Polls Show Dead Heat In Georgia And Iowa While Biden Racks Up YUGE Cash Advantage

 Apair of new polls on Tuesday underscored the difficulty that Donald Trump’s campaign will have in eking out a victory as two red states fall into the tossup column. The news is made worse by the revelation that Joe Biden holds a fundraising advantage as the campaign enters its final phase.

In Georgia, an Atlanta Journal-Constitution poll showed Biden and Trump in a dead heat at 47 percent each. Another one percent backed Libertarian Jo Jorgensen. Only four percent were undecided.

The poll also showed close races for Georgia’s two Senate seats, although Republican David Perdue is running ahead of President Trump. Democrat Jon Ossoff trails Sen. Perdue by only two points while Kelly Loeffler narrowly leads a pack in the special election for her seat. Loeffler polls ahead of a crowded field with 24 percent while fellow Republican Doug Collins and Democrat Raphael Warnock both have 20 percent.

It is tempting to dismiss the poll as an outlier, but most recent polls have showed a close race. The outlier among recent polls is a WSB-TV survey that found Trump up by seven points.

In Iowa, the Des Moines Register found another 47-47 tie. This poll showed four percent supported another candidate with only three percent undecided.

As in Georgia, recent Iowa polls show a tight race. Trump has had only a 1-2-point advantage in the few polls conducted in the Hawkeye State since April.

With few voters undecided, there is scant opportunity for Donald Trump to pull ahead to a comfortable lead in these states that were assumed to be safe Republican territory. Even worse, Dick Morris’s maxim that undecided voters usually break for the challenger and against the incumbent may mean that Biden now has a slight structural advantage. In any case, the Trump campaign must expend resources to shore up states that should be safe.

And resources are getting thin. Politico reported that the Biden campaign out-raised Trump last month with a record-setting $365 million fundraising haul. The Biden campaign outspent Trump by two-to-one and still has a $466 million to $325 million advantage on cash reserves, a $141 million edge. The Trump campaign’s cash shortage has forced the cancellation of television ads in several battleground states, in most of which Trump is already trailing.

If the cash crunch persists, it will make it difficult for Team Trump to answer Biden’s final onslaught of ads. With early voting already underway, Donald Trump desperately needs a break in order to reverse Biden’s “Joe-mentum.” With a shortage of cash and bad poll results all over the map, that break won’t be easy to either find or exploit.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Trump Outraises Individual Dems But Is Behind the Pack

CNBC reports that President Trump’s 2019 fundraising haul far outpaces that of his Democratic rivals. The flip side, however, is that the combined group of Democratic hopefuls has more than tripled Trump’s take.

By the end of 2019, the Trump campaign had more than $100 million on hand after raising more than $46 million in the fourth quarter. The nearest Democratic contender was Bernie Sanders, who raked in $34.5 million. Joe Biden, the Democratic frontrunner, raised only $22.7 million. That’s the good news for Team Trump.

The bad news for Mr. Trump is that when all 14 Democrats are taken into account, the Trump campaign was outraised by $515 million to $143 million, 28 percent of the amount raised by the Democrats. If only individual contributions are considered, the president lagged the Democrats by $76 million to $471 million, 16 percent of what Democrats raised.

Trump’s fundraising gap is the worst of any recent incumbent. In 2011, President Obama raised 92 percent of the amount raised by his Republican rivals while George W. Bush raised more than his Democratic challengers in 2003.

“The field is trouncing Trump in fundraising and that is unprecedented,” Sarah Bryner, director of research and strategy at the Center for Responsive Politics, told CNBC.

The fact that Trump is running virtually unopposed in the Republican primary means that the president will start the general election campaign with a cash advantage over his Democratic challenger. The Democrats are earning smaller amounts and will have higher burn rates through the first half of the year as they wage primary battles against each other.

The big question is how effective the eventual Democratic nominee will be at uniting the party and rallying fundraisers to support his or her campaign. If the Democrats can keep the rate of contributions high through November, they may be able to drown out Trump’s messaging in the closing days of the campaign with a deluge of ads and outreach to voters.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Biden Has The Big Donors But Not The Big Bucks

Joe Biden has been much maligned as a Democratic candidate, but despite the gaffes and lackluster debate performances, the former vice president has proven to be resilient. Even though rumors of Biden’s ebb have persisted as long as he has been in the race, he remains the candidate to beat in the Democratic field, but a closer look at his campaign finances points out where his weakness lies.

