Tina Nguyen/Vanity Fair:
Elizabeth Warren is surging—and the Trump campaign is taking notice
After writing off Warren, the president appears to have realized “Pocahontas” isn’t going to cut it.
Outside the Fox-Republican Party nexus, she’s completed several successful campaign visits to Trump-voting strongholds, where voters admit that while they’re inherently wary of Democrats, they find her genuine and committed to addressing their pet issues of economic inequality and declining opportunities. It’s the sort of message that landed Trump in the White House, but this time executed by a politician with the wherewithal—and the detailed plans—to make good on her promises.
The difference, of course, is where Warren is placing the blame. It’s easy for Trump to tell his base that immigrants are stealing their jobs. It’s trickier for Warren to explain on the campaign trail, in a nuanced way, that the systems of government are designed to perpetuate inequality. Warren herself is aware of the challenge. “It’s like teaching class. ‘Is everybody in here getting this?’ And that’s what I just struggle with all the time,” she told The New York Times. “How do I get better at this? How do I do more of this in a way that lets people see it, hear it and say, ‘Oh, yeah.’” If she manages to walk the line, the president has good reason to be worried. So does Sanders, whose lane intersects with hers. And so does Biden, whose blue-collar Scranton constituency may see a better opportunity in Warren’s many plans.
Aaron Blake/WaPo:
This is Trump’s worst poll number -- and what it means
There is one poll question I keep coming back to when I think about President Trump’s 2020 reelection campaign. It’s the one in which pollsters ask whether people would definitely not vote for him.
This is an especially bad number for Trump. National polls generally show a majority of people (51-56 percent) say they wouldn’t -- with Fox News polls being the exception. And now a poll also shows that number is remarkably bad for Trump in a surprising place: Texas. The University of Texas/Texas Tribune poll shows 43 percent say they’d never back Trump, and another 7 percent say they’re inclined to vote against him. That’s half the state intending not to vote for a Republican president ... in Texas.
These numbers are apparently starting to register in early 2020 polls -- including Trump’s own internal polls -- which show Trump struggling to climb out of the low 40s in key states and sometimes trailing by double digits. He’s also running neck and neck with Joe Biden in Texas.
Sam Stein/Daily Beast:
Exclusive Poll Reveals Dems’ Sexism Problem in 2020
A full 20 percent of Democratic and independent men who responded to the survey said they agreed with the sentiment that women are “less effective in politics than men.” And while 74 percent of respondents claimed they were personally comfortable with a female president, only 33 percent believed their neighbors would be comfortable with a woman in the Oval Office.
That latter number, explained Mallory Newall, research director at Ipsos, was a strong tell about how gender dynamics were souring voters on certain candidates. Asking respondents how they believe their neighbors feel about an issue is “a classic method to get around people being reluctant to admit to less popular views.”
Evan Siegfried/NBC Think:
Trump's biggest risk in 2020 isn't losing young people. It's losing their grandparents.
The president may still win the majority of seniors but, if he does so by a significantly smaller margin, that spells problems in swing states.
People 65 and older have long been solidly Republican, serving as reliable voters who can be counted on to not only turn out more than other blocs, but also do so with less effort on the part of campaigns. Their support was evident in both the 2010 and the 2014 midterm elections, when the GOP won these voters by 21 and 16 points respectively. So, too, was it visible in the last two presidential elections, as senior voters backed Mitt Romney by 12 and Donald Trump by eight points.
However, 2018 witnessed a startling shift toward Democrats; the GOP managed to win voters 65 and older by just two points.
There are signs that this is not a fluke, and that the Trump era has caused senior citizens to abandon the GOP in numbers big enough that could produce huge electoral consequences for both congressional Republicans and Trump alike. In April, a Washington Post/ABC News poll found that 53 percent of senior citizens would “definitely not vote for” Trump in 2020. (This disquieting result was obscured in the national discussion by the fact that 62 percent of women overall and 57 percent of white women with a college degree stated that they definitely would not vote for Trump — the aforementioned shift among suburban women.)
Ron Fournier/WaPo:
Will impeachment backfire on Democrats? Not if they do it right.
