This is going to be a little of a grab bag of stuff: It will include some good news from 538 that I saw this morning, some comments and parts of a Washington Post editorial which explains “why we believe a second term could harm America’s experiment in democracy beyond repair.” and some republican leaders who oppose Trump and are supporting Biden.
.
.Let’s start with the good news from 538: Biden now has a 9.2 point lead in the average of national polls. He is at 51.4 % . That is really incredible. He leads in the polls in Florida by 6.2% at 50.0%, in Arizona by 4.6 % at 48.8% , in Michigan by 7.9% at 50.0%, in Wisconsin by 7.0 % at 50.1% , and in Pennsylvania by 6.2% at 50.0% .
.
These are ridiculous numbers — I write that in a good way ! They are truly amazing ! He is at 50% or better in the AVERAGE of polls in Florida, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. He has a lead of better than 6 points in the AVERAGE of polls in all four states. He has a lead of at least 5 points in the average of polls and been at better than 48% in all four states for about two straight continuous, uninterrupted, months. These are truly amazing numbers in this partisan time.
And these numbers are much better and much more consistent than Hillary’s poll numbers in 2016. She had nothing like this in Florida (Trump would be up in one or more polls every week or two and her leads were never consistently large) .
.
.
.
In Michigan where Biden has been up more than 7 points for two straight continuous months, she did have a good lead. However, her share of the vote was low and this left her vulnerable if the undecideds broke against her and they did. The polls did show her consistently leading, but it was not this large nor this stable. Certainly, it was much closer to Biden’s numbers than some of the other states. The graph makes it clear that her lead was not always above 7 and she was also at 48% or less consistently . She was only barely above 48% for a couple of weeks in October ; otherwise, she was well below 48% allowing a comeback . Most of the time she was around 46% in the average of polls in Michigan. Again, this left a lot of voters who could turn things around and they did.
.
.
.
Wisconsin was a similar story ; she had a lead that was not quite as large as Biden’s but it was close. However, once again she did not have as large a share of the vote. She was almost always below 46%. He is at 50% with a 7 point lead in Wisconsin now. Forty six percent meant that there were a lot of voters who could give the election to Trump if they turned on her or all voted for Trump.
.
.
Pennsylvania was worse for Secretary Hillary Clinton. She would have good strong leads for a couple of weeks and then five or six polls would come out and all show a one or two point lead. The lead was volatile to say the least. She also stayed below 48% for the most part with some brief exceptions. Biden has been up 6 points in the average of polls for over two straight continuous, uninterrupted months and above 49% in the average of polls for over two straight continuous uninterrupted months.
.
.
.
.
.He has led by more than 5 points and held more than 48% of the vote for more than two straight continuous months in the average of polls in Florida, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. That means that he is in a strong place in the electoral college especially because of how stable that lead has been and because it is in the average of polls. Biden has led continuously without any interruption by seven or more points in the average of national polls since June 6th, more than two and a half months. The Monday after next will really tell us where the electorate is . September 1 will tell us where the equilibrium is. Honestly, I would expect Biden / Harris to start about 7 points ahead of Trump / Pence . I kind of feel that it is unfair that their convention is right after ours and I would have to anticipate some reduction in the lead. Still, Biden has been up more than seven points in the average of polls for almost two and a half months. So, I have a hard time imagining the lead being less than that. This is a good place to start considering how partisan our politics are. After their convention, what will be left: debates between Biden and Trump and Harris and Pence. Trump has already lowered expectations of Biden and Trump won’t come off well. Senator Harris will mop the floor with Pence. Trump isn’t a great debater. I can’t see the debates (if they take place) helping Trump at all. That’s about it. So, if republicans are counting on Trump / Pence winning debates decisively enough to switch votes, then they are living in la la land.
.
.
.
BIDEN HARRIS LEAD IN SWING STATES
| STATE |
LEAD NOW |
BIDEN PCT NOW |
MIN LEAD |
SINCE |
MIN PCT VOTE |
SINCE |
TRUMP 2016 |
TRUMP NOW |
| FLORIDA |
6.2 |
50.0 |
5.1 |
6/13 |
48.5 |
6/13 |
48.6 |
43.8 |
| MICHIGAN |
7.9 |
50.0 |
7.0 |
6/6 |
48.5 |
6/1 |
47.3 |
42.1 |
| WISCONSIN |
7.0 |
50.1 |
6.4 |
6/13 |
48.4 |
6/13 |
47.2 |
43.1 |
| PENNSYLVANIA |
6.2 |
50.0 |
5.0 |
6/16 |
48.8 |
6/16 |
48.2 |
43.8 |
.
