Feb12

Pres map


Previous | Next

Trump to Putin: Attack Our Allies

At a rally in South Carolina, Donald Trump said he was approached by the head of a big country that has not paid enough to NATO and asked if his country was attacked, would the U.S. come to its aid. Trump said: "You didn't pay? You're delinquent? No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You gotta pay. You gotta pay your bills." It is one thing to ask NATO members to contribute their share. That is certainly legitimate. It is something entirely different to encourage Russia to attack U.S. allies. It is also unheard of for a presidential candidate to say he would violate a treaty ratified by the Senate. That is borderline close to saying that he will violate any law that he finds inconvenient. Here are Trump's remarks:



NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg reacted with: "Any suggestion that allies will not defend each other undermines all of our security, including that of the U.S., and puts American and European soldiers at increased risk." Trump was also hammered by Nikki Haley, Chris Christie, John Bolton, and numerous Democrats.

NATO experts are saying that Trump has fundamentally misunderstood the value of NATO to the U.S. It is not about pay to play. It is about protecting the U.S. from a World War III that could originate in Europe. Maybe Trump thinks he could let the war rage there and the U.S. would just stay out. He probably doesn't know that France and the U.K. have nuclear weapons and, if invaded, would probably use them. Germany doesn't have them, but is considering developing them. If Russia attacks a NATO country, good luck avoiding a nuclear war (and the radioactive fallout from it, which doesn't stop at national borders).

How will this play out politically? Trump's base will probably eat it up. But college-educated voters in the suburbs are probably not going to react well to Trump telling Putin to go invade any country he wants to. They know that the U.S. simply cannot go it alone. Too much of the economy depends on trade. All manner of critical raw materials are imported. Millions of jobs depend on products that are exported. Putting a wall not only on the southern border but also on the eastern, northern, and western borders and letting Russia and China divvy up the rest of the world as they wish would be a disaster for the U.S.

Trump's remarks also help Joe Biden indirectly by replacing all the news stories about Biden being senile with stories about Trump inviting his buddy Putin to conquer whatever piece of the world China doesn't want. This is just another example of "stuff changes" and what is big news today may not be big news tomorrow. It is also true that many Republicans in Congress really don't like Russia or Putin. They may not be willing to go after Trump right now on this, but the time may come when they do. (V)

Senate Votes to Move the Aid Bill Forward

In a rare Sunday vote, yesterday the Senate voted 67-27 to advance the bill providing $95 billion in aid for Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan. There is still a long way to go, but if all 67 senators who voted for the procedural motion yesterday also vote for the actual bill, it has enough votes to break a potential filibuster.

Some senators want to attach money for the border to the bill, but it appears that ship sailed last week. Will this bill make it? The leaders of both parties want it to pass. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said: "Our partners don't have the luxury of pretending that the world's most dangerous aggressors are someone else's problem. And neither do we." Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said: "We don't wield American strength frivolously. We do it because it's in our own interest. We equip our friends to face our shared adversaries, so we're less likely to have to spend American lives to defeat them." Both of them really mean it. When Russian President Vladimir Putin orders Donald Trump to denounce the bill, he probably will, but enough senators understand the importance of the bill that it will probably pass, even against Trump's wishes.

What happens when the bill gets to the House is another matter. Many evangelicals consider defending Israel a top priority because they believe that when Jesus returns, he is going to skip the many attractions of New York and Paris and make a beeline for Jerusalem. It had better be there. So, House members from evangelical-heavy districts will vote against a bill containing aid for Israel at their peril. On the other hand, some progressive Democrats might want to vote against a bill giving aid to Israel, but many of them still support Ukraine. Of course, if Speaker Mike Johnson refuses to bring it up for a vote, everyone will be saved from embarrassment, but then Joe Biden will pound the Republicans on this and that will hurt them in suburbs full of college-educated voters. Sometimes you can't just kick the can down the road. (V)

What Should Biden Do?

