Previous | Next | Senate page | Menu
New polls: GA MA ME MI NH PA RI WI
Dem pickups: NC
GOP pickups: AZ GA
Fed Cuts Interest Rates by 0.5%
In reality, presidents have little power to influence the economy (at least, for the better). They can sign bills passed by Congress that raise or cut taxes, but not much other executive power directly affects the economy. Nevertheless, the decision by the Fed yesterday to reduce interest rates by 0.5% could help Kamala Harris for multiple reasons.
First, people borrowing money between now and the election for buying a house, a car, or other purchases will pay less interest than they would have last week. Credit card interest charges are also likely to go down. With many people voting based on the high cost of living, having an actual decrease in an important cost is likely to help Harris, simply because people often erroneously give the president's party credit when economic times are good and blame the president's party when they are bad.
Second, there is symbolic value in the rate cut. Harris is going to shout from the mountain tops that inflation is now over, and that prices are barely rising any more. She will probably try to take some credit for it, even though she had nothing to do with it. But the voters don't know this. They also probably don't remember that it was actually Donald Trump who nominated Fed Chairman Jerome Powell. He is the one who kept the economy out of the ditch.
Third, the economy is the top concern of many voters. Even if they don't understand what the rate cut means, it does show that somebody is doing something about the economy. Since they say they don't like the economy, having someone do something about it is good, and the incumbent president's party pretty much always gets the credit.
Fourth, although the stock market was down a bit yesterday, usually lower interest rates make bonds less attractive and stocks more attractive. This means the stock market will probably go up between now and Election Day, generating positive economic news, which usually helps the incumbent president's party. When people see their 401(k) portfolios going up, they tend not to yell "Throw the bums out." (V)
Bad News for Senate Democrats
Usually we put Congressional news at the bottom of the page, but there is a race going on that is somewhat under the radar, but is almost as important as the race for president. The Senate is up for grabs this year with 34 seats up for election. While it is not a run race yet, in all the seats where the incumbent is a Democrat (or a Democrat-turned-independent), the Democrat actually running (even for open seats) is currently ahead in the polling—except two: Montana and West Virginia. If Democrats hold all their current seats, including the open ones, they will have 51 seats in the new Senate. However, the chances of holding West Virginia are probably less than 0.01%. If Gov. Jim Justice (R-WV), were caught in bed with a live boy, a dead girl, and a petri dish with a new variant of COVID that he himself engineered, he'd still win in a landslide. It's probably all going to come down to Montana.
Here is the polling for the most competitive Senate races for which there is polling:
As you can see, the Democrats are doing fine in all the seats they hold except Montana. Nobody has bothered to poll West Virginia, because it is hopeless for the Democrat. Florida and Texas don't look good for the Democrats unless there is a blue wave (but with an abortion initiative on the ballot in Florida, that is possible there). So control of the Senate will probably come down to whether Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT) can win a fourth term over Tim Sheehy, the owner of an aerial firefighting company that lost $77 million last year.
Tester beat Conrad Burns (R) in 2006 by 0.9%, Denny Rehberg (R) in 2012 by 3.7%, and Matt Rosendale in 2018 by 3.6% in a state that Donald Trump won in 2020 by 16.4%. Tester has never run when Trump was on the ballot. To win, Tester is probably going to have to outrun Kamala Harris by something like 16 points. That's a steep hill to climb, although the fact that Tester is a third-generation Montana farmer and Sheehy is a carpetbagger from Minnesota certainly helps.
Now here is the actual news in this item. Tester is going to need every vote he can get in such a difficult environment. He could lose some votes to the Green Party Senate candidate Robert Barb if Barb appears on the ballot. Democrats tried to block him from being on the ballot, but Tuesday, the Montana Supreme Court ruled that Barb will be on the ballot. It was a tricky case because the Green Party held a primary in Montana and then the winner dropped out and the Party appointed Barb to take his place. Democrats argued that the correct procedures were not followed, but the Court said they were. The Democrats' one consolation here is that the chairman of the Montana Libertarian Party, Sid Daoud, will also be on the Senate ballot, and Libertarians often get 3-4% in Montana, with most of that coming out of the hide of the Republican candidate.
What is also noteworthy (and deep under the radar), is that Republican donors often donate to third-party candidates where needed to keep them viable in races where that candidate could pull votes away from the Democrat. It's rat**cking at its finest.
