Philip Bump with a smart take on the DeSantis campaign “retooling” There was California Gov. Pete Wilson in September 1995, who, the Associated Press reported at the time, was heading “into the fall with a new plan to cut costs but without veteran strategist George Gorton” as he sought the Republican presidential nomination. He’d drop out soon after. In June 1999, it was Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) who, according to the Houston Chronicle, “scaled back his [presidential] campaign operation” because of “the difficulties of raising money in a crowded Republican field.” He was out by August. In June 2003, it was Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.) who needed to figure out “how to build on the campaign’s fundraising successes while cutting costs,” as the National Journal wrote. He made it to February of the following year. It seems as though there’s a candidate like this in every cycle, the one who jumps into the presidential race only to quickly overextend themselves, demanding a scaling-back of staff even before winter. In 2011 it was Jon Huntsman Jr. In 2015, Jeb Bush. In 2019, Kamala D.
Uncategorized
JV Last made an excellent point about the upcoming presidential election: The 2024 election has no modern precedent and this unprecedented difference (1) Is not properly appreciated, and (2) Explains why the race has been so stable. This thing is so obvious that you’re going to dismiss it out of hand. But I want you to work through it with me: No one living has seen an election in which two presidents have run against one another. And that changes everything. Let me explain. What is the fundamental hurdle that every presidential candidate has to overcome? When the voter looks at the candidate, she asks, Can he do the job? That’s it. That’s the big question. And the answer is binary: Voters have to imagine each candidate as the chief executive and decide either, Yes, this person is a plausible president, or No, this person is not up to the office. One of the (many) advantages an incumbent president has is that he has proven that he can do the job. This sword has two edges: An incumbent’s presidential record can be attacked. Some voters may like it. Some may not.
I think you know… No surprise here: A Popular Information analysis of @RobertKennedyJr’s first FEC filing reveals the lion’s share of Kennedy’s biggest donors have PREVIOUSLY DONATED ONLY TO REPUBLICANS Follow along for details. Through 6/30, Kennedy’s campaign has collected the maximum, $6,600, from 96 individuals. 37 individuals have previously only donated to Republican candidates for federal office. Only 19 have a history of consistently supporting Dem candidates Mark Dickson, a Californian who amassed a fortune in the aerospace industry, has donated more than 450K to federal candidates since 2015 The total includes $400,000 to Trump Victory Dickson has NEVER supported a Democrat running for office Until he maxed out to Kennedy Keith Sheldon, a retired car dealership executive from Argyle, Texas, has consistently backed Trump, maxing out in 2016 and 2020. He also donated $2.9K to Herschel Walker. And thousands to House GOP candidates. But nothing to Dems. Until he maxed out to Kennedy. Kennedy has dozens of maxed out donors with similar giving histories. And a much smaller number with a history of donating to Dems.
I know why: sabotaging the Democratic Party is his raison d’etre This No Labels gambit is such utter bullshit I’m hard pressed not to just start screaming into the void. I’ve been watching Joe Lieberman take a wrecking ball to the Democratic Party for decades now and he’s not done yet. In this article in the Atlantic, he insists that he doesn’t want Trump to be the nominee and that he just wants to provide a “moderate” “centrist” option since that’s what he believes everyone in America really wants. But he’s very hard pressed to answer why he is determined to threaten his old friend Joe Biden: Lieberman is clear about his distaste for Trump, but he’s hazier on the question of why—or even whether—Biden has fallen short. He’s said repeatedly that if the choice came down to Biden or Trump, he’d vote for the Democrat, and he speaks affectionately of a man he first met nearly 40 years ago and with whom he served for 20 years in the Senate. Yet he’s still hunting for a better option.
They no longer have any need or desire to be statesmen And, as with everything else, it’s a long, slow evolution that’s been accelerated at warp speed by the presence of Donald Trump in American politics: There are 26 Republican governors. Three of them showed up here this week at the annual summer meeting of the National Governors Association. And of those three, one left after the first night, and another had little choice but to attend — his chairship of the group began at the conclusion of this year’s gathering. Striding the Hard Rock Cafe casino stage like a megachurch pastor, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox used his maiden speech as NGA chair to implore his fellow governors to make the organization a model of robust yet civil debate. “If we’re ever going to find our better angels again, it has to start with us setting the example of how to disagree better,” Cox said. But it’s hard to do much disagreeing, or have a conversation at all, when nobody is listening: Fewer than a half-dozen governors were still in attendance for his remarks Friday, the session’s closing day, and they were all Democrats.
