Welcome to the Great Scrubbing

Yesterday Donald Trump signed H.R. 4405, which orders the DoJ to release the Epstein files. The new law has so many giant holes in it you could fly a gifted and gilded 747 through it with ease. It means nothing.

But there is something else so obvious that we can hardly ignore it. Our supposition is too iffy to warrant writing it up on that alone, but now we have a decent source who said it in public. The question is: "Why did Donald Trump flip on the Epstein files, ultimately urging the House to pass H.R. 4405 (after opposing the release for months), then signing the bill yesterday?" The answer couldn't be more obvious: The files will be scrubbed of any mention of Republicans before being (partially) released. Out will come a lot of dirt on various Democrats, Democratic donors, Democratic hangers-on, and the like, but nary a word about any Republican. Then the base will be happy and no damage will be done to any Republicans or any of Trump's cronies. Only to Democrats. Case closed, successfully! Why didn't we think of this outcome before? Silly us.

Actually we did think of this outcome before. See our item on July 21, for example, which is based on a report from the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Dick Durbin (D-IL). (Search our page for "Bondi" to find the reference to the FBI.) If you follow both links, you will see that Durbin reported that AG Pam Bondi assigned about 1,000 FBI agents the job of going through over 100,000 Epstein-related documents, finding all those that mentioned Trump and flagging them for delivery to the department paper and pixel shredder (presumably different devices). Durbin didn't reveal his source, but one of the things he mentioned was Trump's bawdy birthday card to Epstein, which turned out to be true. Apparently Durbin's source probably knew what he or she was talking about.

Now as the poop is about to reach the ventilator, there is more reporting. This time from Epstein. No, not that Epstein. He's dead, under very mysterious circumstances with an 18½-minute gap. Oh wait, the 18½-minute gap was on the Watergate tape. Sorry. It was a 2-minute gap in the surveillance video of Epstein's cell the night he was found dead in it. You remember, the "original" video that had metadata in it that showed it had been edited in Adobe Premiere Pro, a professional video editing program that was apparently a bit too complicated for whoever did the editing and didn't know about the metadata included in the output file.

Well, Mark Epstein, Jeffrey's brother, said his brother "definitely had dirt" on Trump. Mark also said that "everything [Trump] says is a lie." He also said he heard from a pretty good source that the Epstein files are being scrubbed of Republican names. He added that the reason they will be released is that they are sabotaging the files in advance. Could Mark Epstein have been Durbin's source back in July? So far, no one is saying.

Mark also said that back in 2016, Jeffrey told him that he had information on the candidates that was so damning that the election would have to be canceled. Jeffrey didn't tell Mark everything he knew (or so Mark says). Maybe Vladimir Putin gave Jeffrey a tape of Trump being "entertained" by a lovely Russian lady. We don't know, but Mark probably knows more than he has let on so far.

When asked why he is coming forward now about a certain e-mail, Mark replied: "I'm not discussing that e-mail. This is a private e-mail between Jeffrey and myself, it's two brothers talking. It's nobody's business what we wrote." If the Democrats capture either the House or Senate next year, they might just want to have a little chat with Mark—under oath and with a video recording.

Also, if the Democrats get subpoena power in Jan. 2027 and decide they want to get the truth out, there are additional avenues to investigate besides Mark. JP Morgan Chase has already flagged 4,700 transactions in and out of Jeffrey's account there as suspicious. Democrats could issue a subpoena for all those transactions and then invite the folks on the other end of them for a little talk. The lawyers for Epstein's estate probably have all kinds of interesting goodies that they would easily surrender to a subpoena. Ghislaine Maxwell knows more than she has admitted so far, and might be interested in a deal. The FBI confiscated hundreds of DVDs from Epstein. They might not have been destroyed, for certain reasons. They might be quite enlightening. Finally, Epstein's many victims might be willing to spill the beans and name names to the House Oversight Committee in camera and in some cases maybe even on camera. It all hinges on Democrats capturing at least one chamber of Congress in 2026. (V)

MAGA Is Showing Cracks

Up until now, the MAGA movement was whatever Donald Trump wanted it to be. Dissension was not tolerated. The events of the past month (Epstein, the shutdown, health care, etc.) may have changed things a little. Cracks in MAGA are starting to show. Just cracks, no big fissures, but cracks nevertheless. They are happening because Trump's approval rating and power seem to be declining, and his lame duckishness is gradually emerging. Republicans are beginning to see that he won't be around to punish them forever. Here are a few areas where not all Republicans are on the same page:

