July 1, 2019

With 16 Months to go, Negative Partisanship Predicts the 2020 Presidential Election

In July of 2018, I raised eyebrows by predicting some four months before the midterm election that Democrats would pick up 42 seats in the House of Representatives. In hindsight, that may not seem such a bold prediction, but when my forecast was released, election Twitter was still having a robust debate as to whether the Blue Wave would be large enough for Democrats to pick up the 23 seats they needed to take control of the House of Representatives and return the Speaker’s gavel to Nancy Pelosi.

Based on its 2018 performance, my model, , seem well poised to tackle the 2020 presidential election – 16 months out. I’ll serve up that result below, but first let’s set the table by reviewing my model’s 2018 forecasting success.

Not only did I predict that they would gain nearly double the seats they needed, but I also identified a specific list of Republican seats Democrats would flip, including some, such as , that were listed as “Lean Republican” by the majority of race raters at the time. At a time when other analysts coded even the most competitive House races for Democrats as Lean or Tilt Democrat, I identified 13 Republican-held districts as “Will Flips,” 12 as “Likely to Flip,” and 6 as “Lean Democrat.” I also identified a large list of “Toss Ups,” from which I would later identify the remaining “flippers.” In addition, I identified some “long-shot toss-up” districts that could be viable flips under some turnout scenarios. Of the original 25 districts I identified as definitely or highly likely to flip, all but one, Colorado CD3, did so, possibly because the party failed to invest in their nominee there.

The post-election diagnostics of my forecasting model, which departs significantly from the approaches used in conventional election forecasting models, such as those used by , reveal just how powerful my model was at identifying the House districts and Senate races capable of producing Blue Wave effects powered by Trump backlash in the electorate. Indeed, the places I went astray in my final, “handicapped” predictions are races where I ignored the clear signals of my model, such as Georgia’s 6th congressional district, which my model was quite clear about flipping, and Kentucky’s 6th, which my model was quite clear couldn’t. Still, in other races, my manual handicapping was necessary, and correct, because despite its overall accuracy, my model underpredicts the Democrats’ two-party vote share in Utah’s 4th district.

Looking ahead to the 2020 Electoral College map, my model delivers on two of the most critical elements of election forecasting: , that is, simplicity. It’s probably not lost on you, dear reader, that I am offering a forecast not for the presidential primary election, itself still in its infancy, but for the November 2020 general election that is some 16 months away. And I am offering a forecast free from all the trappings you are used to. There are no poll aggregators, no daily or weekly updates, no simple versus deluxe versions. Right now, there is not even a nominee! By and large, I don’t expect that the specific nominee the Democratic electorate chooses will matter all that much unless it ends up being a disruptor like Bernie Sanders.

Barring a shock to the system, Democrats recapture the presidency. The leaking of the Trump campaign’s internal polling has somewhat softened the blow of this forecast, as that polling reaffirms what my model already knew: Trump’s 2016 path to the White House, which was the political equivalent of getting dealt a Royal Flush in poker, is probably not replicable in 2020 with an agitated Democratic electorate. And that is really bad news for Donald Trump because the Blue Wall of the Midwest was then, and is now, the ONLY viable path for Trump to win the White House.

I can't copy and paste the graphics but her electoral vote prediction is Dems: 278 Reps: 197

Her graphic has the breakdown of electoral votes by state.

http://cnu.edu/wasoncenter/2019/07/01-2020-election-forecast/

July 1, 2019

Here's some good news for Buttigieg supporters

https://twitter.com/merica/status/1145631257109381120?s=21

Pete Buttigieg raised $24.8 million from 294,000 people in the second quarter of 2019, his campaign said in an email, a massive haul for a candidate that was largely unknown six months ago



https://twitter.com/bykowicz/status/1145635968998936576?s=21



Kamala Harris grabbed debate headlines. But Buttigieg also appealed. The next day, Charlie Cook told 300 finance professionals on a conference call that he was the “most presidential” candidate on stage either night.

June 28, 2019

Marianne Williamson, Longtime Wacko, Is Now a Dangerous Wacko- The Daily Beast

For decades, Williamson said that medicines don’t cure disease but positive thinking does. Now she’s taking her quackery to a new and dangerous level: the anti-vaxxer conspiracy.