.
I didn’t read the text of the diary about GOP hoping for a vaccine, but their hopes are in vain if they are counting on that. The quickest we have ever come up with a vaccine is four (4) years. We need a large representative sample whom we have tracked for a long time for each phase to know that it is safe (and we need to know that it won’t harm a patient five months later) and effective (does it really protect patients from those who have the novel coronavirus) . There is no way to short cut that process while retaining safety and proving efficacy. Then, it must be manufactured in sufficient quantity. Then it has to be distributed. Then, people must take it and they won’t take it if they think it was rushed and republicans are more likely to oppose taking a vaccine anyway or they think Jesus is their “vaccine”. So, if a vaccine appears sooner, people won’t trust it. They will know that it is a political stunt that is designed not to keep them safe and healthy, but rather to help Donald Trump win re-election. So, that isn’t a worry.
.
.The Washington Post Editorial Board wrote an article entitled, “ A second Trump term might injure the Democratic experiment beyond recovery “
.
.
.
AFTER HE is nominated at a pared-down Republican convention next week, President Trump will make this argument to the American people: Things were great until China loosed the novel coronavirus on the world. If you reelect me, I will make things great again.
Our Democracy in Peril
Part one of a series of editorials on the damage President Trump has caused — and the danger he would pose in a second term.
Seeking reelection in the midst of the worst public health crisis and sharpest economic downturn of our lifetimes, this may, realistically, be the only argument left to him. But, fittingly for a president who has spoken more than 20,000 lies during his presidency, it rests on two huge falsehoods.
One is that the nation, his presidency and, above all, Mr. Trump himself are innocent victims of covid-19. In fact, his own negligence, ignorance and malpractice turned what would have been a daunting challenge for any president into a national disaster.
The other is that there was anything to admire in his record before the virus struck.
.
.The simple fact is that Donald Trump was repeatedly warned about the novel coronavirus and did not act due to his narcissism. He was warned by American researchers within the World Health Organization in 2019 ! He was warned by American national intelligence agencies on January 3 about the dangerous nature of the novel coronavirus. Trump was warned in the presidential daily briefings about how dangerous the novel coronavirus was. HHS Secretary Azar whom Trump picked warned Trump about how dangerous the novel coronavirus was and Trump called him “an alarmist”. Joe Biden wrote an opinion editorial on January 27th in the USA Today about how dangerous the novel coronavirus was and that Trump was not taking it seriously.
.
.Trump’s narcissism cost Americans their lives. First, the reason he refused to step up and take a leadership role in managing the novel coronavirus response because he thought that if it went badly, he would be held accountable and he would lose re-election which mattered more to him than saving American lives. Second, he refused to ramp up testing because if you test more, then you will have more official cases and that might reflect poorly on him and he might lose re-election as a result and that mattered more to him than saving American lives. Without ramping up testing, we don’t know where the virus was, where it is , where the epicenters are, and where it is going. Without ramping up testing, we can’t do contact tracing. Without ramping up testing, we are flying blind. Third, he refused despite all of the warnings he was given to issue a stay at home order ever. He should have issued a stay at home order in early February because of the warnings he was given and the information and people he had access to. He refused to issue the stay at home order because he felt that this could hurt the economy and that could cause him to lose him re-election and that mattered more to him than saving American lives. Fourth, he pushed to reopen states too early because he thought that would help the economy which would help him win re-election and that mattered more to him than saving American lives. Thus, Trump’s narcissism cost us American lives.
.
.Trump needed to take the lead on the response to the national pandemic for many reasons. First, he needed to do so because it hit the entire nation and governors and US senators are only responsible for their states and US representatives represent their congressional districts. Second, the office of the president is an office for which every voter in the country can vote for. Third, as head of the executive branch, Trump had access to the National Institutes of Health, National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, FEMA, Health and Human Services Cabinet, the nation’s intelligence agencies, Center for Disease Control and Prevention , Dr. Fauci and so many others. Fourth, states have smaller budgets and cannot deficit spend whereas the federal government has a larger budget and can deficit spend. Fifth, there needed to be a uniform response. Otherwise, if a strong state had strong mandates (mandated mask wearing, no public gatherings with more than five people, no going inside bars or restaurants, social distancing...) is adjacent to or contiguous with a weak state without any such mandates, then the novel coronavirus will simply move from the strong state to the weak state. Sixth, republicans were only going to listen to Trump and so when he minimized it and called it a hoax and refused to model wearing a mask and refused to model social distancing when giving press conferences, then many republicans did the same and would not take it seriously or wear a mask or socially distance.