Politicians and pundits are always fighting the last war. The Nixon scandal conditioned people to assume Democrats would torpedo Clinton’s presidency. The Clinton scandal causes Democrats to fear backlash if they impeach President Trump.
Until recently, you could have put me in that camp. When special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s report documented Trump’s efforts to obstruct the investigation into Russian subversion of the 2016 election, my revulsion was matched only by a sick sense of hopelessness.
Trump should be held accountable, but impeachment would backfire on Democrats, right?
Then, in an interview Wednesday with ABC News, Trump said there would be nothing wrong with accepting damaging information about an election opponent from a foreign government. “They have information — I think I’d take it,” the president said, essentially encouraging foreign adversaries to help him win reelection.
This is a dangerous and unacceptable precedent: Unless Democrats and Republicans in Congress impeach Trump, every future president has grounds to ask foreign adversaries to launch covert operations against his or her political rivals in the United States.
But impeachment would backfire on Democrats, right?
Not if they do it right. The more I reflect on the Clinton impeachment, the more I realize he didn’t survive because Republicans overreached. He survived because he made sure his public-facing focus was always on the lives and concerns of voters. He compartmentalized the impeachment drama inside a team of lawyers, pollsters and communications specialists — and had them weaponize the case against him
That definition also applies to neoliberalism, centrist, and a host of other things.
WaPo:
Trump may be about to face his biggest test yet on the economy
Trump has threatened to escalate trade conflicts with China, Mexico, the European Union and Japan, spooking business leaders and leading some to pull back investment. Similarly, budget and debt-ceiling talks with congressional leaders from both parties have sputtered, raising the possibility of another government shutdown in October.
The uncertainty — and a cooling global economy — led JPMorgan Chase on Monday to predict that there was a 45 percent chance the U.S. economy would enter a recession in the next year, up from 20 percent at the beginning of 2018.
Also Monday, a key gauge of New York’s manufacturing industry notched the biggest one-month drop ever recorded. It was the latest sign that after a relatively strong economy last year, political and economic forces appear to have combined this year in a way that has darkened the economic outlook. This could be problematic for Trump, who has tried to tout the economy’s performance as key to his reelection.
Here’s Morning Consult, early states only:
And… Florida. Are there older voters in Florida? 🤔
Notable because JBS is a company Trump WH is steering bailout money to. Reuters:
Major companies found using courts to avoid Brazil's slave labor 'dirty list'
Blacklisted companies are blocked from receiving state loans and have restrictions placed on their sales, while the list is also used by private banks to gauge credit risk and by global buyers concerned about their supply chains, legal experts said.
If after two years, a company can demonstrate that has taken steps to improve working conditions, it is removed from the list - which currently features about 186 companies and individuals.
JBS Aves, a unit of the world's top meatpacker JBS SA , orange juice giant Citrosuco, and fashion brand Fabula Confecçao e Comercio de Roupas were among the 12 companies uncovered by a request via Brazil's Access of Information Law.
Frank Sharry/USA Today:
Democrats can turn immigration into a total loser for Donald Trump in 2020 — if they dare
Trump obsesses about immigration so voters will blame 'the other' while he enriches his friends. This is racism in the service of plutocracy.
What should Democrats do?
First, Democrats should recognize that the public is with them, not Trump. A majority of voters believe that immigration is good for America, object to Trump’s race-baiting divisiveness, reject the practice of ripping toddlers from parents and putting kids in cages, oppose his border wall, and want Congress to create a line for undocumented immigrants to get into — with "Dreamers" and Temporary Protected Status holders in front.
Second, beyond calling out the failure of Trump’s cruelty-and-chaos strategy at the border, Democrats need to propose pragmatic solutions of their own. Among the elements: Hire enough adjudicators and lawyers so Central Americans seeking asylum have fair, orderly and efficient hearings — a fair chance, not a free pass. Launch a regional refugee resettlement initiative — away from the border — to rescue eligible refugees through an orderly application, acceptance and admissions program. And address the root causes of migration from Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador so that over time, it is safer for families to stay home than to risk the dangerous journey to America.