the FiveThirtyEight model. It has overall moved to the left since 2016 and the administration there has been fighting Trump's attempts of rigging its vote count. I think this state is going to Biden, RealClearPolitics thinks this state is going to Biden, FiveThirtyEight thinks this state is going to Biden, but it all relies on Pennsylvanians actually going out and making those poll averages come true. But unlike last time, they actually know Trump can win and won't just assume it's over simply because of the polls. Even Rasmussen, a conservative biased polling group republicans love to tout, shows Biden winning by three percent. It's going to be pretty close though, so it comes down to the turnout.

New Hampshire: You're probably tired of having me say things are going to be close. Well, New Hampshire was close last time but I don't think it will be this time. The polls for this state are quite decisive (11% lead for Biden on average!) and Clinton did win last time in this state although narrowly. Estimating it to be a 5-9% margin of victory for Biden is not unreasonable, even though Biden didn't do well in the New Hampshire primary, he is bound to win this small swing state by a similar margin as Trump will win South Carolina, which is not known to be a swing state.

Maine: Biden is bound to get at least 3/4 of the electoral votes here, but I think it's likely that his campaign has won back enough support here that he can get all four. A recent poll by an A+ rated pollster puts him three points ahead in the remaining district. But I wouldn't be surprised if Trump picks up one district. One electoral point likely won't matter to the overall election though.

National:

Biden has been consistently leading over trump since before the primary voting started. His national lead on trump is the main factor why he won the primary in the first place. Biden will get the popular vote, as the popular vote was barely off in the 2016 polls and this time around Biden consistently has at least double, sometimes TRIPLE, the poll lead Clinton had by the day before the election. The lowest I've seen it was four points ahead of Trump. The highest was ten points ahead. He will most likely get around a seven point lead in the popular vote, which indirectly increases his likelihood of winning the electoral college as well. Even though winning one does not necessarily mean winning the other, it is VERY unlikely that someone could get a seven percent popular vote lead and not win the election. Remember, Clinton had less than a three percent popular vote lead and trump only won key states she was expected to win by a sliver.

Third parties probably won't make a whole lot of difference. In 2016, it was a big year for them although it may not look like it. Lots of people assumed Clinton would win, and it made it easy to justify using one's vote on a third party candidate. Nowadays people can see how close it will be and how it is anyone's game, and some will choose to vote either Trump or Biden instead of their preferred candidate like in 2016. Third party polling is not looking good. And it always tightens up on election day. If any do split the vote enough, it's probably not something that said party not running would help anyway. If you're voting green party still, you're probably not willing to vote for Biden even IF the greens didn't run in your state. And if you're voting Libertarian, you're probably not going to vote for Trump even IF Libertarians didn't run in your state.

In conclusion, I think Biden will win both in terms of having the most actual votes, and in terms of having the most electoral votes which are the real deciding factor. But the election could still be contested by the Supreme Court if it's close enough which it likely could be. And the vote count could be stopped prematurely to erase tens of thousands of dem-majority mail-in ballots.

What constitutes a correct prediction?

I will consider it correct if all of these are true:

1: Biden wins overall

2: I get at least 95% of the state colors correct

3: I get at least 90% of the state margins correct

4: I'm right about Biden's popular vote lead within a margin of a percent in one direction or another.

This prediction also assumes that all of the legitimate votes cast are counted. We may not see the end result until a couple of days after election day. If the election is halted with tens of thousands of mail-in votes unaccounted for, I will consider it inconclusive.

[wellesleyunderground]

WU Reviews: Knock Down the House & Surge reviewed by Shloka Ananthanarayanan ‘08 (@shlokes)

This review originally appeared on Shloka’s blog, Pop Culture Scribe.

It’s October and people in many US states have already started voting, either in person or via mail-in ballots. I received my mail-in ballot last week but will be heading to my in-person early voting center on October 24th because I need the thrill of voting via a machine to feel like I gave this my all. If you are an American voter, make a plan and ensure you vote this year. And if you need a reminder of how important elections can be, I give you two wonderful documentaries that highlight all of the work that goes into political campaigning, all of the unnecessary horror of voter suppression, and what it looks like when truly deserving political candidates fight for the chance to represent their fellow citizens in a democracy.

