web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu

Which two Dems have strongest ground game? It may surprise you.

Westlake Legal Group Buttigieg Which two Dems have strongest ground game? It may surprise you. The Blog Polling Pete Buttigieg Elizabeth Warren democrats 2020 Democrat candidates 2020 campaign

As far as ground games go in the early primary states, the two strongest operations come from the campaigns of Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg. Warren isn’t so much of a surprise as is Buttigieg.

A piece in the New York Times tallied up the numbers. Warren and Buttigieg have more campaign offices in the early states than any of the other Democrats running for the 2020 presidential nomination. Both Warren and Buttigieg have a total of 47 field offices. Both are going all-in in Iowa, with Joe Biden a close third in Iowa. In the rest of the early primary states, though, Biden is far less aggressive.

Ms. Warren and Mr. Buttigieg have broken away from the Democratic pack with the most field offices overall in the four early states, and they are making an expensive bet that organizational strength on the ground will catapult them to crucial top finishes in Iowa’s first-in-the-nation caucuses. Their ground games give them more workspaces for organizers and volunteers. More organizers lead to more in-person contact with potential supporters in every nook and cranny of a state.

And in Iowa, where picking a candidate is akin to a religious conversion following extended evangelism from a supporter, a strong and broad organization is often the backbone of a winning campaign.

We know that Elizabeth Warren is battling Joe Biden for the lead in most of the polls right now, while Bernie Sanders is solidly in third place. What isn’t noticed so much is that Buttigieg is quietly advancing and is in the top spot in the second tier of candidates. Any momentum that Kamala Harris saw after the first nationally televised debate has completely fallen away. She’s proven to be a poor candidate. In the RCP averaging Monday morning, Biden is at 27.8%, Warren is at 26.0%, and Sanders rounds out the first tier of candidates at 15.2%. The second tier shows Buttigieg at 5% and Harris at 4.5%. Andrew Yang is at 2.7%. Then in what I think of as the third tier (bottom dwellers) are all the rest, led by O’Rourke, who is at 1.8%.

Presidential elections are not national, though, and it is the numbers in the state polls that provide a better picture of what is happening on the ground. Of the top four candidates in Iowa, for example, Warren leads at 22.7% and Biden is at 19.3%. Sanders is at 16.0% while Buttigieg has quietly risen to 12%. For comparison within the second tier, Harris is at 5.3% in Iowa. Buttigieg now has the largest operation of any of the candidates in Iowa. He has 20 field offices and a staff that’s hovering around 130. Buttigieg’s Iowa state director says, “We’re building an organization to win in February because this is a now or never moment for our country.”

Buttigieg may be trying to moderate his campaign rhetoric, too. Though he is still definitely in the far left side of politics, he is less so than others. For instance, in an interview on CNN, he threw Robert Francis O’Rourke under the bus for his crazy position that churches should lose their tax-exempt status if they don’t embrace same-sex marriage and other parts of the LGBTQ agenda. He told Jake Tapper, “I’m not sure he understood the implications of what he was saying.”

If or when Joe Biden leaves the race, Buttigieg might be in a position to pick up the support of his supporters. When or if Sanders leaves the race, though I think he will once again say in until the last minute unless he has another health event, Warren is the natural home for his supporters. What if it all comes down to a Buttigieg and Warren contest by the time we get to the convention? Within the party of identity politics, does a gay, white man in his thirties garner more support than a 71-year-old white woman who lied about her own personal biography for personal profit? One would be the first gay president and one would be the first woman president. Decisions, decisions.

Something both will have to work on is capturing more support from black voters. In the case of Mayor Pete, he has zero support from them. Buttigieg is in Ohio today and rolling out endorsements from state officials and officeholders.

Warren and Buttigieg are the only ones with field offices in Republican-leaning rural areas that swung from Obama to Trump in 2016 in Iowa. Biden’s campaign is concentrating on areas strong in union support. Buttigieg drew a crowd of around 700 people on Saturday night in Des Moines. Buttigieg raised $19.1 million in third-quarter fundraising so he has the resources to go full-tilt in the early states to challenge the top tier if he doesn’t make any big mistakes. It’s still early yet, of course, and anything can happen. After starting to count him out, I’m going back to keeping an eye on him.

The post Which two Dems have strongest ground game? It may surprise you. appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group Buttigieg-300x153 Which two Dems have strongest ground game? It may surprise you. The Blog Polling Pete Buttigieg Elizabeth Warren democrats 2020 Democrat candidates 2020 campaign   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

She’s Free, Freefallin’: Kamala Harris Places ‘a Distant Fifth’ in New Presidential Poll … in California

Westlake Legal Group KamalaHarrisDemdebate3-620x317 She’s Free, Freefallin’: Kamala Harris Places ‘a Distant Fifth’ in New Presidential Poll … in California polls Polling Politics North Carolina kamala harris Joe Biden Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post elections democrats Campaigns California Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif. speaks Thursday, Sept. 12, 2019, during a Democratic presidential primary debate hosted by ABC at Texas Southern University in Houston. (AP Photo/David J. Phillip)

New Democratic presidential polling information for California from an Emerson University survey shows Joe Biden and Sens. Bernie Sanders (VT) and Elizabeth Warren (MA) all firmly in the top tier with numbers in the double digits. But for home state Sen. Kamala Harris? The news is not good.

The Hill reports:

Former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) are tied for first place among Democratic primary voters in California, while home-state Sen. Kamala Harris (D) is running in a distant fifth, according to a new poll.