Democrats are already crying in their white wine (whine?), assuming that the election and the republic are lost. That's a bit premature as a week is a long time in politics, as we have mentioned a few times before. For example, the day after Robert Hur's hatchet job on Biden (in violation of DoJ rules about saying anything about a subject if the decision is not to indict) was kinda different from the day before it. Is there anything Biden can do to mitigate the situation? Jonathan Alter at Old Goats has seven suggestions.

  1. No excuses: The simplest strategy is not to respond to the report and just move on. Talking about it just gives it more exposure. Not everyone outside the Fox bubble may have even seen it. Presidents can set the agenda, so an Oval Office speech about aid to Israel or Ukraine or the border changes the subject.

  2. The old shoe strategy: Alter has known Biden for decades and says that his gaffes now are only marginally worse than when he was young. This strategy is to get Biden out in public a lot so people can see that he is perfectly in control, even if he makes a small gaffe from time to time.

  3. The Nikki-Nancy defense: In a recent speech, Donald Trump confused Nikki Haley with Nancy Pelosi not once, not twice, but four times. How about an ad showing that along with his many other bloopers. Once Trump mistook E. Jean Carroll for his second wife, Marla Maples. How about putting in: "Trump is so far gone he can't even tell some woman he claims never to have met from one of his many wives"? Maybe even have Biden look at a photo of Jill Biden and then say: "This is my wife, Jill. Unlike some of us, I'm capable of telling my wife from some strange woman I barely know." That will surely enrage Trump and cause him to do something stupid. With careful editing, Trump could be made to look like he's lost all his marbles.

  4. Hug your boo-boos: On the subject of carefully curated videos, how about one showing Biden making boo-boos in his 30s and 40s. The point is: "This is just Joe. He makes gaffes. He's no different than he was 40 or 50 years ago. He's not losing it. He's always been like this."

  5. Hunter and Hur: Biden could point out that Hur did not indict him because he didn't break the law. He could also note that the DoJ is prosecuting his own son. It doesn't play favorites. It follows the law. Jack Smith is also following the law. The DoJ is not on a witch hunt after Trump. It treats everyone equally, including the current and former president.

  6. Use the expectations game: Politics is about expectations. Now every time Biden gives a gaffe-free speech, that may convince some voters that he is perfectly OK. Thus: Give more speeches.

  7. Challenge Trump to debates: The ultimate sign of strength would be to challenge Trump to two or three debates, as usual. If Trump declines, Biden should jump all over him with: "Coward, coward, coward! If you are scared witless of me, how are you ever going to stand up to Chinese President Xi Jinping?" One of the worst taunts for Trump is "Coward." Just keep pounding on it. If Trump agrees, be presidential but hit back hard. If Trump tries to talk over Biden, Biden should fight back hard like saying: "Just shut up and wait your turn, you sleazy old windbag." A line like that could go viral.

Of course, some combination of these could work as well. Panicking is not a good solution. (V)

Democrats Get Bad News and Good News on the Senate

Unfortunately for the Democrats, the bad news is fairly bad while the good news is only moderately good. First the bad. On Friday, former Maryland governor Larry Hogan (R) announced that he is running for the seat of retiring Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD). Maryland is an extremely blue state, but Hogan has twice won statewide election in Maryland and is far better known than either of the serious Democrats running for the seat, Prince George's County Executive Angela Alsobrooks and Rep. David Trone (D-MD). Alsobrooks would make history as the state's first Black senator. Trone can shovel tens of millions of dollars of his own money into the race if he wants to. Neither of them has run statewide before.

Previously, Hogan (67), said he wasn't interested in running for the Senate. What changed his mind? In two words: Mitch McConnell. McConnell has been lobbying Hogan hard to get him to jump in. Even if Hogan doesn't win, his entry may force the Democrats to spend a large amount of money in a deep blue state if Alsobrooks wins the primary, money they would prefer spending in Arizona, Montana, Nevada, Ohio or Wisconsin. Hogan knows very well that it takes 20 years to achieve real power in the Senate, so he isn't doing this because he wants to become known as one of the all-time greatest senators. He is taking one for the team.