To most observers, Marianne Williamson’s quirky presidential candidacy is a footnote. She’s running at around 1 percent in the polls. Few Americans know who she is, even though she’s written a few best-sellers and has managed to qualify for the 20-person Democratic debate squad next week.

But that may change thanks to Williamson’s anti-vaxxer statement last week that policies requiring children to get life-saving vaccines is “Orwellian” and “draconian” and that the issue is “no different than the abortion debate.”

Now she’s headline news—at least in the context of the noxious, moronic, false, and dangerous anti-vaxxer conspiracy theory, which now has a Democratic presidential candidate backing it. (Donald Trump, of course, has backed it for years.)

Williamson seemed to walk back her comments in a tweet last Friday morning, saying, “I understand that many vaccines are important and save lives,” and, “I recognize that there are epidemics around the world that are stopped by vaccines.”But Williamson also noted, “I also understand some of the skepticism that abounds today about drugs which are rushed to market by Big Pharma.”

In fact, if you read the tweet closely, and if you know about Williamson’s 30-year career in the New Age world, two things become clear: first, she hasn’t backed down at all, and second, she’s been anti-science, anti-medicine, and anti-rationality for decades.Williamson was an anti-vaxxer before anti-vaxxers were anti-vaxxers.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/marianne-williamson-longtime-wacko-is-now-a-dangerous-wacko

June 27, 2019

Tulsi Gabbard Is Having A MAGA Moment After Her Debate Performance

More than any other Democratic candidate, Gabbard has developed a favorable presence in right-wing media. She’s made appearances from time to time on Fox News shows like Tucker Carlson Tonight, and her unorthodox candidacy has attracted praise from those farther to the right as well. Gabbard has been controversial; she has apologized for holding homophobic views in the past, including onstage during the debate, and she has been heavily criticized for meeting with the brutal Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad and for questioning whether his regime carried out chemical weapons attacks. But on Wednesday night, she appeared to cement her status as the very online right’s favorite Democratic candidate.

For some on the right, the sole draw of Gabbard is her anti-interventionist worldview, which appeals to libertarians. “I actually think Andrew Yang probably has more appeal in some corners of the right than Tulsi,” said Andy Surabian, a Republican strategist and adviser to Donald Trump Jr. “For Tulsi the only real appeal I see is on the foreign policy side. She’s a committed non-interventionist in the Ron Paul mode, she appeals to some corners of the libertarian and populist right.”

Mike Cernovich, the “new right” social media personality, tweeted on Wednesday night about the increase in Google searches for Gabbard, writing “Tulsi Gabbard was breakthrough star of the night.”“It’s hard to explain but she has a good energy, a certain dignity to her that’s absent in the rest of the field,” Cernovich said in an interview on Thursday. He said he found her views on foreign policy appealing, and said he knew many who felt even more warmly towards her. “I think a lot of people would vote for her over Trump,” he said. “MAGA people.” Despite this, Cernovich said Gabbard hadn’t done any outreach to his cohort.

Right-wing commentator Ann Coulter, who tweeted “Go Tulsi!” after Gabbard tussled with Ryan over Afghanistan onstage during the debate, said she watched the debate with a liberal and a moderate on Wednesday and all three preferred Gabbard over the rest of the field. “It's really astounding that Tulsi is the only Democrat running frontally and unambiguously as anti-war,” Coulter wrote in an email, calling the Democrats “as relentless a war party as the Republicans at their worst. Only more feckless.” Asked if she would consider voting for Gabbard either during the Democratic primary or even in the general election against President Trump if she won the nomination, Coulter replied “possibly both.”

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/rosiegray/tulsi-gabbard-maga-debate

June 24, 2019

Prediction: Nikki Haley will be Trump's running mate in 2020

https://twitter.com/billkristol/status/1143102911691612161?s=21


This op-ed pushing a Trump-Nikki Haley ticket is by former NYC pol Andrew Stein (who later pled guilty to lying in a financial fraud). Stein knows Trump, of course, and is close to others in Trump world. Zero chance this trial balloon isn’t ok with Trump.

June 17, 2019

Well, here is Trump's shit health care idea

By Avik Roy June 17 at 4:11 PM
Avik Roy is president of the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity and a former policy adviser to Mitt Romney, Rick Perry and Marco Rubio.


