Previous | Next | Senate page
New polls: (None)
Dem pickups: (None)
GOP pickups: (None)
Putin Gets Bitten by The Dogs of War
It's not a political story yet, although it could easily become one. When Russian President Vladimir Putin unleashed the dogs of war and invaded Ukraine, he thought they would have Ukraine on its knees in a week or two and he would be a hero. He was definitely not expecting that it would jeopardize his own rule. When Napoleon invaded Russia, he never thought that would lead to a restoration of the French monarchy and his own exile. When Hitler invaded Poland, he wasn't expecting it to lead to his suicide and the partition of Germany. When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, he wasn't expecting that it would result in his eventual death by hanging. Starting a war is funny like that. It is like a box of chocolates; you never know what you're going to get.
The one thing all tyrants fear is an alternative to their rule. Putin thought he might be attacked from the left, so he locked up democracy activist Alexei Navalny. Oops. The threat was from the ultranationalist right. Putin never dreamed that the mercenary leader he created, Yevgeniy Prigozhin, who leads a force of de facto mercenaries called the Wagner Group, would turn out to be his biggest problem. But he did. Prigozhin led a mutiny and started marching on Moscow. He captured the city of Rostov, from which the Russian military runs the war in Ukraine. Then he started moving an army of 4,000 criminals armed with tanks, fighting vehicles, air defense systems, and other heavy military gear towards Moscow. They got within 200 miles of the capital. Then Putin panicked and got the dictator of Belarus, Aleksandr Lukashenko, to offer Prigozhin asylum. The Russian leader also agreed not to try to prosecute Prigozhin, even though only hours earlier he said Prigozhin had committed treason. On the other hand, Putin didn't say he wouldn't put some special flavoring in Prigozhin's tea.
According to the Institute for the Study of War, which is usually pretty accurate, the Wagner Group will be dissolved and merged into the regular Russian army, even though most of the fighters are criminals who were given the opportunity to join Wagner and then be freed after 6 months—in the unlikely event they were still alive. Of course, all of them remember well who put them in prison and who freed them, so their loyalty is questionable. Will they fight, and if so, for which side? Will there be fragging (criminal soldiers killing their own officers) in order to desert? And will Prigozhin now forget his dreams of overthrowing Putin and take up gardening? If the CIA knows, no one there is talking.
The optics of Putin needing Lukashenko to save his a** is humiliating and may have gotten Lukashenko some undisclosed benefits, but there is no honor among thieves or dictators. Russians may think: "Why didn't Putin use overwhelming force to squash Prigozhin like a bug? Was it because the war has decimated the army so much that it is no longer a match for a bunch of untrained criminals? Why didn't the FSB know the rebellion was coming and warn Putin?" Expect personnel changes there. The CIA knew about this for over a week. Kurt Volker, the former U.S. ambassador to NATO, said: "Going after Prigozhin is a finger in the dike. The bigger picture is the end of Putinism." Evelyn Farkas, a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Russia, said that Putin made a huge mistake over the years by letting Prigozhin get so rich and powerful. For a guy who used to run a hot dog stand in then-Leningrad, Prigozhin has done well for himself—possibly until now.
Even though Putin may have won this battle, his image as invincible has been destroyed forever. The next mutiny may be a lot harder to put down, especially if the war in Ukraine starts looking like an actual military defeat. Needless to say, there is not going to be any public polling asking whether ordinary Russians approve or disapprove of the job Putin is doing. But that doesn't matter. What does matter is what the leaders of the military, the National Guard, the FSB, the GRU, and the other security services think and how they act.
Now here's how this could affect politics in the U.S. Many Republican politicians, from Donald Trump on down, revere Putin and have basically sided with Russia against Ukraine. What happens to them if Russia loses the war or is forced to withdraw on unfavorable terms and/or Putin is deposed? Trump, for one, has called Putin a genius. What will Trump say if Putin is killed by his own countrymen or deposed by them? So far, Trump is backing Putin and suggesting that whoever comes next could be worse.
Joe Biden also has a lot riding on the war. He has steadfastly backed Ukraine and opposed Putin. It is almost like Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Putin are fighting a proxy war for Biden and Trump, but they probably don't think of it that way. The facts on the ground can change quickly, and the time until Nov. 8, 2024 is forever in terms of the war and Putin's tenure as president of Russia. Almost any outcome could affect the U.S. election. A Ukrainian victory would help Biden. A Russian victory would help Trump (or Gov. Ron DeSantis, R-FL). A stalemate would probably help Trump more than Biden since Trump would then call Biden a weak leader who can't even beat a weak country with only 24,000 nuclear weapons. Reaction to regime change would depend on who came next. If the new guy is worse than the old guy, Trump could claim: "I supported Putin because he was a moderate." If the new guy is Navalny, Biden will claim: "Due to my leadership Russia is now heading towards democracy."