• Jeffrey Epstein: In a fairly recent poll, only 45% of Republicans approve of Trump's conduct in his handling of the Epstein files. Most Republicans believe that the government is hiding key information from them. Maybe QAnon was right: There really is an elite pedophile ring (only Trump isn't going to break it up; he is part of it). Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and Thomas Massie (R-KY) are pit bulls and are not going to give up now, after having won a stunning upset victory. Greene is a wacko, but she really believes this stuff. Massie is actually quite smart. He was on a team that designed and raced a solar-powered car when he was an engineering student at MIT. After graduating, he formed a tech company, raised $32 million in venture capital for it, hired 70 people, obtained 24 patents, and sold the company in 2003. He is a libertarian and a pit bull but not a wacko.
  
  
• Nick Fuentes: Tucker Carlson is a big fan of antisemite Nick Fuentes. Candace Owens is with him too, and has blamed Israel for assassinating Charlie Kirk. The Heritage Foundation backed Carlson, which led to a huge blowup. This was too much for even Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), who has called the growing antisemitism a cancer. When Ted Cruz is the adult in the room, we are out deep in right field, and not in Fenway Park. This issue could split MAGA badly, especially if Carlson and Cruz both announce presidential runs after the midterms.
  
  
• Tariffs and Affordability: The base is in favor of tariffs in the abstract, because Trump likes them. But the base very much does not like the high cost of living and inflation. But tariffs help stoke inflation. There are Republicans who cheer on the tariffs but other Republicans who oppose them on account of the affordability issue. You can't have it both ways.
  
  
• H-1B Visas: The H-1B visa program allows talented people from India and other countries to come to the U.S. to work for tech and other companies. Some are willing to work for much less than Americans, just to get in the door. This undercuts wages for Americans. Why should a company hire an American for $150K when an Indian will do the work for $75K? This is not exactly "America(ns) First." Laura Ingraham recently interviewed Trump and told him to cut off the H-1B program to help Americans be hired. Trump disagreed. This issue could split MAGA along the lines of "no more immigrants, especially not brown ones" vs. "immigrants are welcome when Big Business wants them."
  
  
• Corruption: Trump isn't even bothering to attempt to cover up his corruption anymore. He bulldozed the East Wing of the White House and then collected $350 million from big companies and rich people to have a gilded palace for his balls. Then there is the crypto, deals with Mohammed bin Salman (MbS), and much more that is entirely for Trump's personal benefit. Republican voters who temporarily lost their SNAP benefits and may soon permanently lose their health insurance are ever so gradually beginning to wise up. Politicians like Greene have already figured this is a horse they can ride to bigger and better things. Trump might concede on the H-1Bs if need be since they mean nothing to him personally (Mar-a-Lago hires unskilled immigrants who don't need H-1Bs). However, he will never concede on the grift. That is why he ran for president the third time. He began to sniff the possibilities for all the people he could shake down and all the ways he could monetize the presidency. Other Republicans are starting to see that opposing this corruption is likely to be a winner with the base.
  
  
• Foreign Policy: Trump campaigned on isolationism and ending forever wars. So far all he has is a temporary truce in Gaza that may not hold in the end. Fighting is still going on in Ukraine and Russia seems to be gaining because it has more soldiers to throw into the meat grinder than Ukraine does. "Who lost Ukraine?" could become a catchphrase to Trump's detriment. Then there is the possibility of an unnecessary war with Venezuela. If American soldiers die there, that will be extremely divisive. For people who truly believe in "America First," the lavish welcome for, and deals with, MbS is more "Saudi Arabia First" than "America First." They want Trump to focus on helping struggling Americans, not pal around with foreign dictators of one flavor or another.
  

All in all, there are an increasing number of issues where Trump's interests and the base's interests are diverging. Once Republican politicians begin to pick up on this, some of them are going to start pulling in a different direction. This will become much more apparent after the midterms, when the 2028 presidential election campaigns heat up quickly. Candidates who want to take down J.D. Vance are going to harp on issues where Vance is tied to Trump but that aren't all that popular with the base, like tariffs/affordability, corruption, and the unwanted focus on foreign affairs. This could split MAGA in ways we can't foresee now.