Enter President Trump and his team at the National Economic Council, led by Larry Kudlow. The council found an elegant way to give employers the opportunity to voluntarily convert their health benefits from a defined benefit into a defined contribution. For example, an employer could fund an HRA for each worker and their family, which they could then use to shop for a plan that best suits their needs.

And the White House should consider building on the HRA rule by requiring that all newly incorporated businesses seeking the tax break for employer coverage do so through HRAs. Such a reform would preserve traditional employer-based group health insurance for those who have it, while ensuring that start-ups that evolve into the Googles and Apples of the future deploy the new model.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-could-revolutionize-the-private-health-insurance-market/2019/06/17/bc8ccce4-9124-11e9-aadb-74e6b2b46f6a_story.html?utm_term=.e02812ed23dd


Comment : 13 minutes ago
"on average, hospitals charge those with private insurance 2.4 times what they charge Medicare for the same services."

A good argument for Medicare for all. Why aren't you plugging private insurance, you fraud?

"shop for low-cost, high-quality health care services"

There is no low-cost, high-quality health care. You get what you pay for. If you get cheap insurance it's junk insurance that covers little and has huge deductibles.

"an elegant way to give employers the opportunity to voluntarily convert their health benefits from a defined benefit into a defined contribution"

Just like the demise of defined-benefit pensions. Workers are forced to fend for themselves without the cushion of a group policy. Anyone who isn't entirely well will face enormous premiums.

This is just a scam to benefit insurance companies and employers at the expense of individual workers.




Basically, Trump is trying to destroy employer offered healthcare as well by putting the burden on the worker who will only have access to junk policies that will cover nothing.

June 17, 2019

We still have questions about whether Russia meddled in N.C. That's a bad sign. - WaPo Editorial

A Post investigation detailed how North Carolina officials have desperately sought information and help from the Department of Homeland Security following a possible Election Day 2016 breach, in which Durham County’s electronic poll books, which provide information on eligible voters, improperly rejected people at their polling places. Election officials resorted to using paper-based poll books, creating massive delays. If a malicious foreign actor wanted to promote havoc on Election Day or call election results into question, this is one way it might happen.

State officials initially thought human error caused the problems, but they could not be sure. They got more concerned after a report that the Kremlin had targeted an election vendor — that is, a third-party company that provides election hardware or software to state and local governments — involved in polling book software. The company from which Durham County got its polling book software, VR Systems, claims that it did not hear from DHS until September 2017, months after a news report revealed that the Russians had targeted an election services firm matching its description, and that, when it did hear, word came in the form of a strange 2 a.m. phone call.

Last year, North Carolina’s attorney general formally requested clarification from DHS on the state’s past and present vulnerabilities. His office reports that he did not receive a substantive answer. By many accounts, the trickle of information flowing from federal to state authorities has increased substantially since Russia’s presidential election hacking, as more state officials have obtained security clearances and as the scope of the threat has become clearer. North Carolina officials also insist that DHS has generally stepped up its game on election security, cooperating intensively with the state to evaluate the integrity of its voting systems.

But it is absurd that there is still any question about whether Durham County’s 2016 polling book problems were tied to the Kremlin. The Trump administration must do better. Federal officials must regulate election vendors as well as state systems. Congress should demand it — and provide whatever funds are needed.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/we-still-have-questions-about-whether-russia-meddled-in-nc-thats-a-bad-sign/2019/06/16/266069b6-8c73-11e9-8f69-a2795fca3343_story.html?utm_term=.aa082fec936e




VR Systems, claims that it did not hear from DHS until September 2017, months after a news report revealed that the Russians had targeted an election services firm matching its description, and that, when it did hear, word came in the form of a strange 2 a.m. phone call.

I mean, wtf?

June 16, 2019

The Guardian's preview of Britain's Next PM debate is art.

https://twitter.com/Tweet_Dec/status/1139901609272664064

June 14, 2019

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!!!!

https://twitter.com/TheTweetOfGod/status/1139554430326472704




God@TheTweetOfGod
Happy birthday to President Trump, who is a fucking piece of shit.

June 4, 2019

Nigel Farage has arrived at the US ambassador's residence

https://twitter.com/ReutersLobby/status/1135929453668917248

BREXIT PARTY LEADER FARAGE ARRIVES AT U.S. AMBASSADOR'S RESIDENCE IN LONDON - REUTERS PHOTOGRAPHER






I guess so they can talk about Brexit and dismantling the NHS. Is he still living in France?