A Night of Few Surprises

Four more states—Maine, South Carolina, North Dakota and Nevada—took their turns holding primaries yesterday. Things went pretty much as expected. Here's the rundown:

• U.S. Senate, Maine: This was the star attraction, of course. The outcome was not in doubt, but the margin was. Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) was unopposed, and Graham Platner (D) is now officially the opponent she will face off against. With 80% reporting, Platner took 72% of the vote, as compared to 19.5% for already-threw-in-the-towel Gov. Janet Mills (D).
  
  It is very hard for us to accept that those Mills voters are going to take a pass on this race, or that they are going to become Collins voters. We thought that Platner's latest scandal could be a real dent in his armor, but the letters we've gotten (see below) suggest that Maine (and Democratic) voters just don't see it that way. So, we presume the Democratic vote will unify behind the party's now-candidate. And keep reading.
  
  
• U.S. Senate, South Carolina: The only other Senate seat up yesterday was the one in South Carolina. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) easily fought off a challenge from the right, taking 56.8% of the vote to 28.9% for "America First" fanatic Mark Lynch. Graham's opponent in the general will be physician Annie Andrews, who easily won the Democratic nomination with 61.5% of the vote. She should savor her victory, because it's the last one for her this cycle.
  
  
• Governor, Maine: Because those crazy kids in Maine used ranked-choice voting for primaries, there's no knowing who the ultimate nominees will be. Four Democrats claimed at least 20% of the first-place votes, as did three Republicans. Any of those seven (including the Bush and the Pingree who are running, but not the King) could advance. The most interesting thing about the gubernatorial election, at least so far, was the turnout. There were about 225,000 votes on the Democratic side of the contest, and about 140,000 on the Republican side. Both races were competitive (as compared to the Senate race, where there was no Republican contest at all). These very different totals suggest Democratic enthusiasm is high, Republican enthusiasm is much less so. If that is true, it's good news for Platner and for the blue team's hopes of recapturing the Senate.
  
  
• Governor, South Carolina: The Democrat here is going to be state Rep. Jermaine Johnson, who is young, Black, charismatic and doomed. He got enough votes that he won't have to deal with a runoff, and can advance directly to the general, where he will lose. On the Republican side, the Trump-backed Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette got 28.9% of the vote, while state AG Alan Wilson took 26.1%. The President's endorsement does not seem to have helped much. In any event, Evette and Wilson will have a runoff on June 23 to see who gets to replace the term-limited Gov. Henry McMaster (R). Meanwhile, Rep. Nancy Mace (R) finished a distant fifth in that primary, with 12.1% of the vote. Such is the price that you pay if you dare to challenge the throne.
  
  
• Governor, Nevada: Gov. Joe Lombardo (R) claimed 90.9% of the vote, and so easily won the right to run for reelection. He will face state AG Aaron D. Ford (D), who got 63.8% of the ballots on that side of the contest. Ford is keeping things simple; his platform has four planks: housing, health care, energy and education. About 175,000 votes were cast on each side of the primary, so this one could be a barnburner. The race raters all have it with a slight Republican lean, the polls so far give Lombardo a lead of about 1.5 points.
  
  
• ME-02: Four House seats that are in "swing" territory, all of them currently in Democratic hands, were on the various ballots yesterday. That includes the R+4 ME-02, which is open because Rep. Jared Golden (D-ME) is retiring. The Republican is going to be Paul LePage, as he was unopposed. Three Democrats are neck-and-neck, with state Sen. Joe Baldacci, former Congressional aide Jordan Wood and Maine State Auditor Matthew Dunlap all between 28.7% and 31.7%. Maine's ranked-choice system means this one will take a little while to sort out. It won't be easy to hang onto an R+4 district against the well-known (if somewhat notorious) LePage, but if Platner proves to have coattails, anything is possible.
  