We'll also pass along the observation from The Bulwark's Bill Kristol, that waiting for moderate Republicans to find their spines has not worked out so well for Democrats and/or the resistance, while encouraging fractures in the MAGA coalition has just paid handsome dividends. In his view, this suggests that "It may be more fruitful in the effort to weaken Trump to find and exploit fractures in the MAGA coalition than to try to find moderates to step up." So, there may be opportunities here for Democrats to exploit, in addition for non-Trump/non-Vance Republicans to exploit. (V)

Trump Threatens ABC Again

Last time Trump bullied ABC News, it coughed up $16 million for him and fervently hoped he would now leave them alone. Nope. Giving in to bullies merely encourages them. Now Trump has again threatened to yank ABC's broadcast license. They never learn.

What did ABC do this time? On Tuesday, an ABC reporter, Mary Bruce, asked him about the assassination of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, which U.S. intelligence has said was ordered by now-honored guest Mohammad bin Salman. Trump's reply was: "ABC, your company, your crappy company is one of the perpetrators. I think the license should be taken away from ABC because your news is so fake and so wrong. And we have a great [FCC] chairman, who should take a look at that."

Trump is not a detail man, so he actually got this wrong. ABC doesn't have the broadcast license. Its parent company, Disney, does. And this is not the first time around for Disney either. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr threatened the company when Jimmy Kimmel made comments suggesting that Charlie Kirk might not have been the nicest person on earth and shouldn't be treated as if he were. Disney caved, and then, under public pressure, uncaved. Carr also speculated that ABC's daytime show The View might not qualify as a news program.

Trump went on to praise his "friend" and business partner, MbS, who gave young Jared Kushner $2 billion to play with, despite the latter's lack of experience handling that kind of money. Given Kushner's above-the-norm 1.25% management fee (1% is typical for money managers), he is taking in $25 million a year, win or lose. MbS probably doesn't even care whether Kushner is doing well with his money. This is peanuts to him and he probably writes it off in his internal bookkeeping as "bribe to Trump." (V)

Another Analysis of Trump 2016, 2020, and 2024

CNN has another analysis of recent elections, comparing the three times Donald Trump was on the ballot—2016, 2020, and 2024. What is interesting is the breakdown by demographic group, based on the exit poll data, which is probably fairly accurate since the question is "How did you just vote?" and not "Are you planning to vote and if so, for whom?" Let's start with minority voters, as shown here:

With Black men, Kamala Harris won, but her margin was a bit worse than Joe Biden's and also worse than Hillary Clinton's. It seems a bit odd that Black men liked an unpopular white woman more than a relatively popular Black woman. In contrast, Black women are hugely faithful to any Democrat. Nothing shakes their faith.

With Latino men it was a disaster. Harris underperformed Joe Biden by 33 points and underperformed Clinton by 41 points. That is a total rout and a complete rejection of Harris, especially since they were fine with a white woman and a white man. Latinas dropped off more than Black women, but still voted mostly for Harris. Among white men there wasn't much change in the three elections. Trump won by margins of 31, 23, and 22 points respectively. Trump also won white women three times, by margins of 9, 11, and 7 points, respectively. The message here is that the massive loss of Latino men was a killer.

Now let's look at the educational divide. Keep in mind that for generations, noncollege voters were Democrats and college-educated voters were Republicans. Here are the data:

White college voters are about evenly split, with Harris doing a little better than Biden. In contrast, white noncollege voters are solidly for Trump with no change, regardless of his opponent. Somewhat surprisingly, both college and noncollege minorities preferred both a white woman and a white man to her.

White women, with or without college degrees, held steady. Those with college degrees liked all three Democrats, with Harris the slight favorite. Noncollege white women disliked all Democrats, didn't matter who. White men with college degrees liked Trump the first time, didn't appreciate what they got, and soured on him a bit later. White men without college degrees really, really don't like Democrats and it doesn't matter which Democrat it is. Democrats have a big problem with noncollege voters. If they want to do better in the future, they are really going to have to address this. As a bare minimum, they will feel compelled to nominate a white man in 2028.