Hogan's entrance in the race makes life much more complicated for either Alsobrooks or Trone, but it is far from hopeless, just potentially a lot more expensive. Going for Hogan is that he was a popular two-term governor who worked well with the Democratic-controlled state legislature. He is widely viewed as a moderate and is universally known and respected in the state.

That said, Maryland's PVI is D+14. Joe Biden swept Maryland by 33 points in 2020. The last Republican elected to the Senate from Maryland was Charles Mathias in 1980, over 40 years ago, and he did it by clutching the coattails of Ronald Reagan, who swept into office in a landslide. There are plenty of examples of popular governors of the "wrong" party trying to fight the state's PVI and losing. For example, in 2020, popular two-term Democratic governor Steve Bullock ran for the Senate in deep red Montana. The R+11 PVI was simply too steep a hill to climb and he lost. Maryland is worse at D+14. The Cook Political Report has downgraded the race from "Safe Democrat" to "Likely Democrat." That means they still think the Democrat will win. The main question is whether they get the Black woman, which could excite the base, or the rich white guy, which means the race wouldn't cost the DSCC any money since Trone can self-fund. While the base is rooting for Alsobrooks, DSCC chairman Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI) is probably secretly rooting for Trone since then he can save his pennies and spend them in Arizona, Montana, Nevada, Ohio, and Wisconsin.

Now the good news for the Democrats. Rep. Matt Rosendale (R-MT) is now officially running for the GOP nomination to challenge Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT) in November. If he gets the nomination, this is very good news for Tester because Tester knows he can beat Rosendale. He did it in 2018 and there is no reason to think that in a presidential year Tester will do worse. Rosendale is a super-MAGA candidate and if he gets the nomination, McConnell will be tearing out his hair in clumps while muttering "candidate quality, candidate quality."

The reason this is not as good news for the Democrats as Hogan's announcement is for the Republicans is that Hogan is almost certainly the GOP nominee in Maryland, even though half a dozen or so other Republicans have filed to run. None of them have the star power to beat a popular former two-term governor. Hogan will win the primary in a landslide. In contrast, Rosendale has to beat Tim Sheehy, a former Navy SEAL and wealthy businessman who owns an aerial firefighting company. The entire Republican establishment is backing Sheehy due to that "candidate quality" thingie. Sheehy will have money and institutional support galore. While Sheehy's lack of MAGAosity may hurt in the primary, it will help if he makes it to the general election.

A big factor favoring Sheehy is Donald Trump's endorsement of him. Trump apparently would rather win the Senate seat than go with the Trumpiest candidate. This is uncharacteristic of him. He knows what happened in 2022. Maybe you can teach an old dog new tricks. Who knew? Still, Rosendale is going to put up a big fight and make a big deal about being a 10.0 on the Richter Scale for Trumpiness, forcing Sheehy to say things that: (1) he doesn't believe and (2) might hurt him in the general election.

The GOP establishment understands this, of course, and may give Sheehy a short course on "How to MAGAtize yourself." During the primary, he will gush over Trump. The day after winning, he will turn off the faucet and start talking about the border. After all, Montana has a 500-mile long border with a foreign country. One other factor that can't be discounted is carpetbaggery. The Tester family has been farming in Montana for over 100 years and Jon owns a farm in the state. Sheehy lived in Minnesota until he moved to Annapolis, MD, to join the Naval Academy. Rosendale was born and raised in Maryland and has the accent to prove it. Expect Tester to point out who knows Montana values through and through a couple of times.

One last point here. Montana is an open-primary state. See below for the implications of that. (V)

There Are Several Types of Primaries

Primary season is upon us, so let us note that different states have different rules about their primaries. In fact some states have different rules for state and congressional primaries vs. presidential primaries. Here is the official list from the National Conference of State Legislatures. It has all the details, with 50 footnotes if you want to get down in the weeds.

