DNC, Day 4: It's Harris' Party

The train has reached the station and the DNC is over. If you want to watch Day 4, you can do so here:

And now, the 10 biggest storylines of the day, as we see them:

1. Trump Gone Wild: It is possible that the single-most important thing that the Democrats could accomplish with this convention is to poke Donald Trump in the eye a few times, causing him to lose his cool, and to say stupid, impolitic things. If so, then mission accomplished.
   
   This week, Trump has been telling anyone around him who will listen how much he hates, hates, hates Kamala Harris and Tim Walz (not to mention the Obamas, the Clintons, the Bidens, etc.). Yesterday morning, he went on Fox to vent, and unspooled a rambling, eight-minute word-salad monologue. Here's a representative chunk:

   Kamala has been the worst. Everything she touched turned bad. California turned bad. San Francisco. You can't walk into San Francisco. You barely can go into California anymore, people. It's a state that's in terrible, terrible crime. Trouble in every other form of trouble. Monetary troubles. It's got nothing. Drugs all over the place. You go into Los Angeles, you can't walk down the streets. It's a shame between Gavin Newsom, but it was really more Kamala because she was your, district attorney in San Francisco. San Francisco is unlivable now. Unlivable 15 years ago as the most beautiful city, one of the greatest cities in the world. Today, it's unlivable. It's going to have to be hopefully be able to be brought back, if that's possible. Kamala, who's a Marxist and a radical left, frankly, she's a radical left lunatic. And if she became president, if this country would turn out to be a big version of San Francisco or a big version of California itself. So these guys, they talk about that, they talk about all different things that they know are totally discredited. They have a thing with soldiers where I'm looking over the graves of soldiers and saying, horrible thing about dead soldiers from World War One. It was totally made up. It was a made up story. I confirmed that was confirmed, but my side of it by 26 people in the military that it never happened. They had one lunatic, talking about it, and they use it all the time.

   This is roughly 20% of the overall commentary.
   
   During Kamala Harris' speech last night, Trump live-Truthed the whole thing, firing off roughly 50 "Truths" in a little less than an hour, with such observations as "Walz was an ASSISTANT Coach, not a COACH!," "She's talking about the Middle Class, but she's the one who broke the Middle Class, and made it UNSAFE AND UNAFFORDABLE!," and "She caused the Attack of October 7th. Iran was BROKE - Didn't have money for Hezbollah!" With analysis like that available, why are you wasting time reading our site?
   
   Incidentally, Trump's messages got about 12,000 "likes" each, presumably from the same people over and over again. Barack Obama sent one tweet about Harris' speech, and got 210,000 likes. If Trump insists on getting into the gutter, and making this personal, he's playing the game the way the Democrats want him to play it, and the way the Republicans are begging him NOT to play it.
   
   
2. Stirring the Pot, v3.0: Trump and his acolytes just keep trying to score hits against the Democrats, with limited success. To start, in response to Oprah Winfrey's staunchly pro-Harris address on Day Three, the Trump campaign released a letter that the TV mogul wrote to Trump a quarter-century ago, thanking him for some kind words that appeared in his book The America We Deserve. Perhaps the point here is that this document from the past proves that Winfrey really thinks you should be voting for Trump, despite her words to the contrary. If so, however, then what does the $5,000 check that Trump wrote to Harris' AG campaign in 2011 say?
   
   Moving along, Mike Lindell has shaved off his mustache, and is prowling the DNC as an "investigative reporter," apparently in search of unisex restrooms and other fodder he might use. The good news is that the MyPillow guy did manage to generate a meme-worthy moment, one that circulated widely. The bad news is that it is a clip of him debating a 12-year-old about election security... and pretty clearly losing. The kid quite rightly recognized that Lindell had no evidence for his claims, and eventually concluded with: "So, your source is 'Trust me, bro'?" Game, set and match.
   
   And now, the really sleazy part. We noted yesterday that there were many displays of emotion during Day Three of the convention, perhaps none more notable than Gus Walz' bursting into tears during his father's speech, and exclaiming how proud he is. No less a luminary than Michelle Obama weighed in with praise for the young man, thanking him for "showing us all what real love looks like."
   
   Naturally, some folks on the right did not see it the same way. Ann Coulter, for example, tweeted: "Talk about weird..." Trump supporter and delegate Mike Crispi added: "Tim Walz' stupid crying son isn't the flex the left thinks it is. You raised your kid to be a puffy beta male. Congrats." There were many other tweets and truths along these lines.
   