By age, the shifts were small. The 18-29-year-olds liked Democrats in all three elections, but Harris the least of all. In other age ranges, the split was closer to even and close to constant over the years.

The article linked above slices and dices the voters other ways as well. The most interesting note is that moderates liked Democrats in all three elections, but liked Biden the best. Also, first-time voters went for Biden by +32 in 2020 but for Trump by +11 in 2024. That is a 43-point shift. Clearly, Trump did very well with low-propensity voters, but the results of this year's elections suggests that while these voters like Trump personally, that affection does not transfer to other Republicans. (V)

Trump Is Dismantling the Department of Education on the Sly

Donald Trump famously once said: "I love the poorly educated." He wants to keep that going by keeping people poorly educated, so he is trying to dismember the Department of Education. He can't formally abolish it by XO. Only Congress can abolish it, and probably a number of Republicans are afraid of a campaign in which their opponent claims "Your congressman voted to defund your kids' school," so the votes for abolition aren't there.

Plan B is to gut the DoEd from the inside, and that is what Trump is doing. Or trying to do. He has signed XOs that move agencies within the DoEd (and their budgets) to other departments. For example, $28 billion in funds for K-12 schools got moved to the Department of Labor. After all, kids work hard in school so that qualifies as labor. Indian Education programs will go to the Department of the Interior. Child care access will go to HHS. Foreign-language education will go to the State Department. Secretary of State Marco Rubio speaks fluent Spanish, but his Department is ill equipped to handle foreign language education in K-12 schools. The Office of Civil Rights, which Trump dislikes, escaped this time, but is definitely on the chopping block in the next round.

Secretary of Education Linda McMahon, unlike any of her predecessors, excepting the OTHER Trump SoE Betsy DeVos, does not like her Department and would be happy to see it abolished, or at least defunded. She says Americans are tired of bureaucracy. Trump probably doesn't even understand what the Department does, but McMahon almost certainly does. It doesn't set the curriculum for any school in the country and has nothing to do with hiring or firing teachers. It exists due to the way education is financed in the U.S. The money for schools comes mostly from local property taxes. The Scarsdale, NY, school district has the highest median household income in the country at $238,000, with housing prices and property taxes to match. If Scarsdale wanted to provide every student in the system with a free top-of-the-line M4 MacBook Pro, that wouldn't be a problem at all. In contrast, in Perry County, AL, the average household income is $36,000. No MacBook Pros for those kids.

What the Department of Education mostly does is try to level the playing field a little bit by funneling money into poorer school districts and helping minority students make it in a system stacked against them. Trump probably senses this roughly, so he is against the Department and wants it to go poof! McMahon understands her marching orders and is doing what she can to gut her Department. Most cabinet secretaries work the other way. They try to get more money for their departments, not less. For example, McMahon recently gave technical education programs and family literacy programs to the Labor Department. Her stated view is that the function of education is to prepare children to enter the workforce. A fair number of other people would strongly disagree with that and say the function of education is to create an informed citizenry that can make good decisions for themselves, their families, their states, and their country, especially electing capable leaders.

The chairman of the American Association of School Superintendents, David Schuler, is not happy with McMahon trying to gut the Department of Education by moving pieces of it hither and yon in the federal bureaucracy: "It is difficult to see how transferring cornerstone programs... out of the department will result in streamlined operations, especially for the nation's small, rural and low-capacity districts." Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) was less polite. She said: "This is an outright illegal effort to continue dismantling the Department of Education. And it is students and families who will suffer the consequences as key programs that help students learn to read or that strengthen ties between schools and families are spun off to agencies with little to no relevant expertise." (V)

Former Republican Election Official Buys Dominion Voting Systems

Dominion Voting Systems is no more. Its voting equipment was used by about one-third of all voters in 27 states. Fox maligned the company, which then sued Fox for defamation. Before it got to trial, Fox gave up and paid Dominion $787 million in damages.

Under the radar, a former Republican election official from Missouri, Scott Leiendecker, has bought Dominion in a privately financed deal. He hasn't disclosed what he paid for it, but if he paid less than $787 million for a company that has $787 million in the bank, he got a really good deal. He also didn't disclose why he bought it and what he plans to do with it. He did absorb it into his company, Liberty Vote, though. He presumably knows that "Liberty" is a popular word among Republicans. Dominion's founder and CEO, John Poulos, confirmed the sale with a seven-word statement: "Liberty Vote has acquired Dominion Voting Systems." That was it.