  
• NV-01: The other three swingy seats are all in Nevada. In the D+2 NV-01, Rep. Dina Titus (D) easily won renomination, and will face off against state Sen. Carrie Ann Buck (R), who has Donald Trump's endorsement. Not sure how much of a selling point that is in a state whose tourist industry has been hit hard by Trump's cold war against Canada.
  
  
• NV-03: In the D+1 NV-03, Rep. Susie Lee (D) also won renomination easily. She will be opposed by composer Marty O'Donnell, who is also Trump-endorsed. This district is where most of Las Vegas is located, so if there's anywhere Trump is likely to be a liability, it's here.
  
  
• NV-04: Rep. Steven A. Horsford (D) had no primary opponent in this D+2 district. He will now face off against Cody K. Whipple (R), who sounds like the mascot for some sort of dessert topping, but who is actually a rancher and who does NOT have Donald Trump's endorsement. This is strange, because Whipple was clearly going to win, and Trump loves every easy opportunity to increase his batting average.

Next up is Oklahoma, where—spoiler alert!—Republicans are going to win everything. (Z)

Oh, Graham!, Part II: Maine Voters

Today, with Graham Platner officially having advanced to the general election, we want to share some thoughts on him (and his latest scandal) from folks who will actually help decide his fate, namely readers who are registered voters in Maine. And away we go:

• P.R. in Saco, ME: I tell you whot, that D.E. in Lancaster is wicked smaht, ayuh. Nailed it.
  
  The Republicans are terrified of authenticity. (Please let that sink in.) Platner is likely to win the seat because Mainers see his authenticity. (But even if he doesn't, he's definitely on his healing path. Good on 'im. There but for the grace of God go I.)
  
  Finally, I get hints that Susan Collins might not fight as hard as she would. She knows her goose is cooked, between the Kavanaugh vote and her relationship with Donny. And, she might just be fine with being retired. She came out touting her 10,000 votes record, noted she is in deep doo-doo with him whose name is no longer on the Kennedy Center, weakly mentioned character in reference to a reporter's question about Platner, and weakly stated the people of Maine will decide.
  
  Which they will.
  
  
• B.C. in Walpole, ME: Okay, look, there's no such thing as an oyster boat. That's where this lobsterman/oysterman false parallel is creeping in. To lobster, you need a lobster boat. You don't go to sea for oysters. You grow them in farms on protected water bodies. I live on the estuary that accounts for 75% of Maine's oyster supply and I've not yet heard the expression "oysterboat," nor even "oysterman." Lobsertman and lobster boat I hear frequently.
  
  Last year, I paddled my kayak 4 miles down a stretch of the Damariscotta River (actually a saltwater estuary), dodging oyster farms the whole way. They use lots of different kinds of boats, but most of them are ordinary johnboats of the kind one would use to go fishing on a local lake (unless you are a Southerner and have the Rolls-Royce equivalent of a bass boat).
  
  How does Platner qualify for working class? Except very briefly, his life's work has been serving in the military, and that's not really what we mean by "working class." His family currently owns an oyster farm. That's not the same as working class either.
  
  Why did his key staff members resign last year? I find that especially disturbing. If I were a reporter, I wouldn't bother to talk to ex-girlfriends. I'd be talking to ex-staff members, and months ago.
  
  
• A.B. in Farmington, ME: One thing I haven't seen other commenters raise is that one cultural change brought about by the reporting on Watergate—a more critical eye toward politicians' bad behavior especially beyond policy—has had an unintended consequence in political reporting: For the last 50 years, there is no better way to make it as a political reporter than to bring down a politician, the bigger the better. On top of that, a non-traditional candidate such as Graham Platner presents a particularly appealing narrative: fresh-faced newcomer arrives on the scene and everyone swoons, then we learn that it's all actually fake and the person is terrible (whether they are or not). As they say, the story writes itself.
  