Directed by Rachel Lears, Knock Down the House tells the story of four female Democrats in different parts of the country who ran for election in 2018. These women were not career politicians, but were all inspired to run following the 2016 election, where the shock of not seeing the first woman President get elected quickly gave way to sweeping anger and resolve to go into office themselves. The most famous candidate in the documentary is Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She serves as the star of this film and gets more screentime than any other candidate, which is a bit unfortunate as I thought the other ladies were rather brilliant too. But in Ocasio-Cortez's case, what's intriguing is that she isn't a Democrat looking to flip her district - instead she is a progressive looking to upset the establishment Democrat, a complacent white man who can't even be bothered to show up to a debate and thinks that the voters in his district will just vote for him out of name recognition and sheer misinformed laziness. But with her grassroots campaign, Ocasio-Cortez convinces the people of New York's 14th Congressional District to vote with their best interests at heart, and thank goodness, they did. In the two years since she was elected to office, we've seen how great it can be when someone who actually gives a damn about the world and her constituents comes to Washington.

The other women featured in this documentary are Amy Vilela from Nevada, Cori Bush from Missouri, and Paula Jean Swearengin from West Virginia. They are all incredible women who are running to protect their people from greedy self-serving Republican interests. None of them won their primaries in 2018, but Swearengin and Bush both won in 2020 and I will be eagerly following their races this November to see if they flip their districts/states blue (Swearengin, in particular, is a fascinating woman who bucks the stereotype that West Wirginia coal miners can only be Republicans, and she is running for Senate, which would be such a coup for the country). All three women have incredible stories of why they chose to run in the first place and serve as a great reminder that politicians do not all have to be corrupt, amoral snakes. Sometimes, they can be women who want to protect their communities and serve their country proudly. Also, Netflix put this movie out for free on YouTube, so really, you have absolutely no excuse not to watch it.

Directed by Hannah Rosenzweig and Wendy Sachs, Surge tells a nearly identical story of three women running for Congress in the 2018 midterm elections. Like the women of Knock Down the House, they were all "activated" following the 2016 election and are determined to make a difference. This movie does a better job of giving each woman equal time to tell her story and following her campaign, and it also showcases some of the challenges they face on elections days with poor infrastructure that seems designed to discourage voting. There's also an incisive look at how the Democrats' Primary Machine works and how candidates depend so much on the support of the Party for monetary and logistical support that could give them a boost and much-needed name recognition during their races.

The film follow Lauren Underwood in Illinois, Jana Lynne Sanchez in Texas, and Liz Watson in Indiana. Again, these three women have different levels of political savvy, and different reasons for why they are running, but they are all united in their passion and commitment to the people of their districts. All three women win their Democratic primaries, but then we get to see how difficult it is to actually flip a district in the General Election when they are up against moneyed Republican interests. Millionaires and lobbyists (and racists and misogynists) aren't going to let these women win without a fight. Devastatingly, in Indiana, Liz Watson's grassroots campaign generates high voter turnout, but the Election Office in one county runs out of ballots as they never expected so many voters. Which causes a delay and results in her losing a lot of people who might have voted for her in the first place. While Underwood and Watson get Party support and have people like Obama, Biden, and Sanders show up to their rallies to get out the vote, Jana Lynne Sanchez's district in Texas is deemed too impossible, so the Party doesn't help her out. She ultimately loses the election, but because of her efforts, Democrats discovered it was actually winnable, and they will be investing in the candidate who runs there in 2020.

Politics is a complicated and dirty business, but what these two documentaries (that were directed and edited and shot and produced by women, FYI) reveal is that there are still idealistic and determined people that we can get behind. More specifically, idealistic, determined women, who face an uphill battle because women simply aren't treated fairly in the political arena. It was thrilling to see how excited they were to see other women running for office and formed a supportive clique to cheer each other on regardless of whether they won or lost their own elections. That's the kind of energy we need in today's toxic political climate. In addition, these women aren't taking corporate PAC money and they have a slog ahead of them, but they are fighting for the right to represent us fairly and decently, and they deserve our attention.