Leiendecker did make an announcement that seemed to embrace some of Donald Trump's ideas about transforming voting procedures, one of which is using paper ballots. He has also talked about "election integrity," which is a very loose term that Republicans love to bandy about. Leiendecker has specifically said that Liberty Vote will be in compliance with Trump's XO on voting, even though District Judge Denise Casper has already blocked part of the XO as unconstitutional, specifically the part requiring proof of citizenship to vote. Noncitizens are already banned from voting, but elections are run by the states and the president has no authority to tell the states how they may run elections. Signing an XO ordering states to do something you have no authority to order them to do is unconstitutional. Congress has some authority, but it must exercise that authority in compliance with the Constitution and by passing laws. Trump also wants to ban early voting and mail-in voting.

Not everyone is happy with Dominion's new owner. Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) claimed (without evidence) that Leiendecker bought Dominion to help Trump "cheat, potentially with voting machines" in the midterms. She urged states to drop the machines. She wasn't alone. Matt Crane, director of the Colorado Clerks Association, said: "The clerks were very upset about this."

It would have been much better if the whole thing weren't done under the table. If Poulos wanted to cash out, fine. He could have had an IPO and have Dominion become a publicly traded company with many stockholders, with all the transparency and auditing that requires. He didn't. And selling it to a former Republican official with probably something in the ballpark of $1 billion from unknown sources does not engender optimism that the unknown sources of money are merely interested in making a profit and nothing more. At this point, it might be best for states to stop using the machines and do what Trump wants: count all the (paper) ballots by hand. (V)

Xavier Becerra Is Stuck in the Middle of Scandal Not Really His

With Kamala Harris not running for governor of California, former representative Katie Porter stumbling, and Sen. Alex Padilla (D-CA) announcing that he will not run for governor, former Secretary of HHS Xavier Becerra had a decent chance of winning the Democratic nomination. But now he is enmeshed in a scandal that could blow up in his face. And he didn't actually do anything wrong personally.

The problem is that some of his campaign aides stole money from his campaign account and he didn't even know about it. This doesn't make him a crook, but it does raise the question: "If you couldn't even manage your own campaign account properly, how can we trust you to manage the $320 billion California state budget?"

Becerra, who spent 24 years in the House, was apparently completely blind to this until federal investigators told him about it. This is especially bad news because Becerra's main selling point has been what a great manager he is.

Two people have been indicted for stealing $225,000 from Becerra's account. They are Dana Williamson, a former chief of staff to Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA), and Becerra's own chief of staff, Sean McCluskie. When Becerra, the former California AG, took the job as secretary of HHS in the Biden administration, he took McCluskie with him at lower pay than he was making in California. McCluskie's family stayed behind in California, and the many cross-country trips were a big drain on McCluskie's finances. So he skimmed money off Becerra's account by routing it through Williamson's company where McCluskie's wife was a no-show employee. McCluskie pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud last week.

No one thinks that Becerra took part in the fraud in any way, but that is actually a black mark against him. He had no idea what was going on with his own money. That doesn't scream "management genius." If he were running for senator, being a great manager isn't so important. Senators manage less than a hundred staff members. The governor of California is responsible for managing over a quarter of a million people. Will this be fatal to Becerra's campaign? No one knows, but it certainly won't help. (V)

New Marist Poll: Democrats are D+14 on Generic House Ballot

A new Marist poll on the generic House ballot has the Democrats up by 14 points, with 55% of adults saying they would vote for an unnamed Democrat and 41% saying they would vote for an unnamed Republican. The candidates matter somewhat, but less for the House than for the Senate. The survey was taken last week.

The most recent poll before that had the Democrats up by 7. This is a pretty big jump, if true. 14 points is a huge lead. Suppose this is true and continues until Election Day. What would that mean? Very crudely, any Republican in an R+13 or less red district would be at risk. There are 131 Republicans currently in districts ranging from D+3 to R+13. All of these would be competitive and in the resulting blue wave, the 58 Republicans in D+3 to R+7 districts would mostly drown, along with some of those in the R+8 to R+13 districts. Democrats would have a huge margin in the House. Such a wave would probably give them control of the Senate as well.