If Tester loses and Debbie Mucarsel-Powell comes up short in Florida, Republicans will control the new Senate 51-49. If Kamala Harris wins, Senate Republicans could block all her cabinet appointments, judicial appointments and much more, which would create all-out war in the Senate and the country. Harris could try to make temporary appointments, as Donald Trump did several times, but there is one other thing that Democrats could do. Yesterday, Taegan Goddard made an interesting remark. The terms of the president and vice president end at noon EST on Jan. 20, 2025. The cabinet officers' terms do not expire. Ever. De facto, they have lifetime appointments unless they resign or are fired by the president. If Harris wins and it looks like the Republicans are going to play hardball and refuse to confirm her cabinet, Kamala Harris could decide to keep some of the current cabinet secretaries, since they have already been confirmed by the Senate.
Going further, Biden could replace his entire cabinet with Harris' picks in December and get the current Senate to confirm them. Of course, if Sen. Joe Manchin (I-WV) and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ) both balked, the plan would fail. If one of them was willing to play ball (probably in return for some goody), then President of the Senate Kamala Harris could break the tie. Of course, if Biden and Harris did this, that would so inflame the Republicans that they would not approve any other Harris appointment, but if that is their game plan from the start, Harris would have nothing to lose. It is also possible that Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) might be willing to break ranks with her party on female nominees. Imagine a cabinet of only women. (V)
Teamsters Don't Endorse Trump
Actually, the Teamsters Union announced yesterday that it will not endorse Donald Trump or Kamala Harris. It won't endorse anyone. This is the first time the union has sat out a presidential election since 1996. Internal polling released yesterday shows that most members will vote for Trump, but the union leaders decided against making an endorsement, despite the UAW, AFT, SEIU, and many other unions endorsing Harris.
The nominal reason for not making an endorsement of Trump is that the leaders sought a guarantee that Trump would not interfere with internal union campaigns or core Teamsters industries and would honor their right to strike. He refused to make any of these concessions. More likely, the real reason is that the members are voting based on cultural issues like abortion and gay rights but the leadership knows very well that on economic issues, Harris would be better for the union and its members. They just think that would be a hard sell to the membership, so they declined to take a stand. Also, Harris does not have much of a history of working with unions.
In the recent past, the Teamsters have endorsed Democrats, including Joe Biden in 2020 and Hillary Clinton in 2016. The last Republican they endorsed was George H.W. Bush in 1988. (V)
Interview Time
Both Kamala Harris and Donald Trump sat for interviews Tuesday. Harris talked with the National Association of Black Journalists. Trump talked with his former press secretary and current governor of Arkansas, Sarah Huckabee Sanders. Here are the interviews:
Harris was asked about polls showing young Black men supporting Trump in much greater numbers than in the past. She admitted that those polls exist and said that she cannot assume any demographic group is in her pocket. She has to earn each one. She said she plans to address barriers that prevent Black men from building wealth. She mentioned student debt, medical debt and bias in home appraisals as issues she wants to deal with. She also has a plan to build more affordable homes. When pressed on Gaza, she repeated what she already has said many times: She favors a hostages-for-ceasefire deal and eventually a two-state solution to the problems in the Middle East.
Harris also ridiculed Trump and J.D. Vance for talking about immigrants eating pets in Ohio. She went on to point out Trump's long history of racism, from refusing to rent apartments in Queens to Black families to calling for the execution of the Central Park Five. She said the current controversy is more of the same old racism from Trump we have always had.
When asked about guns, she said that she would not take anyone's gun away from them, unless it was a military assault weapon. She also supported universal background checks.
Finally, when asked if voters are better off now than 4 years ago, she made the case that they are and that if she wins, they will be even better in 4 more years due to an expanded child tax credit, help for first-time homebuyers, and a ban on price gouging.
In his interview, Trump was asked about the second (sorta) assassination attempt. He said that only consequential presidents get shot at. This would, of course, include the heavy hitters James Garfield, William McKinley, and Gerald Ford. This was Trump's first appearance back on the trail since the second (sorta) attempt on his life, and he seemed no worse off for it.
Trump also said that if Harris wins, the auto industry will disappear in 2-3 years. Then there will be zero manufacturing jobs. His solution to saving the auto industry is more oil drilling and more gasoline production. If history is any guide, this won't be true. During his administration, 8,800 jobs were lost in the auto industry. During Joe Biden's, 128,000 auto jobs were added. The UAW has also endorsed Harris.