[…]

Tech entrepreneur and political newcomer Andrew Yang notches 7 percent support in the survey, with Harris following at 6 percent support.

That is a four point slide for Harris since the last Emerson poll that was taken in late August.

The Emerson poll released Tuesday was also taken after last Thursday’s Democratic debate, which shows that much like the second debate, she didn’t do herself any favors with voters in her own state.

Harris isn’t doing any better in national post-debate polls, either:

Just how bad is the California polling information for the Harris campaign? Very bad:

The survey is a sign that Harris may face a difficult battle in her home state’s nominating contest, a delegate-rich election that carries more significance than ever because of an accelerated primary schedule that places it on Super Tuesday, when voters in a dozen states will cast their ballots for the Democratic nomination.

“Senator Kamala Harris is in trouble in her home state. If she is unable to gain momentum in Iowa or New Hampshire, come Super Tuesday she might have a similar fate to Sen. Marco Rubio in 2016, when he was unable to win his home state of Florida and dropped out of the race,” Emerson Polling Director Spencer Kimball said, referring to Rubio’s 2016 loss to President Trump in Florida’s Republican presidential primary.

The Hill also notes that there has never been a candidate who lost their home state in a primary who ultimately won the presidential nomination.

That the Harris campaign has been in a freefall over the last two and a half months is not new news, but the fact that her numbers are in the basement in her home state is a very troubling sign for her campaign. There is no other way they can spin it.

Assuming she qualifies for the 4th Democratic debate next month, you gotta think at this point that she’s only staying in the race to put herself in contention for a veep slot.

Earlier this month, Harris told a Fox News reporter that in spite of the fact that she was polling in the low single digits she should still be considered in the “top tier.” She is in the top tier only in her own mind at this point.

Flashback –>> Leadership: Watch as Kamala Harris Flip Flops on Voting Rights for Murderers and Rapists in Less Than 24 Hours
——-
— Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter. –

The post She’s Free, Freefallin’: Kamala Harris Places ‘a Distant Fifth’ in New Presidential Poll … in California appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group KamalaHarrisDemdebate3-300x153 She’s Free, Freefallin’: Kamala Harris Places ‘a Distant Fifth’ in New Presidential Poll … in California polls Polling Politics North Carolina kamala harris Joe Biden Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post elections democrats Campaigns California Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Kamala Harris Nears Cancellation

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-08-21-at-10.25.40-AM-620x332 Kamala Harris Nears Cancellation Polling Politics kamala harris Front Page Stories Front Page Floundering Featured Story Election donald trump democrats Democrat primary cancelled Big Donors 2020

Kamala Harris had a bad night last night.

If you didn’t watch it, you weren’t alone. No doubt many preferred watching a bad NFL football game or reruns of Seinfeld to whatever it was that happened on that stage in Texas. We heard the laundry list of liberal lunacy and false promises. Banning semi-automatics, climate change, social justice, etc. Nothing new, but that doesn’t make it any less comforting.

Harris was especially cringeworthy though. She almost appeared inebriated at times. Take this clip for example.

If you can’t watch it, she’s giggling like a school girl while badly delivering a “yes, we can” joke in response to Biden pointing out she’s not a dictator who can do whatever she wants with executive orders.

Much more concerning than her horrible comedic skills though is her positioning in the race, which continues to spook her donors. Things are starting to come to a head now.

Grim is never a word you want to hear about your campaign. CNBC has the report.

Sen. Kamala Harris’ debate performance on Thursday failed to impress many of her party’s big-money donors who were on the fence about her candidacy.

Going into the Democratic primary debate in Houston, Harris’ closest supporters privately acknowledged that if the senator from California did not come out swinging against her opponents and clearly define her policies, wealthy donors could shy away from her campaign.

Many of them were hoping for a repeat of the aggressive tactics she used in the first debate, when she took on former Vice President Joe Biden for his willingness to work with segregationists as a senator in the 1970s.

Now these sources say that those uncommitted contributors are still not convinced they can dedicate their expansive networks to her cause alone.

When the money stops flowing, things can end very quickly.

“I don’t think anything has changed, and it’s been grim,” this person said. Donors believe that on the debate stage Harris is still “unclear about her message and strategy,” this person said. They liked the “Trump focus,” this person said, “but there was too much odd laughter and canned lines.”

This person added that most of their donors want to help former Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., or South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg.

This is all predictable. I’ll pat myself on the back again by reminding everyone that I said Harris was a sucker’s bet the day after her supposedly “game-changing” first debate performance. She simply doesn’t have the charisma and she comes across as a fraud. Those are never qualities to lack if you want to connect with voters and create excitement.

The Democratic primary is essentially a three horse race right now and Bernie Sanders is mostly a mirage. He simply doesn’t have the ability to build a majority. What’s most likely to happen is that Sanders and Warren continue to split the crazy vote while Biden coasts down the middle. Harris is fast approaching not even being a factor. After her failure last night, she has no path to climb back in the race and with her donors bailing, cancellation is near.

 

 

The post Kamala Harris Nears Cancellation appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group kamala-harris-300x153 Kamala Harris Nears Cancellation Polling Politics kamala harris Front Page Stories Front Page Floundering Featured Story Election donald trump democrats Democrat primary cancelled Big Donors 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Garvan Walshe: No Deal has failed. The choice is May’s deal, no Brexit or no United Kingdom.

