Previous | Next
White House Coronavirus Task Force to Shut Down
Donald Trump has had his fill of this COVID-19 stuff. He's tired of the tough questions, the declining poll numbers (excepting the latest from Gallup), the economic turmoil, and his inability to get out and play a little golf. He wants things to go back to normal immediately. And consistent with that, the White House will wind down its COVID-19 task force, with the idea that it will cease all activity sometime around Memorial Day.
While there has certainly been some useful work on COVID-19 done by various elements of the federal government, none of that came from the task force. Indeed, one can argue that the task force was actively harmful, as it mucked around in supply chains and also facilitated Trump's habit of spreading dangerous misinformation. In any event, its primary purpose was PR, a means of communicating to the American people (or, at least, to Trump's base) that the White House is doing stuff. Important stuff! And the shutdown is also a PR exercise, a means of communicating that everyone should remain calm, and that all is well.
This is not to say that the Trump administration is getting out of the COVID-19 business altogether. The unpleasant stuff, like the deaths and the illnesses and the like will be foisted on various parts of the bureaucracy. The President and his team, meanwhile, will focus on getting the economy restarted. Indeed, Trump 2020 may have decided on its core message for the campaign, one that appears in the ad we linked to yesterday. That message is: "We built the greatest economy in history, and we can do it again."
We have to say, that is a pretty good job of taking lemons and making lemonade. However, reality may just intervene to make the lemonade sour (well, more sour than it already is). If President Trump were to get out his Ouija board, former presidents George H.W. Bush, Gerald Ford, and Herbert Hoover might have a few useful thoughts about how the economy does not magically obey the president's commands when it's in recession. Meanwhile, if the prediction of an increase to 3,000 deaths per day by June 1 comes to pass, it may look a little tone deaf for the White House to be shutting down its COVID-19 operation on May 25.
And as long as we're on the subject of COVID-19 and PR, let's mention a couple of other related stories. The first is that Dr. Rick Bright has officially filed his whistleblower complaint, alleging that he tried to warn Trump and his team about COVID-19, tried to persuade them not to advocate for hydroxychloroquine, and tried to encourage them to be honest about the death toll, and was pushed out of his job as a reward for his efforts. Time will tell if Bright's complaint goes anywhere, but it does mean that—to borrow a line from Lyndon B. Johnson—a high-profile former member of the COVID-19 task force is now outside the tent pissing in, as opposed to inside the tent pissing out. LBJ offered that as an explanation for why he didn't fire J. Edgar Hoover; Trump might have done well to take the lesson to heart.
And "don't throw subordinates who might have dirt on you under the bus" is not the only PR lesson that the President refuses to learn. He is also completely unable to grasp the concept of the Streisand Effect, that when you try to hide, censor, or downplay information you don't want circulated, you risk giving it much greater exposure. The specific instance, at least this week, involves the "Mourning in America" ad from the George Conway-led group of anti-Trump Republicans that calls itself The Lincoln Project. The ad now has more than 4.5 million views on Twitter, and another 1.5 million on YouTube, in part because Trump keeps grousing about it. It is amazing that the President, a 73-year-old man with a five-decade career in business and marketing, still has not figured out that for every person who hears his complaints and says, "Yeah, I thought that was a load of hooey," there are ten people who say "Hm. I hadn't heard about that ad," and then promptly go look it up. You can't buy that kind of publicity, at least not with the amount of money the Lincoln Project has in its bank account. (Z)
Republicans Go to Court to Fight COVID-19 Restrictions
By all indications, it is a small minority of Americans that is unwilling to abide by the orders of their state governors and to wear masks, stay at home, practice social distancing, cancel the beach trip, etc. However, that minority is vocal, and apparently includes a lot of people who vote, because Republican officeholders have taken careful notice of their complaints.