Most states fall into one of seven categories, as follows:

  1. Closed: Only Democrats vote in the Democratic primary; only Republicans vote in the Republican primary
  2. Semiclosed: Like closed except the parties can allow independents to vote in their primary
  3. Semiopen: Voters may choose either ballot on Primary Day and that registers them with that party
  4. Open for independents: Unaffiliated voters may choose either ballot; partisans must stick with their party
  5. Open: All voters may choose either ballot on Primary Day but it does not register them
  6. Top two: All candidates are on the same list and the top two advance to the general election
  7. Top four: All candidates are on the same list and the top four advance to the ranked-choice general election

Columns two through eight below indicate which category a state is in (or, which one it comes closest to fitting). The last column is "Yes" if the presidential primary follows the same rules as the state and congressional primaries. A "No" means the rules for presidential primaries are different. Here are the basic principles for each state for state and congressional primaries.

State Closed Semiclosed Semiopen Open for inds. Open Top two Top four Pres, too?
Alabama        
X
    Yes
Alaska            
X
No
Arizona      
X
      No
Arkansas        
X
    Yes
California          
X
  No
Colorado      
X
      Yes
Connecticut  
X
          No
Delaware
X
            Yes
Florida
X
            Yes
Georgia        
X
    Yes
Hawaii        
X
    No
Idaho  
X
          Yes
Illinois    
X
        Yes
Indiana    
X
        Yes
Iowa    
X
        Yes
Kansas  
X
          No
Kentucky
X
            Yes
Louisiana          
X
  No
Maine      
X
      No
Maryland  
X
          Yes
Massachusetts      
X
      Yes
Michigan        
X
    No
Minnesota        
X
    Yes
Mississippi        
X
    Yes
Missouri
X (R)
X (D)
           Yes
Montana        
X
    Yes
Nebraska          
X
  No
Nevada
X
            Yes
New Hampshire      
X
      Yes
New Jersey  
X
          No
New Mexico
X
            Yes
New York
X
            Yes
North Carolina      
X
      Yes
North Dakota        
X
    No
Ohio    
X
        Yes
Oklahoma  
X
          Yes
Oregon  
X
          Yes
Pennsylvania
X
            Yes
Rhode Island      
X
      Yes
South Carolina        
X
    Yes
South Dakota  
X
          Yes
Tennessee        
X
    Yes
Texas        
X
    Yes
Utah  
X
          Yes
Vermont        
X
    Yes
Virginia        
X
    Yes
Washington          
X
  No
West Virginia  
X
          Yes
Wisconsin        
X
    Yes
Wyoming
X
            Yes

The (semi)open primaries open the opportunity for ratf**king. For example, in Montana, it is clear that three-term senator Jon Tester will be the Democratic nominee. So far, no one else besides Tester has even filed to enter the Democratic senatorial primary in Montana, although the filing deadline is March 11. If Tester is the only candidate and he gets at least one vote (for example, his own) he will be the Democratic nominee.

However, it is not out of the question that some Democratic-aligned group could decide to engage in some shenanigans. It could urge Democrats to simply ask for a Republican ballot on Primary Day and vote for Matt Rosendale, since he is by far the easier candidate to beat. That also means they can't vote for Joe Biden, but Primary Day in Montana is June 4, so by then Biden will have locked the nomination up. It is unlikely that the Montana Democratic Party would want to be caught red-handed doing this, but some outside group could take the lead. There is nothing illegal about buying ads or sending out flyers telling Democrats and independents that they are allowed to vote in the Republican primary and that voting for Rosendale will help Tester. The campaign will come out, of course, but if there is a Montana super PAC called "Citizens for Montana" with unknown funders, then so what? (V)

Stefanik Will Say or Do Anything to Become Trump's Running Mate

Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) desperately wants to be Donald Trump's running mate this year. She is a 20.0 on the Richter Scale for Opportunism. Going from an unknown backbencher to #4 in the House Republican caucus in 2021 to vice presidential candidate in 2024 would be an amazing career progression. And all she had to do was spout some nonsense about Trump that she doesn't believe. She is a Harvard graduate in government and a five-term representative so she clearly is smart enough to know how the game is played, and she is playing it well.