  The tell (to me, at least) in the Platner situation is the use of the word "scandal," which doesn't really make sense when applied to the issues that have arisen in his campaign: He is not doing something actively that requires explanation. Rather, he is being presented with allegations about past behavior and being asked to explain himself or demonstrate that this does not reflect who he is today. It is worse than a scandal because it will come up every single time he talks to a political reporter. Moreover, the fact that he very specifically said there was nothing else that would come out almost directly before the sexting allegations arose seems to have convinced political reporters that they cannot trust him and that means he is an even bigger target.
  
  All that said, it is totally legitimate to ask about a candidate's character. First, because it might actually give you some insight into how they will handle future situations, but second and more importantly, voters care (notwithstanding the well-described asymmetry on this topic between Ds and Rs). You can't simply wave that away.
  
  The recent stories about Platner's past behavior are essentially the perfect political Rorschach test, and most people are exceedingly likely to just react according to their existing preferences. I know a lot of Janet Mills supporters (she's from the same town I live in) and they are pissed about Platner and, in my opinion, the reasoning for why they don't like him follows from their opinions rather than forming an opinion based on that reasoning. I also know Platner supporters (I'm one) and many of them (I'm not one) feel like the world is out to get Graham and, by extension, all his supporters.
  
  Now I will swoon a little bit. Graham has been tremendously available to Maine voters and has barnstormed this state non-stop for the last 9 months. He has spoken to Maine voters without notes and accepted any question and, to me, demonstrated that he understands both the need for change and the mechanisms necessary to achieve it. I agree with the argument of the campaign that real people should be senators, not merely those groomed for it from childhood, and he has struck me in direct, one-on-one conversations as someone who has the combination of real world experience, book smarts, and a clear political vision. I really like Janet Mills and believe she has been a terrific governor, but Graham was a better candidate from day one and he has a vision of change for the future that meets this moment in the way that is needed. I definitely ranked him number one yesterday, did not rank any other candidates, and I'm looking forward to seeing him defeat Susan Collins in November.
  
  However, I do worry that I have not seen anyone in the public discourse acknowledge the danger that Graham will get the nomination and then face allegations that cannot be sufficiently explained. The specific concern I have is that no one other than Graham, his wife, and the women involved have seen the inappropriate (the WSJ described them as "sexually explicit") texts that Graham sent early in his marriage. If those text are truly problematic from a legal perspective, then they could sink his candidacy. If that happens, the Democratic Party in Maine will be scrambling to find a replacement and the damage is likely to cost Democrats any chance of winning the Maine Senate seat and therefore a possible Senate majority in the next Congress. As a person who thinks about the process of politics, as much as feeling the emotions around supporting a beloved candidate, this is scaring the hell out of me with Platner's campaign. Accordingly, I really hope the campaign releases those texts (if they have them) before the opposition can.
  
  Dirigo!
  
  
• M.P. in Portland, ME: Thank you for all you do to keep us Mainers informed, and thank you for this opportunity to comment on our extremely important Senate race this year. I like both Janet Mills and Graham Platner. I wish Mills had stayed the course through the primary, though her name still appears on our ranked-choice ballot. Democrats still have the opportunity to vote for her.
  
  When I completed my mail-in ballot, I chose Platner as #1 and Mills as #2; however, if the New York Times article had been published before then, I might have ranked Mills as #1. I do not know what to believe about Platner's past actions, and Mills has been tested in multiple statewide elections, winning them all. However, the current mentality of "throw the bums out," combined with some ageism, worked against Mills. For now, it appears that Platner will win and remain the nominee. I am fine with that, but it does give me pause that there may be even more scandals revealed in the coming months. In the end, my primary goal, and the goal of many Mainers (Democrats, Independents, and Republicans) is to rid ourselves of Susan Collins. We may not like her for different reasons (Kavanaugh for me; not Trumpy enough for many Republicans). Anecdotally, three of my friends, all women (ages 33 to 75), have no qualms at this point about supporting Platner in the primary or the general election. Each cited the fact that the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave has either bragged about or been convicted of much worse offenses than those of which Platner has only been accused. Like it or not, that is where we are in American politics.
  
