The Economist/YouGov poll was a very good one for Elizabeth Warren, though Joe Biden still leads.
A reminder of how early things are, but with the first debate not so far off, jockeying for top five position still going on in earnest (Earnest is, I suppose, a small town somewhere in IA).
Paul Waldman/WaPo:
Why Elizabeth Warren is surging
Behold, the Elizabeth Warren surge has arrived.
Overinterpreting small movements in polls is always dangerous, but if she does continue to rise — and right now she looks like one of the only Democratic candidates who is gaining support — there are some particular reasons why, reasons that may help us understand what primary voters are thinking and how the media are shaping the race.
Let’s be clear: Warren’s gains are modest at this point. But she is getting more attention on cable news, and more stories written about her in other media (see here, here, or here). While, nationally, she still trails former vice president Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in most polls, a new Economist/YouGov poll shows her passing Sanders into second place, and a Monmouth University poll in the key early state of Nevada also shows her in second place, as well…
Which brings us to what has become Warren’s slogan: “I have a plan for that.”
Warren may be successfully turning the act of having policy plans into a virtue in and of itself, one that stands apart from the substance of the plans. Democratic voters are drawn toward candidates they think have policy muscle to go along with charisma. And in Warren’s case, what’s in her plans may matter less for the support she gets than for the idea that she’s the candidate who has plans for everything. It means she’s serious, substantive, prepared and ambitious about change. Not coincidentally, these are all things President Trump is not.
Read that as Warren leaners.
Warren and Sanders seem like they’re on different escalators. Might be that with so many players, everyone gets their turn to have a moment. Or it might be Bernie’s moment was 2016. We’ll see how it shakes out.
Edward Isaac-Dovere/Atlantic:
As Bernie Sanders Leans Into Socialism, His Rivals Laugh
The longtime independent senator is preparing to deliver a speech in which he will reiterate his support for the bogeyman du jour.
“I’ll have to hear the speech,” she said diplomatically of her rival’s coming address. But what about the argument of the title, to insist on democratic socialism? I asked. “I’ll have to hear his speech,” she said again.
That Sanders would lean into democratic socialism—and that he’d do so now—is surprising only to people who don’t know him. He wants this fight. He believes that he’s more right than most insiders are ready to acknowledge, based on his own successes and based on how he’s defined so much of the larger Democratic agenda these past four years—not to mention all the polls that show support among young people for socialism.
There was more on Trump’s lousy poll numbers in yesterday’s round-up. Again, no one is guaranteeing Trump loses, but with numbers like this he has an uphill task and a track record of mediocrity when someone’s not helping him or he’s not cheating.
Richard North Patterson/Bulwark:
Why Elizabeth Warren Matters
She is, by far, the most important Democrat running for president.
In contrast to the array of candidates who propose to banish Donald Trump by channeling outrage or inspiring hope—or, in the case of Bernie Sanders, conjuring a fantastical “political revolution”—Warren offers specific proposals to define our future. Says David Brooks: “I might agree or disagree with some of Elizabeth Warren’s zillions of policy proposals, but at least they’re proposals. At least they are attempts to ground our politics in real situations with actual plans, not just overwrought bellowing about the monster in the closet.” …
Specifically, Warren would try to use government to ground corporate decision making in a far-sighted ethic which transcends the accretion of shareholder value and political power. While this rebalancing of interests may sound revolutionary, it’s not. American businesses adhered to it in living memory..
Very interesting critique from an ex Common Cause head.
Mary Ziegler/NY Times:
The End of the Rape and Incest Exceptions
Republicans are abandoning language that has long been standard in abortion bans. Why?
Do abortion opponents really think that Americans will so easily let go of rape and incest exceptions? Yes and no. Social movements on both sides of the abortion debate rely on their own pollsters and focus groups. And it’s possible these sharply polarized sources of data might simply be misleading them on what the public is willing to support. After all, a recent NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll confirmed that strong majorities supported the rape and incest exception, including more than 30 percent of those who describe themselves as pro-life.
But what the abandonment of rape and incest exceptions reveal is that some abortion opponents no longer care about what most Americans have to say. These activists argue that popular opinion will never change unless abortion foes make a case for what they really want. This March, David French spoke for many in writing in National Review that it was “time to throw down the gauntlet, declare to the world” that “the era of incrementalism is over, and show that the people are ready to embrace life.”
Great thread:
Greg Sargent/WaPo:
Trump may be damaging his biggest reelection asset
Meanwhile, many recent polls have found that Trump’s tax cut, whose benefits went overwhelmingly to corporations and the wealthy, is unpopular.
This has created an interesting situation: Trumpism represents a fusion of nationalist lurches in some directions (on trade and immigration) with more conventional GOP plutocracy in others (the tax cut, the failed effort to roll back health coverage for millions).
But both of these elements of Trumpism have proved deeply unpopular. The trade policies are under water. The 2018 elections were all about Trump’s immigration policies and tax cut (both of which Trump and Republicans worked hard to push to the forefront) and the failed Obamacare repeal effort (which Democrats relentlessly pushed forward), yet Republicans suffered the biggest House wipe-out since Watergate.
Jennifer Rubin/WaPo:
There is little wonder that the White House is raising all manner of spurious excuses to prevent a clear accounting of the president’s misconduct. We have reached the point where Trump is attempting to obstruct a House investigation into his attempt to obstruct Mueller’s investigation (telling McGahn to lie) of his obstruction (the attempt to fire Mueller). Got that?
The courts to date have rejected the Trump legal team’s frightful assertion of immunity from congressional investigation with regard to documents. In upholding the House’s ability to extract critical information from McGahn, the courts would be reinforcing the central premise of our legal system: No one is above the law.
The House cannot defend the Constitution all by itself. The courts must play their role, and now they will be presented with the opportunity to curtail a president whose conception of his own power is fundamentally at odds with our constitutional system.
NY Times:
With Most States Under One Party’s Control, America Grows More Divided
Analysts said that issues addressed by state legislatures this year, which included gun control, health care, education and police procedures, might have more immediate, lasting effect than anything approved in Washington, D.C., where government is divided.
The roots of the polarization in state legislatures can be traced to elections in 2010, when Republicans made decisive gains in statehouses and pressed for policies that included restricting labor unions and abortion access, while expanding gun rights, according to Sarah F. Anzia, a political scientist at the University of California, Berkeley.
Around the same time, Dr. Anzia said, national organizations representing interest groups ranging from teachers to gun owners became more active in state capitals, because they found it far easier to make headway in places like Sacramento and Charleston, W.Va., than in Washington because of gridlock in Congress.
The number of states with either supermajorities of Democrats that also have Democratic governors (California, Nevada and Oregon, among others) or Republicans with Republican governors (Alabama, Ohio and Tennessee, among others) has grown, too, meaning that many lawmakers rarely feel the need to compromise.
WaPo:
Trump or a Democrat? Eastern Iowa ponders its presidential choice.
Faulkner hasn’t been happy with some of the things Trump has done — namely, his comments about immigrants that she said “come across as racist” and the tariff war he started that could hurt the farmers who stop by her store for coffee — and she’s open to voting for a Democrat in 2020. But she has no idea whom that might be or even which of the 23 candidates might best align with what she’s looking for.
“In all honesty here,” she said, “lately I haven’t been paying a lot of attention.”
I don’t think she’s read the Mueller report.