Garvan Walshe is a former National and International Security Policy Adviser to the Conservative Party. He runs TRD Policy

Until this week I had thought that Brexit, though something I had opposed, had become inevitable. The referendum victory, though narrow, was clear, and those who continued to oppose Brexit lacked the ruthlessness and tactical sophistication to press their case successfully.

That’s started to change. The campaign, begun in earnest during the ratification of the Maastricht Treaty, to take Britain out of the EU is now at risk of failing altogether. The manner of its failure, the scorched earth tactics of its more extreme partisans, and the increasing radicalisation of the Remain electorate (reflected in the Lib Dems’ tactically astute shift in position to direct revocation of Article 50, without a referendum) could cause a significant portion of the public to feel completely alienated from the political system, at a time when Britain’s constitutional traditions are being subverted for factional gain.

(As in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, blame for constitutional vandalism is not evenly shared; people just disagree about who should shoulder most of it.)

So though I opposed Brexit, I still don’t think it should currently be reversed. Around half of Remainers still see EU membership in transactional terms: but it is that transactional idea of membership that David Cameron tested to destruction. Many of the rest have turned into pro-European partisans, but out of opposition to Brexit rather than love of European integration.

Should a stable majority of the British public come to understand that the European Union is a project of political integration that involves the nation states of Europe sharing the sovereignty they once jealously guarded, then the UK should rejoin. But cancelling Brexit now would be bad for both the UK, which would find itself kicking against the loveless marriage to which it had returned, and the EU, which would have an unhappy and divided Britain to contend with.

The Brexiteers failed internationally because they overestimated Britain’s power. They began promising the easiest trade deal in history and some even suggested that Ireland should leave a failing EU and rejoin the UK; now they’re stuck negotiating a trade deal with Phil Hogan, the Irish Commissioner.

They failed domestically because they mistook a moral argument for a political one.

Their moral claim is that winning the referendum creates an unanswerable case for having some kind, indeed any kind, of Brexit. Both sides of the referendum campaign said that they would abide by the result, and that moral duty, they believe, is sufficiently strong that it should override other considerations, including Britain’s traditions as a representative, not a direct, democracy; whether the actual exit deal negotiated in fact turned out to be good enough; and whether during the time between referendum vote and implementation, the people might have changed their mind, or the electorate changed its composition (changes, in particular youth registration and naturalisation of EU citizens, themselves prompted by the Brexit vote).

But moral claims on their own do not a political strategy make. Brexiteers needed to have converted their victory on the day of 23rd June into a broad and lasting consensus in favour of Brexit. It had appeared that May had planned to do just that when she became Tory leader in 2016, but she changed tack during her conference speech that year in pursuit of a very specific hard-right fever dream that came unstuck the following July.

I’ll come back to this electoral mirage in a moment. Its effects however, were to deprive May of a majority, force her to rely on the DUP whose demands proved incompatible with those of the EU, as well as the need to avoid giving the SNP an argument to demand the same status as Northern Ireland, and resulted in the Withdrawal Agreement, which couldn’t pass the House of Commons, disastrous EU election results, the rise of the Brexit Party and her resignation and replacement by Boris Johnson.

Johnson inherited a war on two fronts — against the Brexit Party and the Lib Dems — and devised a sort of Schlieffen Plan to get the Conservative Party through. Complete Brexit by 31st October, then pivot to the kind of one-nation Toryism he professed as mayor, to give a country tired of Brexit and austerity something to unite around.

Over the summer, it looked like he had maintained just enough ambiguity about his intentions to keep his opponents divided. Instead he united them by proroguing Parliament and horrified the party by taking the whip from 21 rebels including Nicholas Soames and Philip Hammond, sparking the resignation of Amber Rudd, his own brother Jo, and even the Duke of Wellington. Whatever the Conservative Party is these days, it doesn’t have space for the descendants of Britain’s national heroes. Much of this is attributed to his senior adviser Dominic Cummings, who combines the flexibility of the younger Moltke with the defence-minded attitude of Marshal Foch.

Unable to force his policy through a parliament in which he doesn’t have a majority, having reduced that majority further by his purge, he has been outmaneouvred by Jeremy Corbyn; his bid to call an election twice blocked by the Commons.

Situation excellente says Cummings, j’attaque.

The quite obvious plan, as is clear from adverts promising a “People versus the Politicians” election, is to reactivate enough anger from Leave voters to win a parliamentary majority against a divided opposition. It’s a plan with superficial possibility. Some pollsters, particularly YouGov, are showing a sizeable Conservative lead. Others give a much closer result. Panelbase has a Tory lead of three points, Opinium of ten. Leaving aside differences in weighting, having five parties means that even variations of one or two percent because of sampling error can mean the difference between the Tories on 35, Labour on 25 and Lib Dems on 17, Brexit Party on 13 (Tory Majority of 88, says Electoral Calculus) and Tories on 32, Labour on 28, Lib Dems on 15, Brexit Party 15 (Hung Parliament. Tories ten short).