But a few words of warning here. First, the midterm election was not last week, nor is it this week, or any week this year. As readers well know, in politics a week is a long time. Second, this is just one poll. Marist is very good, but it will take several more polls confirming this before we really believe it, and even then, stuff changes. Nevertheless, it is better for a party to be +14 than -14 in the generic House poll. (V)

Schlossberg Gets Company in the Race for Nadler's Seat

Last week, we noted that Jack Kennedy's only grandson, Jack Schlossberg, is running for Congress in NY-12, the Manhattan district being vacated by Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY). Now he has competition. Cameron Kasky has announced that he is also entering the Democratic primary, where he will face Schlossberg and possibly more challengers.

Kasky is a survivor of the massacre at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL. He co-founded the March for Our Lives movement, which pushes for stricter gun laws. Kasky is somewhat leftier than Schlossberg, but not that much. He is also 25, so he is legal, but the argument that Congress needs fresh blood is somewhat weak against Schlossberg, who is only 32 himself. Schlossberg has a couple of arguments in his favor. He was born in the district, went to school there, and lived there his entire life until he went to college. Kasky was born in Florida, lived there through high school, and only moved in New York when he started at Columbia University, from which he dropped out without a degree. Schlossberg has a bachelor's from Yale and a combination J.D. and MBA from Harvard. He is a member of the New York bar. He also has access to the Democratic establishment and donors via his mother, Caroline Kennedy.

In short, Schlossberg is going to be the establishment favorite and is only 7 years older than Kasky. He will have money out the wazoo and lived all of his youth in the district whereas Kasky is a recent arrival (= carpetbagger) from Florida. NY-12 is a very wealthy district, with a median household income of $150,000. All things considered, a moderately liberal Kennedy scion who comes from wealth and is the grandson of a beloved president is a better fit for the district than a queer leftist kid from Florida who just showed up. One of the lessons Democrats are (slowly) learning is that candidates need to be a good fit for the district or state they are running in and Schlossberg is a pretty good fit for a district that exudes money and power and covers Manhattan from 18th St. up to 100th St. across all of Manhattan and a bit farther north on Riverside Drive and Adam Clayton Powell Blvd.

Yesterday, it got even weirder. George Conway, a former card-carrying member of the Federalist Society, and dyed-in-the-wool conservative, is thinking of running for Nadler's seat, too. And get this: as a Democrat.

Conway takes part in a podcast with Sarah Longwell at The Bulwark where he dumps on Donald Trump about once a week, but that doesn't make him a Democrat the way Schlossberg and his family have been for generations. Conway used to live in NY-12, but moved to D.C. when his former wife, Kellyanne Conway, became Donald Trump's (third) campaign manager in 2016. If both challengers jump in, Schlossberg will call Kasky a carpetbagger and Conway a lifelong conservative Republican who only recently saw the light. (V)

Gov. Greg Abbott Finally Sets a Date for Runoff Election for Texas House Seat

Former representative Sylvester Turner (D-TX) died on March 5, 2025. Gov. Greg Abbott (R-TX), no stranger to playing politics, kept the seat open until Election Day this year. After all, the TX-18 district is poor, with a median household income of $67,000 and full of people of color, with 42% Latino and 32% Black. Surely these people have better things to worry about than whether they have representation in the House, right? It is very gerrymandered, covering parts of Houston, and is D+21:

No one won the special election with more than 50% of the vote, so Abbott grudgingly had to schedule a runoff. He decided that Jan. 31, 2026, would be a nice date. After vote counting and certification, the people of TX-18 will have representation again, after 11 months of not having it.

The runoff candidates are both Democrats. One is Harris County Attorney Christian Menefee. The other is Houston City Council member Amanda Edwards. They were the top finishers in the November nonpartisan election that featured two dozen candidates. Menefee got 29% of the vote and Edwards got 26%. The winner will serve from mid-February 2026 until Jan. 3, 2027, but will have to start running for reelection almost immediately. However, the redistricting, if it sticks, will pit the winner against Rep. Al Green (D-TX). The filing deadline is Dec. 8, but the question of which map will be used is currently tied up in the courts after a judge ruled that the new map is an illegal racial gerrymander. (V)

---

Previous report         Next report

---

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.

---The Votemaster and Zenger