Stefanik recently told CNN's Kaitlan Collins that if she had been vice president on Jan. 6, she would not have certified the electoral vote. In other words, she would have violated the Constitution to please Donald Trump, something that even Mike Pence refused to do:

Cartoon of Trump telling Pence shown as a dog to pee on the Constitution

She probably meant what she said, since on Jan. 6, she voted not to certify the results in Pennsylvania (although she did vote to certify the Arizona results). The difference may be that she disagreed with the decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court concerning mail-in ballots. Even though she is not a lawyer, she felt she somehow knew more about Pennsylvania law than the seven justices on that court.

When Collins asked point-blank if she has been vetted as a potential veep candidate, Stefanik said: "I would [be] proud to serve in a Trump administration, but we have a lot to do." There is no reason to think she would swap her job as chair of the House Republican conference (and possible future speaker of the House) for secretary of anything. No, she is gunning for that bucket of warm ... liquid.

Would she be a good choice? Depends on whether you mean on the campaign trail or in the Big Chair should Trump win and eat his last Big Mac while sitting there. Stefanik is a lot smarter than Sarah Palin, but at 39 hardly has the gravitas expected in a president. She might even be counterproductive on the ticket. After all, Democrats could observe, apparently quite correctly, that if Stefanik becomes VP, she won't accept a Democratic victory in 4 years, thus leading to a constitutional crisis. And would Stefanik counter the voters that would be lost to that line of attack by pulling in women? Certainly not Black ones and probably very few white ones since the women who might appreciate her are already planning to vote for Trump.

As to the Big Chair, independents who are worried about a President Harris might be equally (or more) worried about a President Stefanik. After all Harris (59) was San Francisco D.A., two-term California AG, U.S. senator for 4 years, and vice president for 4 years. Stefanik's résumé is quite a bit thinner. She would be one of the least-prepared presidents in modern history. She is good at being Trumpy and holding congressional hearings where she can attack university presidents, but she is probably even less prepared to run the federal government than Trump. Trump, at least, had extensive experience running the Trump Organization, which is a conglomerate of over 500 companies, so he knows something about managing a moderate-size operation. Stefanik has never managed anything bigger than her own staff. As president, she would be in way over her head. Imagine her negotiating with Vladimir Putin or Xi Jinping. We'd rather not imagine that. (V)

S&P 500 Closes above 5,000 for the First Time Ever

There are many factors that will affect the elections, but one that is always in the mix is the economy. Right now, many people do not realize how good it actually is, at least according to traditional measures. Inflation has been tamed and unemployment is at a historical low. To some extent, Donald Trump can actually claim some of the credit since he appointed the magician who pulled off this amazing trick, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell. But people tend to credit or blame the sitting president for the economy, no matter what it is doing.

One other measure of how well the economy is doing is the S&P 500 index. On Friday, it closed above 5,000 for the first time in history. The NASDAQ is also at a record high. The Dow Jones index is almost at a record high, which was set on Feb. 2. While Joe Biden had relatively little to do with this, if he is smart he will take credit for it. Specifically, he should tell people who have a 401(k) plan, an IRA, or mutual funds to take a good look at their brokerage statements. They are likely to be pleased with how much their assets have gone up. Happy people tend not to want to "throw the bums out." Here is the S&P 500 since Dec 1, 1984. It closed at 3799 on Jan. 19, 2021 and at 5027 on Friday. That is a gain of 1228 points, or 32% on Biden's watch. Those people with some kind of retirement plan invested in the stock market might be interested in hearing that. Here is the S&P 500.

S&P 500 closes above 5000 for the first time

The place to hype this record is in the suburbs, where people are much more likely to own stocks in one form or another than in rural areas or in inner cities. And the suburbs are precisely where most of the swing voters live. Many of these people are socially liberal but fiscally conservative. While they like low taxes, they also like having their stocks go up. If the market continues to go up all year, it could help Biden and make them forget (or ignore) Robert Hur's report saying that he has a poor memory. (V)

Five Key Elections in February

We are almost to Valentine's Day, but February still holds a number of interesting elections as follows:

Anyway, that will wrap up February. Then come the three elections in early March (Missouri, Idaho, and North Dakota), then the axe falls on March 5. (V)