Trump rambled during the debate with Harris and rambled again during the interview with Sanders. In an answer about the withdrawal from Afghanistan, he confused Bagram Air Base there with an oil reserve in Alaska. During his ramblings in answering that question, he said he didn't ramble.
Trump also called climate change a hoax. He said that if the ocean rises an eighth of an inch in 400 years, there will be more seafront property. He added: "Isn't that a good thing if I have a little property on the ocean? I have a little bit more property. I have a little bit more ocean."
Sanders made some news herself. She said that on stage, she felt pretty good about herself, but when she got home, her kids made her feel humble, but unfortunately Kamala Harris doesn't have any kids to make her feel humble. Harris' stepkids apparently are not up to the job. This is just another attack on people without children of their own. Specifically women without children. Male politicians without children of their own generally get a pass. We are not sure this line of attack is a good idea politically. See below. In addition, Harris not having humility is a dog whistle for Harris being an uppity Black woman who doesn't know her place. (Hint: It's not the White House, as far as Sanders and Trump are concerned.) (V)
J.D. Vance: Scapegoater in Chief
These days, J.D. Vance is constantly accusing some of his constituents of stealing pets and eating them. This is not some random slip of the tongue of the kind Donald Trump sometimes makes. It is a very deliberate and well-thought-out intentional strategy. Yale Law School taught him well. He knows precisely what he is doing and why.
Vance met now-billionaire German-immigrant and Republican megadonor Peter Thiel at Yale Law School in 2011. Thiel introduced Vance to the works of French literary theorist René Girard. Girard believes that all human beings desire things because they see other people with those things. Over time, personal rivalries give way to social conflict. These are resolved by picking on some weak group and blaming them for society's ills. Then everyone—except the scapegoatees—is happy. Vance was so impressed by this theory, that he converted to Catholicism (Jesus is the prototype scapegoat here). Vance has written essays about this.
In the current campaign, scapegoating the Haitians in Springfield, OH, is valuable in two ways. First, it keeps immigration and immigrants in the news and makes them look responsible for social conflict. Second, it keeps abortion off the front pages. Vance and Donald Trump would much prefer all the news to be about immigrants than about pregnant women who desperately need an abortion, sometimes to save their lives. Sunday, on television, Vance actually (albeit inadvertently) admitted to making up the story about Haitians eating cats and dogs and encouraged his supporters to flood social media with memes of Trump as the Pet-Protector-in-Chief. In short, Vance could care less if the story is true. It is a valuable campaign tool, so he uses it. Donald Trump has a kind of feral sense of what his base wants and delivers it, but without thinking it out first. Vance is much, much smarter, thinks very carefully about what to lie about and how to present it, and then goes on television and the Internet with all the highly polished skills one would expect from a lawyer trained by the Yale Law School faculty on how to convince a jury of something.
Kamala Harris joined in and said of Trump: "We've gotta say that you cannot be entrusted with standing behind the seal of the President of the United States of America, engaging with that hateful rhetoric."
But the story has more consequences. For the Haitians, it has completely upended their lives, with schools and businesses closed and death threats everywhere. But it is also affecting House races. Rep. Marc Molinaro (R-NY) made a posting to eX-Twitter and Instagram supporting the false claims and attacking Democrats on the border (even though the Haitians are in the U.S. legally). However, south of him, Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) has a sizable number of Haitian constituents. He wasn't so happy with Molinaro and Vance. These are both competitive seats that could determine control of the House and now they are on opposite sides of this false story.
Molinaro is facing Democrat Josh Riley, who demanded that Molinaro apologize. Molinaro did nothing of the sort and said Riley would open the southern border to criminals. Riley hit Molinaro for his opposition to the Lankford-Murphy border bill that Trump wanted killed. In the meantime, Lawler is facing former representative Mondaire Jones, who is not shy about telling Black voters in the district that Trump and Vance are racists. He has hosted events with leaders of the Haitian community in the district.
While we are on the subject of scapegoats, both Trump and Vance seem to be picking on childless cat ladies as well as childless dog ladies and childless ladies and gentlemen in general. While Trump's base is working-class men (and some women) who are the heads of families, not all voters fall in that particular demographic group. Will November see the revenge of the childless cat ladies? In 2023, the proportion of U.S. adults under 50 who do not have children was 47% in a survey. That's a pretty big group to be insulting and telling they don't have much of a stake in the future so maybe they shouldn't be allowed to vote. Some of them might just decide to vote this time, since it could be the last time if Trump wins.