Third-quarter fundraising data shows Biden running a distant fourth in campaign contributions. Bernie Sanders had the largest haul with $25.3 million followed closely by Elizabeth Warren with $24.6 million. Pete Buttigieg placed third in the money race with $19.1 million, trailed by Biden with $15.2 million. In all, the top 12 Democrats hauled in $128.5 million. By way of comparison, Donald Trump and the RNC raised $125 million over the same time period.

Disturbingly for the Biden campaign, the vice president’s third-quarter fundraising was down from $21.5 million in the second quarter. In contrast with the other leading candidates, Biden benefitted from Democratic big-money donors who previously supported Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Politico reported that Biden earned $20.7 million from contributions of at least $500. This was more than $1.5 million more than his nearest competitor. However, Biden’s big-money advantage was still not enough to overcome the small donors who gave to his rivals.

In the third quarter, 96 percent of Biden’s contributions came in amounts less than $200 with an average donation of $44. In contrast, Bernie Sanders received $10 million more with an average amount of $18. Elizabeth Warren’s average donation was $26 while Pete Buttigieg received an average of $32 from his donors. Even a quick look at the math reveals that more people are giving to Sanders, Warren, and Buttigieg than to Biden.

Yet despite the fundraising slump and months of predictions of doom, Joe Biden still sits atop the Democratic primary polls. Why would that be?

The answer is probably what I’ve been saying for months, namely that Biden is benefitting from a scenario similar to the situation that allowed Donald Trump to best 16 other Republicans for the nomination in 2016. Most of the Democrats are competing for a share of the woke, progressive Democratic base while Biden commands the largest part of the smaller share of moderate Democrats.

The progressive wing of the Democrats is more engaged and willing to send in contributions, giving the other candidates a fundraising edge, but Biden still commands the largest number of voters. Money matters but votes are what really count. The question is whether Biden can maintain his advantage in voters.

Originally published on The Resurgent

April 17th, 2019 Bernie Is The Big Winner In Democratic Fundraising

The fundraising reports are in for the first quarter of 2019. The big news was the $30 million raised by President Trump’s re-election campaign, but the fundraising stats from the plethora of Democratic candidates could shed some light on who donors consider to be a viable candidate. Fundraising numbers also provide access to an important platform for Democrats. Only candidates with at least 65,000 individual donors will qualify to participate in the first Democratic primary debate in June 2019.

Candidate reports from the first quarter, which are available on Open Secrets, show that Bernie Sanders is the undisputed money leader in the race so far. Sanders raised more than $18 million, not counting transfers from previous campaigns. More than $15 million of Sanders’ take was from small donors, reflecting his extensive grassroots network. This bodes well both for Bernie’s ability to continue to raise money and his ability to tap into his donor network to find volunteers to work his campaign.

Kamala Harris was in second place with a $12 million take, which also excludes transfers. In contrast with Sanders, Harris received more than half of her donations, $7.6 million, from large donors. Harris has shown a better ability to raise money than to garner support, averaging about eight percent in polling.

In third place was Beto O’Rourke with $9.3 million. As with Bernie, Beto raised more money from small donors, but about 40 percent of his donations also came from large donors. This shows a good mix of grassroots and wealthy backers.

Pete Buttigieg was the surprising fourth-place finisher with more than $7 million. Buttigieg, who averages about five percent in polling, also performed well with both small and large donors.

A quartet of congressional figures make up the next four finishers. The campaigns of Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar, Cory Booker, and Kirsten Gillibrand were boosted by transfers from prior campaign coffers but none seem to have gained traction either in the polls or with donors. Warren is the only candidate of the four to raise a significant amount ($4.2 million) from small donors. The others don’t seem to have much grassroots support.

When it comes to cash on hand, Bernie Sanders is the leader once again. The Sanders campaign has more than $15.6 million in the bank, which is significantly more than Elizabeth Warren, who was in second place with $11.2 million.

The next four on the list were boosted by transfers from previous campaigns. John Delaney, a former congressman from Maryland, has the third-largest war chest with $10.5 million. Gillibrand, Harris, and Klobuchar follow in order with accounts ranging from $10.1 to $6.9 million.

In the seventh and eighth positions are newcomers Beto O’Rourke and Pete Buttigieg. O’Rourke held $6.8 million while Buttigieg had $6.4 million. Both of these candidates have strong fundraising numbers and will likely see their bottom lines increase sharply in the coming months.