Robert Kennedy Jr. Is Flirting with the Libertarian Party

Robert Kennedy Jr. is running for president because: (1) He wants more than the 15 minutes of fame to which he is entitled, (2) He wants a well-paying gig on Fox News next year, or (3) He is secretly a sadist and wants millions of people to die when half the population stops getting routine vaccines for once-lethal but now easily controlled diseases. Pick one. Or more. We don't know. Being elected president is not one of the options. If he really wanted to be president, he should have waited until 2028 when both parties will probably have wide-open primaries, and then flipped a coin and picked one of them.

Be that as it may, he is running in 2024 and discovering that getting on the ballot ain't no picnic. So far, he has gotten on the ballot in exactly one state: Utah. The chances of his winning that state are as close to zero as you can get without actually being zero. "He" is trying to get on the ballot in 12 other states. We wrote "he" because actually, the effort to get him on the ballot in those states is being funded by his super PAC, which by law may not coordinate with the candidate and do things that candidates need to do, like get on the ballot. What the super PAC is doing is probably illegal. The DNC has filed a complaint with the FEC about that.

Kennedy seems to understand that he is skating on thin ice—although having seen Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) outsource almost his entire campaign to his super PAC may have given him the courage to do the same thing. Nevertheless, Kennedy is looking at a second option: becoming the Libertarian Party candidate. That would solve the ballot-access issue instantly, since the LP is on the ballot in most states already.

LP chair Angela McArdle has confirmed they have spoken about Kennedy being the LP standard-bearer, but said no decisions have been made. In the end, the 1,000 or so delegates to the LP convention in late May will pick the nominee. One problem Kennedy has is that he is not a Libertarian. On one issue—vaccinations—he is on the same page as the LP. Neither one wants the government to force people to be vaccinated against their will.

But there are many other issues. The Kennedy family has long supported the use of a powerful government to help people. The LP supports the smallest possible government and believes the free market can solve every problem. The LP believes in unfettered gun ownership, decriminalization of drugs, demilitarization of police forces, same-sex marriage, open immigration, low taxes, legalization of prostitution, and free trade, among other things. It used to believe in abortion on demand, but in 2022 scrapped that plank. Before Kennedy can get the LP nomination, he is going to have to convince the delegates that he is on their side most of the time.

And the triangulating got even stranger yesterday. Kennedy's super PAC laid out $7 million for a Super Bowl ad. For the spot, they took a JFK ad from 1960, which featured a bunch of stills of the candidate with some animation and an upbeat song playing in the background, and replaced the stills of the uncle with stills of the nephew. Here is the ad, if you would like to see it:



It is very hard to figure out who the target demo is here. People who remember Jack fondly, but don't pay enough attention to know that Bobby Jr. has some very, very different policy ideas? In any case, if RFK Jr. does decide to dance with the Libertarians (who, it should be noted, are wary of not-really-Libertarians using them for ballot access), then he will have to embrace some positions that anger Democrats and others that will anger Republicans. This is far from a done deal. (V & Z)

Likely RNC Chairman Is a Full-Bore Election Denier

Donald Trump has made it clear that RNC Chair Ronna Romney McDaniel has to go. The Republicans have had three bad election cycles in a row (2018, 2020, and 2022) and therefore heads must roll. Trump has never considered the possibility that 2018 was a reaction against his presidency, 2020 was a reaction against himself personally, and 2022 was a reaction against his candidate choices. He's never, ever to blame for the problems that seem to follow him everywhere he goes. So, his head is safe. Much as he might want to, he can't fire Mitch McConnell. Only the people of Kentucky can do that and they don't seem to want to. So Trump has decided McDaniel's time is up. She will be allowed to stay on until after the South Carolina primary, then she must make way for someone Trumpier.