Consider this poll, conducted in the middle of the crisis by FocalData, for the Conservative Group for Europe, with a sample of 10,000 – enough to use the statistical technique for MRP:

  • CON 33 per cent
  • LAB 30 per cent
  • LD 15 per cent
  • BXP 11 per cent
  • GRE 4 per cent
  • NAT 4 per cent
  • OTH 2 per cent

MRP calculates a statistical correlation between demographic characteristics (e.g. age, income) and voting behaviour, and then applies the results of those correlations to individual seats. The theory underlying it is that a 55-year-old man with a degree in Wakefield is likely to vote the same way as a 55-year-old man with a degree in Winchester. Wakefield votes differently to Winchester because different sorts of people live there, not because people from Wakefield are different to those in Winchester. This is broadly true (with some exceptions, which are relevant) and well-designed MRP has been able to predict individual constituency results far more accurately than uniform national swing. Crucially, it still works when swings are not uniform, and votes change between several parties, not just the big two.

That poll shows Labour a bit on the high side, and the Lib Dems a bit on the low side, but it is roughly in the region of recent polling. FocalData’s MRP calculations, which do not model Northern Ireland, yield 312 Tories, 242 Labour 21 Lib Dems, 52 SNP plus 5 others. I applied some swing modelling to these numbers, and if the Labour vote falls a few pecrentage points lower, and the Lib Dem vote rises, this could lead to the Conservatives winning a small majority; but equally small changes in the other direction could make Labour the largest party and able to form a majority for a second referendum with the support of the SNP and Lib Dems.

More ominous still, the poll asked Tory voters whether they would vote tactically to prevent a No Deal Brexit and a quarter said they were “likely” or “highly likely” to do so. I think this would be balanced by Labour voters who would vote tactically to ensure Brexit was done. Though I don’t think this question was asked, as there are fewer Labour Leavers than Tory Remainers a reasonable equivalent estimate would I think be 15 per cent.

I applied this adjustment to the individual constituency results, in two different ways. The first scenario adds takes a fraction of the Tory vote away and assigns it to the highest of Labour, Lib Dems, the Greens or one of the nationalist parties; it also takes a fraction of the Labour vote and assigns it to the highest of the Tory or Brexit Party column. The second scenario makes the assumption that Tories opposed to no deal are also opposed to Jeremy Corbyn, so it assigns the tactical vote to the pro-Remain party, other than Labour, who with the best chance of winning. Labour votes are assigned as in scenario 1.

Some caveats are in order: not everyone who says they’ll vote tactically actually will. Some will pick the wrong party and waste their vote; these estimates don’t take Labour-Lib Dem switching into account, and on the other side of the equation, they make the assumption that Brexit party voters who were thinking of switching to the Conservatives have already done so.

Nonetheless, the results are sobering. If anti-No Deal tactical voting included the possibility of voting Labour, the results would be a solid Labour majority of 50.

  • CON 135
  • LAB 374
  • LD 63
  • SNP 55
  • GREEN 1
  • PLAID 4

The possibility of this occurring could indeed deter anti-No Deal Tories from lending their votes to Labour. If Labour don’t benefit from anti-No Deal tactical voting the outcome is predicted as:

  • CON 224
  • LAB 277
  • LD 71
  • SNP 55
  • PLAID 4
  • GREEN 1

These are properly considered “edge” scenarios. Actual voter behaviour is likely to be somewhere in the middle (there will be some seats where Tories might feel comfortable voting for an increasingly rare Blairite, for example). Nonetheless, it makes an election a rather dicier prospect that some of its cheerleaders hope.

The fever dream I mentioned was the idea that the Conservative Party can somehow extend its reach into the northern working class (or, given the demographic profile of such voters, chiefly northern pensioners retired from industry) while still holding on to its urban professional vote in the cities and suburbs. A slightly more realistic version proposes cancelling the losses from cities and suburbs with greater inroads in to towns by adding a working class vote to the existing middle class Tory vote there. This has been partially successful in the south, the midlands (the only area where the Conservatives picked up seats in 2017) and probably in Wales, but has repeatedly failed in northern England, where people are willing to vote Leave, and even for the Brexit Party, but for whom a Conservative vote is a step too far.

I met quite a few of these voters on the outskirts of York in the 2017 campaign. They quite liked Theresa May herself, they said. She seemed solid and serious, but they didn’t trust the Tory party which, they felt, would always find a way, however devious, to screw people like them. The current front bench is not short of people who could convey that impression. Stirring up anger at the establishment and fear of Corbyn worked in the referendum, where Labour essentially gave up campaigning, but failed in the general election when Labour were able to keep onto their core vote. It would be quite a gamble, albeit in keeping with World War I inspired strategy, to repeat the 2017 plan two years later.

As I write, the Scottish courts have ruled Johnson’s prorogation of Parliament unlawful, prompting No 10 to issue an attack on “Scottish” judges, questioning their independence. This latest Fochian outburst is highly unwise and should not have come from a government of a party that still calls itself the Conservative and Unionist Party. The Acts of Union of 1706 and 1707 preserve the independence of Scottish and English legal systems and as a result jurisprudence has developed separately in the two nations of this kingdom. The Supreme Court, which hears the appeal next week has three options. It can declare prorogation lawful in both, allowing the SNP to say “English” judges overruled their traditions. It could declare it unlawful in both, which would, insofar as it upheld the Scottish verdict, require the Supreme Court to rule in effect that the Prime Minister had misled the Queen; or, it could produce the even more uncomfortable verdict that prorogation might have been lawful in England and Wales but unlawful in Scotland (in this situation the judgement that the Prime Minister misled the queen would still apply; but the English courts would have ruled that misleading her as to the reasons for prorogation was not, somehow, material to the case).

