Democrats Are on Pace for a Down-Ballot Blowout

Much can change in the months between today and election day in November, 2020, but if current trends hold, not only will Trump likely be ejected from the White House but so too will many down ballot Republicans. While some Republicans try to pretend they are distanced from Trump, increasingly - and I would argue, correctly - voters see no line of separation between down ballot Republicans and Trump.  Truth be told, all of the GOP is now complicit in the nightmare that is the Trump/Pence regime and need to be punished at the polls accordingly.  A piece in New York Magazine looks at what may prove to be a decimation of down ballot Republicans.  Let's keep fingers crossed that Trump's woes worsen and that the GOP goes down with his sinking ship.  Here are article excerpts:

By now, you are probably aware that Donald Trump’s poll numbers have seen better days. [Trump] The president trails Joe Biden by an average of 9.6 percent in RealClearPolitics’s poll of polls. On Tuesday, USA Today/Suffolk’s poll — which had Trump leading Biden last December — showed the Democratic nominee ahead by 12. No incumbent president has ever trailed by this much at this point in an election cycle. Trump’s numbers have been so uniformly and egregiously bad, even the poll-unskewer-in-chief admitted last week that he was losing telling Sean Hannity that Joe Biden is “gonna be your president because some people don’t love me, maybe.”

The GOP’s abysmal polling in the congressional generic ballot has garnered less attention. In today’s Suffolk poll, voters favored a Democratic Congress over a Republican one by 14 points. In 538’s polling average, Democrats boast a nine-point lead on the question of which party’s congressional candidates voters intend to support. In 2018, Democrats won the House “popular vote” by roughly eight points, the party’s best showing since the Watergate scandal, and a margin large enough to turn more than 40 districts blue. Thus, current national polling suggests Democrats are poised to consolidate their midterm gains and make further inroads into Republican territory this fall. And as the New York Times’s Nate Cohn notes, surveys of discrete swing-district House races are consistent with that story: We've got three Dem polls this morning, all generally apocalyptic for the GOP Even in TX-06 (and GOP+4 in the House race) Biden+10 in IN-05 (and D+6 in the House) Biden+2 in MO

Republicans can lose the popular vote in a rout this November and still retain their Senate Majority. But if Biden beats Trump by ten points — while Democratic House candidates outpace GOP ones by nine — Chuck Schumer will probably be a Majority Leader come January.

Notably, a 2020 down-ballot landslide would represent a marked departure from events four years ago. Even as Hillary Clinton won the popular vote in 2016, Republican congressional candidates won 1.1 percentage points more ballots than their Democratic adversaries. This was partly attributable to the (then) GOP House majority’s incumbency advantages. But it also ostensibly reflected a widespread perception that congressional Republicans — and Donald J. Trump — were very different political entities.

Four years later, swing voters no longer recognize much distinction between [Trump] the president and his party. The GOP’s loudest Trump skeptics have either been evicted from Congress or converted to the faith. On impeachment, coronavirus, and just about everything in between, congressional Republicans have made [Trump's] the president’s cause their own. And the public has taken note.

Being Trump's VP Choice - Like Buying a Ticket on the Titanic?

For the better part of three decades or more the Republican Party has coddled, pandered to and embraced Christian extremists and those most motivated by hatred of others being it based on race, national origin, or sexual orientation.  The goal?  Short term election victories based on voters motivated by animus towards others.  Yet now, the so-called GOP establishment continues to display revulsion toward the natural outcome of the seeds that it sowed: Donald Trump.  In a column in the New York Times George Will - who seems to be becoming a slightly milder version of Pat Buchanan - is urging Republicans to do all they can to keep Trump out of the White House while striving to minimize the potential down ticket carnage he and others fear Trump would bring in November. Indeed, Will even speculated on who would be the best VP choice for Hillary Clinton to insure a Trump defeat (he likes Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio).

Now, a piece in the Times looks at the manner in which many in the GOP are fleeing from the prospect of being Trump's vice presidential running mate - something Senator Lindsey Graham equates to "buying a ticket on the Titanic."  Will in his column states that any Trump VP choice will be inherently unqualified because no one qualified would want the position and electoral doom.  Perhaps I am too much the cynic, but I am finding great pleasure in seeing the GOP reap the whirlwind of its own creation.  Here are highlights from the New York Times piece:

It’s a time-honored tradition for politicians to deny any interest in the vice presidency. But this year, with the possibility of Donald J. Trump as the Republican nominee, they really mean it.

“Never,” said Chris Schrimpf, a spokesman for Gov. John Kasich of Ohio, who is still running against Mr. Trump. “No chance.”

Or, as Senator Lindsey Graham put it, “That’s like buying a ticket on the Titanic.”