Trump even has a preferred candidate to replace her: the chairman of the North Carolina Republican Party, Michael Whatley. He is: (1) a veteran Republican operative and (2) very experienced in repeating Trump's lies about the 2020 election. The first qualification is very helpful, but the second one is what will probably get the deal done. Whatley has repeatedly said there was massive fraud and "We know it that it took place in places like Milwaukee and Detroit and Philadelphia." These happen to be the biggest cities in three swing states Joe Biden barely won. We are not impressed with Whatley's intelligence, we must say. How could he have missed Phoenix and Atlanta? Of course, there is not a whit of evidence of fraud in any of them and Trump lost 60 court cases in which he claimed fraud. It is tough to prove fraud when there isn't any. Interestingly enough, in the state Whatley knows best, North Carolina, he didn't see any fraud at all. Could that be because Trump won that one?

Whatley has been in training for a while. He was a member of the George W. Bush recount team in Florida in 2000. For some reason, there he respected the Supreme Court when it shut down the counting while Bush was ahead. He had no respect at all for the 60 court decisions on the election in 2020. Odd.

On the subject of the Jan. 6 coup attempt, Whatley has condemned the violent acts performed but said they were not done by Republican voters or primarily by Trump supporters. On the other hand, Whatley was a presidential elector in North Carolina and voted for Trump, but does admit that Joe Biden got more electoral votes.

Whatley does have a downside, though: He is tightly associated with the Republican establishment that Steve Bannon wants to burn to the ground. That could be his Achilles' heel. Some RNC members have a different potential chairman in mind: Drew McKissick, chairman of the South Carolina Republican party. While Trump may prefer Whatley, ultimately the 168 members of the RNC pick the chair. In an earlier leadership contest (for co-chair), McKissick beat Whatley and still commands the support of a bloc of members. McKissick is definitely interested in leading the RNC if McDaniel steps down, so there could be a battle. Also, as co-chair, logically McKissick is next in line. Trump would prefer that McKissick not run so as to make the election of Whatley a coronation, but McKissick may not go easily. In any case, we will know how that goes by the end of February. (V)

Two More House Republicans Are Retiring

Former member of the House Republican leadership Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) has announced that she is retiring after 10 terms in the House. Her district in eastern Washington, WA-05, is R+8 and she has typically won it with 60% of the vote. She is only 54, so she could serve for another 20-30 years if she wanted to, but apparently she doesn't. Rodgers has never been involved in a scandal and does not appear to be interested in seeking higher office. She didn't explain why she is retiring.

The congresswoman has a 14-year-old son with Down syndrome, so she might legitimately want to have more time for him. On the other hand, in Congress, she has been a strong voice and advocate for the disabled and has gotten important legislation that helps disabled people passed and signed into law. With Rodgers leaving, it is not clear if anyone else will take over that role.

Yesterday, another House Republican said he will not run for reelection. It is Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-WI). He is only 39 and has served four terms in the House. His district, WI-08, is R+10. He could have served another 40 years. What happened?

We are not sure, but Gallagher was one of three Republicans who voted against the impeachment of DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. We suspect he was informed before the vote that opposition to the impeachment would mean a career-ending primary challenge. He did what he thought was right and no doubt Mike Johnson got to work finding a primary challenger, so Gallagher threw in the towel while he is young enough to start a career in the private sector. Republicans brook no dissent. None.

As you can see from our retirements page (which is in the menu to the left of the map above), 23 Democrats and 18 Republicans have announced their retirements so far. However, from the Democrats' perspective, the situation is far worse than these numbers reveal. Every one of the retiring Republicans is in a district R+8 or redder. In fact, 16 of the 18 are in districts R+10 or redder and 11 of them are in districts at least R+15. This means that Republicans are likely to hold all 18 open seats. There is not a single competitive district in the lot of them. In contrast only 9 of the 23 open Democratic districts are D+10 or bluer. That means as many as 14 open Democratic seats could be at risk. The consequence is that Democrats will be playing defense in almost half their open seats and offense in none of the open Republican seats. They could lose half a dozen or more open seats and have no pickup opportunities here. We don't understand why Republicans who couldn't possibly be defeated are quitting in droves while vulnerable Democrats are doing the same. Are Democrats sniffing something foul in the air? (V)


Back to the main page