   Needless to say, this is vile. Maybe these people know, maybe they don't, that Gus Walz is neurodivergent, and has a number of challenges he must live with. What they definitely know is that he is not 18 years of age. You probably shouldn't attack anyone for the "crime" of loving their father. You definitely shouldn't attack a minor child; the world of politics may be cutthroat, but kids are off-limits. (Incidentally, both Coulter and Crispi got so much blowback they deleted their tweets.)
   
   We think there's a pretty clear message in all of this. Debating a 12-year-old? Attacking a 17-year-old? There is simply no political gain to be had in any of that. From this, we conclude that Trump's supporters are as upset and as scared as he is right now, and are likewise being guided by emotion rather than by what is politically wise. If Trump keeps shooting himself in the foot, and if his devoted supporters "help" by firing a few additional shots, then it's not going to be good for his campaign.
   
   
3. Democrats Do It Better?: If you made a list of the 20 best speeches of the Democratic National Convention, there are probably only two from yesterday—Gabby Giffords and Kamala Harris—that would make the cut. On the other hand, there were at least five or six speeches yesterday that were as good as anything at the Republican National Convention. With the entire DNC in the books, we stand by our previous assessment that the Democrats are, on the whole, head and shoulders above the Republicans when it comes to public speaking. It wasn't always true, but it is right now.
   
   We asked readers for their thoughts on this question, and we said yesterday we would share some of those. So, here are half a dozen readers on whether we are right and, if so, why the Democrats might be (so much) better than the Republicans:
   
   
   • A.R. in Los Angeles, CA: Besides the reasons you posit, I also think that the folks chosen to give speeches are better writers. I'm sure some of them had a good portion of their speeches written for them but most probably had to put in some work themselves. This could be a subset of being in a profession that requires persuasive writing skills (like law), or really believing in the message the Democrats want to send, but the substance of the speeches was so stellar in addition to the excellent delivery.
     
     I also think it stems from a genuine commitment to public service and a love of country. I'm so thrilled to see the Democrats taking back patriotism and reminding Americans what that word means and embodies. When that kind of passion drives a public address, it shines through and also helps calm the nerves.
     
     
   • J.S. in Columbia, MO: Spewing hatred is exhausting while spreading kindness is exhilarating.
     
     
   • E.G. in Rosemount, MN: I was noticing how strange it was that Democrats have all of these past presidents to headline vs. there being very few real heavy-hitters at the RNC. Yes, there are more presidents and VPs alive on the Democratic side, and they are younger, but there are still some big guns on the Republican side. The problem is that many of them won't stand by Trump (George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Mike Pence), while others may be unwelcome because Trump does not want to be upstaged (Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-KY; maybe Arnold Schwarzenegger). It feels so "uniting" on the Democrats' side and just goes to show you how fractured the Republican side is. What if these burned bridges were available to shine their light on Trump?
     
     
   • S.K. in Lobitos, Peru: I have been thinking about the same issue, and my theory (to add to yours) is that the Republicans have limited themselves to only Trumpistas. Thus they have a smaller pool of speakers from which to draw, unlike the Democrats, who are doing a much better job keeping their tent large and promoting the voices of all ranges of the party.
     
     
   • J.A. in Dripping Springs, TX: I take exception. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) WAS stellar... in the sense that a black hole is a stellar body. A soul-sucking singularity where everything goes to die.
     
     
   • E.G. in The Villages, FL: Ted Cruz is a better speaker than everyone at the DNC combined.
     
     
   The last comment, from a person who might not be aware that marijuana is not yet legal in Florida, is the only one we got that disagrees with our premise.
   
   
4. The Missing Link: There were two elements to the program on Day Four that were rumored, but did not come to pass—one serious, and one kind of silly. The serious one is that there was considerable pressure on the DNC to give a speaking slot to a Palestinian American, so they could give their views on the War in Gaza. If the DNC had acceded to this request, the choice would presumably have been Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), but it didn't happen. Maybe the party leadership decided that it would cost more votes than it would gain, especially since the party is making an aggressive play for Middle America. They might also have wanted to leave that subject for Harris; she had a passage in her speech expressing empathy for the people of Gaza.
   
   
5. The Other Missing Link: On a much more silly note, there was a gap in the convention schedule, which gave rise to claims that the singer Beyoncé was going to make a surprise appearance. The gossip website TMZ.com went so far as to report that an appearance was definitely happening. It did not, causing much consternation on social media. CNN's Abby Philip, apparently without irony, declared: "TMZ lost a lot of credibility tonight." We didn't know they had any to lose.
   