Also yesterday, a poll of Northern Ireland was released by Lord Ashcroft showing majority support there for the backstop, and an essentially evenly split vote on reunification with the Republic (51–49 in favour). The even split is maintained thanks to a majority of older voters continuing to support the Union. The youngest age group of voters breaks 60–40 in favour of a United Ireland.

The Johnson government’s strategy of heightening the contradictions has so far been an unqualified failure. Prorogation united the opposition to require him to seek an extension if he stays in office. The attempts to call an election failed. The removal of the whip from 21 Tory MPs reinforced their determination to defy number 10. Polling for the election itself increasingly suggests it would produce another hung parliament and quite possibly one led by a pro-second referendum administration. Continuing with this aggression is not only putting the Conservative Party’s continued existence at risk, and increasing the chances of Jeremy Corbyn establishing himself in No 10, it is threatening the integrity of the UK as a whole.

The Prime Minister needs to accept this failure and change tack. Leaving without a deal is no longer possible. Parliament will both prevent that, by requiring an extension, and, prevent an election that could (but probably wouldn’t) deliver a parliament that would accept it. Substantive modifications to the deal are also out of the question (the only one bruited is replacing the UK-wide backstop with an NI-only one, which is actually a retraction of a concession the UK made to the EU). The deal itself allows for a wide variety of Brexits, from Canadian-style free trade to a Norway style membership of the single market. If it is agreed, the UK will stay in the single market and customs union for at least a further year and a half, possibly up to three and a half years, limiting the economic shock of disruption. It would allow the Prime Minister to pivot to the One Nation Conservatism needed to win centrist voters back from the Lib Dems, and of course, it would allow him to tell Brexit Party supporters that we had left the EU.

The Spartans who consider this capitulation should think very carefully. Theresa May said there were three options: this deal, no deal, or no Brexit. The effect of prorogation has been to take away the option of no deal by constitutional means. The choice left is now this deal, no Brexit, or no United Kingdom.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Steyer makes the cut for October debates

Westlake Legal Group steyer-impeach Steyer makes the cut for October debates Tom Steyer The Blog Polling debates campaign contributions 2020 Democratic primaries

We haven’t even made it to the Democratic debates in Houston this week but the candidates are already jockeying for position in the October debates to be held in Ohio. And for reasons that remain a total mystery to me, billionaire liberal activist Tom Steyer has somehow qualified for that round. (Steyer won’t be on the stage in Houston this week as he didn’t manage to score well enough in four approved polls.) So where is this support coming from? (Boston Globe)

Tom Steyer, the billionaire and former hedge fund investor turned impeachment activist, became the 11th Democratic presidential candidate to qualify for the October debates on Sunday after a new poll showed him with 2 percent support in Nevada.

To make the cut, candidates must procure donations from 130,000 people and earn 2 percent support in four qualifying polls. Steyer fell one poll short of qualifying for the third Democratic debate in Houston this week. But the Democratic National Committee’s rules allow polls to carry over and count toward qualification for the fourth set of debates.

When the DNC announced the requirements for the October debates in Ohio, they didn’t change them at all from the Houston rules. Everyone still needs 2% support in four approved polls and 130,000 unique donors, including a minimum number from at least twenty states.

That seems a bit disappointing, doesn’t it? I thought part of the purpose of staging this many shows was to begin winnowing down the field. By the time we get close to Halloween, there will only be a couple of months left before the actual voting begins, so it shouldn’t have been unreasonable to raise the stakes a bit, even if it was only 4% in four polls and perhaps 200,000 donors. I mean, this is a national race, after all.

But still, that seems to be why Steyer was able to squeak over the finish line to qualify for the Ohio stage. He appears to have focused a lot of his effort on Nevada, and a two percent showing there this weekend gave him the fourth poll he needed. Where his “support” is coming from is also unclear. As of this morning, his RCP national polling average was still stuck at 0.5 percent. Yesterday’s ABC News/WaPo survey had him doing a smidgen better at one percent. But he’s had the whole summer to try to build some momentum and it just doesn’t seem to be happening.

While we’re on the subject of voter appeal, what is Steyer running on anyway other than a platform of demanding Trump be impeached? It doesn’t sound as if he’s pushing any bold new plans that the rest of the pack aren’t already hyping. For quite a while now, he’s been pretty much a one-trick pony. And the trick in question is impeachment. But if he wins the presidency, Donald Trump will be gone anyway.

One last point on the upcoming debates that I wanted to hit was the recurring question of the size of the crowd on the stage. Last month I asked why the DNC couldn’t run the Houston debates over two nights even if they only had ten people qualifying. ABC News obviously has both nights open in preparation for the event and it would give each candidate more time to speak. Well, they decided not to do that, so we’ll once again have ten lecterns on a single night this week.

But with Steyer qualifying for next month, there may be a silver lining to this story. He’s the eleventh person to make the cut, so hopefully, they’ll be splitting that event out over two nights.

The post Steyer makes the cut for October debates appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group steyer-impeach-300x173 Steyer makes the cut for October debates Tom Steyer The Blog Polling debates campaign contributions 2020 Democratic primaries   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Denial: Kamala Harris Falsely Claims Her Campaign Is in “Top Tier” Even as Polling Shows She’s in a Freefall

Westlake Legal Group kamala-harris-620x317 Denial: Kamala Harris Falsely Claims Her Campaign Is in “Top Tier” Even as Polling Shows She’s in a Freefall polls Polling Politics North Carolina New Hampshire kamala harris Joe Biden Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post elections democrats Culture Campaigns California Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020 Democratic debates 2020

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., speaks during the Democratic primary debate hosted by NBC News at the Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts, Thursday, June 27, 2019, in Miami. (AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee)

Sen. Kamala Harris (CA) is making a campaign swing through New Hampshire this week, and while there Fox News asked her about whether or not she feels she’s still in the top tier even as the media is painting the Democratic presidential nominating race as a three-way race between Joe Biden and Sens. Sanders and Warren:

“Of course I’m part of that top tier and we all know that,” the California Democrat told Fox News and Seacoast Online on Friday evening, during an interview before headlining a party fundraising gala in Portsmouth, N.H.