Rounding out the top-tier candidates is Cory Booker. The New Jersey senator had just over $6.1 million in his bank account at the end of the first quarter.

Obviously, the big winner in the fundraising race so far is Bernie Sanders. His strong fundraising among small donors reflects a veritable army of dedicated grassroots supporters that will present a formidable opponent for the other Democratic hopefuls.

Other winners include Beto O’Rourke and Pete Buttigieg. The newcomers both had surprisingly strong showings that will enable them to get their names and messages out to primary voters. Fox Business reported that average donation for the Buttigieg campaign was $36.35. Simple math shows that this would almost certainly give the recently unknown candidate a place in the first debate.

Kamala Harris was also a winner. As the second-place fundraiser, her campaign is bringing in enough cash to keep going for the foreseeable future despite a poor showing in the polls.

The big loser was Elizabeth Warren who had very disappointing fundraising numbers. Her previous frontrunner status stands in stark contrast to her current status as a has-been who has generated little interest. Warren has a large war chest, however, so don’t look for her to drop out any time soon.

Everyone else was also a loser. The group of Washington insiders, Klobuchar, Booker, and Gillibrand, also had disappointing results, in terms of both polling and fundraising. Large war chests will enable these candidates to stay in the race at least until the first debate.

The plethora of other candidates may not be so lucky. The numerous small and unknown candidates may start dropping out soon. If they don’t start to gain enough traction to get a seat at the debate, there will be little reason for them to stay in the race.

The wild card is Joe Biden. Biden is not reflected in the fundraising numbers despite leading in the polls because he does not have an active campaign yet. If Biden is serious about running, he is working to prepare potential donors to start giving as soon as he makes his announcement. The former vice president and senator is an experienced politician with an extensive network from his previous campaigns. He will hope to outraise the $6.1 million raised by Beto and the $5.9 million garnered by Bernie in the first 24 hours of their campaigns to affirm his status as the frontrunner.

Finally, Republicans should not feel too confident despite Donald Trump’s $30 million haul. While this is more than any Democrat, it should be noted that Democratic fundraising is splintered among a crowded field and many Democrat donors may be waiting for Joe Biden to enter the race. Despite Trump’s impressive number, it only takes two Democratic candidates, Bernie Sanders, and Kamala Harris, to eclipse the president’s haul. It may not be long before Democratic donors rally behind a presumed nominee and President Trump’s fundraising lead begins to quickly erode.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Tom Steyer Pours Millions Into Liberal Candidates As Kochs Close Spigot For GOP

Billionaire hedge fund manager Tom Steyer plans to spend at least $100 million on leftist politics in 2018. Rather than just giving directly to Democratic candidates and organizations, Steyer is building a parallel structure that could give his preferred candidates an important boost as the Koch brothers, deep pocket Republican donors are scaling back their support for the Trump-era GOP.

Politico reports that Steyer is pouring his cash into organizations such as NextGen America, Need to Impeach and his For Our Future PAC as well as individual candidates and clean energy ballot initiatives in Arizona and Nevada. Steyer’s main two organizations have almost 1,000 staffers and another 2,000 volunteers.

The groups have the potential to sway close elections. Need to Impeach has already identified nearly 700,000 infrequent voters in the 63 most competitive House districts from its email list. The list totals more than 5.5 million people.

“Our list is bigger than the NRA’s — and we’re going to make sure that it votes that way in 2018,” said Kevin Mack, the group’s lead strategist.

Steyer’s focus on impeachment runs counter to the conventional wisdom. Internal polling found that only 32 percent of Democrats wanted candidates to avoid talking about impeachment while 59 percent were in favor of using the possibility of impeachment as an election issue. Democratic leaders feared a Republican backlash if Democrats campaigned on impeachment, but Steyer’s polling of Republicans showed that only 21 percent were worried that a Democrat-controlled House would impeach Trump.

These numbers may be explained by the fact that Democrats are far more likely to take control of the House than the Senate. House Democrats could impeach Trump, but a Republican Senate would be unlikely to remove him from office. If Trump was removed from office, Vice President Pence would become president, arguably giving congressional conservatives a boost.

“There’s all this concern in Washington that impeachment is going to rile up Republicans, but our numbers show the opposite. … It’s time to get past the establishment talking points and get to what’s really going to win elections,” Mack said, noting that the “21 percent of Republicans… aren’t going to vote for us anyway.”

As Steyer’s spending ramps up, the largest Republican donors are closing their wallets. The Koch brothers announced over the weekend that they regretted supporting some candidates who were disappointing in their support for the brothers’ libertarian principles.

