Swing State Voters Favor Biden On Crime And Coronavirus

 Fox News polling in Arizona, North Carolina, and Wisconsin found that President Trump trails Democratic challenger Joe Biden in all three of these states, which were won by Trump in 2016. A surprising finding of the report was that many voters prefer Biden over Trump when it comes to handling both crime and the Coronavirus pandemic.

In a head-to-head matchup, likely voters in all three states picked Biden over Trump:

Arizona: Biden-49 Trump-40

North Carolina: Biden-50 Trump-46

Wisconsin: Biden-50 Trump-42

The poll also asked about four issues facing the country: the economy, the pandemic, policing and criminal justice, and dealing with China. Here is who voters trusted “to do a better job” in the three states polled:

Arizona:
Economy: Biden-44 Trump-45
Coronavirus: Biden-53 Trump-36
Policing and Criminal Justice: Biden-47 Trump-42
China: Biden-44 Trump-43

 

North Carolina:
Economy: Biden-43 Trump-51
Coronavirus: Biden-50 Trump-41
Policing and Criminal Justice: Biden-46 Trump-47
China: Biden-43 Trump-48

Wisconsin:
Economy: Biden-45 Trump-45
Coronavirus: Biden-52 Trump-35
Policing and Criminal Justice: Biden-47 Trump-42
China: Biden-44 Trump-45

The polling showed lopsided support for Joe Biden on the pandemic, but also indicated a surprising weakness for the president on his signature issues. Across the three states, the best Trump could manage was a statistical tie on criminal justice. Joe Biden trailed the president on the economy and China in North Carolina but ranked statistically even with the president in Arizona and Wisconsin on those issues.

It is especially striking that Wisconsin voters preferred Joe Biden to handle policing and criminal justice since Kenosha has been the scene of violent protests and riots since Jacob Blake was shot by police on August 23. The subsequent unrest led to two killings by Kyle Rittenhouse, who is being charged with murder.

The polling also covered senatorial races in Arizona and North Carolina. In Arizona, Republican incumbent Martha McSally is trailing Democrat Mark Kelly by an astonishing 17 points (56-39 percent) in a race that is trending towards a landslide. In North Carolina, Thom Tillis, another Republican incumbent is doing a bit better but still trailing Democrat Cal Cunningham 48-42 percent.

These two races may provide Democrats with two of the three seats that they need to win control of the Senate. A probable loss by Alabama’s Doug Jones would require an additional two Democratic pickups.

The Fox polling only covered three swing states while several others are in play. If only these three states flipped from the 2016 results, Trump would still win the Electoral College by 270-268. Florida, Michigan, and Pennsylvania provide additional opportunities to put Biden over the top. As I discussed earlier this week, Biden leads in those states as well.

Polling data shows that Trump’s approaches to the plethora of crises facing voters are falling flat with voters. Today marks 60 days until Election Day. If Donald Trump intends to pivot to a more unifying (and competent) strategy that would better appeal to undecided and moderate voters, he is running out of time to do so.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Or

Fox News Poll Shows Trump Trailing In Swing States

Three new Fox News polls sampled voters in the swing states of Arizona, Ohio, and Wisconsin. The news in all three states was not good for the president. Mr. Trump, who won all three states in 2016, now trails Joe Biden in each case.

In the Arizona poll, the president trails his Democratic challenger by a 42-46 margin. On the issues, the economy was the only area in which Trump scored better than Biden (by 48-41 percent). Shockingly, Biden even edged out Trump on immigration in this border state by one percentage point. Trump’s net approval rating in Arizona was negative-six points.

The poll also showed that Arizona is a likely spot for a Senate pick-up for Democrats. The poll showed Republican incumbent Martha McSally trailing Democrat Mark Kelly by 13 points.

In Ohio, which has seemed increasingly Republican, the Fox poll showed Biden with a two-point lead (45-43 percent). This is well within the 3.5-point margin of error for the poll. In Ohio, Trump’s 50-percent approval rating gave him a net approval of two points.

Moving to Wisconsin, the poll found Trump trailing Biden by nine points (40-49 percent). The president’s net approval in the state was negative-nine points, closely mirroring the difference in the head-to-head matchup.