Can he be any more obvious? Is there even one of his supporters who cringes when he transparently sucks up like this? Former President Trump praised the judge overseeing his classified documents case as his legal team seeks a postponement of his trial in Florida. Trump’s motion for a continuance of the trial, filed last Monday, awaits a decision by Judge Aileen Cannon, an appointee of the former president who presided over his initial challenge to the FBI search of his Florida home. Asked on “Sunday Morning Futures” on Fox News whether he believes the judge will grant the motion, Trump said he did not know. “I know it’s a very highly respected judge. A very smart judge, and a very strong judge,” Trump said. When host Maria Bartiromo noted that Trump appointed the judge in the case, Trump said, “I did, and I’m very proud to have appointed her.” “But she’s very smart and very strong, and loves our country,” Trump said.
“Our campaign is data-driven” The trade show area of political conferences is lined with of booths filled with vendors and staff from nonprofit groups. Lots of tech firms with the latest in campaign software — for fundraising, for campaign communications and social media, for data management. I feel like strolling through dressed as Darth Vader and intoning, “Don’t be too proud of this technological terror you’ve constructed.” That sentiment is not mine alone. Micah L. Sifry discusses a survey of volunteers from 31st Street Swing Left, Markers for Democracy and Swing Blue Alliance. He summarizes their report, “The Experience of Grassroots Leaders Working with the Democracy Party,” calling it “sobering.” One bullet speaks to a pet peeve of mine and a current project (bolded): One volunteer I spoke with recently complained that VoteBuilder/VAN is not only clunky but still has “a 1980s interface.” While Democrats may attempt to update their software, there is a reluctance to update their strategies. There is a systematic overreliance on tech to solve Democrats’ problems.
Greg Sargent nails it The failure of Rep. Jim Jordan’s (R-Ohio) House Judiciary Committee hearing last week to generate any kind of coherent narrative might have been expected (Washington Post): Blame it on the “MAGA persecution complex” — the vast array of outlets in the right-wing media ecosystem that incentivizes GOP lawmakers to pander to conservative victimization and grievance. It’s feasting on so many claims of persecution that it’s essentially eating itself to death. At last week’s hearing, Republicans alleged that the FBI investigated conservative parents at school board meetings. (That’s entirely baseless.) They insisted FBI Director Christopher A. Wray, a registered Republican, personally sicced the FBI on conservatives. (Wray called this “insane.”) They claimed the FBI has eagerly persecuted Trump. (The FBI has actually been rule-bound and cautious.) They railed that FBI plants incited the Jan. 6, 2021, attack.
Growing turnout where there’s room to grow It’s happened before. The final, low-prestige panels of the Netroots Nation conference — late Saturday afternoon when people are already leaving — turn out to be the most interesting. “You cannot win without the youth vote” featured observations from Voters of Tomorrow panelists: Ahead of the 2022 midterm elections, many national news sources suggested that the youth would not turn out. In reality, the election saw the second-highest youth turnout in the last 30 years. Gen Z voted overwhelmingly for pro-democracy candidates. Without the youth vote, the “red wave” may have become a reality. The Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade was the animating issue in 2022, as well as in the Wisconsin Supreme Court race in 2023. While the youth vote has been increasing, 2022 was the first when over half of Gen Z could vote, the panel agreed. They predict even higher turnout in 2024. Florida Rep. Maxwell Frost, 26, told a ballroom crowd earlier that Democrats must work to make Gen Z’s future a hopeful one of abundance, not retrenchment, if they want their engagement.
Michigan Republicans go lower I’ve never forgotten the first time I encountered an essay by the late, great Molly Ivins. She described happenins inside the “Austin Funhouse,” a.k.a, the Texas state capitol where, pre-Viagra, overstimulated legislators often went to “fist city.” In Michigan they hit lower, says Michigan Democrats’ state Senate Majority Whip Mallory McMorrow.