“We're going to be much stricter,” Charles Koch said. Koch added that their network of organizations would also “hold people responsible for their commitments.”

The Kochs had previously planned to invest $400 million in the 2018 election cycle, but Mr. Koch hinted that those plans might change, saying, “Where we invest is where we find an opportunity where our capabilities can make a difference, and so we'll engage in politics to the degree in which it's really moving our overall agenda. If we don't see that, then we'll go into these other areas.”

Even more troublesome for Republicans, Koch said that his network would consider supporting moderate or conservative Democrats.

“What I'm OK with are policies that will move us toward a society of mutual benefit, equal rights, where everybody has the opportunity to realize their potential,” said Koch. “So, I don't care what initials are in front or after somebody's name.” He added, “We would love for there to be more Democrats who support these issues.”

Already, Americans for Prosperity, a Koch-backed group, has publicly praised Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D) for supporting a Dodd-Frank reform bill and Joe Manchin (D-W.V.) for agreeing to meet with President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh.

President Trump responded to the Koch announcement in characteristic fashion. In a series of tweets, the president called the Kochs “a total joke” with a “highly overrated” network. The president says he “never sought their support because I don’t need their money,” but other Republican candidates who are not independently wealthy will certainly miss the Koch money.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Analysis: GOP House Map Is Toughest Since 1930

With just over three months until Election Day, the question on everyone’s mind is whether there will be a blue wave or, as some Republicans suggest, a red wave. Perhaps the tsunami will simply peter out and preserve the status quo in Congress. A new analysis from the Cook Political Report offers Republicans the disquieting news that the House electoral map is their toughest in almost 100 years.

“With 102 days to go, Democrats remain substantial favorites for House control,” David Wasserman writes. “A big reason: Republicans are defending 42 open or vacant seats, a record since at least 1930.”

Republicans are defending 42 open seats this year. Of those, eight are in districts won by Hillary Clinton and another 13 are in districts in which President Trump received less than 55 percent of the vote.

“History is working against the GOP in many of those seats,” said Wasserman. We found that since 1992, in situations when a president's party was stuck defending an open seat two years after the president failed to carry it, that party has batted zero for 23 keeping it in their column.”

The current party breakdown in the House is 236 Republicans and 193 Democrats (with six vacancies). The 43-seat Republican margin means that Democrats need to win 22 seats to take control of the lower chamber. If, as history suggests, Republicans lose the eight seats in districts carried by Hillary, that would carry Democrats a third of the way to a majority before any other factors are considered.

Wasserman also points out that another ongoing trend within the Republican primary is to purge candidates who have shown insufficient loyalty to President Trump. Many Trump critics have chosen this year to retire, but some, such as Rep. Mark Sanford in South Carolina’s first district, have been fired by Republican voters in elections where support for the president is a “dominant theme.” The purge of non-Trumpers could come back to bite Republicans in November.

The loyalty test puts Republican candidates in a similar position to Democrats during the Obama Administration. Recent headlines have trumpeted the president’s recent rise in approval ratings, but the buried lede is that Mr. Trump’s approval is still in the low 40s per the FiveThirtyEight average of polls, similar to Barack Obama’s approval in the last six years of his presidency.

Even though both Obama and Trump are immensely popular within their own parties, they are unpopular with voters at large. This meant that Democrats had to run close to Obama in the primary and then distance themselves from him in the general election. The fact that Republicans won control of both houses of Congress (as well as many statehouses) during the Obama years shows how difficult this is to accomplish. This year, Republicans face the same challenge of proving loyalty to President Trump in the primary and then facing an electorate that disapproves of the president.

Republicans candidates also face a fundraising gap, Wasserman notes. The leading Democrat raised more than the Republican in 20 of the 42 Republican open seats between April and June. This was not only true in all but one of the districts carried by Hillary, but also in 13 of 34 districts carried by Trump.

As noted previously in The Resurgent, Republican super PACs are expected to make up some of the fundraising difference. The down side, however, is that PAC money may be spread thin due to the large number of vulnerable Republicans.

Donations to candidates are a measure of voter excitement as well as financial strength. The fact that Democrats are outraising Republicans, including some incumbents, at the district level is indicative of an enthusiasm gap that could spell disaster for the GOP in November.

In all, the current Cook analysis shows 37 tossup seats, 34 of which are Republican. Another 53 Republicans seats are rated as “likely” or “lean” as opposed to 11 Democrat seats. Cook rates 153 Republican and 181 Democrat seats as “solid.”