So before you vote this year, and in every election following, pay some attention to the people on your ballot. See if there's a new candidate who is more deserving of your vote than the establishment candidate you've been voting for all your life but who has never actually pushed any policies that you want. In Surge, someone talks about how party affiliation has become like a religion - you'll vote for the person from your Party even if they're ripping you off. Let's stop doing that and only vote in the people who actually want a better life for us and our families, instead of pocketing millions from corporate interests. Read up on what these candidates stand for and don't just vote for someone because they have a (D) or an (R) after their name, but because they actually represent the values that matter to you. Get out there and vote, America. We're all counting on you.

[millennial-review]

I saw a post that you shared that said the next 2 years are going to be brutal.. Can you explain what this means for the US and why it's going to be brutal? I was under the impression Democrats having control over the House was a good thing.

For me last night was definitely a mixed bag. I don’t want to underplay how important Democrats taking the the House is. This will allow for significant oversight on the Trump administration that is currently nonexistent. Things like the Russia investigation will be performed more seriously. We’ll have inquiries into his shady financial dealings, connections with right wing media, and all sorts of stuff that we probably don’t even know about right now. That’s really great and might set up some political victories in 2020, but I doubt we’ll get any criminal charges, chances to impeach anyone, or really any significant changes. To Republicans it will look like Benghazi looked to Democrats at the time, a bunch of over hyped showmanship that doesn’t change their opinion. To the extent Trump finds last night a repudiation of him (which I don’t think he does) maybe he will moderate. That COULD happen, I think the opposite will happen. Maybe he’ll work with Democrats on something like an infrastructure bill, that could be good, but I doubt either party wants to give the other credit for something like that headed into 2020. And as far as policy goes the Democrats didn’t really enhance their ability to shape it in any significant way. But still, preventing Republican control of both houses and the White House is pretty significant. They can’t pass things like the Tax Cuts or attempted Obamacare repeal now, which is significant. There is a lot more, I’ve got a little list and below that I’ll discuss why I think these next two years are going to be brutal. Other Good Things That Happened Last Night: 

- There are over 100 women in the House of Representatives for the first time. - America elected their first openly gay governor in Jared Polis of Colorado. - Kansas elected the first Native American woman to the House of Representatives, who also happens to be a lesbian.- A number of states passed Medicaid Expansion which will give affordable healthcare to over 500,000 people.- Two Muslim women were elected to the House for the first time in Michigan and Minnesota.- Amendment 4 passed in Florida which will allow hundreds of thousands of felons to regain the right to vote.- Beto O’Rourke managed to outperform polls and laid the groundwork for House and state level candidates in one of the largest states in the country.- Three DSA members were elected including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.- Massachusetts upheld transgender rights in a ballot measure. 

In my view, the bad very well could outweigh the good. And the reasons I think the next 2 years are going to be brutal are wrapped up in the bad. Trump proved that 2016 wasn’t a fluke, he’s actually pretty good at politics. Trump campaigned hard in Indiana, Missouri, and Florida, two of which seemed like toss ups at worst/lean Dem at best. But rural white voters turned out hard for him and made those first two 10+ blowouts. Same with Tennessee, which was never really lean Dem or a toss up, but was one of the more likely potential pick offs in a really great year for Democrats. The last poll out of Florida had Bill Nelson/Andrew Gillum up 5+ points each and both were up most of the race, as it stands now both are losing by about .5 and Nelson’s race for sure is headed to a recount. Off the back of a series of rallies in Northern Florida which is Trump country to the core, and turned out for the president. There is a case to be made that Trump was on the ballot, suburban voters repudiated him in a significant way. That’s how Democrats took back the House, but rural white voters love him more than ever. And those are the same voters that have disproportionate representation in the Electoral College (and the senate). I’m pretty convinced Trump has a serious shot in 2020. I’m also pretty convinced Trump thinks these series of victories are thanks to his strategy of xenophobia and demonizing immigrants, the “caravan” and the birthright citizenship stuff. Trump dialed it up significantly for the midterms and he wasn’t even on the ballot. I guess I’m just really worried that the Democrats will use the House to pressure Trump, as they should, but under that pressure and an election with his name on the ticket, the racism, division, and xenophobia is going to get even more out of control. We already see Trump’s most enflamed supporters trying to assassinate his opponents (obviously a one off incident, but still there are threats against journalists and minority communities in record numbers, some of which materialize into things like the Tree of Life Synagogue shooting). I just think with Trump emboldened and perhaps rightfully so, that aspect of his presidency is going to get worst, and in my opinion that’s one of the most troubling things. As I said above, Republicans can’t pass policy I dislike as easily anymore, but they can still pack terrible judges on federal courts (including the Supreme Court) and Donald Trump can still use racism, hatred, and division to sow fear in an attempt to win elections. And historically speaking the downstream consequences of that sort of thing are like, road to authoritarianism/civil war/something else significant and bad.  That’s the Main Reason I Think the Next Two Years Will be Brutal, But Here are a Bunch of Other Really Terrible Results of Last Night: 