  As a side note, in the governor's race, I ranked Shenna Bellows #1, Nirav Shah #2, and Hannah Pingree as #3. If I could have my ballot back, I would most likely choose Troy Jackson (who was surging in the last poll) in one of the top three spots. I'm a little embarrassed to admit it, but I think I confused his name with David Jones, who is running for governor as a Republican. I'm not sure if it's my fault or Jackson's campaign's fault that I didn't know more about him.
  
  
• P.S. in Portland, ME: I have had one 30-minute phone conversation with Graham Platner. He is an obviously highly intelligent student of history, with a detailed understanding of why our best way out of the mess we created is a new progressive era. I have seen him speak at several rallies and I have chatted with him a couple of times afterwards. In one encounter, I was standing near him when a young couple came up to him and the woman, a mental health professional, thanked him profusely for raising awareness of mental illness as a miswiring of the brain that can be treated. When they were just about done, I walked over to talk with the women while Graham was standing there as well. I let her know that I had a brother that is a retired family doctor, a sister that is a retired pediatric radiologist, an oldest son that is an ER doctor, a middle daughter that is an anesthesiologist, and a youngest daughter that is also, like her, a licensed mental health professional. I just wanted to let her know that in my world, out of all of them, when I need support, my youngest daughter is generally the most useful. Then I said something that was actually said to me long ago by my Rabbi, "We are all crazy, just some of us deal with it better than others." Graham laughed, but in a manner of solid agreement. Sometimes you can just tell. This is a person that was in a lot of trouble, but found his way, and found a new life and is not going backwards. No way, no how. A person who, as I said, is very smart and wears his heart on his sleeve. Like all great leaders—FDR, Kennedy, Lincoln—he can really deliver a speech and because of that, and his clearly strong motivation to serve, he just took off. Graham will not be spineless in the Senate. He will make his decisions based on science and data and facts, to include history. We should all want Graham Platner to be the next elected Senator from Maine.
  
  
• S.B. in Winslow, ME: From the moment this guy first came on the scene, I wasn't happy about it. Before Janet Mills threw her hat in the ring, there was a lot of support for her to do it from the Democrats in the area, as she's a proven politician and had a majority of Mainer support. I was cautious, simply because I think she wanted to retire and was talked into running against a weakening Collins. Her less-than-energetic campaign supported my theory and her withdrawal as Platner's popularity ascended proved it (IMO).
  
  What troubles me deeply about Platner was the same thing that troubled me in 2016 when I heard people talking about Donald Trump. It was 0% on experience or policy and 100% on feelings. With Trump, I repeatedly heard "He tells it like it is!" and "That's just locker room talk." (Thinly veiled bigotry and misogyny.) With Platner, I hear "I don't care about what he did in his youth or what's going on in his marriage" and "I'll vote for any Democrat before I'd vote for Collins or any Republican." (Thinly veiled anti-Trumpublican anger.) In other words, Graham Planter is the Democratic version of Donald Trump, and that makes me ill.
  
  Sadly, I find myself in the second group. The damage being done to our democracy by Trumpism and the Roberts Court is astounding and, I deeply pray, impermanent. I loathe that Americans are voting people with no political experience into senior government offices, but still remain grateful that people can vote for whomever they want... at least those who still can vote. Platner, for worse or "worser," is a D in the Senate. Right now, at this point in our nation's history, Democrats need every seat possible to stop the structural destruction of our country. I just pray we haven't sold our collective soul in doing so.
  
  
• A.C. in Tenants Harbor, ME: I'm a Maine voter. I plan to vote for Graham Platner. Sure, I'd prefer it if he were not a "bad boyfriend." But I don't want to date him. I want him to build a coalition of people and interests that will challenge and work to change the grip of the oligarchs (using shorthand for all the monied manipulators). And all of the traditional "elites." I'm sick of entitled elites. He speaks to the lived realities of most of us here in Maine (I believe), and has courage when more reasonable, mainstream Democrats are too cautious. I believe that any rash impulses will be checked and tested by his colleagues, should he be elected. And I believe he can win over Susan Collins in ways that the other main Democratic contender, Janet Mills, cannot.
  