“This is a campaign that has to be about each person working hard and earning the support. I plan on earning the support of each and every voter,” she also stated.

Watch:

In Harris’s mind she might be a “top tier” candidate but the reality is her campaign has been in a freefall since mid July.

She enjoyed a nice bump in polling numbers, positive press coverage, and fundraising in the aftermath of the first debate at the end of June where she broadsided Joe Biden over the forced busing issue and his praise of working with segregationist Senators back in the 1970s in order to get things done.

Media types and liberal commentators were treating her as the invincible candidate, but as July rolled on, her numbers began to start declining. And after Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) absolutely took Harris to the woodshed over her troubling criminal justice reform record as California’s attorney general, her numbers dropped even more .

Even more troubling for her is the dramatic drop in support from key Democratic voting bloks like black voters and female voters.

Ever since her poor performance at the second debate at the end of July, she has not been able to get her mojo back at all and has struggled to define herself and her campaign.

In fact, things have gotten so bad for Harris that just a little over a month after she mocked Gabbard for her low polling numbers, Harris finds herself only 2 points ahead of the Hawaii Congresswoman in a recent poll, with the margin of error putting her even with Gabbard:

The next Democratic debate is Thursday. Expect her to again attack Biden (but perhaps not from a racial angle this time around), and to take a few swings at Sen. Elizabeth Warren (MA), too, as Warren’s numbers have consistently risen since mid-May, which firmly puts her in the top tier.

——-
— Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter. –

The post Denial: Kamala Harris Falsely Claims Her Campaign Is in “Top Tier” Even as Polling Shows She’s in a Freefall appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group kamala-harris-300x153 Denial: Kamala Harris Falsely Claims Her Campaign Is in “Top Tier” Even as Polling Shows She’s in a Freefall polls Polling Politics North Carolina New Hampshire kamala harris Joe Biden Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post elections democrats Culture Campaigns California Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020 Democratic debates 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Heartbreak: Bill de Blasio Fails to Qualify for Third Democratic Debate, But Struggling Campaign Presses On

Westlake Legal Group BilldeBlasioAPimage-620x317 Heartbreak: Bill de Blasio Fails to Qualify for Third Democratic Debate, But Struggling Campaign Presses On Polling Politics North Carolina New York Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post elections democrats Campaigns Bill de Blasio 2020 Elections 2020 Democratic debates 2020

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio participates in the second of two Democratic presidential primary debates hosted by CNN Wednesday, July 31, 2019, in the Fox Theatre in Detroit. (AP Photo/Paul Sancya)

It would appear that Democratic voters are not in a New York state of mind.

The day after Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (NY) officially dropped out of the presidential race, the participants in the third Democratic presidential debate were announced. One name that was not on the list, rather unsurprisingly, was NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio.

The NY Daily News reports reports:

It’s official: Mayor de Blasio won’t be on stage next month with the rest of the Democratic candidates hoping to become their party’s presidential nominee.

De Blasio, whose long-shot presidential bid has been marred by low poll numbers and slumping fundraising, did not make the cut, party leadership announced Thursday.

Hizzoner didn’t manage to meet the qualification requirement of garnering at least 2% support in four or more polls approved by the Democratic National Committee. He also failed to fulfill the second requirement of receiving at least 130,000 unique donations.

Here are the candidates who did qualify, according to the DNC’s criteria:

The Mayor has faced intense criticism from constituents back home who say he should be focusing more on the problems facing New York City than running for higher office. Some have even taken to distributing “missing person” posters with de Blasio’s name and face on them:

Campaign literature began to pop up on lampposts in Midtown Friday, with a tongue-in-cheek message declaring de Blasio “MISSING,” amid his longshot quest for the Oval Office.

“Last seen embarrassing himself in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina,” read the black-and-white posters. “If seen please tell him to immediately return to New York and do the job he was elected to do.”

The poster — printed with a photo of Hizzoner and his age, height and weight — asks anyone with “information about this man’s whereabouts” to contact “deblasioforresident@gmail.com.”

Here’s what they look like:

Ouch.

According to multiple media reports, though, de Blasio was in Nevada campaigning today and doesn’t appear to have any plans to drop out:

When contacted Thursday, de Blasio’s campaign remained focused on the campaign ahead of them.

“The Mayor very much looks forward to his return engagement on ‘Pod Save America,’” they said in a statement.

“He also looks forward to the Nevada State AFL-CIO convention on Thursday and the New Hampshire State Democratic Convention on September 7 as well as many appearances ahead.”

De Blasio’s campaign has been plagued with setbacks, including just last week when he appeared in front of an Iowa union crowd via video conference, and the audio feed made him sound like he had swallowed helium.