Taking the lead in doing something about it are Republican officeholders in Wisconsin. They have carefully surveyed the lay of the land, and noted that the GOP has a stranglehold on the state legislature and the state supreme court, while the governor's mansion is occupied by a Democrat (namely Tony Evers). So, the legislature has done an end-run around Evers, and taken the matter to the court, asking them to invalidate most of the COVID-19-related orders issued by Evers and by Department of Health Services Secretary Andrea Palm (D). Those who followed Tuesday's hearing, and who note that the Republicans currently have a 5-2 majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court (though lame duck Daniel Kelly is recusing himself) say that a party-line vote is coming, and that most or all restrictions in the Badger State are going to be overturned.
Wisconsin is not the only state where this sort of legal drama is currently playing out. In neighboring Michigan, Rep. Paul Mitchell (R-MI) filed suit on Tuesday in an attempt to overturn the dictums of Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D-MI). Michigan's Supreme Court is less stacked than Wisconsin's is, but it's still 4-3 Republican, so it's likely that they will follow Wisconsin's lead. It's not entirely clear what Mitchell's agenda is here, since he's retiring from the House when his term is up. He's offered no public statement on the matter. Reps. Vidal Sassoon and Christian Dior were also unavailable for comment.
In any event, it's clear that a lot of the red states, and some of the purple states, are going to follow the Swedish model of COVID-19 management. They will throw the doors open and see what happens. If it works out, then Republican officeholders may be hailed as visionaries who recognized that Chicken Little was wrong when she said the sky was falling. On the other hand, they could invite a spike in illnesses and deaths without actually rebooting their states' economies. That would be a bad position for a political party to be in come November, particularly if they were bowing to the demands of a decided minority of voters.
It should be noted, however, that Swedes are a healthy bunch and Americans are not. Forty percent of Americans are clinically obese and another 35% are overweight. Sweden is the 90th fattest country in the world with only about 15% of Swedes being obese and another 35% overweight. Letting COVID run amok in an unhealthy country is a whole different kettle of (salted) fish than letting it do that in a healthy one and the results might be quite different. (Z)
Lucy Flores Says She Believes Tara Reade
We've had a couple of items, and several letters, raising questions about Tara Reade and her allegations against Joe Biden. Now it's time for the opposite perspective. This comes from former member of the Nevada Assembly Lucy Flores, who appeared with the then-Veep at a campaign event in 2014, and who said he made her feel uncomfortable when he (platonically) kissed her. Flores sat for an interview with Slate, said she finds Reade's account to be credible and that "I don't consider the evolving stories Reade has told as 'changing the story.'"
Flores also says that she was threatened after criticizing Biden, and that she knows Reade has been threatened, too. This runs contrary to what we wrote this weekend, though it's not easy to find much confirmation of these threats. It's also not clear if they come from angry Democrats, or instead from incels or some other militantly misogynist element in American society. In any event, it's obvious that there isn't going to be any sort of meaningful closure on this story, though we remain persuaded it will largely fade from view due to the lack of new revelations. Also, even Flores concedes that she is "very, very begrudgingly voting for Biden," since the alternative is Donald Trump. (Z)
More Health Issues for Ginsburg
On Tuesday, CNN, Fox, and The Washington Post, among others, sent out e-mails containing the five words that make every Democrat's hair stand on end: "BREAKING NEWS: Ruth Bader Ginsburg..." This is particularly true as the nation is ravaged by a plague that disproportionately targets the elderly and those who have had health issues in the past. As it turns out, however, the news is relatively mild. The Associate Justice suffered a gallbladder attack, and had a nonsurgical procedure to fix the problem.
That said, when a person is 87 years old and has had cancer three times, there may not be such a thing as a "mild" health scare. In any case, every time this happens, it undoubtedly gives Joe Biden's presidential hopes a boost, as it provides a stark reminder that the next president is going to appoint at least one Supreme Court justice, and possibly two or three (at the end of an eight-year presidential term, if it comes to pass, Stephen Breyer would be pushing 90 and Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito would be pushing 80). Democrats who don't much fancy the cut of Biden's jib (like, say, Lucy Flores—see above) undoubtedly fancy the thought of another Brett Kavanaugh on the Court even less. (Z)
New York Primary Is On, After All
Speaking of judicial news, Andrew Yang's lawsuit demanding that the New York Democratic presidential primary be held landed on the docket of United States District Judge Analisa Torres. And on Tuesday, she ruled, ordering the New York Board of Elections to put the qualified Democratic candidates back on the ballot in time for the (rescheduled) June 23 primary.