  
• J.A. in Bangor, ME: I've lived in Maine for nearly 30 years but I can never be a Mainer because I wasn't born here. This is something that may not mean very much in southern Maine (commonly referred to as "Massachusetts North," where I live) but means a great deal to people in other parts of the state. Susan Collins is certainly a Mainer and this has helped her in past elections. Take 2020 for example—Joe Biden won Bangor by 20%, but Susan Collins was in a dead heat in her race, which means some sizable number of people voted for Biden and Collins on the same ballot. As I see it, Collins has been seen as one of us, and at the end of the day people feel she'll put Maine people first. She is seen around Bangor at Sunday mass and shopping alone at the grocery store and this seems endearing to people.
  
  This year, however, Collins is in the fight of her life as Graham Platner is also a Mainer through and through. I do not see a dead heat this senate election in Bangor and I think he'll win with Biden-level numbers. He'll also win statewide. Susan's run is over.
  
  
• H.M. in Portland, ME: Graham Platner will have the support of Maine Democrats in the general election. "Trump" is a dirty word in this part of the country and Susan Collins, who has supported him when her vote really counted (see Kavanaugh, Brett; support for ICE; hideous Cabinet confirmations; etc.) is well past her expiration date.
  
  Platner has been meeting people in countless town halls, libraries, schools, job sites etc. He has worked his butt off and stood to take responsibility for his actions. Collins, meanwhile, only meets voters in carefully controlled environments and hasn't had a town hall this century. The contrast is extremely vivid. People love what Platner says, believe what he can do, and that possibly this is a start of a movement. They don't like the controversies but, especially compared with the Trump misdeeds, are willing to give him as much rope as possible.
  
  Susan Collins has won election after election against, frankly, extremely poor candidates. Now she is going against strength, plus some of the best political ads you'll ever want to see.
  
  Despite the controversies, Platner collected more than 70 percent of the primary vote, even while Janet Mills remained on the ballot as an alternative. Those who did not support him will in November. He's that good. And by then, the alternate candidate will be Susan Collins.

Thanks to all who wrote in. We'll have one more set on Friday. (Z)

Hilton Secures His General Election Booking

Not every outlet has called it, but Decision Desk HQ certainly has, and we think they have the right of it. The California gubernatorial election is going to be a matchup between Democrat Xavier Becerra and Republican Steve Hilton.

Here are the vote totals as of 11:30 p.m. PT yesterday:

Candidate	Votes	Percentage
Xavier Becerra	2,390,780	27.9%
Steve Hilton	2,137,993	25.0%
Tom Steyer	1,928,381	22.5%

There are estimated to be about 856,000 votes outstanding. In the roughly 4 million votes that have been announced since Election Day, Tom Steyer has made up about 3% on Hilton. He's not going to make up another 2.5% from the remaining number. Sorry, Tom, there's $200 million down the drain. You and Mike Bloomberg should form a club and commiserate.

With the primary out of the way, Becerra can now commence his glide path to becoming the next governor of California. We have put the odds of a Becerra victory at 95%, and here are half a dozen reasons why:

1. Blue California: The Golden State has a PVI of D+12. As we have discussed several times recently, that is very near the upper limit for a flip. And even then, it usually requires an unusually damaged majority-party candidate, or some issue that has absolutely clobbered the party in power. Yes, Californians are unhappy about homelessness, but that is not going to be enough for Hilton to overcome that extreme a PVI (and see below).
   
   
2. Blue Wave: Also, as we have written approximately a million times, it figures to be a blue wave year. And a rising tide lifts all (blue) boats. Though the statewide races are not likely to be competitive, California Democrats will be out in force to make sure as many Democrats get elected to the House as is possible.
   