- THE COURTS Trump and the Republican Party have reshaped federal courts in a significant way and have even more latitude to do so. There are some really out there judges on the Fed Soc. radar that could be pushed with the extra wiggle room in the Senate. - Steve King (closest thing we have to an open white nationalist in the House) managed to hang on to his seat. - White Nationalist campaigns in Florida and Georgia were significant in the form of robocalls and online ads, and wins in those close races will likely embolden them. - Trump may feel compelled to fire Robert Mueller (there are already stories that he does feel he has room to do that now that he has more votes in the Senate to replace Jeff Sessions).- Rob DeSantis was the most Trumpian gubernatorial candidate we’ve seen so far and with his victory what I described above might flow down the ballot. 

[berniesrevolution]

With the results of the November midterm elections, we have officially witnessed the end of Rubinomics. Former Treasury secretary Bob Rubin was the ringleader of an incremental, neoliberal economics ascendant in the Democratic Party in the 1990s and through the Obama years. The Rubin school oversaw the deregulation of banking and finance, free-trade agreements with insufficient worker and environmental protections, and the dismantling of core parts of the safety net with Bill Clinton’s “welfare reform” of 1996. These economists, taking a page from Ronald Reagan, argued that markets self-regulate if we just leave them alone.

History has proven them wrong, and this month’s elections signaled the start of a fresh approach. A decade out from the Great Recession, wages are still stagnant, and the cost of living is spiraling out of control. Even though typical economic indicators, like the low unemployment rate, suggest we live in a strong economy, exit polls show that only a third of voters say their own financial situation has improved in the past two years.

A new cohort of candidates this year chose to run on a clear, unapologetic economic progressivism as good politics and good policy. A new analysisfound that two-thirds of the incoming Democratic freshman class in Congress campaigned on some form of Medicare for All or the expansion of Social Security. Nearly 80 percent campaigned on tax credits that benefit working families or on rolling back Trump’s tax cuts for the wealthy.

The election showed that the percolating economic progressivism of newly elected Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ayanna Pressley was not just a flash in the pan—it’s a politics that works at the ballot.

Take Lauren Underwood, a progressive woman of color just elected to Congress from a suburban Illinois toss-up district. She ran against the Trump tax cuts, calling for reform of a tax system that “overburdens middle-class families with paying more than their fair share of taxes.” Katie Hill, in the formerly Republican-dominated Southern California suburbs, and Cindy Axne in Iowa also ran successful populist campaigns.

Similarly, voters in clearly red states showed their support for progressive economics in direct elections for ballot measures. In Missouri and Arkansas, voters increased the state minimum wage. In Utah, Idaho, and Nebraska, voters approved ballot measures to expand Medicaid, blowing past the intransigence of Republicans and conservative Democrats.

Not every candidate running on a progressive agenda won, and there is much to be learned from races where we came up short. But most newly elected House Democrats won on progressive economic ideas. To be clear, this is not about a rivalry between the Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton wings of the party. In fact, most of these candidates shunned direct connections with Sanders, Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, and other national politicians. Instead, they moved to where voters are today in 2018, and voters rewarded them.