   
6. Job No. 1: Thus far, here are the viewership numbers for the two conventions:
   
   

   Day	Republicans	Democrats
   1	18.1 million	20 million
   2	14.8 million	20.8 million
   3	17.9 million	20.2 million
   4	25.3 million	???

   
   These are all the average number of viewers tuned in during primetime hours. Also, Nielsen does not include streaming viewers in their figures, so the Democrats' advantage is probably a bit bigger than it appears here.
   
   Barring the unexpected, the viewership for Day Four will be the largest, attracting several million people who have not otherwise tuned in. In view of this, the folks running the show yesterday clearly had several major tasks they were trying to accomplish. The first of those was a classic on the convention to-do list: Give some face time to candidates running for key offices.
   
   In particular, there are 19 Democratic and 3 independent Senate seats that are part of the Democratic caucus and are up this year. One of those, of course, is a lost cause (West Virginia), while others are completely safe (California, Hawaii, etc.). Roughly speaking, there are nine Senate Democratic caucus seats that are plausibly in play: Arizona, Nevada, Montana, Minnesota, Michigan, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin.
   
   Angela Alsobrooks (MD) spoke on Day Two and Amy Klobuchar (MN) spoke on Day Three. Last night, the blue team got four more folks in competitive races up on stage: Ruben Gallego (AZ), Elissa Slotkin (MI), Bob Casey (PA) and Tammy Baldwin (WI). That means that only Jacky Rosen (NV), Jon Tester (MT), and Sherrod Brown (OH), arguably the three most endangered senators, did not make an appearance. A speaking slot would have been theirs for the asking, but all three decided that they didn't want to risk having to own anything unpopular that might take place while they were in attendance.
   
   Incidentally, there are also two Democrats with a chance to unseat a Republican. Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (D-FL) took a pass on speaking (though Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-NY, made a pitch for her), while Rep. Colin Allred (D-TX) spoke last night.
   
   
7. Job No. 2: A second task for the evening (and for the convention, of course), was to make the case against Donald Trump. Sometimes this took the form of serious critiques of the man and his ideas. Sometimes this took the form of snark; plenty of speakers let the former president have it with both barrels.
   
   Other than Harris' speech, there were four particularly effective Trump-critical moments yesterday. First, after an introduction from Al Sharpton, four members of the "Central Park Five" spoke. Recalling that Trump pushed aggressively for them to be executed, even after their innocence was beyond doubt, the clear message here was: "Don't forget, Trump's a racist" (which Sharpton did not hesitate to point out).
   
   Second, there was a Daily Show-style bit where the correspondent visited a Trump rally for United Auto Workers, only to be unable to find any actual auto workers. The message here, of course, is that Trump doesn't actually care about organized labor.
   
   Third, there was a different bit in which Harris' young nieces were brought out to conduct a lesson in the proper pronunciation of "Kamala." The message here was: "Trump mispronounces Harris' name deliberately... because he's a racist."
   
   Fourth, former Republican representative Adam Kinzinger of Illinois was given a prime speaking slot, and made the (very reasonable) case that Trump is not a conservative.
   
   
8. Job No. 3: The most important job yesterday, of course, was to introduce Kamala Harris to the country. There were numerous videos documenting her story. For the first one, they got the most ideal and the most obvious celebrity narrator we can imagine. If you haven't seen it, and you want to take your best guess, we'll tell you who it was at the very end of this item. But we'll say not too many people out there can speak with the voice of a president AND the voice of God.
   
   On the whole, the evening had considerably less political starpower than the three previous nights. This is not a coincidence. First, you can't have someone on the speakers' list who outshines the candidate (which is why, incidentally, you don't put Hulk Hogan on stage just minutes before the candidate's acceptance speech). Second, the heavy-hitter speakers last night were chosen primarily so that they might attest to various elements of Harris' résumé.
   
   For example, Elizabeth Warren's job was to explain that Harris has credibility on pushing back against the abuses of Wall Street. Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland ran through Harris' environmental bona fides. Former representative Gabby Giffords (D) and her husband, Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ), were there to assure everyone that Harris cares about gun control. (Sidebar: Given how grievously Giffords was injured, she looked and sounded great and, as we note above, gave one of the best speeches of the night.) Former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta was responsible for affirming Harris' foreign policy chops.
   
   Note, incidentally, that all of these speeches were supplemented with videos, remarks from other speakers, etc.
   
   
9. Ella Enchanted: It wasn't always this way, but these days, the custom is to invite family members of the candidates on stage to talk a little bit about their mother/father/stepmother/stepfather/aunt/uncle/godmother/godfather, so as to humanize the candidates. Last night (and this was surely planned well in advance, and wasn't just trolling), Ella Emhoff was on stage to talk about her stepmother. She was wearing a dress that—gasp!—showed her tattooed arms. We assume that many Republican pundits went into fits of apoplexy as a result.
   