The domestic politicking instigated by the coup attempt has already started. Former representative Adam Kinzinger already took a pot shot at Trump, Tucker Carlson, Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Josh Hawley (R-MO), Rep. Marjorie Taylor Green (R-GA) and former Democrat Tulsi Gabbard for supporting Russia. More will follow.
At this point, the future is completely unknowable. Almost anything can happen. (V)
What We Have Learned Since Dobbs
On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. Some of what has happened since then was predictable. Some was not. Here are 10 developments since then:
- SCOTUS thought it was finished: The Supreme Court thought that it would leave
the matter to each state, then it was out of the loop. That didn't happen at all and won't going forward. One
judge in Texas banned mifepristone and bingo, the case landed in the Supreme Court. Another pending case is
about a federal program for family planning that requires health care providers to discuss all options,
including abortion. Yet another is about teenagers getting abortions and not telling their parents. The docket
will be full of abortion cases next session. Nice try, Sam, but it will soon be back on your plate.
- The right is fragmented now: Like the dog that caught the car, the
anti-abortion movement doesn't know what to do next. Some want every state to ban the procedure in all cases.
Others want to have one or two exceptions. Still others want a national law banning it everywhere. Some want
to ban it starting at conception, but others want to ban it at 6, 13, or 15 weeks. It is far from clear what
happens next.
- So is the left: Many progressive groups want a federal law allowing abortion
everywhere. Others want to enshrine the right to an abortion in as many state constitutions as possible. There
are also fights over the latest time it should be available. How about 24 weeks? How about 36 weeks? What
about up until birth?
- Abortion rights are a political winner: There were six abortion-related ballot
issues last year. The pro-choice side won all of them. Some progressive groups are trying to get them on the
ballot in more states in 2024 (but see below about the group trying to get rid of those pesky citizen
initiatives).
- Republicans are struggling: Republicans are caught between an unyielding base
that wants to ban all abortions and a general-election electorate that wants to allow them at least up to 24
weeks. If Republican office-seekers are strongly anti-choice, they can win primaries but not general
elections. If they are pro-choice, they can't win primaries. Many are trying to have it both ways, but that is
a tough sell.
- Some state Constitutions protect abortion rights: The South Carolina Supreme
Court ruled that a 6-week ban violated the state Constitution's right to privacy. What will happen if the
legislature comes up with a 9-week ban or a 12-week ban or a 39-week ban? Does the state Constitution protect
any of those? On the other hand, Idaho's Supreme Court upheld a ban. There have been 40 cases filed since the
Dobbs decision and many will eventually reach the state Supreme Courts.
- Most doctors won't break the law: Civil disobedience works sometimes, but
doctors won't do it. They have too much at stake. In fact, some are so afraid that they won't even perform
abortions that are probably legal. Some won't even treat miscarriages and will let a woman bleed to death
rather than risk loss of their medical license and prison. On the other hand, doctors and medical students are
fleeing states with strict bans and many people in those states will have trouble getting certain kinds of
medical care in the future.
- Abortion is difficult to separate from other healthcare: Pharmacists have
refused to fill all kinds of prescriptions of drugs for other conditions that might be used to
terminate a pregnancy. They have also refused to dispense certain birth control methods. Some pharmaceutical
companies are dropping research on reproductive health for fear of lawsuits and violating state laws.
- Religion cuts both ways: Lawsuits from Jewish, Muslim and Satanic groups are
trying to overturn abortion laws on the grounds that their religions permit abortions and state laws banning
it are an unconstitutional establishment of the Christian religion in state law. This is an area that is
certainly going to hit the Supreme Court sooner or later and not one they are probably enthusiastic about
addressing. Up until now all the bakers, florists, Web designers, etc. who think they are exempt from state law
due to their religion have been Christians. What happens when they belong to other religions?
- States haven't prosecuted out-of-state providers: States that ban abortion make
it illegal to perform one or enable someone to perform one. But what happens when the abortion is "performed"
by an out-of-state doctor mailing abortion pills? Can an out-of-state doctor be prosecuted? What if the
doctor's state has a law expressly banning out-of-state prosecutions and banning extraditing anyone for
enabling an abortion?