.
We have only four percent of the world’s population, but twenty five percent of the world’s deaths due to the novel coronavirus and twenty five percent of the world’s official cases. This should not happen to a first world nation with some of the best medical schools and research universities and some of the best epidemiologists and medical doctors in the world. The reason this happened is Donald Trump.
.
.
But the trajectory has been alarming. The capitulation of the Republican Party has been nauseating. Misbehavior that many people vowed never to accept as normal has become routine.
A second term might injure the experiment beyond recovery.
And so, over the coming weeks, we will do something else we have never done before: We will publish a series of editorials on the damage this president has caused — and the danger he would pose in a second term. And we will unabashedly urge you to do your civic duty and vote: Vote early and vote safely, but vote.
.
.Here are a couple of important republican groups and republican leaders within the party for Biden and against Trump and his enablers
Republicans for the Rule of Law
Bill Kristol . He urged GOP officials to save their party by endorsing Biden.
..
.The "Never Trump" conservative elaborates, "Donald Trump is not up to the job of president. He is particularly unsuited to lead the nation in a context of twin public health and economic crises. He can't be trusted not to throw the country into a crisis of democracy and legitimacy during the forthcoming election campaign, and he shouldn't be entrusted with the powers of the presidency for another four years. Many Trump Administration officials know this. Many Republican elected officials and donors know this. Many conservative leaders know this."
.
.There was a very interesting interview in which Kristol answered questions.
.Lincoln Project
Steve Schmidt
Rick Wilson
Mike Madrid
Tara Setmayer
Stuart Stephens
Then there are other republican leaders for Biden and against Trump and his enablers.
Here is a list of republican national security leaders who oppose Trump and his enablers and support Biden. There are too many to put in this diary.
Senator John Warner
Anthony Scarramucci
Senator Chuck Hagel
This is the Lincoln Project members like Steve Schmidt and Rick Wilson and Stuart Stephens and Mike Madrid and Tara Setmayer discussing the upcoming Republican National Convention and Trump’s strategy. The Trump strategy, they believe, is maximizing the white man without college degree demographic via conspiracy theories. They do not expect competence. They considered it likely that we would see a violation of the Hatch Act as the Trump team is going to use the White House for the convention. They feel that the Democratic Party had a lot of variety ideologically whereas the Republican Trump Party is extremely narrow , a “pup tent” instead of a big tent like the Democratic Party. They felt that the Democratic National Convention was extremely well done. They think that they are only 3 people who would speak at any normal Republican National Convention. They foresee a week of unprecedented nuttiness.
Monday, Aug 24, 2020 · 2:56:11 PM +00:00 · Dem
The usual suspects are out in force trying and failing to come up with an example of an incumbent in modern political history coming from behind to win in a similar situation.
Nobody is going to stop doing everything that they can to help team Blue win.
I repeatedly have written against complacency in past diaries, but I stopped. I was trying to make the usual suspects happy by including warnings against complacency. But it was never enough. And then they would insist that people believe a lie and lie to themselves and tell themselves that we are down by 20 points.
At that point, I realized that trying to make them happy by including warnings against complacency was a mistake.
Nobody is going to be complacent, least of all people here on Daily Kos.
.
.
.538 has some comments about the lead
.
That was the second-biggest lead for any Democratic candidate heading into the convention period since at least 1968, and the largest for any candidate since 1996, when Bill Clinton led by about 15 points.
Biden’s pre-convention lead was the biggest in two decades
Undoubtedly, it’s a bullish sign for Biden to be this far ahead of Trump. In fact, since 1968, no incumbent president has trailed by as much as Trump heading into the first convention
.
.They then decide to compare apples to oranges and draw some conclusions about apples because of facts about oranges. All of which is fascinating and smells of desperation. An incumbent who has mismanaged a pandemic leading to over 180,000 deaths and double digit unemployment is different than a candidate who is not an incumbent and even more different than a candidate who is both an incumbent and has mismanaged a pandemic leading to over 180,000 deaths and a wrecked economy. So, guessing that this race will tighten dramatically because races with non incumbents who did not mismanage a pandemic tightened is not convincing because it is concluding something about oranges based upon facts about apples. What’s also fascinating is Mr. Sketchy only applied the 5 point difference in different circumstances in only one direction, taking five points from Biden instead of adding five points to him. However, that choice as revealing as it is, isn’t as important as the error of drawing conclusions about oranges based upon facts about apples. What is helpful is knowing that this is the biggest lead for a challenger against an incumbent in fifty years.
.