A remarkable range of leading Republicans, including Gov. Nikki Haley of South Carolina and Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona, have been emphatic publicly or with their advisers and allies that they do not want to be considered as Mr. Trump’s running mate. The recoiling amounts to a rare rebuke for a front-runner: Politicians usually signal that they are not interested politely through back channels, or submit to the selection process, if only to burnish their national profiles.

But Mr. Trump has a singular track record of picking fights with obvious potential running mates like Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, who has indicated a lack of interest in the vice presidency generally and has yet to reconcile with Mr. Trump publicly. Ms. Haley and another potential pick, Gov. Susana Martinez of New Mexico, have sharply criticized Mr. Trump at recent party gatherings and do not want to be associated with his sometimes-angry tone, according to advisers and close associates who have spoken with these Republicans.

Several Republican consultants said their clients were concerned that Mr. Trump’s unusually high unfavorable ratings with all voters and his unpopularity among women and Hispanics could doom him as a general election candidate and damage their own future political prospects if they were on his ticket.

A cross section of leading Republicans agree that his most sensible choice would be an experienced female governor or senator, given that he would most likely face Hillary Clinton in November and need support from a majority of white women to offset her strong support among blacks and Hispanics. Yet Mrs. Clinton is currently ahead of Mr. Trump with white women by double-digit percentages, according to a recent CBS poll.

The pool of Republican women in major offices is relatively small, and Mr. Trump has already alienated some of them. Governor Haley denounced him for not quickly disavowing support from the former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, and Governor Martinez has criticized his remarks about Hispanics.

Fox Business News: Romney Donors Shifting Money to GOP House and Senate Candidates

If what Fox Business News is reporting is true - i.e., that the big money donors are beginning to shift their money from the Romney/Ryan ticket to the GOP House and Senate races - it can only mean that the big money GOP fat cats see Romney/Ryan as dead meat and have concluded that they do not want to throw their money down a losing rat hole.   It is perhaps too early to know if this report is true and I hope no one who sees the GOP as an obstacle to progress, but it seems to be encouraging.  Here are some highlights from the Fox Business News article:

The Romney campaign is experiencing what some officials believe could be the beginning of a mass exodus of big money donors diverting their cash away from the Republican presidential hopeful and toward Republican candidates for the House and Senate races more likely to win in November, the FOX Business Network has learned.

The trend isn’t at the acute stage, at least not yet, said one person with direct knowledge of the matter. This person, a major player in Romney’s New York fundraising circles, confirmed to FOX Business that a few New York donors have backed away from financial commitments to the Romney campaign and instead said they will spend their money to help the Republicans hold on to the House of Representatives, and pick up seats in the Senate.

But another person with direct knowledge of the matter says the trend, though nascent, is more geographically broad based, and reflects an increasing degree of anxiety both with what they believe is the tentative nature of the Romney campaign, and recent poll numbers that show President Obama with a lead, particularly in key battleground states, that some Republican contributors are starting to believe is insurmountable.

“This isn’t just a New York trend,” this person said. “It’s beginning to occur all over the place.”  A spokeswoman for the Romney campaign said “many donors like to also donate to other candidates in addition to the support they have already given Gov. Romney.”  

One bright spot is that at least so far, the big donors that are moving away from Romney have not diverted their cash to President Obama, in attempt to cozy up to the administration during its second term, according to people inside the campaign.

“The debates will be very important,” said one person with knowledge of the matter. “If Romney does well that money could come back.”

I hope that anti-GOP voters continue to work as if they are the underdog and keep up a forceful ground game and do all in their power to assure a massive turn out.  I want to not only see the GOP standard bearers defeated but defeated resoundingly.

Fate of Titanic in Hands of Norfolk Judge

It is perhaps ironic that nearly a century after the Titanic struck ice in the North Atlantic, Rebecca Beach Smith, a federal judge in Norfolk will be deciding how to best preserve the largest collection of artifacts from the ill-fated ocean liner and protect the ship's resting place from disturbance in honor of the more than 1500 people who died in the early hours of April 15, 1912. As I have noted before, I have always been fascinated with ocean liners and had the good fortune of having a friend who was representing RMS Titanic Inc. who arranged for me to be present when the first artifacts from Titanic were off loaded in Norfolk. I still have books about Titanic autographed by members of the team that photographed the wreck and brought up artifacts. My friend - now a U.S. magistrate - had the incredible experience of going down to see the wreck. Here are some highlights from the Virginian Pilot:

*

Nearly a century after the Titanic struck ice in the North Atlantic, a federal judge in Norfolk is poised to preserve the largest collection of artifacts from the opulent oceanliner and protect the ship's resting place.

*
U.S. District Judge Rebecca Beach Smith, a maritime jurist who considers the wreck an "international treasure," is expected to rule within weeks that the salvaged items must remain together and accessible to the public. That would ensure the 5,900 pieces of china, ship fittings and personal belongings won't end up in a collector's hands or in a London auction house, where some Titanic artifacts have landed.