President Trump’s poor response to the three crises of Coronavirus, the recession, and the race riots seemed to be driving much of the opposition to his re-election. While Trump scored best on the economy in all three states, Biden rated better on race relations and Coronavirus in all three cases. On immigration, the only other issue tested, Biden was preferred in Arizona (which was a statistical tie on the question) and Wisconsin. Ohio voters liked Trump’s approach to immigration.

As I frequently point out, individual polls are a single data point and should be treated with caution. There are also additional swing states to consider. In addition to the three surveyed by Fox News, Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania are likely battleground states this year. For a more complete look at polling in all seven swing states, all of which were won by Trump in 2016, here is a rundown based on Real Clear Politics averages:

Arizona: Biden leads by 2.8 points

Florida: Biden leads by 3.4 points

Michigan: Biden leads by 4.2 points

North Carolina: Biden leads by 0.8 points

Ohio: Biden leads by 1.0 point

Pennsylvania: Biden leads by four points [As a caveat, Trump held a four point lead in the only May poll, but Biden has led in every other recent poll.]

Wisconsin: Biden leads by 3.4 percent

Based on these polling averages and assuming that the tossup states of North Carolina, Ohio, and Pennsylvania go to Trump, Joe Biden would win the electoral vote by 288-250 if the election were held today.

I frequently hear from Trump supporters who are skeptical of all polls since polling pointed toward a Hillary Clinton victory in 2016. In most cases, the surprise states of 2016 were polling within the margin of error by Election Day, and the final Electoral College result hinged on about 70,000 votes. It is whistling past the graveyard to assume that Donald Trump can repeat that performance this year. If Biden still leads in all swing states in November, Trump will have to defy the odds and run the table to keep his job.

Increasingly, the polling for 2020 is not close. On the contrary, more and more red states seem to be moving towards battleground status. For example, the Real Clear Politics average shows Trump only holding a two-point lead in Texas. Likewise, Arizona used to be reliably Republican.

The polling does not predict with certainty that Trump will lose in November, but it is a warning sign that his re-election campaign is in trouble. To turn the tide, the president must change his image, but he seems incapable of doing so.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Swing State Polls Look Bad For Donald Trump

A new round of head-to-head polling from the swing states came in yesterday and the results are somewhat encouraging for Republicans. While Donald Trump trails the leading Democrats in national polling, many of the swing state races are too close to call.

Due to the large number of candidates and states to examine, for clarity, I will present each state separately and give Trump’s net poll rating with each candidate based on the Real Clear Politics average. A negative rating means that Trump is behind and a positive rating means that he is ahead. For reference, I’m also including the latest state-level Trump approval numbers from Morning Consult, which were taken as the Ukraine whistleblower scandal was breaking in late September.

National

Trump vs. Biden               -10

Trump vs. Warren            -7.3

Trump vs. Sanders           -7.9

Trump vs. Buttigieg         -4.5

Trump vs. Harris               -5.3

Trump approval                -13

Arizona

Trump vs. Biden               -1.7

Trump vs. Warren            0.7

Trump vs. Sanders           5.3

Trump approval                -4

Florida

Trump vs. Biden               -2.0       

Trump vs. Warren            0.3

Trump vs. Sanders           1.0

Trump approval                -2

Iowa

Trump vs. Biden               1.5

Trump vs. Warren            4.5

Trump vs. Sanders           1.0

Trump vs. Buttigieg         4.0

Trump approval                -14

Michigan

Trump vs. Biden               -7.7

Trump vs. Warren            -3.0

Trump vs. Sanders           -7.3

Trump approval                -10

North Carolina

Trump vs. Biden               -5.4

Trump vs. Warren            0.2

Trump vs. Sanders           -2.4       

Trump approval                -3          

Ohio (no recent polling)

Trump vs. Biden               -7.0

Trump vs. Warren            -1.5

Trump vs. Sanders           -5.0

Trump approval                -5

Pennsylvania

Trump vs. Biden               -7.3       

Trump vs. Warren            1.7

Trump vs. Sanders           5.4

Trump approval                -8

Wisconsin

Trump vs. Biden               -5.7

Trump vs. Warren            -1.0

Trump vs. Sanders           -2.7

Trump approval                -11

There are a couple of important takeaways from this polling, even though the election is still a year away. The first is that Joe Biden is a stronger candidate in the swing states than Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders. In six of the seven swing states with recent head-to-head polling, Biden leads Donald Trump. Warren fares worst of the three top-tier Democrats, but Bernie Sanders is not much better.