And this is just a brief summary. There are many more cases in the works, with no end in sight. If the Supreme Court thought it was done with the issue, boy was it wrong. (V)
Independent Women Will Be a Problem for the Republicans in 2024
Probably something like 85-90% of voters have picked one of the parties and will vote for a yellow dog if their party puts one on the ballot. But there is a small slice of voters who are on the fence. Some like aspects of each party and some don't pay much attention to politics and don't really know what is going on. Given how close elections are now, this small slice of independents is increasingly important. Roughly half of the independents are women, which makes sense since roughly half of Americans are women, and they are increasingly at odds with the culture war the Republicans are making central to their platforms. In particular, the Republicans' positions on abortion and LGBTQ+ rights do not sit well with many independent women. This is becoming a big problem for Republican candidates.
A new USA Today/Suffolk University poll shows that by a margin of 68%-20%, independent women oppose the Dobbs decision. Worse yet for Republicans, 75% of them said abortion should be legal in all or most cases. And worst of all, 85% said abortion would be one of the top issues determining their vote. In addition, 63% of independent women support LGBTQ+ rights. Republicans are going to have a hard time with this important swing group.
The poll also asked about Trump's legal problems. Among independent women, 57% said that his indictments made them less likely to vote for him. Among independent men, it was 48%. (V)
Jack Smith Asks for More Time
Judge Aileen Cannon scheduled the Mar-a-Lago documents case for August 14, but no one expected it to happen then. What everyone was expecting was for the defense to ask for more time and get it. Consequently, it was a surprise when Special Counsel Jack Smith was the one to ask for the trial to be delayed. He wants it in December, so the defense attorneys have enough time to get the security clearances they will need in order to read the documents that their client absconded with. The defense attorneys did not oppose the delay, but come December they could ask for more time. Or Trump could fire them in November, hire new attorneys, and they could ask for 6 months to get security clearances. Rinse and repeat.
If the trial really happens in December, it will be before the Iowa caucuses, which will probably be in January. If Trump is found guilty, that could certainly affect how Republican voters see him. Consequently, he will almost certainly keep asking for delays, at least until after the July convention. Then he will claim that the trial should be postponed until after the election because he is an official nominee for president. Or maybe until after Inauguration Day. Or maybe until after his funeral. (V)
Matt Rosendale Plans to Challenge Tester (Again)
Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT) got some good news Friday. Rep. Matt Rosendale (R-MT) is planning to challenge him for the Senate. This is good news because Rosendale is a member of the Freedom Caucus and one of the most extreme right-wing bomb throwers in the House. Montanans are conservative, but they generally don't like bomb throwers. In fact, they often elect Democrats to statewide office. Rosendale is probably the best opponent Tester could get.
But wait, there is more. Rosendale is the kind of candidate that will get Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) muttering something about "candidate quality" again. Rosendale knows that, but could care less what McConnell thinks or wants. Rosendale even said the race will be decided "by the people across Montana, not Mitch McConnell."
How might a Tester-Rosendale race go? Well, we have some data on that. Rosendale challenged Tester in 2018. Tester won, 50% to 47%.
But Rosendale isn't the GOP nominee yet, and if McConnell has something to say about it, won't be. You know who else has something to say about it? It's the other senator from Montana, Steve Daines (R-MT), who just happens to chair the NRSC this cycle. His job is to win back the Senate and he knows very well that Rosendale is a proven loser. Daines has a different candidate in mind: Tim Sheehy, a former Navy SEAL who now runs an aerial firefighting company. Sheehy is also very rich and could be self-funding. If Sheehy parachutes down to earth and Rosendale jumps in anyway, we will have an extremely bitter and divisive primary, with Donald Trump undoubtedly backing Rosendale and McConnell, Daines, and the NRSC backing Sheehy. Bitter ideological primaries are rarely helpful, especially if the Trumper wins (see: Oz, Mehmet). Money could decide the race, though, as Sheehy will have plenty of it and Rosendale is a poor fundraiser.