   
3. Anti-MAGA California: It is true that more Californians than Texans voted for Donald Trump, but that is only because the state has so many people. The fact is that California, on the whole, loathes the President, not only because of his general behavior, but because he has specifically thumbed his nose at the Golden State many times (particularly as regards assigning blame, and withholding aid, for wildfires). In his three presidential elections, Trump took 38.3%, 34.3% and 31.6% of the California vote. A candidate who is joined at the hip with him, as Hilton is, is not likely to improve much on that.
   
   
4. Hasta La Vista, GOP: California has actually been a blue state since 1934. And yet, for many years, the governorship changed hands on a regular basis, and it was held by many prominent Republicans, most obviously St. Ronnie of Reagan. What made that possible is that a lot of the arrivals in the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s who made the state blue were some version of Southern Democrats (e.g., the Okies), who were certainly more than willing to consider conservative candidates.
   
   These days, most California Democrats are from the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party, and are not willing to consider conservative candidates. The GOP has been an endangered species at the state level for about 30 years, with the main exception to that being Arnold Schwarzenegger, who served as governor from 2003-11. However, he had massive celebrity appeal, was VERY moderate, and he first claimed the governorship in a wonky recall election. The last time a standard Republican won a standard California gubernatorial election was when Pete Wilson did it in 1994, more than 30 years ago.
   
   
5. Yo Soy Mexicano: Identity politics is a thing. California is 41% Latino and, more specifically, about 32% Mexican. Further, there could well be an extra surge of support, along the lines of what happened with Barack Obama in 2008, since Becerra is in line to break a glass ceiling that has been in place since Pío Pico fled the governorship of Mexican California in 1848. It's been nothing but white men in that chair since.
   
   
6. Carpetbagger: While Becerra is the son of immigrants and was born in Sacramento, Hilton is British-born, and only gave up that citizenship last year. He has lived in California for only a little more than a decade, and has a habit of demonstrating his lack of familiarity with California culture, such as not knowing what a street taco is actually made from. Californians don't disdain carpetbaggers the way Southerners do, but even they prioritize an authentic Californian over a much-less authentic one.

There has been one quality poll of the Becerra vs. Hilton matchup, and it had Becerra taking 58% of the vote to 35% for Hilton, with just 2% preferring a third-party candidate and just 5% of voters undecided. Those are very grim numbers for the GOP, of course, because Hilton would not only have to take all the undecideds and hold on to all of his voters, he'd have to flip about one Becerra voter in ten. That is a tall, tall mountain to climb.

And now that the race is set, we very much hope that some reporter will ask Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA): "If California Democrats are manipulating the election results 'upstream,' as you claimed, then why would they involve themselves in the L.A. mayoral election, and yet put the governorship at risk?" It would be fun to see the steam coming out of the Speaker's ears. (Z)

Things Aren't Going So Well for Trump on the Foreign Affairs Front

You must keep in mind that Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu works for Donald Trump. After all, Trump says so. And so, when Trump calls up Netanyahu, and tells him to stop bombing Iran/Lebanon, the PM says, "How high?" Or... well... something like that.

Then again, maybe not. There was indeed such a phone call. In fact, several such phone calls. And Netanyahu, providing a clear demonstration that he is not Mike Johnson, just kept bombing away, no matter what Trump told him to do. Iran, of course, fired back, as did Hezbollah. We saw several outlets yesterday with headlines that said things like, "Exchange of missiles means ceasefire may be imperiled." "May be?" We continue to take the position that the moment that missiles start flying, there is no longer a cease fire. We're wacky like that.

The fundamental problem here is that the Israeli populace has veered rightward during its current war. And, perhaps more significantly, Netanyahu leads a fragile, right-wing governing coalition that has grown harder right during the current war. And so, Netanyahu is being pulled in one direction by Trump, and in a different direction by the people who are keeping him in power (and out of prison). The PM is no fool, and knows exactly which side his challah is buttered on, if he is forced to choose.