Second, Trump approval is a pretty good proxy for how he stacks up in a head-to-head matchup in most cases, although this is dependent on individual candidates as well and the numbers don’t match up exactly. In only one of the states examined, Iowa, does Trump have a negative approval rating but leads in polling.

Finally, as we saw in 2016, it isn’t enough for the Democrats to win the popular vote and expect that to translate into an Electoral College victory. The Democrats must give Donald Trump a 5-10 point shellacking in the popular vote to be assured of winning enough swing states to secure the White House. This is especially true due to the difficulties of state-level polling in swing states.

Based on the current polling presented above (while assuming Ohio stays red), Joe Biden would win the Electoral College by 333-205 and Bernie Sanders would eke out a 273-265 victory. Elizabeth Warren would lose by 258-280, but many states are actually too close to project in a Warren-Trump matchup. Neither side could be confident of victory at this point, although Warren does seem to represent Trump’s best chance at reelection.

The election is a long way away and a lot can happen. In the current cycle, that is even more true than most years due to the breaking Ukraine scandal, impeachment, the slowing economy, and a number of other factors. While the swing states are not looking good for Donald Trump, they are looking much better than the national average, but that’s why they call them battleground states.

While many of the state-level races are not polled frequently, it will be important to watch them for trends over the next year. Significant movement in one direction or the other could represent a changing dynamic within the election.

Originally published on The Resurgent

BREAKING: NC GOP Chair Indicted For Fraud

Charlotte’s WBTV reports that former congressman and current chairman of the North Carolina Republican Party has been indicted on charges of directing illegal campaign contributions to North Carolina Insurance Commissioner Mike Causey in an attempt to bribe him. Greg Lindbergh, a Durham businessman and two of Lindbergh’s associates were also indicted.

The indictment, based on an investigation which has been ongoing since at least August 2018, alleges that the contributions were made “in exchange for the removal of NCDOI’s Senior Deputy Commissioner, who was responsible for overseeing regulation and the periodic examination of ” a company owned by Lindbergh. Causey was working with federal authorities and was charged in the indictment. WBTV previously reported that Causey made secret recordings of a meeting with Hayes, Lindbergh, and another person.

NCGOP Executive Director Dallas Woodhouse  confirmed to WBTV last year that the state Republican Party had made a $240,000 payment to Causey’s campaign but said that the donation was legal. The $240,000 was a portion of a donation to the state party that was made by Lindbergh.

The four men under indictment are charged with conspiracy to commit honest services wire fraud and bribery concerning programs receiving federal funds and aiding and abetting. Hayes is also charged with three counts of making false statements to the FBI.

The North Carolina GOP has been saddled with accusations of voter fraud relating to the 2018 election of Mark Harris. The evidence of fraudulent absentee ballots was so overwhelming that the state board of elections has called for a new election.

The Republican scandals in the Tar Heel State have serious implications for the national party. North Carolina has become something of a swing state. Barack Obama won North Carolina in 2008 while Donald Trump carried the state by only four points in 2016.

The scandal may aid Democrats in their quest to capture the Senate as well. Thom Tillis, one of the state’s two Republican senators, is up for reelection next year. Tillis has served only one term after defeating Democrat Kay Hagan in the Republican wave of 2014.

Originally published on The Resurgent

February 22nd, 2019 NC House Race Gets Do-over After Voter Fraud Scandal

The contested race from the North Carolina ninth district is getting a do-over. Republican Mark Harris led in the vote count last November when allegations of voter fraud led the state board of elections to refuse to certify the results of the race. Now the board has unanimously called for a new election.

As Resurgent reported at the time, there was strong evidence of absentee ballot fraud on behalf of the Harris campaign. Sworn affidavits from voters alleged that Harris campaign workers picked up absentee ballots from voters, a violation of North Carolina law. Some voters also say that the campaign workers completed their ballots for them, which is also illegal.