Speaking of bitter ideological primaries, there is also one in West Virginia. McConnell and the NRSC want Gov. Jim Justice (R-WV) to go man-to-man with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), assuming Manchin runs. The Club for Growth calls Justice a RINO and is backing Rep. Alex Mooney (R-WV). The Club is putting $10 million behind Mooney. Justice has more money than Scrooge McDuck so he can see that and raise it $50 million if he has to. West Virginia is a cheap media state, so any company wanting to sell cars or food or shampoo or anything else had better buy up 2024 air time now, before Mooney and Justice buy up the entire year's worth. (V)
Judge Orders Giuliani to Pay Georgia Election Workers' Attorney Fees
Back when the House was investigating the Jan. 6 coup attempt, two of the witnesses were Georgia election workers Shaye Moss and Ruby Freeman. They thought they were just doing their civic duty, helping run Georgia elections and told the House members that. However, their lives changed instantly on Dec. 10, 2020, when Rudy Giuliani claimed they had rigged the 2020 election for Joe Biden. He said they brought in suitcases full of fake ballots and scanned them multiple times. The death threats poured in. They were scared. They quit their jobs. They went into hiding. They also sued Giuliani for defamation.
The judge in the case, Beryl Howell, ordered Giuliani to turn over certain evidence. He didn't bother. Must have been too busy to comply, just like Donald Trump. Howell was not amused. On Friday, she ordered Giuliani to pay Moss and Freeman's attorney fees. She didn't specify the amount, but clearly she is annoyed with Giuliani and probably isn't going to take much more stalling from him.
There is no indication how long the case will take, but Giuliani is in a weak position since his statement was widely circulated and the damage it caused Freeman and Moss is easy to prove. Like Trump in the E. Jean Carroll case, he could be hit with a major judgment. Which he may or may not have the money to pay.
Oh, and while we are on the subject of defamation lawsuits, Maricopa County (AZ) Recorder Stephen Richer just filed a lawsuit against Kari Lake for repeatedly claiming that he interfered with the 2022 gubernatorial election results, causing her to lose. Richer says that he has had death threats and more as a result of her lies. The Carroll case showed that defamation cases against public figures sometimes win, despite the high standard of proof required. The Dominion Voting Systems case showed that sometimes the defendants see that their case is hopeless and give up. (V)
There Will Also Be Attorney General and Secretary of State Races in 2024
While the presidential race, along with some Senate and House races, and then the gubernatorial races, will suck up most of the political oxygen in the next year and a half, don't forget that there are also races in 2023 and 2024 for attorney general and secretary of state in some states. If you think that SoS races don't matter, maybe the name "Brad Raffensperger" might bring back some memories. Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball has a rundown of some of the key ones coming up.
Some of the races are in states so red or so blue that we know which party will win, even if we don't know the candidates yet. That's just life in 2023. Some predictions are really easy. Of the 23 races on tap, 18 are done deals and two are almost done deals. Of course, that doesn't make them less important, because AGs can file election lawsuits and, in most states, SoSes run elections.
There are two races in 2023 that are not in the bag yet for the Republicans, but almost. The AG position in Kentucky is open because incumbent Daniel Cameron (R) is running for governor. The AG race will pit state Rep. Pamela Stevenson (D), a retired U.S. Air Force colonel, against Russell Coleman, a former U.S. Attorney. Kentucky is quite red right now, but before Cameron it had 16 Democratic attorneys general in a row. So, it would not be too strange if Stevenson won.
The Kentucky SoS race is also not a sure thing for incumbent Michael Adams (R). The Democrat is Buddy Wheatley, who is from Northern Kentucky, near Cincinnati. He is a former state representative. He is a strong candidate and Democrats sometimes win in Kentucky, but Adams is the favorite.
Now for the competitive races in 2024. The North Carolina AG race is an open seat because AG Josh Stein (D) is running for governor to succeed the term-limited Roy Cooper (D-NC). The leading Republican is state Rep. Tom Murry, but U.S. Rep. Dan Bishop (R-NC) might jump in. The leading Democrat is currently attorney and veteran Tim Dunn. However, if Democratic Rep. Jeff Jackson's district is redrawn in an unfavorable way, he might jump in as well.
Pennsylvania also has an open seat for AG, as appointed AG Michelle Henry (D) is not running. Currently, the Democrats have a surfeit of candidates and the Republicans have none. Already declared are Democrats Eugene DePasquale, the former auditor general; Joe Khan, the former Bucks County solicitor; and Keir Bradford-Grey, a former Philadelphia public defender. Plenty of other Democrats are also considering the race. They all smell victory.
Texas is kind of a special case. AG Ken Paxton (R) has been impeached. If he is convicted, there will be an open-seat special election in Nov. 2024. But it is still Texas, so the Republican is favored.