Meanwhile, yesterday Iran shot down an American helicopter. Trump promptly got onto his Kissinger-is-turning-in-his-grave social media platform to conduct a little "diplomacy," and fired off this missive:

I have just been informed by our Great Military that last night the Iranians shot down one of our highly sophisticated Apache Helicopters while patrolling over the Strait of Hormuz. There were two pilots involved, both are safe and uninjured. Nevertheless, the United States must, of necessity, respond to this attack. Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DONALD J. TRUMP

The circumstances of the shooting are unclear (for example, it could have been a case of mistaken identity). But by going off half-cocked (and we mean that on multiple levels), Trump yet again painted himself into a corner. Following through on the threat risks escalating the war, something he clearly does not want to do. But if he TACOs (and it was Tuesday, after all), then he looks weak before the international community, the American people and, perhaps most importantly, the Iranians, who will dig in even further when it comes to making demands in negotiations.

Late last night, the U.S. did counterattack, though details are sparse. The Iranians then fired back, hitting U.S. targets in the region, most obviously a base in Bahrain. All of this could just be face-saving ballet, or it could be the prelude to renewed fighting. We'll know in 48 hours or so, we suppose. Trump says that, despite all of this, peace talks are going well, and the end is near. Anyone who believes that, raise your hand. Yeah, that's what we thought. (Z)

Political Bytes: Vance Can Dance

Another roundup of news that doesn't quite merit a full item.

That's a Good Little Soldier: Yesterday, VP J.D. Vance proudly announced that he has referred Gov. Tim Walz and state AG Keith Ellison (both DFL-MN) to the Department of Justice for prosecution, since they were allegedly "aware of widespread taxpayer fraud in federally funded social programs for years" and did not take steps to stop it.

Our Take: There will probably be an investigation, and there will probably be some headlines, but this clearly isn't going to go anywhere, since even Vance isn't claiming the two men actually engaged in fraud. Vance is just kissing up to Donald Trump, and trying to make up a little ground on Marco Rubio in the 2028 Republican presidential horse race.

---

No Divorce Trial: Wannabe U.S. Senator from Texas Ken Paxton (R) won't have a messy and public divorce trial after all, as he and his soon-to-be-ex-wife agreed on settlement terms.

Our Take: No surprise here; Mrs. Paxton struck at the very best time to extract the very best deal she could possibly hope to get. Now, Democrat James Talarico will just have to content himself with pointing out that Paxton is still sleazy, still corrupt, still an adulterer, still a faux Christian, and is still responsible for letting several sexual predators off with a slap on the wrist. In other words, still plenty of material to work with here.

---

I Have Met the Enemy, and He Is Me... Sort Of: Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK) is hopping mad, and has been telling anyone who cares to listen exactly why. As he faces a tough reelection battle, he's drawn a new opponent, and it's... Dan Sullivan. The new Dan Sullivan has the middle initial "J," and is a registered Republican, but has a history of donating to lefty causes. The Dan Sullivan who is a senator has the middle initial "S," is also a registered Republican, and believes there is some rat**cking going on, courtesy of the Democratic Party and the Senate campaign of former Rep. Mary Peltola (D).

Our Take: This almost certainly is rat**cking, though whether Peltola/the Democrats are involved, or if the non-senator Dan Sullivan is just doing some freelance rat**cking, is not clear. Certainly, "Freelance Rat**cker" would make a great business card. In any event, it up, Mr. Senator. There's no rule forbidding people with similar names from running for office and, as they say, politics ain't beanbag.

---

Sherrod Brown Can Still Get Down: Ohio is big and tough to poll, and so there haven't actually been that many polls of what figures to be a key U.S. Senate race. In fact, we just got our first high-quality poll of the Sherrod Brown (D) vs. Sen. Jon Husted (R) matchup since the primary last month (and, in fact, the first poll of the race in over 2 months), and it's a doozy. According to Beacon Research/Shaw & Co./Fox, Brown is up 8 points, 53%-45%.