Forty-seven percent is a historically large percentage of the population. A Pew study just released says that of those without children, 38% once wanted them but it didn't work out, 32% never wanted children, and 25% weren't sure. All these groups did say that having children would make it easier when they age. (V)
One of These Is Not Like the Others: Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania
The three northern blue-wall states are crucial to the election. Donald Trump won all three in 2016 and along with them, the presidency. Joe Biden won all three in 2020 and also the presidency. It's not an accident.
In some ways, all three are very similar They are all whiter and older than the country as a whole. None have many immigrants. All have stagnant populations. They have relatively few college graduates. All used to be manufacturing powerhouses but are no longer. The term "Rust Belt" wasn't pulled out of thin air. By far the biggest demographic is white Christians, most of whom are Republicans.
On paper, Wisconsin is the toughest nut of the three to crack for the Democrats. Its biggest county, Milwaukee, is only half as populous as the counties containing Philadelphia and Detroit. Republicans do better in the WOW counties outside Milwaukee (Waukesha, Ozaukee, and Washington) than any other suburban counties north of the Mason-Dixon line. Finally, Wisconsin is the least unionized of the three states.
But despite all this, many strategists see Wisconsin as the easiest of the three states for Harris. One reason is the enormous growth around Madison recently. Dane County is the fastest growing county in the state and is becoming ever more blue. In the 2023 state Supreme Court race, the Democrat got 82% of the vote in the county. Also, Democrats do much better in Wisconsin in the small cities than in the other states, especially in Eau Claire, Appleton, La Crosse and the counties around Green Bay.
One factor that makes Wisconsin easier for Harris than Michigan is the Arab-American population around Dearborn. Wisconsin has few Arab-Americans. Another is that the U.S. car companies have been slow to embrace electric cars, so Harris' push for electric cars might hurt Detroit. Still, Michigan has some plus points for Harris as well. In 2022, 70% of college-educated women voted for Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D-MI). Black women across the state were excited when Biden passed the baton to Harris.
This leaves Pennsylvania as the toughest for Harris. Exit polls show that Trump won white working-class voters there by a bigger margin than in the other states. This is probably because the loss of manufacturing jobs in Pennsylvania has been more brutal than elsewhere. The Pittsburgh Steelers didn't get that name out of the blue. Some of the jobs in the steel mills have been replaced, but older steel workers aren't ideal candidates for jobs in healthcare, financial services, higher education, and robotics. And of course, an old white guy like Biden was a better fit demographically than a younger Black woman. (V)
Trump Is Campaigning in New York
Isn't Donald Trump campaigning in New York like Kamala Harris campaigning in Texas? Not really. There are a bunch of very competitive House districts in New York State and Trump was on Long Island yesterday campaigning for endangered Rep. Anthony D'Esposito (R-NY). It's kind of unusual actually, because Trump normally cares only about Donald Trump. Probably his campaign manager pointed out to him that if he wins but Democrats capture the House, they will block all his magnificent, wonderful, incredible, fantastic plans that will save the country from ruin. So he spent a few hours on Long Island.
Polls show Trump leading in the district. D'Esposito's opponent, Laura Gillen, seems to understand this and has been hesitant to criticize Trump, talking mostly about the issues. The district is D+5, so Gillen might be able to power through simply on the blue lean of the district. (V)
Georgia Election Officials Are Planning to Refuse to Certify a Harris Win
Some Georgia election officials are already working on counting the votes. Or, more accurately, not counting the votes. The Guardian has obtained e-mails and other communications from a shadowy group of Georgia election officials who are planning to portray the November election as beset by fraud if Kamala Harris carries their state. They are coordinating strategies, policies, and messaging to make sure Donald Trump wins Georgia—for example, by refusing to certify the count in counties Harris wins. The earliest messages go back to January of this year, and are well developed by now.
The group has ties to multiple groups of election deniers, including the Tea Party Patriots and the Election Integrity Network, which is run by Cleta Mitchell, a former lawyer who advised Trump during the period he was trying to get the state legislatures in states Biden won to send new slates of electors to Congress.