What this means is that New York Democratic Party officials (who make up a majority of the Board of Elections, and thus were responsible for the decision) have managed to secure the worst of both worlds for themselves. Whether the goal was to protect public health, or to protect Joe Biden's delegate lead, or both, that was not achieved. Meanwhile, supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Andrew Yang, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), and other Democratic candidates are now feeling alienated. Not to invoke Will Rogers too often, but there's clearly a reason he said: "I belong to no organized party. I am a Democrat."
If Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) can get his act together, he could potentially make trailer trucks—no, make that barges—full of lemonade. He could make the primary all mail-in and order the Board of Elections to send every eligible voter an absentee ballot (possibly postponing the primary a bit if more time were needed). That would be a dry run for an all mail-in election in November, and would encourage other blue states to follow suit. Since the Democrats control the trifecta in New York, if new laws are needed, Cuomo could surely arrange for the legislature to pass whatever laws he says are necessary. (Z)
Bernie Just Mild About Liz
The divide between centrist and left-leaning Democrats is not the only divide in the Party, as it turns out. The Washington Post has an item about all the jockeying that is taking place, as various interest groups within the Democratic Party try to lay claim to the VP slot. And the most interesting tidbit in there is that Bernie Sanders has very pointedly chosen not to throw his support behind Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA).
Since all of these discussions are behind the scenes and off the record, there has been no comment from Sanders about his lack of enthusiasm for Warren on the ticket. So, here are our best theories:
- Bad Blood: There was some unpleasantness between Sanders and Warren during the campaign,
most obviously their dispute over Sanders' alleged remarks regarding a woman president. Maybe that water isn't under the
bridge yet. Maybe it never will be.
- Not Really Allies: We've made the case before that Warren and Sanders, while ostensibly
allies, really represent different constituencies and have somewhat different political programs. Warren's progressivism
is more in line with the historical movement that bore that name, with heavy amounts of pragmatism and
consensus-building. Sanders' progressivism is actually more like populism, with heavy amounts of uncompromising idealism
and "tear the system down" rhetoric.
- Ceding the Throne: Sanders has enjoyed the trappings of being the most prominent figure
from the left wing of the Democratic Party (even though he is not actually a party member). Undoubtedly, given his age,
he has prepped himself for the day when he will yield his scepter to the younger generation, most likely to Rep.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY). However, if Warren gets the VP nod, she would immediately become the face of American
left-wing activism, and Sanders would be yesterday's news. That may not be to his liking.
- Political Capital: The Vermont Senator is going to be given a certain amount of input into
the Democratic platform and into the appointments made by Biden, should the former veep be elected. However, Sanders
only gets so much input. He may be choosing to save his eggs for some other basket, like the Secretaryship of the
Treasury or of Labor, as opposed to spending his political capital on the veep slot.
- Tactical Assessment: You don't have as long and successful a political career as Sanders has had without developing a keen sense of political tactics. Maybe he's taken the lay of the land, and he just doesn't think Warren is the smart choice if the Democrats want to win in November.
Maybe we've hit the bullseye with one of these, or maybe it's several of them, or maybe none. There are two assertions we can make, however, that are on pretty firm ground: (1) tapping Warren for the #2 slot is far from guaranteed to unify the wings of the Democratic Party, and (2) Biden is going to have little choice but to name part of the Cabinet around the same time he names his running mate, so as to soothe the feelings of the various factions that are going to be disappointed that their horse didn't get picked. (Z)
For Republicans, Things Are Getting Rocky in the Rockies...