——-
— Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter. –

The post Heartbreak: Bill de Blasio Fails to Qualify for Third Democratic Debate, But Struggling Campaign Presses On appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group BilldeBlasioAPimage-300x153 Heartbreak: Bill de Blasio Fails to Qualify for Third Democratic Debate, But Struggling Campaign Presses On Polling Politics North Carolina New York Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post elections democrats Campaigns Bill de Blasio 2020 Elections 2020 Democratic debates 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

The Hill to Dems: C’mon, you only have four real presidential contenders

Westlake Legal Group dem-debate-july2 The Hill to Dems: C’mon, you only have four real presidential contenders The Blog Polling monmouth kamala harris Joe Biden dnc 2020 Democratic primaries

There may not be even that many. Despite a field of more than twenty candidates vying for stage space in upcoming debates, The Hill’s Niall Stanage has concluded that only four Democrats have any hope of winning in the primaries. Too bad more of the other candidates haven’t yet realized that:

Marginal candidates at the bottom of the large field have begun to drop out — Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) became the latest to do so on Friday — and a deadline is looming this week to qualify for the third round of debates in Houston in September.

Meanwhile, at the head of the pack, only a major surprise would deliver the nomination to anyone outside the top quartet: former Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.).

Those four lead the polls and suck up media attention. They also offer Democratic voters a potential standard-bearer from the left (Warren or Sanders), the center (Biden) or somewhere in-between (Harris). And, of course, either Warren or Harris could become the first female president.

Put it all together and it is difficult to see an opening for other contenders to make a serious run at the nomination.

Is Stanage sure about that number? Take a look at this RCP chart from today and ask yourself where you’d draw the line on potential for primary wins:

Westlake Legal Group rcp-8-26-19 The Hill to Dems: C’mon, you only have four real presidential contenders The Blog Polling monmouth kamala harris Joe Biden dnc 2020 Democratic primaries

Any line drawn from this representation would either get drawn at the 15% line or at the 10% line — both of which would only leave three candidates in the race. Kamala Harris has tailed off so far that Pete Buttigieg has her within a margin-of-error gap. Everyone else is well below the 5% mark in a range best described as statistical noise.

The race actually looks very consistent over the last six months, with only one dynamic and sustained change — Elizabeth Warren’s rise. After a fumbled start, Warren has risen into the top tier since early June. At the moment, Warren’s tied with Bernie Sanders and seems to have risen at least to some extent at his expense. The two of them put together would only tie Biden, though, while Harris’ remaining support would barely budge the needle.

But how secure is Biden’s lead? A new Monmouth poll drops him into a three-way tie, with liberals fleeing from Biden:

The poll finds a virtual three-way tie among Sanders (20%), Warren (20%), and Biden (19%) in the presidential nomination preferences of registered Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters across the country. Compared to Monmouth’s June poll, these results represent an increase in support for both Sanders (up from 14%) and Warren (up from 15%), and a significant drop for Biden (down from 32%).

Results for the rest of the field are fairly stable compared to two months ago. These candidates include California Sen. Kamala Harris at 8% support (identical to 8% in June), New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker at 4% (2% in June), South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg at 4% (5% in June), entrepreneur Andrew Yang at 3% (2% in June), former cabinet secretary Julián Castro at 2% (<1% in June), former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke at 2% (3% in June), and author Marianne Williamson at 2% (1% in June). Support for the remaining 13 candidates included in the preference poll registered only 1% or less.

Biden has suffered an across the board decline in his support since June. He lost ground with white Democrats (from 32% to 18%) and voters of color (from 33% to 19%), among voters without a college degree (from 35% to 18%) and college graduates (from 28% to 20%), with both men (from 38% to 24%) and women (from 29% to 16%), and among voters under 50 years old (from 21% to 6%) as well as voters aged 50 and over (from 42% to 33%). Most of Biden’s lost support in these groups shifted almost equally toward Sanders and Warren.

Even this strongly suggests a three-way race has emerged. Biden’s losing support in this survey, but it’s not flowing to Harris or other lesser candidates in the field. Even if this poll is an outlier, it offers no hope to other Democrats who keep hanging on for the ride.

It would be in the DNC’s interest to force the issue and weed out the hopeless in order to produce more efficient debates. Unfortunately, the DNC’s credibility is somewhere around the Baghdad Bob level after their heavy-handed attempts to protect Hillary Clinton in the 2016 cycle. The easiest way to clarify the field would be to set a new bar of 10% support in four approved polls rather than 2% for the October debate, differentiating it from the September debate rather than using the same qualifiers for both. That would likely lead to a voluntary exodus of the also-rans while perhaps leaving Harris on the stage to get to four. The DNC won’t do it, though, because they don’t want to look as though they’re intervening … even if it is just to impose reality on fantasy candidates.

The post The Hill to Dems: C’mon, you only have four real presidential contenders appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group dem-debate-july2-300x173 The Hill to Dems: C’mon, you only have four real presidential contenders The Blog Polling monmouth kamala harris Joe Biden dnc 2020 Democratic primaries   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Kamala Harris In Freefall In Latest Poll

Westlake Legal Group kamala-harris-620x317 Kamala Harris In Freefall In Latest Poll President Polling poll kamala harris Joe Biden Front Page Stories Featured Story democrats CNN Allow Media Exception 2020

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., speaks during the Democratic primary debate hosted by NBC News at the Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts, Thursday, June 27, 2019, in Miami. (AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee)

During the CNN Democratic debate, one of the more shocking moments was the absolute thrashing that Tulsi Gabbard put on Kamala Harris regarding her real record as attorney general of California.