One thread was a letter sent by the Georgia Democratic Party to county officials reminding them that they had no discretionary authority to challenge election results. They are required by law to certify the count of the actual votes cast. It is up to the courts to determine if there were irregularities. The United Tea Party of Georgia called this "troubling" and "intimidating." The e-mails showed that the author of these remarks was David Hancock, an election denier and member of the Gwinnett County Board of Elections.
Another election denier who is in a position to refuse to certify county elections is Michael Heekin, a Republican member of the Fulton County Board of Elections. Several other members of election boards are also active in Tea Party Patriots and the Election Integrity Network.
Election experts have cited Georgia court cases as far back as 1899 ruling that certification is "ministerial," meaning that boards are required to simply report the total votes cast for each candidate, even if they suspect fraud. It is simply not their job to investigate. It is up to the courts to handle that. However, a recent state law gives county boards more leeway in deciding whether to certify the vote or not. (V)
Andy Wins and Andy Loses
Well, OK, it's not the same Andy. Despite its small size, the House Freedom Caucus wields an amount of power far greater than its numbers ought to give it. The problem is that it can block nearly anything House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) wants and often does. Consequently, who runs it is very important.
The current chairman is Rep. Bob Good (R-VA), who lost his primary, so he needed to be replaced. There were two main candidates, Reps. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) and Andy Harris (R-MD). Just before the FC members were about to caucus to elect their new leader, Biggs saw the writing on the wall and dropped out, leaving only one candidate, Harris, who was then duly elected. A President Harris and a Chairman Harris are not likely to get along very well. Of course, a President Trump and a Chairman Harris will be great buddies.
The election is only for this session of Congress. The FC didn't want a lame duck to be the leader going into the election and Good obliged by resigning his post. In January, the FC will choose a new leader. If Harris manages to shut down the government and pull off a few other FC priorities, he will be the frontrunner in 2025.
Harris is chair of the Appropriations subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, and the FDA. This gives him some power of spending and is likely to lead to clashes with Johnson. (V)
Today's Presidential Polls
Gee, lots of blue in the table below and no red. It might mean something, who knows. But Michigan is the only swing state where Harris is up +5 or more.
| State | Kamala Harris | Donald Trump | Start | End | Pollster |
| Georgia | 44% | 47% | Sep 09 | Sep 15 | U. of Georgia |
| Massachusetts | 62% | 31% | Sep 12 | Sep 16 | U. of New Hampshire |
| Maine | 50% | 41% | Sep 05 | Sep 15 | Pan Atlantic Research |
| Michigan | 51% | 46% | Sep 12 | Sep 16 | Quinnipiac U. |
| Michigan | 52% | 47% | Sep 11 | Sep 16 | Marist Coll. |
| New Hampshire | 54% | 43% | Sep 12 | Sep 16 | U. of New Hampshire |
| Pennsylvania | 49% | 49% | Sep 11 | Sep 16 | Marist Coll. |
| Pennsylvania | 51% | 46% | Sep 12 | Sep 16 | Quinnipiac U. |
| Rhode Island | 58% | 38% | Sep 12 | Sep 16 | U. of New Hampshire |
| Wisconsin | 49% | 48% | Sep 11 | Sep 14 | Fabrizio + Anzalone |
| Wisconsin | 49% | 48% | Sep 12 | Sep 16 | Quinnipiac U. |
| Wisconsin | 50% | 49% | Sep 11 | Sep 16 | Marist Coll. |
Click on a state name for a graph of its polling history.
Today's Senate Polls
Other polls have put Elissa Slotkin even further ahead. Ditto Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI).
| State | Democrat | D % | Republican | R % | Start | End | Pollster |
| Maine | Angus King* | 53% | Demi Kouzounas | 23% | Sep 05 | Sep 15 | Pan Atlantic Research |
| Michigan | Elissa Slotkin | 51% | Mike Rogers | 46% | Sep 12 | Sep 16 | Quinnipiac U. |
| Pennsylvania | Bob Casey* | 52% | David McCormick | 43% | Sep 12 | Sep 16 | Quinnipiac U. |
| Wisconsin | Tammy Baldwin* | 50% | Eric Hovde | 47% | Sep 11 | Sep 14 | Fabrizio + Anzalone |
| Wisconsin | Tammy Baldwin* | 51% | Eric Hovde | 47% | Sep 12 | Sep 16 | Quinnipiac U. |
* Denotes incumbent
Previous | Next
Main page for smartphones
Main page for tablets and computers