We've been waiting for some polls in the Rocky Mountain states, and we finally got one on Tuesday, from Montana State University. Their presidential result, which we have below, has to be mildly concerning for the Trump administration, and may help explain why the President was ready to lop off Brad Parscale's head. But the really chilling news for the GOP is that Gov. Steve Bullock (D-MT), who is getting good reviews for his COVID-19 management, is up 7 points in his race against Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT), 46% to 39%.
If that is not enough, the good people at MSU decided to get ambitious and to poll their neighbors to the south. Who knows why—maybe they have a thing for square-ish states, or governor-to-senator success stories. Whatever the case may be, in addition to the presidential result (see below), the poll has former Colorado governor John Hickenlooper (D) leading Sen. Cory Gardner (R-CO) by 17 points, 48% to 31%.
As always, we caution against putting too much stock in one poll. Especially this one, because MSU has only a middling track record, and a 17-point-gap in the Colorado Senate race is just a tad bit hard to swallow. That said, we do believe Gardner's seat is in serious danger. And if Daines' seat is lost too—something more and more within the realm of possibility—it will be very difficult for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) to keep his job. It appears that Bullock will rise and fall with his COVID-19 efforts, and since Montanans generally support stay-at-home orders and the like (something also covered by this poll), the Governor is in the happy position of not having to take risky gambles like the ones being considered in Wisconsin and Michigan (see above), not to mention Washington, DC (see further above). (Z & V)
...and Things Are Getting Ugly in Maine
Another Senate seat that the Republicans desperately want to hold onto, and that the Democrats badly want to steal, is the one currently occupied by Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME). Among Republican senators up in 2020, she is in more danger than anyone but Cory Gardner and Martha McSally (AZ). And the air war is already well underway. First, there is this ad, which accuses Collins of gross incompetence in the face of COVID-19:
It's paid for by the PAC Majority Forward, which is just a dark money front to obscure the involvement of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY).
In response, there is this ad, that lauds Collins' heroic COVID-19 efforts:
If you watch it, you will see that the spot also laments that DARK MONEY is being used to fund the anti-Collins ads that people in Maine are seeing. This is rich, since the pro-Collins ad is funded by One Nation, which is itself a dark money front for Mitch McConnell.
In short, neither side is taking any chances in Maine. Note also the aggressive use of filters in the two ads, which can take normal Susan Collins:
And turn her into slightly angelic Susan Collins:
Or into evil ice queen Susan Collins:
Anyhow, both sides know that Collins' seat could well be for all the marbles, so they are already getting out their very best Akro Agate Moonies to shoot with. (Z)
Today's Presidential Polls
The election is six months away, but it's already time for the presidential campaigns to do triage and figure out where not to waste their money. Colorado is basically a lost cause for Donald Trump (and Cory Gardner's Senate seat may also be in the same category). The Republicans cannot afford to waste resources in long-shot states when they have so many other states they need to defend.
Even if the red team lets Colorado (and New Mexico, and Virginia, and Minnesota) go as hopeless, however, there are still a lot of tough choices to make. North Carolina is close to a must-have for Trump (and for the GOP Senate caucus), and it's notoriously expensive to campaign in. Not to mention Florida, and Texas (and its Senate race), and Pennsylvania, all of them Trump states in 2016, all of them very large and costly to contest, and all of them (apparently) in danger. Do the Republicans focus solely on the true swing states, like North Carolina and Wisconsin and Florida, and hope that the Iowas and Texases and Georgias of the world take care of themselves? Or do they spread themselves paper thin (and perhaps too thin, as Hillary Clinton did in 2016)? Yet another reason it's no fun to be Brad Parscale right now. (Z)
| State | Biden | Trump | Start | End | Pollster |
| Colorado | 53% | 35% | Apr 10 | Apr 19 | Montana State U. |
| Montana | 40% | 45% | Apr 10 | Apr 27 | Montana State U. |
| North Carolina | 49% | 46% | May 02 | May 04 | Civiqs |
Back to the main page