The next race to watch is the special election in Ohio’s 12^th district on August 7. The race for an open Republican seat pits Republican Troy Balderson against Democrat Danny O’Connor in a district that Trump won by 11 points. Cook currently rates the race as a tossup even though Balderson led in two June polls. If Balderson is unable to muster a strong win in this solidly red district, it could be a bellwether for other Republican candidates with less favorable circumstances.

There are many pieces of evidence that point individually to a looming Republican disaster. No one of them is conclusive evidence of a blue wave, but, when taken together, they paint a picture that should make the GOP very uneasy.

Nevertheless, all is not lost for Republicans. Good candidates can overcome financial disadvantages and bad ones can blow an easy opportunity, something that Republicans should have learned in the Obama years as well.

“If you really want to track 2018, do yourself a favor,” Wasserman said on Twitter. “Go beyond fancy models/big data. Get to know the people running.”

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1022112407064403976

Originally published on The Resurgent

Democrats Have A YUGE Fundraising Advantage Over House Republicans

One of the big questions of 2018 is whether the Democrats hoped-for “Blue Wave” will materialize this November. President Donald Trump’s unpopularity has not necessarily translated into a boost for the Democrats, however. Generic party preference polls have been up and down with Republicans even leading at times. New Federal Election Commission data shows that donors are already voting with their wallets and it paints a bleak picture for the GOP.

Politico analyzed FEC filings for the second quarter and found that Democrats in 56 House districts outraised their Republican opponents. In 16 cases, House Republicans finished the quarter with less cash on hand than their Democrat challenger while there were no cases in which House Democrats had less money than their Republican challenger.

In battleground districts, many contested due to retiring Republicans, more than two dozen Democrats led the Republican in fundraising. In 19 of these tossup districts, the Democrat had more cash on hand than the Republican.

In all, 22 Democrats running in Republican districts raised more than $1 million over the past three months, a difficult accomplishment for challengers, many of whom are relatively unknown. These Democrats received large one-time contributions from liberal organizations such as Daily Kos and Swing Left in addition to donations from online sources, Democrats around the country and donors within their districts. Only three Democrats earned more than $1 million purely from their own donors.

While several sitting Republicans raised more than $1 million, other GOP incumbents are lagging. Among the vulnerable incumbents are Dana Rohrabacher in California and Dave Brat of Virginia.

The Democrat fundraising advantage is partly offset by large donations to the Republican super PAC that is backing House candidates. The Congressional Leadership Fund received a record $51 million in the second quarter to add to the more than $70 million already in the bank, but many analysts argue that the lack of giving to specific Republican candidates points to a problem at the district level.

The Republican fundraising picture is looking worse than the Democrats in 2010 prior to the Tea Party wave. In the second quarter of 2010, 44 incumbent Democrats trailed Republicans in fundraising and eight Republicans had more cash on hand than their incumbent opponent. In that election, Republicans gained 60 House seats.

Campaign money does not necessarily translate into votes. In past races, Democratic fundraising has not always helped their candidates win the seat. For example, in 2017 Democrat Jon Ossoff set fundraising records for a special election in Georgia, but ultimately lost the election.

Nevertheless, campaigns flush with cash have an easier time getting out their message and motivating voters. In local races, name recognition can count for a lot and campaigns with money can blanket the airwaves and street corners with the candidate’s name and picture. Campaign contributions are also a measure of the level of support for a candidate.

“From a money standpoint, it’s scary. From a turnout perspective and what all this money means for intensity [in November], that’s even scarier,” said Glen Bolger, a Republican pollster who focuses on House races.

“This is shaping up to be the Democratic equivalent of the 2010 Republican year, and a lot of these members have never seen this or run in a cycle like it before,” Bolger added. “But the list of outraised candidates is getting longer, not shorter.”

The Congressional Leadership Fund’s executive director, Corry Bliss, said that the PAC money will blunt the Democratic advantage, but seemed to acknowledge that some Republican seats will be lost.

“Those who are not willing to help themselves should not complain when outside support does not come their way,” Bliss said.

Chris LaCivita, a Republican consultant agreed that the fundraising problems spell trouble for Republican incumbents despite the Republican advantage in PAC money.

“If you allow yourself to be outraised, then you are inviting trouble,” LaCivita said. “In a midterm election with your party in power, trouble generally equates to defeat.”