(Continue Reading)

[mariacallous]

This November Donald Trump faces an existential test. He has spent the primary season throwing around his political weight by endorsing candidates all over the United States. The midterm elections will serve as a true test of his power, and the outcomes will determine his future strength in the party.

Donald Trump’s record of success in primary endorsements has been mixed, as my colleagues have written extensively about in previous posts. He has padded that record, in part, by offering last minute endorsements—or in the case of the Missouri Senate race with a vague endorsement. Some of Mr. Trump’s endorsements went to candidates who were incumbents or were widely expected to win. In other races such as for governors of Pennsylvania and Maryland and for Senate in Connecticut, Ohio and Arizona, those endorsements were important to the outcome.

Trump’s endorsement strategy is bold—to an extent never before in modern politics he has put his reputation on the line in the midterm elections. But winning primaries is only half the battle. While any politician or former elected official likes to tout a win-loss record (when it is flattering) of their endorsements, the former president faces a second and bigger battle in the general election. In some cases, his endorsements were seen as supporting less electable candidates [i.e., Doug Mastriano (PA-GOV); J.D. Vance (OH-SEN); Herschel Walker (GA-SEN); Mehmet Oz (PA-SEN); Josh Gibbs (MI-03); etc.)

With the sitting Democratic president entering the midterm cycle with low approval ratings, the environment is ripe for Republicans to dominate at all levels of government. Mr. Trump’s endorsement of candidates in deep red states or districts will surely pad his win-loss record. However, if Senate candidates like Walker, Oz, Vance, or Blake Masters (AZ) ultimately lose in numbers that maintains Democrats’ Senate majority, Mr. Trump will be widely blamed. Many expect Democrats to lose their majority in the House. However, if they manage to keep it or if several Trump-backed candidates lose, narrowing Republicans’ potential majority, Mr. Trump will take another hit.

Finally, in governor races, where Republicans could have been or should be competitive in places like Pennsylvania, Arizona, Maryland, Wisconsin, and Michigan, Trump’s endorsements could backfire if Democrats net a pickup in those races. The potential for Republicans to sweep Democrats across the board exists, but it may not ultimately happen, and that possibility is starting to worry Republican strategists. If Democrats hold off historic losses, and especially if they are able to maintain or even expand control in the U.S. Senate, the GOP blame game will begin.

Of course, surprising Democratic strength this November would not be entirely Mr. Trump’s fault. A wildly unpopular Supreme Court decision around abortion (although resultant from Mr. Trump’s Supreme Court nominations), a string of legislative victories, slowing inflation, and sustained job creation all work to bolster Democratic chances. But it’s a midterm and Republicans are supposed to win. If Republicans don’t win, questions about and skepticism of Mr. Trump’s political power and influence will be centerstage in GOP discussions.

Yes, Mr. Trump made himself vulnerable by making endorsements of riskier candidates, bucking the GOP establishment. However, many Republicans endorsed different, controversial candidates in certain races. If election night in November proves underwhelming for Republicans, Mr. Trump’s GOP rivals will pounce. Potential 2024 candidates like Ron DeSantis, Mike Pence, Liz Cheney, Nikki Haley, Larry Hogan, Greg Abbott, and Mike Pompeo are looking for any opportunity to paint the former president as weak, politically ineffective, and as yesterday’s news. The midterms will present the opportunity to label him exactly that. Swarms of GOP voters will continue to genuflect before Donald Trump; others may grow their skepticism about whether he is truly the future of the party.

Thus far, Mr. Trump has already had some luck in head-to-head endorsement fights with his former vice president, Mike Pence. Trump-endorsed candidates bested Pence-endorsed candidates in the Arizona and Wisconsin gubernatorial primaries. (Although, it should be noted in the Georgia governor’s race, Pence-backed Brian Kemp beat out the Trump-backed candidate). However, those “wins” for Mr. Trump reflects precisely his vulnerability in the general election. If Pence-backed candidates are seen as more electable (they likely were) and Trump-backed candidates lose the general, it will be marketed as other party elders being better equipped to pick general election winners than the former president.