   We had a number of readers write in yesterday with comments on why Emhoff's inoffensive physical appearance was nonetheless so triggering to many people on the right. The response, from reader I.T. in Orlando, FL, captures the tenor of most of those messages:

   I believe the "nightmare" is that she presents as a bit androgynous. The tattoos and sleeveless shirt play a role, but it's the overall breach of traditional femininity that so flummoxes the conservative critics. Even the picture you featured on your site (she seems to be mid-yawn perhaps) I believe was carefully selected—by a fundamentally classless person—to suggest that she's conventionally unattractive. And while many of us might not only vehemently disagree with such a sentiment, but also recognize that it is apropos of nothing, we should not lose track of the real suggestion here. It is not a suggestion that she is unattractive, but a suggestion that anyone who deviates from traditional gender aesthetics is unattractive.
   
   The degree to which the conservative movement is currently dominated by gender obsession cannot be overstated. Everything boils down to "he's not a real man" because he's a man who expresses emotion (Gus Walz) or "she's not a real woman" because she wears pants or has long hair or, god forbid, leaves her mouth open long enough for it to be caught on camera, instead of smiling a tight-lipped smile like a model woman should. It's a distorted expression of generationally baked-in insecurity, and it is the cause of so much mental and emotional dis-ease in our world. That's how I see it, anyways.

   That seems a pretty good explanation to us.
   
   
10. A Star Is Born?: To a large extent, the candidate's speech is when everything is on the line. If they succeed, the convention succeeds, pretty much regardless of what came before. If they fail, the convention fails, again regardless of what came before. If Harris had blown it, it would have been very deflating for the Democrats, after having such a successful first 3.75 days, to fall short right before the finish line. The good news for the blue team is that she most definitely succeeded.
    
    Let's talk about stagecraft one last time. To start, Harris clearly puts a lot of thought into her sartorial choices. There is simply no question that she thought very carefully about what she should wear on stage last night; she probably discussed it with one or more advisers, too. In the end, she chose a very dark blue suit with a lavallière shirt. We are not fashion-expert enough to fully parse this, but we can say that it's obviously a very formal choice, and one that caused her facial expressions to stand out, framed by the darkness of the suit and the brightness of the background. Also, if you want to dissect things on an Elizabeth II level (the queen was often suspected of using her fashion choices as a way of subverting the prohibition on royals expressing opinions), well, a lavallière shirt is also known as a "pussy bow" shirt. A subtle reference to "grab 'em by the pu**y"? Maybe. Just to make sure we weren't visiting crazytown, we took a look, and confirmed there are others thinking the same thing.
    
    Moving along, we wrote at the time—and we still feel—that Trump's convention speech was a disaster. One obvious reason is that it went on way, way too long, clocking in around 92 minutes. Presumably, Harris learned long ago that you just can't prattle on that long. Or maybe she learned from Joe Biden, whose 2020 acceptance speech was just 25 minutes in length. Or maybe she watched the crowd at the RNC as some of them fell asleep, and figured it out that way. However she got there, Harris' speech was roughly 40 minutes in length (though the CNN fact-checkers would undoubtedly tell you that's incorrect, and it was actually more like 39 minutes and 20 seconds). Leave your audience wanting more, not less, is the general idea.
    
    At a more nuanced level, let us note that classic movie/theater plot structure goes something like this: In Act 1, you are introduced to the protagonist or protagonists. In Act 2, the protagonist or protagonists go on a journey, in which they experience a series of setbacks and triumphs. In Act 3, their journey climaxes, either in ultimate triumph or final defeat. Trump presumably knows none of this. Certainly, he structured his acceptance speech completely wrong. The very best part was the first 20 minutes or so, and then it was all downhill from there, like a balloon deflating. How does a reality TV star not know where to put the climax? Readers can write their own jokes about him climaxing after just 90 seconds.
    
    Harris presumably does know something about proper structure. In Act I of her speech, she introduced herself and reiterated the details of her story, much of which had been covered by the videos. In Act II, she talked a bit about her journey, some of the pitfalls she encountered, and how dealing with those set her on the path to public service and politics.
    
    The biggie, of course, was Act III. The rather thunderous climax came when she formally accepted the Democrats' nomination for the presidency. That was followed by some commentary about why she should be president and why Donald Trump should not. Her critique of Trump was framed very well; she argued that he is an unserious man who nonetheless presents a serious threat to the country. Surely we'll hear that framing again, at the debates, if nothing else.
    
    As to Harris' case for being president, we're still sitting on a piece about her agenda, and whether she's not doing enough to give specifics on policy. For now, we will say two things on the subject (which we'll expand on next week). The first is that specifics are, to an extent, a fantasy. Nobody can possibly know what is possible in 2025 until they know the composition of the House and the Senate. The latter, of course, sits on razor's edge, and there is a world of difference between 50D/50R and 49D/51R.
    
    We will also add that... she did give specifics. Over the course of the evening, she specifically committed to a bill that will combat price gouging, a tax cut for working people, passage of the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and passage of the currently-dead border bill that was negotiated by Chris Murphy, James Lankford and Kyrsten Sinema. Those seem like quite a few specifics, to us.
    
    So, Harris did well. Very well, in fact; one of the two or three best speeches of the convention. The candidate and her team must surely be thrilled with how it went.

And... that's the ballgame. The ultimate conclusion here is this: the Democrats put on as successful a convention as we've ever seen. Perhaps that is remarkable, given the recent change at the top of the ticket. Or maybe it's not remarkable at all, for the same reason. Now, we all sit back and wait to see if the Harris/Walz ticket benefits from the big show.

There will be endless articles and maybe some polls in the next few days, but perhaps one early glimmer of what is going to happen is a focus group CNN ran in central Pennsyslvania with 8 undecided voters who watched Harris' speech together. Most were blue-collar workers and some were members of the UAW. While the union leadership is very pro-Harris, some of the members have other ideas. In the end, six of the eight will vote for Harris, one will vote for Trump, and a young woman won't vote. She didn't explain why though. All we can infer is that she wanted something else than what is being offered.

Oh, and the narrator for the first Harris biographical video was Morgan Freeman, who played the president in Deep Impact and God in Bruce Almighty and Evan Almighty. (Z)

DNC Diary, Day 4: The Convention Hall Was Electric

Reader A.S. in Fairfax, VA, has endured something like a marathon this week, but still found the energy to send us some comments on the final day of the Convention:

If you have never participated in a balloon drop of 100,000 balloons, add it to your bucket list. Day Four started with remarks from Paul Begala at our delegation breakfast. Hearing him talk, you get the impression that he could write a perfect speech in minutes.

A few of us then went over to Dempalooza to pick up some swag and see what advocacy groups we could support. This part of the convention was open to the public, so maybe some Chicago residents were able to have some fun and meet some well-known activists while allowing the DNC to take over a part of their city.

I brought out the all-white outfit for the evening celebration at the United Center, and even though word didn't reach everyone to wear white, I thought it was a great effort and everyone had fun with it. Night four on the convention floor was madness! Everyone wanted to be as close as possible, so everyone not already a delegate did everything they could for a chance to sit with the delegation. The delegation whips were outstanding, making sure every delegate had a seat—even if a guest, dignitary, or elected official had to move. At one point, the floor and lower bowl areas were declared to be at max capacity and to comply with fire regulations, people who got up and went to the concourse would not be allowed back in until another space opened up. Delegates were exempt from this as the delegates must be allowed to participate, per the convention rules.

The anticipation was high for us to hear from our nominee, but there were also rumors of a few surprise guests that never, ever, ever materialized. I guess we all bought into the hype and had expectations, but there was no disappointment after our celebrations of freedom throughout the night. The DNC dance party was a great touch, though I do worry that if footage of me trying to dance reached the cameras, we might lose every state. Kamala Harris looked and sounded to me like the prosecutor presenting this case for the people. She presented the facts of the case and previewed the evidence that I'm sure we will see over these next two months.

The hotel bar was full until it closed around 3:00 a.m. CT, with everyone trying to get one last party in before we return to our home states and continue the work of navigating a path to 270. We'll get our canvasses and calls going when we get home and we hope that the 20+ hours of DNC programming inspires others to join us. Early voting in Virginia starts in just about a month.

Participating in this convention has left memories and relationships that may last forever and it has certainly inspired me to try to dig a little deeper up through November. My path to being a delegate was simply asking the 200+ people at my congressional district convention to allow me to represent them in Chicago and I could not be more grateful for the opportunity.

Thanks again for your time and your insight, A.S.! (Z)

No Abortion Initiative in Arkansas

Obviously, most of our attention this week is on the DNC. However, there were a couple of non-convention news stories yesterday that merit a mention. Yesterday, we noted that nine states will have abortion initiatives on the ballot. That might have been 10, but... no.

The paperwork needed to get an initiative on the Arkansas ballot is pretty complicated, and the pro-choice forces didn't quite get it right. The will of the voters was pretty clear, but paperwork is paperwork. Anti-choice forces asked the Arkansas Supreme Court to toss the initiative; pro-choice forces asked that it remain on the ballot, or, failing that, that some extra time be given to allow them to "cure" the problem. Yesterday, the state Supreme Court, by a vote of 4-3, sided with the anti-choice folks, and tossed the initiative off the ballot.

If this had happened in Montana or Florida or Arizona, it would be a real kick in the teeth for the Democrats, electorally. Arkansas, however, has no statewide races this year, no U.S. Senate race, and no competitive House districts (they are all ruby red). This being the case, the big losers yesterday were Arkansan women who desire reproductive freedom. Presumably, they'll get their day, but it will have to wait until the next election cycle, which is in 2026. (Z)

Supreme Court: Nobody Is Going to Love This Ruling

While most politics-watchers' attention was elsewhere, the Supreme Court snuck in a ruling yesterday, using its infamous shadow docket. The short version is that, when it comes to voting in Arizona, the Republican Party went 1-2.

The legal situation is actually a little complicated. In simplest terms, there are a pair of Arizona laws that require someone to provide documentary proof of citizenship in order to be allowed to vote. The initial law, from 20 years ago, imposed that requirement for state and local elections. An additional law, rammed through in 2022 by the GOP-controlled legislature, would extend that to federal elections, as well as to all absentee ballots. The RNC and other Republican groups filed suit to try to get both laws enforced. If the Republicans were to prevail, it's estimated that roughly 42,000 Arizonans (the majority of them Latino) would be tossed off the voter rolls. As a reminder, Joe Biden's margin of victory there in 2020 was 10,457 votes.

Both laws had been stayed by a federal judge while the lawsuit plays out. Yesterday, the Supremes lifted the stay on the earlier law, by a vote of 5-4 (the five male justices were on one side, the four women were on the other). However, the stay on the later law was allowed to remain in place. It's not known exactly what the vote was for the second part of the decision, only that it was the three liberals, Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, and one or both of Chief Justice John Roberts/Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

The current state of affairs might very well hold once the entire legal process has played out. States have a fair bit of latitude in running state and local elections, but when it comes to federal elections, if a person registers using the universal federal voter registration form, federal law is very clear that documentation of citizenship is not required (merely an affirmation). In terms of this year's elections, the federal contests shouldn't be too much affected by the Supremes' ruling. On the other hand, it could interfere with Democrats' hopes of flipping the two chambers of the Arizona legislature. (Z)

I Read the News Today, Oh Boy: A Hunter on the Chisholm Trail

We'll have more scavenger hunt material soon; there just wasn't time to do that AND put all of this other material together.

Anyhow, for the headline theme last week, we gave the hint: "[T]here may appear to be a couple of misspellings or typos in the headlines. In fact, there are not." Then, on Saturday, we added "If we had used the theme for this upcoming Friday (the 23rd), we would have done everything possible to fit Santos (well, actually, 'Santos') into a headline. However, we couldn't do it this week, because it would not have been accurate to the theme." And now, the key, courtesy of reader B.S. in Ottawa, ON, Canada:

It appears each headline references an American political figure who was convicted of a crime:

• Dueling Banjos: Trump and Harris Each Hold Public Events—Ahem, Donald Trump.
  
  
• Debates: Coming to Your TV This Fall (Probably!)—Secretary of the Interior Albert B. Fall was the only person convicted for the Teapot Dome scandal. It feels like I hear about the Teapot Dome scandal every few months on Electoral-Vote.com and never anywhere else. Fall was definitely the one that made me sure I was on the correct path.
  
  
• Trump Campaign: Lewandowski Is Back; Can Manafort Be Far Behind?—Convicted felon Paul Manafort was Trump's campaign manager in 2016.
  
  
• Another Walz Mini-Scandal: Initial DWI Story Looks to Have Been a Snow Job—Rep. Donald Snow (R-ME) was imprisoned in Maine for embezzling from estates where he was executor, but was later pardoned.
  
  
• Which Side Are You On?: Kennedy Tries, Fails to Make Nice with Harris Campaign—Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) was convicted of leaving the scene of an accident after causing personal injury without making himself known, thanks to his actions at Chappaquiddick.
  
  
• The Media: What's with the DeLay in Publishing the Purloined Documents?—Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX) was convicted of money laundering with his campaign, but had that overturned by friendly courts.
  
  
• I Read the News Today, Oh Boy: 10 Cloverfield Lane—Rep. Thomas J. Lane (D-MA) got re-elected to the House after spending time in prison for tax evasion, which doesn't really give me confidence in the upcoming election.
  
  
• This Week in Schadenfreude: Musk Is in over His Head, No Ifs, Ands, or Butz about It—Earl Butz was Secretary of Agriculture under Tricky Dick and Jerry Ford with some choice words about Black Americans that went public. He was later sent to prison for tax evasion.
  
  
• This Week in Freudenfreude: Here's to the "Great White North"—Oliver North, he of Iran-Contra fame, was convicted of three felonies, and then got the convictions vacated.

We could not use "Santos" last week because "George Santos" was not formally convicted until Monday of this week. As to today's headline, Duncan Hunter was convicted of misusing campaign funds (but did not have to serve his prison term thanks to a Trump pardon).

Here are the first 50 readers to get it right:

T.F. in Craftsbury Common, VT M.B. in Albany, NY D.L. in Springfield, IL L.D. in Bedford, MA G.K. in Blue Island, IL B.S. in Ottawa J.N. in Zionsville, IN S.F. in Pemberton Borough, NJ J.H. in Sturbridge, MA J.B. in Waukee, IA J.S. in Germantown, OH M.L. in West Hartford, CT E.K. in Skaneateles, NY S.K. in Ardmore, PA J.S. in Columbia, MO A.P. in Kitchener, ON, Canada I.G. in Manhattan, NY M.S. in New York City, NY P.A. in Redwood City, CA C.S. in Tampa, FL D.M. in Oakland, CA M.B. in Melrose, MA J.W. in Newton, MA J.S. in Pittsburgh, PA A.C. in Burlington, VT

M.W. in Newington, CT A.L. in Jackson Heights, NY F.Y. in Ann Arbor, MI C.L. in Boulder, CO E.H. in Calgary, AB, Canada M.H. im Ottawa, ON, Canada T.M. in New York City, NY M.M. in Manahawkin, NJ D.L. in Uslar, Germany R.D. in Cheshire, CT D.M. in Austin, TX D.D.R. in Portland, OR M.W. in Frederick, MD E.G. in Rosemount, MN J.S. in Long Beach, CA J.A. in Redwood City, CA L.B. in Veldhoven, the Netherlands M.M. in Wylie, TX R.E.M. in Brooklyn, NY R.S. in Milan, OH D.W. in Manhattan, MT W.H. in San Jose, CA S.S. in West Hollywood, CA F.B. in Santa Monica, CA E.Z. in Charleston, SC

As long as answers were in the right general vicinity, we allowed them.

For this week's theme, it relies on just one word per headline, and the abortion item is not part of it. The Trivial Pursuit category is either History or People and Places (either is about equally justifiable). As to a hint, we are feeling very blau that we could not find a way to get Braun into a headline.

If you have a guess, send it to us at comments@electoral-vote.com, ideally with subject line "August 23 Headlines." (Z)

This Week in Schadenfreude: Vance Just Can't Fudge It

It is one of the oldest traditions in American politics. When you are running as part of a presidential ticket, and you are traveling around the country campaigning, you sample local foods so as to communicate you respect the local culture and you are a man or a woman "of the people." That means that whether you really like the food or not, you eat Pączki in Michigan or Illinois, BBQ in Texas, crab cakes in Maryland, Key Lime pie in Florida and deep fried things that should really not be deep fried at the Iowa State fair. J.D. Vance is clearly aware of the tradition but, beyond that, he has no idea how to actually navigate these appearances. This week alone, he screwed up not one, not two, but THREE of them so badly that they went viral.

First up was one of the most traditional candidate stops of them all: Pat's King of Steaks for a Philly cheesesteak sandwich (though we must concede, we prefer Geno's, and what we REALLY prefer is a roast pork sandwich). Now, what happened with Vance is being mis-reported in some places. The would-be VP was clearly aware that John Kerry botched his Pat's trip in 2004, and asked for swiss cheese on his sandwich (the correct option is Cheez Whiz, and the only other options are Provolone and American). Anyhow, Vance asked why Philadelphians hate Swiss cheese, while noting he is in agreement. The staff was confused, because Philadelphians don't hate Swiss cheese, they just don't put it on cheesesteaks, probably because it doesn't melt fully enough for that purpose. Point is, just order and eat your damn cheesesteak, and don't try to score points with a clumsy callback to a minor controversy from 20 years ago.