“These guys need to wake up and take a look in the mirror and decide — do they want to be reelected?” he added.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Jones Has Heavy Advantage Over Moore in Ads and Fundraising

Roy Moore is still in a close race with Democrat Doug Jones, but you might not know it from watching Alabama television. The Democratic candidate is spending about seven times more than the scandal-plagued Republican. Jones has aired about 10,000 television ads compared to about 1,000 for Moore.

“I saw probably 40 to 50 Doug Jones ads, and I saw one Roy Moore ad,” Daniel Deriso, an aide to the Democratic mayor-elect of Birmingham, said of the Thanksgiving break.

Politico reports that Jones held a financial advantage even before the accusations of sexual misconduct against Moore. Since the reports of Moore’s alleged misbehavior in the late 1970s became public, online donations to the Jones campaign have rolled in from around the country. At the same time, the Moore campaign took a hit as the Republican National Committee cut off support.

AL.com gave Moore a slight fundraising advantage in late October. At that point, Moore had raised $2.5 million through the end of September and had $543,000 on hand after the difficult primary fight. Jones had raised $1.6 million and had a balance of $1 million. Three weeks later, after Moore’s accusers came forward, the Washington Examiner reported that Jones was raising $250,000 per day.

The fundraising advantage gives Jones the upper hand in the race, which is rare for Democrats in deep red Alabama. Even amid the ongoing scandal and with scant support from national Republicans, polling shows a tight race with Moore and Jones in a dead heat. Jones’ ability to drown out Moore’s message in a blitz of advertising may be the deciding factor in the race.

Politico notes that Jones’ ads are aimed at Republicans who are not happy with Moore. The ads feature Republican critics of Moore, criticisms of the healthcare system and emphasize Jones’ background as a federal prosecutor, a nonpartisan position that helps to distance him from the national Democratic Party. The ads feature quotes from Ivanka Trump, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, and Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Al.) saying that they believe Moore’s accusers.

The Jones campaign is flush enough with ad money that it is moving beyond attacking Moore’s sexual history to education policy. In a new ad, Jones says that Moore “compares preschool and early childhood education to Nazi indoctrination” while Jones promises to work “across party lines for preschool and smaller class sizes.”

Appearing as nonthreatening and bipartisan is vital for Jones. Fifty-two percent of Alabamans identify as Republicans and half say they are conservative. There is no path to victory in a statewide election for a Democrat who cannot win Republican votes.

It is Jones’ liberal views that are his Achilles heel in conservative Alabama. His opposition to restrictions on abortion has made him vulnerable to attacks in a state where 57 percent of voters identify as pro-life. Still, some Alabamans find the accusations against Moore too much to overlook.

“I’d like to see someone in there who’d support Trump, but I believe the women,” Suzanne Turner of Huntsville told the Washington Post. “I put a Doug Jones sign in my yard. I felt a little sick doing that. But I had to.”

The race is reminiscent of last summer’s special election in Georgia in which Democrats pinned their hopes and treasure on Jon Ossof. Ossof outspent Republican Karen Handel by six to one in the race for former Secretary of Health and Human Services Tom Price’s congressional seat, but still lost a close race.

As the campaign enters the final stretch, it will be Jones whose message inundates the airwaves and sets the tone. Jones will be able to paint himself as a nonthreatening moderate while hammering away with the argument that Moore is an extremist and a sexual predator. In Alabama, it may still not be enough. 

Originally published on The Resurgent

Major Conservative Donor Dumps Steve Bannon... For Mitch McConnell

Politics is a finicky business. One week you’re the kingmaker, sitting atop the GOP and the next you’re cast aside for your arch-enemy, the establishment RINO in charge of the Senate. This is the month that Steve Bannon is having.

After Roy Moore’s victory over incumbent Senator Luther Strange in Alabama, the former White House strategist and alt-right media mogul was on top of the world. He had just bumped off the establishment pick for the seat of now-Attorney General Jeff Sessions and there was talk that Bannon was now the de facto head of the Republican Party. The insurgent strategist announced plans to challenge every sitting Republican senator who came up for re-election in 2018. Luther Strange was to be only his first victim.

Even before the story of Roy Moore’s affinity for underage girls broke, things were starting to crumble for Bannon. In early November, Robert Mercer, a hedge fund billionaire and major conservative donor, announced that he was selling his stake in Breitbart, Bannon’s alt-right website. In his announcement, Mercer cited differences with Bannon and Milo Yiannopoulos, an alt-right firebrand elevated to stardom on Breitbart who was revealed to have links to white nationalists and a soft spot for pedophilia.