*

salvage company, RMS Titanic Inc., wants the court to grant it limited ownership of the artifacts.
At the same time, a cadre of government lawyers is helping Smith shape covenants to strictly monitor future activity at the Titanic wreck 2½ miles beneath the surface of the Atlantic. Amid evidence of the ship's deterioration, experts and government lawyers say the sanctity of the Titanic must be properly protected as a memorial to the 1,522 people who died when it went down.

*

Because the Titanic sank in international waters on April 15, 1912, and the ship's owners are long gone, the wreck site and its artifacts have been subject to competing legal claims since an international team led by oceanographer Robert Ballard found it 24 years ago. The courtroom survivor is RMS Titanic Inc., also known as RMST, which gathered the artifacts during six dives. Courts have declared it salvor-in-possession — meaning it has exclusive rights to salvage the Titanic — but have explicitly stated it does not own the 5,900 artifacts or the wreck itself.

*

Smith is drawing upon the State Department and NOAA to help craft the covenants to keep the artifacts preserved, intact as a collection and available to the public, and to guide future salvage operations at the Titanic wreck by RMST. At a hearing in November, the no-nonsense judge made clear the stakes. "I am concerned that the Titanic is not only a national treasure, but in its own way an international treasure, and it needs protection and it needs to be monitored," the judge told lawyers in the case.

*

International protections have been sought for the Titanic almost since the wreck was discovered. Ballard, who led the team that found the ship, told a congressional hearing in October 1985: "Titanic is like a great pyramid which has been found and mankind is about to enter it for the first time since it was sealed. Has he come to plunder or appreciate? The people of the world clearly want the latter."

Possible Key to Titanic’s Doom

Since I was a child I have always been interested in the Titanic and its tragic story. I think I first became aware of Titanic watching the old 1953 movie "Titanic," starring Clifton Webb, Barbara Stanwyck and a very young Robert Wagner (who I thought at the time was VERY hot). Since then, I have read countless books on the ship's sinking, including survivor accounts. After Robert Ballard discovered the wreck in 1985, the first installment of artifacts from Titanic were brought into Norfolk and unloaded at the Waterside slip. Since an attorney friend of mine was representing the salvagor, I got to go and see some of the materials and had the members of the underwater team autograph my copies of "A Night to Remember" and "The Night Lives ON" by Walter Lord. Later, many of the items were dislayed at Norfolk's Maritime Museum, including a large section of the hull, and my son and youngest daughter wentt ot he exhibition.

Because of this long time interest, I found today's news of a new theory of why the ship's hull may have failed in the collision with the iceberg interesting. The theory seems to make sense and would eplain why the glancing blow to the ship caused such a long area of flooding. Here are story highlights:

*

Researchers have discovered that the builder of the Titanic struggled for years to obtain enough good rivets and riveters and ultimately settled on faulty materials that doomed the ship, which sank 96 years ago Tuesday. The builder’s own archives, two scientists say, harbor evidence of a deadly mix of low quality rivets and lofty ambition as the builder labored to construct the three biggest ships in the world at once — the Titanic and two sisters, the Olympic and the Britannic. For a decade, the scientists have argued that the storied liner went down fast after hitting an iceberg because the ship’s builder used substandard rivets that popped their heads and let tons of icy seawater rush in. More than 1,500 people died.

*

Now, historians say new evidence uncovered in the archive of the builder, Harland and Wolff, in Belfast, Northern Ireland, settles the argument and finally solves the riddle of one of the most famous sinkings of all time. The company says the findings are deeply flawed. Apart from the archives, the team gleaned clues from 48 rivets recovered from the hulk of the Titanic, modern tests and computer simulations. They also compared metal from the Titanic with other metals from the same era, and looked at documentation about what engineers and shipbuilders of that era considered state of the art.

*

Many of the rivets studied by the scientists — recovered from the Titanic’s resting place two miles down in the North Atlantic by divers over two decades — were found to be riddled with high concentrations of slag. A glassy residue of smelting, slag can make rivets brittle and prone to fracture. “Some material the company bought was not rivet quality,” said the other author of the book, Timothy Foecke of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, a federal agency in Gaithersburg, Md.

*

For its part, Harland and Wolff, after its long silence, now rejects the charge. “There was nothing wrong with the materials,” Joris Minne, a company spokesman, said last week. Mr. Minne noted that one of the sister ships, the Olympic, sailed without incident for 24 years, until retirement. (The Britannic sank in 1916 after hitting a mine.) “It’s fascinating,” said Tim Trower, who reviews books for the Titanic Historical Society, a private group in Indian Orchard, Mass. “This puts in the final nail in the arguments and explains why the incident was so dramatically bad.”

*
The Titanic had every conceivable luxury: cafes, squash courts, a swimming pool, Turkish baths, a barbershop and three libraries. Its owners also bragged about its safety. In a brochure, the White Star Line described the ship as “designed to be unsinkable.”