The fraud, which was centered on Bladen County, is allegedly linked to a Harris staffer named Leslie McCrae Dowless. The Charlotte Observer noted that candidates who employ Dowless have a history of doing abnormally well with Bladen County absentee voters. Dowless was previously accused of tampering with absentee ballots in 2016 and was convicted of insurance fraud in 1992.

Statistics also pointed to fraud. Michael Blitzer, a political science professor at Catawba College, analyzed the absentee voting and found that Bladen County had a much higher share of absentee ballots than the other counties in the district. Seven percent of Bladen’s registered voters asked for absentee ballots compared with about three percent statewide.

Even though Bladen County Republicans requested only 19 percent of absentee ballots, Harris received 61 percent of the absentee mail vote there. What’s more, Bladen County was the only county in the district where Harris won the absentee mail vote. FiveThirtyEight noticed the same discrepancies in the Bladen returns.

Amid the controversy, Democrats said in December that they would refuse to seat Harris if the election results were certified by the state. This position left little choice for the state but to have a new election.

After initially opposing a new election, Harris relented last week. His change of heart came hours after state officials said that the Harris campaign had withheld documents relevant to the investigation of the fraud. Harris’ campaign attorney denied that the failure to provide the documents was intentional.

A new North Carolina law requires a primary in election do-overs so the upcoming matchup may not see Harris in a rematch against Democrat Dan McCready. It isn’t yet clear if Harris will run again, but McCready is already fundraising. Politico reports that the Democrat has raised $500,000 in new campaign contributions since he withdrew his concession.

Democrats and Republicans both agree that a new election is needed in the district. “It certainly was a tainted election,” said board chairman Bob Cordle, a Democrat. “I believe the people of North Carolina deserve a fair election.”

David Black, a Republican member of the board, agreed, saying, "This did not help the reputation of North Carolina, but we've turned the corner now."

Originally published on The Resurgent

Democrats Say They Will Refuse To Seat NC Republican Linked To Voter Fraud

Earlier this month The Resurgent described the case of the North Carolina ninth congressional district where the election of Republican Mark Harris has still not been certified. An investigation found a suspicious pattern in absentee votes for Harris and prompted the board to delay certification of the election results. On Friday, the board disbanded without certifying the election despite a last-minute petition by the Harris campaign. The dissolution of the board leaves the outcome of the election in uncertainty, but incoming House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) says that the House will not seat Harris.   

In an interview on MSNBC Friday, Hoyer said, “I simply said if Mr. Harris is not certified as the duly, fairly, legally elected member, we would certainly oppose his seating. And as I understand it, that verification has not come. In fact, Republican leaders in North Carolina have said that there is substantial question as to the validity of the outcome of the general election. That's in court now as you know.”

“We'll see what the court does, but it is clear apparently from all sides that there was fraud committed by certain participants in the administration of the election,” Hoyer continued. “Under those circumstances, we ought to have a new election for the general election, not the primary. The primary was not contested, but for the general election.”

If the House refuses to seat Harris, then a new election will be held in the district. New elections would include new primaries the Republican and Democratic nominations as well as the Libertarian Party which also fielded a candidate. 

Originally published on The Resurgent

Voter Fraud May Have Thrown This North Carolina Congressional Election

Voter fraud may have changed the outcome of a congressional election in North Carolina. For a change, the fraud allegations are against the Republicans and, rather than centering on a voter ID issue, the problem deals with absentee ballots, a weak link in the electoral systems of many states.

The race in North Carolina’s ninth district was called for Mark Harris, a Republican running to succeed Robert Pittenger, the Republican incumbent who was defeated in the primary. Harris, a Charlotte pastor, led Democrat Dan McCready by 905 votes on Election night and McCready conceded the next day. Over the next few weeks, irregularities in the election have caused the North Carolina Board of Elections to delay certifying the election. On Nov. 26, the board, which is made up of four Republicans, four Democrats and one nonpartisan, voted unanimously to delay until an investigation had been completed. The race is still officially undecided.

The investigation centers on absentee ballots in Bladen and Robeson Counties, two of the most rural counties of the district, and a staffer for the Harris campaign staffer who allegedly ran an operation that submitted hundreds of illegal ballots. Sworn affidavits and news reports allege that Leslie McCrae Dowless and other campaign workers would go to visit voters and have them fill out requests for absentee ballots. Mr. Dowless and others allegedly returned later to pick up the absentee ballots, which were sometimes unsealed, with the promise of submitting them.