The hits seem to just keep on coming for Bannon.

Now Sheldon Adelson, another billionaire conservative donor, has announced that he is breaking ties with Steve Bannon. To add insult to injury, Adelson is making clear that he is not just breaking off relations with Bannon, he is declaring war on the populist wing of the GOP.

“The Adelsons will not be supporting Steve Bannon’s efforts,” Andy Abboud, an Adelson spokesman, told Politico. “They are supporting Mitch McConnell 100 percent. For anyone to infer anything otherwise is wrong.”

Adelson’s break with Bannon comes a day after he addressed the Zionists of America and called on the Jewish group to “work as partners” against the Republican establishment per Haaretz. Adelson, who is Jewish, was originally slated to introduce Bannon at the gala event.

The break between Adelson and Bannon seems to have little to do with Zionism or Bannon’s alleged but unproven anti-Semitism and everything to do with Bannon’s attempted hostile takeover of the Republican Party. With little to show from the Republican control of Washington and retirements mounting from experienced congressional Republicans, last week’s Democrat sweep of the off-year elections and the sudden implosion of Roy Moore’s campaign were apparently the last straw.

Bannon’s problems with Moore and Yiannopoulos were both due to insufficient vetting. Internet sleuths found embarrassing videos of Yiannopoulos while the Washington Post investigated longstanding rumors about Moore. With Bannon openly supporting Kelli Ward in Arizona, a Republican senatorial candidate who once hosted a town hall meeting with chemtrails as the subject, Adelson must have been wondering what other surprises he could expect from Bannon’s handpicked candidates.

Mitch McConnell may not be the most charismatic or conservative of Republicans, but he is a survivor who helped to rebuild the party after the Democrat wave election in 2008. Sheldon Adelson has apparently decided that the Bannon revolution has run its course and decided to choose experience over populist anger.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Signs Point To Democrat Wave Building For 2018

2018 is shaping up to be a year of great uncertainty. What will happen to Obamacare? Will tax reform become law? What of the myriad investigations of Russian interference in the election? Along with these questions, there is growing doubt about the Republican Party’s ability to hold its congressional majorities in the 2018 elections.

Josh Kraushaar of National Journal writes that many House Republicans are “increasingly alarmed” that Republican congressmen in vulnerable seats are not doing the fundraising work that is needed to defend themselves from Democrat challengers.

“Of the 53 House Republicans facing competitive races, according to Cook Political Report ratings, a whopping 21 have been outraised by at least one Democratic opponent in the just-completed fundraising quarter,” Kraushaar writes. “That’s a stunningly high number this early in the cycle, one that illustrates just how favorable the political environment is for House Democrats.”

Among the Republicans Kraushaar mentions by name are Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.), who only raised about a third as much as his leading Democrat rival, John Culberson (R-Texas), Claudia Tenney (R-N.Y.) and Leonard Lance (R-N.J.). These seats are all rated as “lean Republican” by the Cook Political Report, but the incumbent Republicans are falling far behind Democrat challengers in fundraising.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.), who has been criticized for his support of Vladimir Putin and Russia, has only $600,000 in the bank according to the report. His Orange County, California district is in an expensive media market where much more advertising money will be needed. Rohrabacher’s seat is currently rated as a tossup.

Adding to the Republican finance problems are primary challenges from the right. Rohrabacher will be facing a Republican primary challenger in addition to a Democrat in the general election. Former White House strategist and sometimes Trump supporter Steve Bannon is supporting primary challenges to many sitting Republicans.

Republicans currently hold a 46-seat majority in the House of Representatives. If Democrats can win 23 seats, it would tip the balance of power in the lower chamber. Per the Cook Political Report, Republicans currently have 12 tossup seats in the House. This includes two open seats in Washington and Michigan. An additional 23 seats lean Republican, but this includes the four seats mentioned earlier where the Republican incumbent is likely to be outspent by large margins.

In contrast, Cook only rates three Democrat seats as tossup. These are all open due to retirements. Six seats lean Democrat and one of these is Florida’s 27^th congressional district where a Republican, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, is retiring.

In fact, Ros-Lehtinen is only one of 18 House Republicans who have announced their plans to retire in 2018. Cook’s David Wasserman notes that so far only four of these retirements are in vulnerable districts, but, with a months to go before the primary season starts, that could change.