Our Take: Probably no region of the country has been hurt more by Donald Trump's two wars—trade and Iran—than the Midwest. If voters there are really and truly angry, well, the Midwest is home to four potentially swingy Senate seats (Ohio, Iowa, Minnesota and Michigan).

---

Pumped Up: Speaking of the Michigan U.S. Senate race, a picture of Republican candidate Mike Rogers was captured by the AP (left). The campaign then put that photo on its social media (right). Notice any difference?

Our Take: He must have been accidentally exposed to unfiltered gamma rays.

---

California Homelessness: We previously linked, a couple of times, to a libertarian-funded report that claims that the $24 billion California spent over 5 years, trying to improve on the state's homelessness problem, did not work, as the homeless population actually grew over that time. Now let us pass along news of a federal report, released just over a week ago, that says that homelessness is actually down nationwide (3.3% compared to last year) and also in California (2.8% as compared to last year).

Our Take: More evidence that Spencer Pratt really doesn't have a clue.

That's our story and we're sticking to it. (Z)

Never Forget: The Life You Save

Today, we hear from reader P.H. in Orlando, FL:

My Grandfather was Matthew Patrick Berecy, born of Irish stock in 1890.

In his twenties, he volunteered to be a field ambulance man—a stretcher bearer—on the fields on France, in trench warfare. He would, after the 75mm cannons were silent, climb out of the relative safety of the trenches, and with three other soldier comrades take a stretcher to collect the wounded, the bleeding, and the dying, to do what he could to save lives.

He was a short man at 5'6", but oh, what an athlete. He could swim, sail, play tennis, was a mean pro-am golfer, and handy at rugby.

One day, the mustard gas canisters were again lofted from enemy lines, as they had been for several months of 1918. He and his fellow stretcher-bearers had gas masks on, when they came across a wounded soldier with shrapnel wounds on his bleeding legs, flailing and moaning in the mud, and with each groan, closer to the wicked poisoning of his life-giving lungs, without a mask.

Then came the mustard gas again.

If one was in a pit—a bombed-out crater—one could survive the gas for a while without the mask, as the gas generally settled about 10 inches off the ground. Matt realized that without a mask, the soldier was doomed to die a horrible death on the way to the aid post several hundred yards behind.

So, he instructed the lead stretcher-bearer, who had been sharing his mask with the soldier, holding his breath between times, to not to do that, as they were all floundering in the mud to gain traction with the weight. Matt's instructions were: "Look, I'll give him my mask, and make a run for it."

Matt arrived on the steps on the field hospital unconscious and temporarily blind. He has mistimed his sprint through the craters and the sodden slippery mud by only hours—it was 6:00 a.m., 11th of November, 1918... mere hours before the armistice and the end of World War I.

Matt spent 2 years in a French hospital and finally arrived home in 1920. His body was so changed that his mother didn't recognize him on the wharf. He had aged 20 years, lost all his hair, one third of his weight, and most of his teeth, and his beautiful blue eyes had turned to a dirty gray. His mother fainted when she saw him. It had been 6 long years.

At the start of World War II, he volunteered again for service, in his fifties. The recruiting officer took one look at him, and said, "No, you've done your service to the nation."

He coughed up gas for 4 decades.

Matthew Patrick Berecy passed in 1953. It was not until 2023 before I finally located his grave. On it, inscribed 70 years ago, was a note: "His Duty Nobly Done."

I never met Matt, be died 4 years before I was born.

He named his second Daughter, Yvonne, after the French nurse who spent 18 months in France assigned to him, more than 20 years before. My Aunt Yvonne went on to become a Missionary Nun Catholic nurse in the South Pacific for many decades, from 1960 until 2010, saving—it is estimated—10,000 lives, from disease, from famine, and birth deaths to mother and newly born with western medical and care technology.

The man my grandfather saved on the last day of the war?

My other grandfather.

Robert Jefferson Hancock. They were born in the same year, and the same city. They never again met—their children got married nearly 4 decades after, in 1952.

Thank you, P.H. And... wow. (Z)

---

Previous report         Next report

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger