Texas Hates Democracy

In a just world, someone would arrest, convict, and imprison Gov. Greg Abbott and AG Ken Paxton (both R-TX) and then would throw away the key. They are the most anti-democratic, corrupt, power-abusing, self-interested one-two punch in state politics right now. In fact, they might be the worst one-two punch in state politics in the last half-century (go back further than that, and you run into the segregationists, who were also really bad).

Every reader of this site knows that Texas has allegedly been on the cusp of turning purple for at least a decade, if not more. It hasn't actually happened, but that doesn't mean that the thought doesn't keep Texas Republicans up at night. And they go into full freak-out mode when they see a poll like this one from Public Policy Polling, which has Donald Trump leading Kamala Harris by just five points, and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) leading Rep. Colin Allred (D-TX) by just two. It's almost certainly an outlier, but it's also a reminder that Texas' status as a one-party state could be in jeopardy.

One solution to this problem would be to pursue ideas and programs that will curry public support. You know, that thing called "politics"? The preferred approach of Abbott and Paxton, however, is to abuse their positions of power to disenfranchise Democratic voters. To that end, the Texas state government, with Paxton taking the lead, has booted 1 million people off the voter rolls since the last presidential election. Roughly half of those individuals have died or left Texas. The other half, however, simply failed to respond to inquiries from the state demanding that they confirm their voting status. "Coincidentally," the folks removed from the rolls are disproportionately people of color and/or disabled, which means they are also disproportionately Democrats.

And it gets even sleazier. Abbott and Paxton are all-in on the fantasy that vast numbers of undocumented immigrants are casting votes in Texas elections. In order to fight this "problem," Paxton recently executed search warrants on a bunch of homes in Texas. No undocumented voters, and no evidence of votes by undocumented Texans, were found. By pure chance, however, the homes all belonged to Democratic activists, particularly members of the League of United Latin American Citizens.

This week, Paxton is still busy. Harris and Bexar counties (home to Houston and San Antonio, respectively) were busy at work on plans to allow people to register to vote via mail. On Monday, the AG sent letters to officials in both counties telling them they better not try it, and that he would sue them if they did. Paxton claims that the program would "confuse" noncitizens and "induce" them to register fraudulently. Those just so happen to be among the most heavily Latino counties in the state. Paxton probably didn't even know that, though, right?

At the start of this item, we proposed that Abbott and Paxton are as bad as the segregationists of the 1950s and 1960s. Now that we think about it, is there even a distinction? Whether it's Ken Paxton or George Wallace, they're doing everything they can to keep Black and brown people from voting.

And while Texas is probably the worst, it's far from the only example, depressing as it is. Republicans in a number of states aren't betting the farm on having vote counters bringing home the bacon for them. They are also interested in determining who may vote. This is doubly true when the vote-counter-in-chief is a Democrat (as in Arizona, Michigan, and North Carolina) or a straight-shooting Republican (as in Georgia). Here are a few more states where members of the red team are actively trying to interfere with voting:

• Arizona: A couple of weeks ago, the Supreme Court gave Arizona Republicans a partial win on a new voter-ID law. The good news for Republicans was that some new registrants would have to prove their citizenship before registering to vote using the state's registration form. The bad news was that people already registered would not have to bring proof of citizenship to the polls when they vote in November. On the whole, the Republicans' win here is small because even if someone shows up to register and is sent away for lack of proof of citizenship, they can come back again with such proof (typically a U.S. passport, birth certificate, or Certificate of Naturalization).
  
  
• Georgia: Back in May, four of the five members of the Georgia State Election Board voted down a new proposal to allow county boards to investigate or delay certifying election results. The rule would violate both state and federal law. Local boards are not allowed to investigate alleged irregularities without a court order to do so. They are supposed to add up the numbers and just report them.
  
  Three months later, a similar rule came up and this time it passed 3-2, largely due to pressure from Donald Trump and other election deniers and thanks to the replacement of one member by a very Trumpy new member who has no experience at all in election administration but a lot of very strong opinions about who should win. Experts said that the new rule violates state and federal law even more than the original one. A court challenge is underway.
  
  
• Michigan: The RNC and the Michigan Republican Party have sued the state on the grounds that there aren't enough Republican election workers in Detroit, the state's largest city. The suit asks the judge to order equal numbers of Democratic and Republican workers up and down the line in Detroit. Since there are about eight times as many Democrats as Republicans in Detroit, finding enough Republicans who are willing to be election workers isn't that easy, which is why there is an imbalance. The suit does not ask for parity in heavily Republican rural counties in other parts of the state, for some reason.
  
  
• Nebraska: In July, a new state law took effect that would re-enfranchise about 7,000 people with felony convictions. The state had no plans to tell anyone about the new law, which means many former felons undoubtedly would not know if it were up to state officials. So, a private group raised money for an ad campaign in Omaha and Lincoln to inform former felons of their new rights. The ads never ran, because Nebraska AG Mike Hilgers (R) and SoS Bob Evnen (R) halted implementation of the new law and shut down registrations of former felons, in plain violation of the new law. Hilgers' approach was to simply declare the new law to be unconstitutional. He also declared unconstitutional a 2005 law that ended lifetime disenfranchisement of anyone convicted of any felony. That law allowed former felons to vote starting 2 years after they had completed their sentences. Who needs a state legislature or judges when the AG can do all the heavy lifting with a simple announcement? The 2005 law affected 59,000 Nebraskans. Oh, and the incarceration rate of Black Nebraskans is 10 times that of white Nebraskans. Weird, no?
  
  
• North Carolina: The Tar Heel State will begin sending out absentee ballots within the week. People who voted absentee in 2020 may be surprised about two new procedures, though. First, the voter now has to include a photocopy of a valid photo ID. Second, the voter must fill out the ballot in the presence of two witnesses or a notary public. Although the instructions list these requirements, many long-time voters probably aren't going to read them and will cast ballots that will be thrown out unless the county has some procedure for allowing voters to cure sick ballots. The Republican-controlled legislature that passed the new laws is assuming that more absentee voters are Democrats than Republicans, so they hope this works for them.
  
  
• Pennsylvania: In April, election workers in Republican-controlled Washington County, PA, refused to tell voters that their absentee ballots had been rejected (typically because the voter forgot to put a date on the envelope, which is irrelevant when the ballot arrives before or on Election Day). State law requires such notification to give the voter a chance to cure the ballot. Last Friday, Judge Brandon Neuman (D) ruled that county officials must obey state law. The chairman of Washington County's Board of Commissioners said that state law does not allow counties to begin processing absentee ballots before Election Day, so there is no time to notify voters about errors. However the ACLU, which represented the plaintiffs, said that nothing in state law prevents election workers from looking at incoming sealed envelopes to see if there is a date there, and if not, to inform the voter, which is what state law requires. Most counties in Pennsylvania do exactly that.

The above items show some of the more recent efforts to combat voting. This year, about half the states have changed voting laws, generally to make it more difficult. If you want an in-depth report on them, click here.

The Republican hypocrisy on voting integrity is staggering. There is a consortium of states called the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) that tries to catch double voting by allowing states to see if any registered voter is also registered in a different state. This typically happens when someone moves to a new state and does not deregister in the old state before registering in the new one. Being registered in two or more states is not a crime, only voting twice is. In the past, most states were members of ERIC. Now, many Republican-controlled states have withdrawn from an organization whose goal is to enhance election integrity, because ERIC also provides citizens with information on how to register. And Republicans whine about double voting at the same time they are sabotaging a large national group whose main goal is combating double voting.

In addition to all the new laws, a private group, True the Vote, has an app that teaches private citizens how to challenge other people's right to vote. So far, half a million people have been challenged. We try to keep the editorializing to a minimum, in general, but when it comes to voting rights, all bets are off. And all of this is absolutely shameful. (V & Z)

Massachusetts Heads to the Polls

There was an election in Massachusetts yesterday. And here we are, writing an item about it, because that's what we do. But it would be hard to imagine an election with less intrigue. Here are the results, such as they are:

• U.S. Senate: Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) faced no challenger in her primary. Yesterday, she found out that her victim in November will be lawyer and Marine Corps veteran John Deaton. He seems a generally decent fellow, with an inspiring personal story. This will not matter one bit when he loses by 20+ points.
  
  
• U.S. House: Every single one of Massachusetts' nine congressional districts is very blue, and will have an incumbent running for reelection. In seven of the nine, nobody else bothered to file, either on the Republican or Democratic side. So, 7/9ths of the Massachusetts delegation to the 119th Congress is already known.
  
  In MA-08, for some reason, three Republicans filed to run in the primary. Robert Burke won, with 46.2% of the vote. His platform is "INVASION/BORDER CRISIS, EXCESSIVE SPENDING/ HYPER INFLATION, HOUSING, PARENTAL RIGHTS." Those are not the section headers, that's the entire platform. Why he's running, we do not know, as the district is D+15, and he's probably going to lose even bigger (to Rep. Stephen Lynch, D) than John Deaton will in the Senate race.
  
  Meanwhile, the one Massachusetts House district that is within spitting distance of being competitive is the D+6 MA-09, represented by Bill Keating (D). He already knew that his opponent would be nurse Dan Sullivan, who says it is time for a change. Good luck running on such a detailed, wonky platform, Nurse Dan (as he prefers to be called). It's difficult to even find his website, by virtue of the fact that Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK) is a tad more famous. Anyhow, maybe Keating will be caught accepting gold bars from the Egyptians, and this race will become competitive. Otherwise, not so much, we think.

We told you it wasn't very interesting. Next week, Delaware, New Hampshire and Rhode Island bring primary season to a close. (Z)

Another McCain Goes Rogue

At this point, it's clear that Donald Trump's trip to Arlington was an unforced error. He did not succeed in tarring Kamala Harris with the Abbey Gate tragedy, much less with the broader problems related to the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. Meanwhile, with the general attempt to use dead soldiers as political props, not to mention crass actions like giving the "thumbs up" over a soldier's tombstone, Trump did a bit of damage to himself. Maybe more than a bit, given his spotty history when it comes to honoring and dishonoring the nation's war dead.

The latest chapter in a story that, thus far, just isn't ending, involves 1st Lt. Jimmy McCain. He is the youngest son of the late Sen. John McCain. Given the poor relationship between Trump and the Senator, and given the nasty things that Trump said about the Senator, it is somewhat improbable that Jimmy was going to cast his ballot for The Donald, even if the Arlington incident had not taken place.

However, it did take place, and it's lit a fire under the younger McCain, who is furious about the "violation," as he calls it. "It just blows me away," he said. "These men and women that are laying in the ground there have no choice [whether or not to be used as window dressing for a campaign event]." So, he has switched his registration to Democratic, and has made clear he will be voting for Kamala Harris.

We assume that McCain, as an active-duty soldier, cannot campaign for Harris or otherwise endeavor to influence voters. In fact, we're not sure why he felt it was OK to share his plans to vote for Harris—we thought that was verboten. In any case, it's out there now, and we could imagine it moving the needle a little in Arizona. John McCain is still well-loved by many Republicans there, and now both his widow and his son have come out for Harris (although his daughters and his other son are remaining silent). On top of that, there is an approximately 100% chance that Trump will say something nasty, either about Jimmy, or about John, or about the entire family. That will fan the flames even more. Needless to say, if the Grand Canyon State ends up being close—and it could well be—every vote counts. (Z)

When Mudslinging Is All You've Got

The Trump campaign has finally noticed something that we figured out, what, 5 or 6 years ago? In short, he's not ever going to be any more popular than he already is. Taking a macro view, he has been a politician for about 10 years, he was a reality TV star for 10 years before that, and he was famous-for-being-famous for nearly 30 years before that. Taking a micro view, he crushed his rivals for the Republican presidential nomination, survived an assassination attempt, picked a running mate and held a convention, and it changed nothing. The needle just DOES. NOT. MOVE. OK, that's actually not true—sometimes it moves down a little. But his ceiling is about 48% of the American public, and that is as immutable as gravity.

To that end, as both CNN and The Washington Post are reporting, the Trump campaign has given up trying to make him and/or his ideas more popular. He doesn't really have many ideas, anyhow, and as to the candidate himself, everyone in the country long ago made up their minds as to how they feel about him.

So, what's a presidential candidate to do, if they can't run on their own merits? The answer is: Tear down your opponent. And so, going forward, Team Trump's plan is to spend all of its money and energy on attacking Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. And the focus largely isn't going to be on anything substantive; it's going to be personal attacks on top of personal attacks on top of personal attacks. Or, to paraphrase Winston Churchill, a slur wrapped in a conspiracy theory inside a falsehood.

One wonders how the Trump campaign finally got to this place. It seems improbable that Chris LaCivita sat the candidate down and said, "Donald, 52% of the American public just doesn't like you, and never will." More likely is that there was some shallow flattery about Trump's gut instincts, and how he should go with that, without any explanation as to why. Alternatively, maybe the people running the campaign realized that Trump was going to go with his gut and his propensity for mudslinging regardless, and the new "strategy" is just wrapping that in a pretty package.

Whatever the case may be, things are going to stay ugly for, presumably, the rest of the campaign. Indeed, since Trump's personal attacks really haven't been landing, it figures that things are going to get uglier and uglier, as he gets more and more desperate. If you live in a swing state, and you have your TV on for more than 5 minutes a day, we don't envy you.

As chance would have it, the rules by which Trump is going to play are apparently the exact rules by which the Democrats want him to play. First of all, behaving like a troll will serve to remind voters of the kind of man Trump is, and of the exhausting way he behaved while president. Second, many Democrats believe there's no way to wage this campaign based on policy, and that Kamala Harris needs to talk mostly about the differences in personality. If Trump is behaving like his worst self, that makes that conversation all the easier for the Democrat to have. Third, in his rallies or ads, Trump may (inadvertently) say something that is very offensive to some group, for example, women, and then Harris can use that material in her own ads. Fourth, by focusing on tearing down Harris instead of talking about the issues, Trump may be giving up on the one or two issues that actually work for him, namely inflation and immigration. Harris would definitely prefer Trump to run a racist and sexist campaign than to remind people that eggs cost more than they did in 2000. (Z)

It's That Time of Year

The calendar has turned to September. Soon, the school year will start (for those who haven't already headed back to the classroom). The NFL regular season commences this week. The official start of fall is a few weeks away. And, as is always the case these days, it's time for Congress to start squabbling over the budget.

Under normal circumstances, the members of Congress would be scared witless of shutting the government down in the middle of a presidential election season, and so would find a way to work something out, even if that means just kicking the can down the road into January or February of next year. But what we have right now aren't normal circumstances.

To start with, the budget hawks in Congress feel like they've had their lunch handed to them in the last several rounds of budget talks. And some of them are saying, with apologies to Twisted Sister, "We're not gonna take it anymore." Some of these folks not only believe in fiscal austerity, they ran on the issue, and they don't particularly want to run for reelection having accomplished nothing on this front. And it's not just members in ruby-red districts necessarily. Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL), to take one example, is a well-known budget hawk.

Another problem is that the Republican Conference, particularly in the House, has a number of members who would see a government shutdown as a feature, not a bug. They would be thrilled to go back home and say "We all know that government is bad, and so I've done the best possible thing—brought it to its knees." These folks don't much care about the consequences to the country or to their fellow Republicans.

A third issue is that a fair number of Republicans—the really Trumpy ones—want the SAVE Act inserted into any spending bill before they'll vote for passage. The SAVE Act declares that it is forbidden for non-citizens to vote in federal elections. Since that is the situation whether or not the "legislation" passes, the bill wouldn't actually change anything. What it would do, however, is allow Republicans to say that undocumented immigrants are voting in huge numbers, and that it's such a huge problem that even the Democrats in Congress agreed something had to be done about it.

Further, even if there is agreement on the general notion of kicking the can, the question of how far into the future to kick it could be contentious. Broadly speaking, Democrats would be happy to kick it far into next year. That way, regardless of what happens in the presidential election, the government would be funded under the auspices of a Democratic president's budget throughout that time. The Republicans believe, of course, that they might well recapture the Senate and/or the White House, putting them in a stronger position. So, they will prefer a pretty short can kick, as opposed to a long one.

And if all of this isn't hairy enough, the fiscal year ends at the end of this month, and Congress won't even be back in session until next Monday. So, they will basically have 15 working days to come up with something, or else shut down all or part of the government.

As you can see, the great majority of the issues above involve disputes within the GOP Conference. So, it will largely be up to the Republican leadership to figure something out. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who has unexpectedly become the voice of reason in the last couple of years, is trying mightily to rein his conference in. In particular, he doesn't want to touch the SAVE Act with a 10-foot pole. As to Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), the last time there was a budget to be worked out, he suddenly went from being a hard-right bomb thrower to being a centrist dealmaker. Will he pull the chameleon act again? We'll find out in a week or two. (Z)

The Calendar Going Forward

The conventions are now behind us. What is ahead of us? Here is a partial list of key dates in the coming months:

September 6: North Carolina and Delaware, per state law, can begin mailing absentee ballots. North Carolina will likely wait until Monday, September 9, however. As to Delaware, its primary isn't until September 10, so we don't see how they can mail ballots until sometime after that date.

September 7: 60 days to the election. This means the Department of Justice, et al., are not supposed to do anything from this date forward that might unduly affect the outcome. This means that in theory, at least, if Kamala Harris has a secret email server, the director of the FBI isn't supposed to yell: WE FOUND EMAILS!!! 10 days before the election. Unless he wants to, of course.

September 10: ABC News debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump.

September 10: The last state-level primaries, in Delaware, New Hampshire and Rhode Island.

September 16: Early voting begins in Pennsylvania.

September 18: Possible sentencing of Donald Trump in criminal fraud trial.

September 20: Early voting begins in Minnesota, South Dakota, and Virginia.

September 21: Early voting begins in Vermont.

September 26: Early voting begins in Illinois.

Sometime in October: The Harris-Walz campaign has signaled a willingness to hold a second presidential debate sometime during the month. Whether the details can be worked out is anyone's guess.

Sometime in October: Trump might have to appear in court in Washington, DC.

October 1: CBS News vice presidential debate between Tim Walz and J.D. Vance.

October 1: Federal government may shut down (see above).

October 6: Early voting begins in Maine.

October 7: Early voting begins in California, Montana, and Nebraska.

October 8: Early voting begins in Indiana, New Mexico, Ohio, and Wyoming.

October 9: Early voting begins in Arizona.

October 12: Early voting begins in Nevada (all mail-in).

October 15: Early voting begins in Georgia.

October 17: Early voting begins in North Carolina.

October 20: Harris will celebrate her 60th birthday, which will get a fair bit of coverage. This may remind some people that Trump is considerably older than Harris is.

October 22: Early voting begins in Wisconsin.

October 26: Early voting begins in Michigan and New York.

November 5: Election Day

November 6, 12:01 a.m. (projected): Trump could begin whining that the election was stolen.

November 20: Joe Biden turns 82. There will be many op-eds talking about how the U.S. dodged a bullet.

December 11: Deadline for the states to issue the certificates of ascertainment.

December 17: Presidential electors gather and vote.

January 3: The new Congress will be sworn in.

January 6: Congress will count the electoral votes under the watchful eye of President of the Senate Kamala Harris, and under the rules established by the new Electoral Count Act.

January 20: Inauguration Day.

January 21: The 2028 presidential campaign commences.

As you can see, we are heading into the home stretch, with voting starting in about a week. (V & Z)

Today's Presidential Polls

Will 20% of Maryland voters really cast a split ballot? We are still having trouble accepting that. Will 10% of Arizona and Nevada voters do likewise? We are very skeptical about so many states where the presidential and Senate elections are so far apart. In Maryland, we think that the Senate poll showing Angela Alsobrooks and Larry Hogan tied is simply a statistical fluke since earlier polls showed Alsobrooks with a huge lead. Arizona and Nevada are harder to explain since there are many polls showing Rep Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) and Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) with huge leads and also many polls showing the presidential race a tossup. (Z & V)

State	Kamala Harris	Donald Trump	Start	End	Pollster
Maryland	56%	35%	Aug 24	Aug 30	Gonzales Research
Michigan	44%	45%	Aug 26	Aug 29	Glengariff Group
North Carolina	47%	48%	Aug 26	Aug 28	East Carolina U.

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