Of course, another path exists. That path involves Donald Trump’s endorsements being wildly successful. The dream scenario for the former president is one in which Democratic Senate incumbents in Arizona, Georgia, and Nevada lose to Trump-endorsed Republicans, and Trump-endorsees hold Senate seats in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Pair that with a large GOP House majority and flipping governors’ seats in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, and Donald Trump will look to the Republican Party like a political genius and a powerful kingmaker. If Trump-backed candidates push the GOP over the finish line in terms of control of the Senate and an expansion of Republican control of statewide offices, it will be hard for other Republicans to challenge the former president in his path to the nomination in 2024.

Donald Trump is not on any ballot in 2022, but his political future is. Mr. Trump could have sat quietly in the political shadows during the midterm campaigns, rebuilding his political operation and strategizing a path to return to the White House. Instead, he opted to stay engaged and continue his work of reshaping the Republican Party in his image. The risks and rewards are both significant—an unsurprising wager a man who cut his teeth in big-city real estate would be willing to take. But, ultimately, the midterms will likely either make Donald Trump an also-ran or the commanding force in party politics for years to come.

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Elections officials are counting primary ballots in Arizona, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri and Washington on Tuesday in a series of races that will set the stage for some of November's most competitive gubernatorial and Senate contests.

Kansas voters chose to protect abortion rights in their state. The political comeback of a former Missouri Governor was shut down. And the matchup in what will be one of the key gubernatorial races this fall was set.

Here are takeaways from the early results:

KANSAS MAINTAINS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO ABORTION

Kansas voters sent a dramatic message on Tuesday, opting to maintain the right to an abortion in their state's constitution just weeks after the US Supreme Court decided to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Polls have long shown that voters overwhelmingly support protecting abortions rights. But the win for the "no" vote in Kansas is proof of that and signals that the Supreme Court decision has further angered voters and possibly shifted the politics of the issue ahead of the November elections.

The "no" leaves the state constitution unchanged. While lawmakers in the state can still try to pass restrictive abortion laws, courts in Kansas have recognized a right to abortion under the state constitution.

The biggest warning to Republicans, many of whom have trumpeted the overturning of Roe and backed pushes to pass stricter abortions laws, is perhaps the turnout in Kansas. With 78% of the vote in on Tuesday night, nearly 700,000 people have cast ballots in the primary, a figure that already dwarfs the turnout in the 2020 presidential primary election.

"This is further proof of what poll after poll has told us: Americans support abortion rights," said Christina Reynolds, a top operative for Emily's List, an organization that looks to elect women who support abortion rights. "They believe we should be able to make our own health care decisions, and they will vote accordingly, even in the face of misleading campaigns."

GREITENS' ATTEMPTED COMEBACK FALLS FLAT

Republicans in Missouri breathed a sigh of relief after state Attorney General Eric Schmitt won the wide-open Senate primary, according to a CNN projection.

Perhaps more significant than who won, though, in the deep-red state, is who lost: disgraced former-Gov. Eric Greitens, who was attempting a political comeback. Greitens resigned in 2018 amid a sex scandal and accusation of campaign misconduct, and subsequently faced abuse allegations from his ex-wife, which he has denied

Schmitt, the Attorney General, emerged from a crowded field that included two members of Congress, Reps. Vicky Hartzler and Billy Long.

Former-President Donald Trump stayed out of the race, issuing a tongue-in-cheek statement supporting "Eric" on the eve of the primary -- leaving it up to voters' interpretation whether that meant Schmitt or Greitens.

A MEMBER OF THE 'IMPEACHMENT 10' IS DEFEATED

Rep. Peter Meijer became the second of the 10 Republicans who voted to impeach former-President Donald Trump to be ousted in a primary Tuesday, losing to Trump-endorsed conservative challenger John Gibbs, CNN projected.

Democrats played a role in boosting Gibbs -- a calculated decision that has become a flashpoint, angering some Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans.