Datesha Montgomery, a 27-year-old woman from Elizabethtown, N.C., said in sworn affidavit cited by ABC News that a woman “came by and asked for my absentee ballot” in early October.

“She states that [the woman] was collecting peoples [sic] ballots in the area. She had just come from another ladies [sic] house. I filled out two names on the ballot, Hakeem Brown for Sheriff and Vice Rozier for board of education. She stated the others were not important. I gave her the ballot and she said she would finish it herself. I signed the ballot and she left. It was not sealed up at any time,” Montgomery said in the affidavit.

Under North Carolina law, only the voter, the voter’s close relatives or legal guardian are allowed to drop off absentee ballots. Despite the law, at least five voters in addition to Montgomery have signed affidavits that present similar stories.

The case for fraud goes beyond voter testimony. There is also statistical evidence. The ninth district is made up of parts of eight counties. Michael Blitzer, a political science professor at Catawba College, analyzed the absentee voting and found that Bladen County had a much higher share of absentee ballots than the other counties in the district. Seven percent of Bladen’s registered voters asked for absentee ballots compared with about three percent statewide.

Even though Bladen County Republicans requested only 19 percent of absentee ballots, Harris received 61 percent of the absentee mail vote there. What’s more, Bladen County was the only county in the district where Harris won the absentee mail vote. FiveThirtyEight noticed the same discrepancies in the Bladen returns.

Blitzer also pointed out that Bladen County had an abnormally high rate of unreturned ballots. Forty percent of absentee ballots mailed out were never returned. The next highest ghosting rate was only 27 percent. This could indicate that some of the ballots that were picked up were discarded rather than turned in.

If that weren’t enough, WSOC, a local television station, interviewed Ginger Eason, whose name appears as a witness on 28 absentee ballots. Eason said that Dowless paid her $75 to $100 per week to pick up absentee ballots. This would have been a violation of the law if the voters were not Eason’s relatives. WSOC also listed seven other people who were listed as witnesses on an unusual number of absentee ballots.

Leslie McCrae Dowless, who goes by his middle name, is a longtime political operative in Bladen County who has a criminal history. Dowless, who turned in 592 of the 1,341 absentee ballots in Bladen, was convicted of insurance fraud in 1992. He was also accused of tampering with absentee ballots in 2016. That year two voters accused his workers of paying them to request absentee ballots. In one case, the requested absentee ballots were never delivered and the voter tried to vote in person, only to be told that ballots for her and her family had already been turned in. In another case, a get-out-the-vote activist working for Dowless was accused of telling the voter who she had to vote for.

Candidates supported by Dowless typically do very well in Bladen County, especially with absentee ballots. The Charlotte Observer pointed out that Todd Johnson, who Dowless worked for in the 2016 Republican primary, won 98 percent of Bladen’s absentee vote despite finishing third overall. In this year’s primary, Harris did nearly as well with 96 percent. Harris defeated Pittenger by only 828 votes in the primary so it is possible that absentee ballot fraud may have affected the outcome of that election as well.

Dowless has not responded to calls from new organizations but did deny any wrongdoing to the Charlotte Observer.

At this point, a resolution to the Bladen County absentee scandal is uncertain. The US Attorney is conducting an investigation and the Board of Elections will hold a hearing on or before Dec. 21. The board could call for a new election with the same candidates, including Libertarian Jeff Scott, who won just under two percent of the vote. If the state certifies the original election results, the House may also refuse to seat Harris. In that case, an entirely new election with new primaries would be held.

While this one congressional district won’t decide the fate of the House, it underscores the depth of the blue wave that Republicans would probably have lost another seat in a district that hasn’t gone Democrat since 1963 if a shady staffer hadn’t harvested hundreds of illegal votes. It is very possible that when the dust clears the Democrats will have added another Republican scalp to their midterm trophies.

The Bladen County scandal also undercuts the Republican message about ballot security and voter ID laws. The fact that Republicans appear to have paid for absentee votes and possibly discarded ballots containing votes for the Democratic candidate makes a mockery of the party’s planks calling for election security and voter verification. Republican efforts have concentrated on voter ID laws, but absentee ballots typically don’t require verification of identity.

Originally published on The Resurgent

NC Republican Is First Incumbent To Lose In 2018

Among the other election news from Tuesday were reports of the first incumbent to be ejected from Congress. The unlucky congressman was Robert Pittenger, a Republican from North Carolina’s 9^th district.

Mark Harris, a conservative pastor, upset Pittenger in a race that focused largely on the two candidates’ allegiance to Donald Trump. The Weekly Standard notes that the two men hotly debated who was the first to support Trump in 2016. Harris also criticized Pittenger for his vote for this year’s omnibus spending bill.

Pittenger defeated Harris in the Republican primary by 134 votes two years and then went on to win the general election by 16 points. Trump carried the district by 12 points. On Tuesday, Harris won by two percent or about 800 votes according to unofficial results.

Mark Harris is a Baptist minister and a past president of the North Carolina Baptist Convention. He was heavily involved in the fight to protect traditional marriage in the state.

The 9^th district may be competitive in the fall even though a Republican has held the seat since 1963. Dan McCready, the Democratic nominee, is a Marine veteran of the Iraq War, a small business owner and a Harvard graduate. McCready notes on his website that he “was baptized in water from the Euphrates river.”

The 9^th district runs from Charlotte east toward Fayetteville and encompasses a wide variety of voters. In addition to Charlotte’s eastern suburbs, it also includes Ft. Bragg and several poor counties in between.

McCready, a moderate Democrat similar to Pennsylvania’s Conor Lamb, has several potential advantages in the race. His military background may play well in the Ft. Bragg area. His website calls for pro-business and fiscally responsible policies in addition to typical Democrat issues such as healthcare and the environment. McCready also promised not to support Nancy Pelosi if he is elected.

In contrast, Harris is vulnerable to attack on some key issues. North Carolina’s WSOC-TV points out that unswerving allegiance to Trump may be a liability in a swing state where the president’s popularity is not high. A recent poll of North Carolinians showed Trump with 43 percent approval and 50 disapproval.

Harris is also likely to excite his Democratic opposition due to his role in the controversial “bathroom bill.” In 2016, Mother Jones described how Harris was among the leaders of opposition to a Charlotte “antidiscrimination” ordinance that would have allowed men who identify as women to use the women’s restroom. Harris’ notoriety means that liberals from around the country can be counted on to support his opponent.

Cook Political Report previously rated North Carolina’s 9^th district as “lean Republican” with Pittenger as a candidate, but the seat may become a likely pickup for Democrats now that Harris is the nominee. The combination of a more right-wing Republican and a moderate Democrat could spell trouble for the GOP in November. 

Originally published on The Resurgent

Federal Court Strikes Down N.C.'s 'Partisan' Gerrymander

In a blow to North Carolina Republicans, a panel of federal judges ruled on Tuesday that the state’s congressional map is an unconstitutionally “partisan” gerrymander. The ruling gave the state until 5 p.m. on Jan. 29 to submit a new map or the court would take further action.

The unanimous ruling by judges appointed by Barack Obama, Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush was the first time that a court has struck down congressional districts for being too partisan notes the Charlotte Observer, but the Wisconsin congressional map is currently on trial before the Supreme Court in a similar case.

In the North Carolina decision, the majority held, “On its most fundamental level, partisan gerrymandering violates ‘the core principle of republican government . . . that the voters should choose their representatives, not the other way around.”

Once part of the Republican bloc of Southern states, North Carolina has been increasingly purple in recent election cycles.  Only three of the state’s 13 congressional seats are held by Republicans, as are both Senate seats, but those statistics understate the fluid nature of Tarheel politics.

Democrat Kay Hagan was elected to the Senate in the 2008 Democrat wave, but was unseated by Thom Tillis in 2014. North Carolina’s other Republican senator, Richard Burr, took the seat of John Edwards, who retired in 2005 in order to run for vice president.  While the Republican candidate has won North Carolina in three of the last four presidential elections (2008 was the exception), margins have been close. Donald Trump carried the state by less than four points.

The current North Carolina congressional districts date back to 2016. The districts were redrawn to exclude racial data after a court found that the previous districts, drawn in 2011, were unconstitutional racial gerrymanders. At the time, Republicans were open about drawing districts to their advantage, a common practice in many states.

“I propose that we draw the maps to give a partisan advantage to 10 Republicans and three Democrats because I do not believe it’s possible to draw a map with eleven Republicans and two Democrats,” N.C. Rep. David Lewis (R-Harnett County) said at the time. Lewis’ comment was the basis for a lawsuit by the League of Women Voters and Common Cause in North Carolina that led to Tuesday’s ruling.

Dallas Woodhouse, executive director of the N.C. Republican Party, blasted the ruling on Twitter saying, “It is incredibly disappointing  activist Judge Jim Wynn is waging a personal, partisan war on North Carolina Republicans.” Woodhouse added that the decision was a “hostile takeover” of the North Carolina General Assembly, which has responsibility for drawing congressional districts.

North Carolina Republicans plan to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court, but a delay in redistricting may cause further problems as the 2018 elections approach. Congressional candidates must file to run for office by February 12, scarcely two weeks after the court’s deadline.

If the ruling stands and North Carolina’s congressional districts are redrawn to be less partisan, the new lines could contribute to an already tough election year for the GOP. The loss of safe congressional seats in North Carolina would come at a particularly bad time Republicans as many signs point toward Democrats winning control of the House of Representatives in a possible wave election this year. 

Originally published on The Resurgent

Looming recounts may extend election

If you thought the election was over except for the protests and the formality of the Electoral College, prepare to be disappointed. One recount has already been requested and experts are urging Hillary Clinton file for recounts in three states.

The first recount was requested by Pat McCrory, governor of North Carolina, on Tuesday according to Politico. McCrory, the Republican candidate, was trailing Democrat Roy Cooper, by more than 8,500 votes according to the Cooper campaign. McCrory’s campaign has alleged widespread voter fraud.

The first recount of this election season may not be the last. New York Magazine reports that a team of computer scientists has urged Hillary Clinton to file for recounts in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania citing signs that vote totals could have been manipulated.

J. Alex Halderman, director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society, was among the scientists who found a suspicious pattern of Clinton performing more poorly in counties with electronic voting machines than where paper ballots were used. The group said that the seven percent difference was large enough to raise the possibility that election computers could have been hacked.

So far no proof of tampering with the election has been found, but the large difference between counties with electronic voting machines and paper ballots is an anomaly that Halderman believes should be investigated. There may be other explanations for the discrepancy as well.

Donald Trump’s margins of victory in Michigan and Pennsylvania were less than one percent. Michigan has not been formally decided, but Clinton trails by 11,000 votes there. She lost Pennsylvania by 68,000 votes. Wisconsin had a margin of one percent, about 27,000 votes. Halderman’s statistical analysis, focused on Wisconsin, shows that there were enough suspicious votes to throw the outcome of these states into question. It would take a reversal of all three states to change the outcome of the Electoral College election, although faithless electors may change that total. As many as six electors have said that they will not vote for Donald Trump.

It is not clear if the suspicious pattern extends to other states as well. Also unclear is whether the North Carolina recount will examine presidential as well as gubernatorial votes.

The deadline to apply for a recount is looming in all three states. NY Magazine reports that Clinton supporters are lobbying for recounts and a forensic examination of voting machines, but the Obama Administration does not want the results challenged in order to smooth the transfer of power.

The possibility of Russian tampering with election results was raised prior to the election. The Obama Administration has blamed Russia for the hack of Democratic National Committee emails. Donald Trump has remained skeptical of the Russian connection, but Mike Pence has indicated that he believes that Russia was behind the email hack.

Whether Hillary will ask for a recount hasn’t been determined yet. The outcome of any recounts and investigation may not change the election, but it does raise the possibility that the election that everyone thought was settled might not be over yet.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Democrats may regain Senate majority

US Capitol (Diliff/Wikimedia)

A month ago, the GOP seemed to be the odds-on favorite to retain control of the Senate. With the tumultuous month of October behind us, the odds seem to have shifted slightly to favor the Democrats regaining control.