Next up, the next day, was Tenuta's Deli in Kenosha, WI, a well-known purveyor of Italian foodstuffs. Again, trying to be a charmer, Vance asked the staff if they have any foods they don't like, so that he might buy some for the reporters who are part of his entourage. First of all, J.D., no small business is going to say, "You know, our eggplant parmesan is actually really awful." Second, how tacky to crap on the reporters like that. These are people who are just trying to do their jobs, and who are, incidentally, providing you a lot of free publicity.

Vance got through all three meals on Wednesday, but on Thursday, he was back to putting his foot in his mouth. Now in Valdosta, GA, he visited a donut shop for a really cringeworthy appearance (which you can watch here). He tried to make small talk with the staff of the donut shop, who clearly had not been warned about his visit in advance, and who even more clearly had no idea who he is. He tried a humble-brag about how he just so happens to be running for vice president; the staffers' body language communicated "Vice president of... what?" Eventually, when it was obvious that the two people behind the counter just wanted to do their jobs and move on to the next customer, Vance tried to place an order, but he has only a vague idea of what the different kinds of donuts are (he knew about glazed and sprinkles, and that's about it), and so told the staff to give him "whatever makes sense."

In short, if Vance is going for "man of the people," he's not doing a good job of it. If he's going for "weird" (and "socially awkward" and "barely capable of normal human interaction") then he's knocking it out of the park. Since he's said so many cruel things, and has embraced so many cruel policy ideas, we have no problem in enjoying a little schadenfreude at his expense when he can't even navigate something so simple as placing his sandwich/donut order. (Z)

This Week in Freudenfreude: Still Waters Run Deep

Joe Biden first attended the DNC in 1976, and has been to every one since. If you do the math, that is 13 consecutive Democratic conventions, with #14 in 2028 being an open question.

As chance would have it, Biden is not the only person in Chicago this week who can be described in that way. It's also true of Angie Gialloreto. Who is that, you might ask? Well, at 95, she is the oldest delegate to have attended this year's Democratic National Convention.

Gialloreto, who just watched as a Black woman was nominated for President of the United States by a major political party, was born on February 27, 1929. Think about how different the world was back then:

• Women had had nationwide suffrage for less than a decade.
• The last member of Congress to have been a slaveholder was still living.
• Martin Luther King Jr. was about 6 weeks old.
• "Gay" meant "happy."
• Abortion was illegal in many states (OK, some things haven't changed).
• Franklin D. Roosevelt was, to most people, a barely remembered failed VP candidate.
• Jackie Robinson would not debut with the Dodgers for another 18 years.
• Not one of the songs played during the Democrats' roll call this year had been written.
• There was no Internet. In fact, there were basically no computers.
• Kamala Harris was 35 years from being born.

In short, Gialloreto has seen a lot. And she's been paying attention. While the first convention she attended was in 1976, the first one she followed was the Democratic National Convention of 1944, which just so happened to be in Chicago. She was, as you can imagine, pulling for FDR to be nominated for a fourth term. She got her wish, of course, even if she could not vote for him. Her first presidential ballot was cast for Adlai Stevenson in 1952.

Gialloreto was, and remains, a huge fan of Joe Biden, as you can tell from her shirt:

She was saddened to see him depart the ticket, but is nonetheless excited about his replacement. Her words for Harris: "Go girl! Go get them! I'm ready to go with you."

Although Gialloreto is small and stooped-over, and though she refers to herself as "Grandma Moses," there's the heart of a lion in there. She wants to see younger people do as she did, all the way back in 1944:

It's time young people should have the voice and daggonit, they better have the opportunity to express it. There's been this closed door thing. "Oh, you're too young." No! Do it. Express yourself. Let people know what you want and how you feel. I started at 15. I sure in hell am not going to stop at 95.

Would 'twere that all of us could not only make it to 95, but to be that feisty when we get there.

Have a good weekend, all! (Z)

Today's Presidential Polls

Realistically, Donald Trump probably cannot survive a loss in Pennsylvania, given what that implies for the rest of the map. He definitely cannot survive a loss in Pennsylvania AND North Carolina. (Z)

State	Kamala Harris	Donald Trump	Start	End	Pollster
Missouri	41%	59%	Jul 25	Aug 22	Activote
North Carolina	47%	47%	Aug 19	Aug 21	SurveyUSA
New York	58%	42%	Aug 01	Aug 21	Activote
Ohio	44%	56%	Aug 02	Aug 22	Activote
Pennsylvania	51%	49%	Aug 05	Aug 22	Activote
Texas	45%	50%	Aug 05	Aug 16	U. of Houston
Utah	28%	60%	Aug 02	Aug 09	HarrisX

Click on a state name for a graph of its polling history.

---

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 or share:

---The Votemaster and Zenger