Meijer, a freshman, voted to impeach Trump just days after taking office, after the insurrection of January 6, 2021. Gibbs, meanwhile, backed Trump's lies about widespread fraud in the 2020 election.

Meijer's loss means the Grand Rapids-based 3rd District seat will be one of the most competitive House contests in November's midterm elections.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, eyeing the seat as a possible pick-up opportunity, spent more than $300,000 on television ads seeking to bolster Gibbs with pro-Trump GOP primary voters by portraying him as a Trump-aligned conservative.

In Washington, two more Republicans who voted to impeach Trump, Reps. Jaime Herrera Beutler and Dan Newhouse, were attempting to survive their own primaries. The state's open, non-partisan primary system in which the top two finishers regardless of party advance to November's general election made them more difficult targets for Trump and his supporters.

UNKNOWNS IN ARIZONA

Arizona's race for the Republican nomination for governor could depend on whether former-President Donald Trump's supporters turned out in force on election day in a state that conducts its contests largely by mail.

Karrin Taylor Robson, a former member of the Arizona Board of Regents who is backed by former-Vice President Mike Pence and outgoing Gov. Doug Ducey, led former television journalist Kari Lake, a Trump-endorsed election denier, in the early returns Wednesday morning.

But the early results were largely mail-in ballots. Votes cast on election day were expected to favor Lake -- a result of Trump's years-long effort to undermine faith in mail-in voting.

The Arizona gubernatorial primary was the most significant contest in a set of primaries that tested Trump's influence over the GOP.

If Trump's slate of statewide candidates in Arizona advances to the general election, they'd be positioned to take over the election machinery of one of the nation's most important presidential battleground states if they win in November.

Blake Masters, the venture capitalist endorsed by Trump and backed by millions in spending from GOP megadonor Peter Thiel, led the state's GOP primary to take on Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly.

State Rep. Mark Finchem, a Trump-endorsed "Stop the Steal" activist who has said the state legislature should be able to overturn voters' will in presidential elections, led the GOP primary for Secretary of State. Democrats saw a tight race between Maricopa County recorder Adrian Fontes and state Rep. Reginald Bolding.

And in the Attorney General's race, Trump's preferred candidate, election denier Abraham Hamadeh led.

DIXON VICTORY IN MICHIGAN GOVERNOR'S RACE SETS UP REFERENDUM ON COVID POLICIES

Tudor Dixon, the conservative commentator endorsed by Trump in the final days of the race and backed by large factions of the Michigan Republican establishment, won the state's GOP primary to take on Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, CNN projected.

The clash in Michigan could be one of the nation's most competitive Governor's races.

Whitmer has cast herself as a bulwark for abortion rights in a state where Republicans have sought to enforce a 1931 law that would impose a near-total ban on abortion.

Dixon, meanwhile, framed the race in her victory speech Tuesday night as a referendum on restrictions Whitmer imposed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Dixon, a mother of four who is backed by former-Education Secretary Betsy DeVos's family, is also an advocate of school choice — potentially positioning education as a marquee issue in November's midterm election.

PROGRESSIVES SUFFER ANOTHER DEFEAT IN MICHIGAN

Rep. Haley Stevens' projected Democratic primary victory in Michigan's newly drawn 11th Congressional District over fellow Rep. Andy Levin marks another blow against progressives in what has been a mostly disappointing primary season.

It's also a resounding victory for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, and its super PAC, United Democracy Project, which has spent millions backing moderate, more staunchly pro-Israel candidates in Democratic primaries.

Stevens and Levin are both supportive of Israel, but Levin -- who is Jewish -- has been more willing to criticize its government's treatment of Palestinians and is the lead sponsor of the Two-State Solution Act.

Progressive Democrats, frequently targeted by AIPAC spending this primary season, have fumed at fellow Democrats for accepting or courting support from the group, which has also contributed to Republican election deniers. AIPAC has defended the practice, arguing that its policy goals need bipartisan support.

J Street, a liberal pro-Israel group that has clashed with AIPAC, tried to boost Levin with a $700,000 July ad buy, but that sum paled in comparison to the millions bundled by AIPAC and more than $4 million spend by UDP.