The Democrats have a structural advantage due to the fact that they are defending only 10 seats while Republicans are defending 24. Only one Democratic seat, the Nevada seat of the retiring Harry Reid, was considered at risk. A total of eight Republican seats, many in blue or purple states, are threatened. Many of these at-risk seats were won in the Tea Party wave election of 2010. Wave elections often allow weak candidates to win who cannot retain their seat when political conditions return to normal.

FiveThirtyEight puts the chances that the Democrats will win the Senate at over 60 percent. A recent blog post noted that four of the eight most hotly contested races have seen major shifts. Three races have shifted toward the Republicans and one toward the Democrats. Indiana, New Hampshire and Wisconsin have moved slightly toward the Republicans while Pennsylvania now favors the Democratic challenger.

Here are summaries on the battleground Senate races for Republican seats:

·         In Florida, Sen. Marco Rubio’s lead over Democrat Patrick Murphy has tightened slightly, but Rubio is still the clear favorite.

·         In Illinois, Sen. Mark Kirk’s seat is all but lost. Rep. Tammy Duckworth’s lead has widened to 13 points in the Real Clear Politics average after Kirk made an embarrassing comment about Duckworth’s heritage.

·         In Indiana, a race previously considered a Democrat lock, Rep. Todd Young (R) was tied with former Senator Evan Bayh (D) in a recent poll. FiveThirtyEight’s models show Young’s chances of taking the seat surging from 30 percent to 45 percent. The seat is currently held by Republican Dan Coats, who is retiring.

·         In Missouri, Sen. Roy Blunt is in a tossup race with Secretary of State Jason Kander. FiveThirtyEight gives the race as a 55 percent chance of going to the Democrats, a slight improvement for Blunt.

·         In New Hampshire, Sen. Kelly Ayotte seems to be maintaining a margin-of-error lead over Gov. Maggie Hassan. FiveThirtyEight has downgraded Hassan’s chances of winning the seat from 67 to 56 percent. The race is still a tossup, but with slightly better odds for Ayotte.

·         In North Carolina, Sen. Richard Burr’s race with state Rep. Deborah Ross is still a tossup. FiveThirtyEight puts Ross’s chances of taking the seat at 34 percent, down nine percent from two weeks ago.

·         In Ohio, Sen. Rob Portman’s seat seems to be reliably Republican. Portman holds a double-digit advantage over Gov. Ted Strickland.

·         In Pennsylvania, Sen. Pat Toomey has trailed Katie McGinty in nine straight polls. The race is still close, with McGinty leading by an average of less than four points, but FiveThirtyEight has moved the race from a tossup to a 73 percent chance of a Democratic victory.

·         In Wisconsin, Sen. Ron Johnson’s chances are still not good. Former Democrat Sen. Russ Feingold has consistently led the race. FiveThirtyEight says that the race has moved slightly in Johnson’s favor, but Feingold still has a 90 percent chance of retaking the seat.

The sole Democratic battleground seat is Nevada. This race is a tossup between Rep. Joe Heck (R) and Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto. Heck holds a slight advantage in the RCP average of polls, but FiveThirtyEight gives Cortez Masto almost a 60 percent chance of winning.

The current balance of power in the Senate is 54 Republicans to 46 Democrats (including independents). The Democrats need a net pickup of four seats to split control of the Senate or five seats to take a majority. In the case of a 50-50 split among the two parties, the incoming vice president can cast the deciding vote.

At this point, Democrats look likely to retain Harry Reid’s Nevada seat as well as pick up Republican seats in Illinois, Indiana, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. These four seats would be enough to split the Senate evenly with the Republicans.

The fifth seat, to give the majority to the Democrats, will likely come from either Missouri, New Hampshire or North Carolina. All three races are tossups and FiveThirtyEight gives Democrats the edge in both Missouri and New Hampshire.

Regardless of whether Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump wins the presidency, it has been viewed as critical for Republicans to hold the Senate. The Senate has the role of confirming judges and Supreme Court justices as well as confirming treaties. Any bills from the House’s Republican majority, which is likely safe, must go through the Senate before they are signed into law by the president.

The most recent round of polling gives little hope of preserving the Republican Senate majority. As Republican Senate hopes fade, so do hopes of everything from keeping liberal justices off of the Supreme Court to repealing and replacing Obamacare.

Originally published on The Resurgent