In the Senate, things are a bit more solid for Republicans. The only two tossup seats are Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) and Dean Heller (R-Nev.). Democrats have three seats rated as tossups (Donnelly in Indiana, McCaskill in Missouri, and Manchin in West Virginia) so they would have to run the table to bring the Senate to a tie. In that case, Vice President Pence would cast the deciding vote on legislation, but Republican bills would be even more vulnerable to defections by mavericks like Rand Paul (R-Ky.), John McCain (R-Ariz.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Susan Collins (R-Maine).

The reason for the Republican fundraising slump is likely two-fold. Donald Trump’s popularity is not good. This is especially true in swing districts held by vulnerable Republicans. Some Republican incumbents may be tainted by their association with the unpopular president.

Even among Republican voters, the current Congress is not popular. The failure to pass any sort of Obamacare reform bill cemented the perception of a do-nothing Congress. A CNN poll last month showed that twice as many Republican voters support the president as Republican congressional leaders.

As the congressional stalemate has become more apparent, Republican donors have closed their wallets. The party is pinning its hopes for 2018 on the success of tax reform since it has few other accomplishments to show for its majority. A senior House Republican strategist said that he expects many more Republicans to retire if tax reform fails.

It is far from certain that Democrats will take control of the House in 2018, but current trends are not looking good for vulnerable Republicans. If the Democrats win control of the House, it would fundamentally change Donald Trump’s presidency as the Republican takeover of the House in 2010 did for Barack Obama. More ominously for President Trump, a Democratic majority would open the door for a possible impeachment.  

Originally published on The Resurgent  

Is Trump campaign closing up shop two weeks early?

With less than two weeks to go until Election Day, there are indications that the Trump campaign is closing up shop early. Two new reports indicate that Trump may be leaving other Republicans to hold the bag as he prepares to go back to his day job.

The Washington Post reported that Trump has stopped holding fundraisers for Trump Victory, the joint fundraising committee between the Republican Party and the Trump campaign. Steven Mnuchin, the Trump campaign’s finance chairman, said that the last formal fundraiser was held on October 19, the day of the last presidential debate, and that no more events were scheduled. In contrast, the Clinton campaign had 41 events scheduled between publication of the article on October 25 and Election Day.  

“We’ve kind of wound down,” Mnuchin said, two full weeks before the election. “But the online fundraising continues to be strong.”

The Post reported that Trump Victory raised more than $40 million through the end of September. The funds were used to pay field staffers who are working to get out the Republican vote. Lew Eisenburg, chairman of Trump Victory, said “when the opportunity presents itself, we will have ad hoc fundraisers” with Trump and vice-presidential candidate Mike Pence.

Mnuchin said that Trump’s focus would be on campaign events rather than fundraising. “We have minimized his fundraising schedule over the last month to emphasize his focus on political [events]. Unlike Hillary, who has been fundraising and not out and about, he has constantly been out and about.”

“We couldn’t be more pleased with how the fundraising has gone,” Mnuchin continued. “We have big media buys, we have a terrific ground game.”

Mnuchin is correct on media buys, if not the ground game. For the first time in the campaign, Trump is outspending Clinton on campaign ads. Bloomberg reports that for the week of October 18, Trump spent $14.4 million to Clinton’s $13.9 million. Over the course of the campaign, Clinton has outspent Trump by about three to one.

The downside to Trump’s decision to end fundraising events may be the effect on down ballot races. With the probability of a Hillary presidency looming, maintaining a Republican Congress is the key to stopping Hillary’s liberal agenda. Without Trump Victory as a source of funds, many vulnerable Republican incumbents in close races may be ousted by Democrats.

If he isn’t fundraising, what is Trump doing with his time? With the countdown to the election marked in days and Trump trailing in the swing states, Politico reports that he’s getting back to the business of building his brand. On Monday, Trump kicked off a nightly internet newscast that many feel may be a precursor to a Trump network. On Tuesday, Trump held a press event at the Trump National Doral Miami where he bragged that his property was “one of the great places on earth.” On Wednesday, he took time out from the campaign to attend a ribbon-cutting at the new Trump hotel located in the Old Post Office in Washington, D.C.

“Politics is a side hobby for Trump, kind of like fishing or model railroading. Hotels, that’s serious business, and I hear the hotel is fabulous,” Curt Anderson, a top Republican strategist, told Politico. “Which of his aides would like to take credit for scheduling this trip to D.C.? Is no one able to stand up to this guy? No one at all?”

Originally published on The Resurgent