There is one competitive SoS race in 2024. In North Carolina, where the SoS does not run elections, Democrat Elaine Marshall is running for reelection. As she always does. She won in 1996, 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012, 2016, and 2020. But last time she won by only 2 points. At some point the people of North Carolina might say "enough already," but so far they haven't. Two Republicans are running. They are Darren Eustance, former chairman of the Wake County GOP, and Gaston County Commissioner Chad Brown. Neither is well known, while Marshall is extremely well known. But North Carolina will be a huge battleground for president, governor, and AG, and that could easily spill over to the SoS race. In fact, it wouldn't be surprising if one party won all the races. It could easily depend on which one has the best GOTV operation. (V)
Robinson Endorses Trump
Normally when a lieutenant governor unknown outside his state endorses someone, even for president, it's not really newsworthy. But sometimes it is. As you read in the previous item, North Carolina is going to be one of the biggest battlegrounds in 2024, right up there with Arizona, Wisconsin, and Georgia. At the Faith and Freedom Coalition Conference in D.C. on Friday, Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson (R-NC) endorsed Donald Trump for president.
Now here's why this is important. Robinson is running for governor and will face NC AG Josh Stein to succeed term-limited Roy Cooper. Robinson is exceedingly Trumpy, not to mention homophobic, antisemitic and all-around bigoted. Oh, and he's Black. Among other things, he has said: "There's no reason anybody anywhere in America should be telling any child about transgenderism, homosexuality, any of that filth." He also condemned the movie Black Panther and said: "How can this trash, that was only created to pull the shekels out of your Schvartze pockets, invoke any pride?" There's plenty more where that came from.
Now that Robinson has endorsed Trump, the next step is for Trump to endorse Robinson, which Trump has hinted he will do. This practically guarantees that Robinson will win the Republican gubernatorial primary and we will have a redo of the 2022 Pennsylvania gubernatorial election, with a race pitting a Jewish AG named Josh Stein against a Trumpy general-purpose bigot. Only this time, Trump will probably be on the ballot and the stakes will be much higher, with North Carolina's electoral votes likely in play. Having Robinson on the ballot (and possibly Trump coming to North Carolina to campaign for him), could energize Democrats and possibly turn off moderate Republicans who find Robinson repulsive. If Robinson indeed gets the GOP nomination, Mitch McConnell will again be kvetching about "candidate quality."
Robinson wasn't the only speaker at the conference, of course. Just about all the Republican POTUS wannabes were there. Trump was cheered when he spoke about abortion, even though he was notoriously slippery about his actual position on it. Chris Christie was booed for attacking Trump. Ron DeSantis got applause. Kari Lake gave a speech, even though she hasn't decided yet if she is running for vice president or for the Senate. She would prefer the former but would accept the latter as a booby prize. Even Vivek Ramaswamy and Larry Elder showed up. A good time was had by all. (V)
Billionaire-Funded Group Is Working to Erode Democracy
Many states, especially those in the West, have a form of direct democracy via citizen-initiated referenda. These can often be used as an end run around a gerrymandered state legislature. A Florida group, the Foundation for Government Accountability (FGA), funded by billionaire and major Republican donor Dick Uihlein, is trying to fix this bug in the system by making referenda nearly impossible to get on the ballot and even less likely to win. Uihlein is an aggressive election denier and conspiracy theorist. In 2022, he was a major funder to Pennsylvania gubernatorial candidate Doug Mastriano and Nevada SoS candidate Jim Marchant.
In (at least) four states—Arkansas, Missouri, Ohio, and South Dakota—FGA is actively working to make it difficult to get initiatives on the ballot, typically by requiring a certain number of petition signatures in every county. Getting even a few hundred signatures in every conservative, rural county will be a huge hill to climb. It is also trying to raise the threshold for having an initiative approved from 50% + 1 to 60% +1. Together these would doom all but the most popular initiatives, and probably most of those as well. Why have the voters bother their pretty little heads with governing when legislators who have been bought and paid for can do it themselves?
The current fight is in Ohio, where a special election will be held in August to amend the state Constitution to change the procedure as described above. When the amendment was discussed in the state legislature, the FGA lobbyist said that it was needed to prevent dark-money out-of-state billionaires from changing Ohio law. The technical term for this is "chutzpah." Special elections in August tend to be low-turnout affairs, so with enough money behind it, the amendment could pass. If it does, the other states on the list are next. (V)
Previous | Next
Main page for smartphones
Main page for tablets and computers