Gabbard pointed out Harris’ office slow-walking evidence and harsh enforcement policies that make up just some of the questionable tactics Harris endorsed in her career as a prosecutor. The gutting provided by Gabbard appears to have had a lasting effect on Harris: She’s tanking in the polls.

Harris has dropped twelve points in the polls, and it’s only going to get worse. Harris has two problems.

The first is what Gabbard hit her on: She’s a cop. She’s always been a cop. She will always be seen as a cop. What made people excited about committee hearings she was involved with was the fact that she was a prosecutor, a person whose goal is to get the opposition to say exactly what she wants them to say. If you go back and listen to her responses to Gabbard, she got caught in the same trap Chris Christie crushed Marco Rubio on in 2016 – the robotic talking points. She didn’t defend herself, but instead went back to what she was saying before the attack.

She couldn’t defend the attacks.

The second is much more dangerous for her: Attacking Joe Biden is an attack on Barack Obama. Harris has tried to hit Senator Joe Biden and not Vice President Joe Biden, but Biden has been clever enough to always refer back to his time with Obama to remind black voters he was Obama’s guy. If you attack Obama’s guy, you attack Obama, and that’s a major problem for Harris.

Harris could end up out of future debates if she doesn’t find a way to rehabilitate the image. She’s in trouble.

The post Kamala Harris In Freefall In Latest Poll appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group kamala-harris-300x153 Kamala Harris In Freefall In Latest Poll President Polling poll kamala harris Joe Biden Front Page Stories Featured Story democrats CNN Allow Media Exception 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Stacey Abrams: Republicans could send off-duty law enforcement into polling places next year to intimidate minority voters

Westlake Legal Group sa-1 Stacey Abrams: Republicans could send off-duty law enforcement into polling places next year to intimidate minority voters voter The Blog suppression Stacey Abrams Polling places MSNBC law enforcement democrats

Via the Free Beacon, there’s some agita online today about Abrams floating another hair-raising theory of corruption at the polls after insisting without evidence for months that she’s the rightfully elected governor of Georgia. Although, interestingly, she seems to be backing off that last claim now — somewhat, allowing last night that “I don’t know that empirically I would have won” last year.

Does that mean the rest of the party is now free to punt on the burning question of who the “real” governor is, or do racial politics require them to hug the “Stacey won” talking point tight even as she’s inched away from it?

Anyway, she’s on firmer empirical ground in worrying about off-duty patrolmen turning up in majority-minority districts in 2020 on behalf of the GOP. It sounds outlandish but that actually happened in New Jersey in 1981. Armed off-duty cops showed up at the polls in black neighborhoods wearing armbands identifying them as part of the “National Ballot Security Task Force,” which sounds like an official government agency but was actually just an outfit thrown together by the RNC. (There’s a Wikipedia page and everything.) It created enough of a stir that the RNC entered into a consent decree the following year in which it promised not to use such tactics for 35 years. The consent decree lapsed in 2017 and the DNC went to court to try to get it extended but lost. So, in theory, the RNC is free to try this again. Whether they’d dare do that in an age of ubiquitous smartphones and social media, when evidence of the “Ballot Security Task Force” staring down black voters in line to vote could and would be streamed in real-time on Election Day, is a separate question. But that’s the genesis of Abrams’s complaint.

The most newsworthy soundbite from her in the media yesterday wasn’t this, by the way, it was her answer to the Times when asked if she’d agree to be VP if asked. Answer: Hell yes.

So in saying you’re open to other opportunities, that includes any potential selection for vice president?

I would be honored to be considered by any nominee.

But my responsibility is to focus on the primary. And that means using the primary as an opportunity to build the apparatus to fight voter suppression. Because in the end, no matter where I fit, no matter which ones of our nominees win, if we haven’t fought this scourge, if we haven’t pushed back against Moscow Mitch and his determination to block any legislation that would cure our voting machines, then we are all in a world of trouble.

The hard truth for her is that she’s not an obvious pick for any member of the top tier. She’s a good demographic balance for Biden and Sanders but they’re each so old that her lack of federal or statewide experience would attract intense scrutiny. She’s not such a great demographic balance for Warren and Harris since Dems would worry that an all-woman ticket might scare off some working-class voters in the midwest. Her best pairing, I think, would be with someone like Buttigieg or Beto, running as part of a “youth” ticket where you wouldn’t need to worry that the president won’t make it through a full term. Plus, Buttigieg has no federal or statewide experience either; voters will have to clear that hurdle psychologically in voting for him much more so than they will with her as VP.

Exit question: When was the last time someone without federal, statewide, or military experience was put on a ticket *as VP*? Trump lacked all three as well, but Trump had to run the gauntlet of a national primary election. Republican voters sized him up and declared him worthy notwithstanding his lack of government credentials. Abrams is aiming to land on the ticket as an appointee, not as the choice of Democratic voters. I think the last person to pull that off was Sargent Shriver, George McGovern’s VP in 1972, although Shriver had served as ambassador to France and as head of the Peace Corps so he’d had some nominal federal duties before he was named. Abrams would be breaking new ground in the VP slot.

The post Stacey Abrams: Republicans could send off-duty law enforcement into polling places next year to intimidate minority voters appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group sa-1-300x159 Stacey Abrams: Republicans could send off-duty law enforcement into polling places next year to intimidate minority voters voter The Blog suppression Stacey Abrams Polling places MSNBC law enforcement democrats   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com