“There’s some evidence that maybe Bullock’s performance with handling COVID-19 and generally good favorability in the state makes this a unique situation where traditional rules may not apply. Unlike other states with candidates newer to the statewide ballot, Bullock is already well-defined in voters’ minds, and it may be harder to change voters’ opinions of him.”
Do the math and you have 13 Republicans seats (out of the 23 they are defending) in some level of peril with five months before the election.
And when you consider that Democrats need to net only three seats (if Joe Biden wins) and four (if Donald Trump is re-elected), you see why Republicans are rightly and increasingly concerned about their chances of holding the chamber this fall.
The two most notable, politically speaking, deal with President Donald Trump and his resistance to release any and all financial records.
How the court decides the two cases could have major implications in the coming 2020 election. The President has never released any of his tax returns, insisting he is under audit and/or that they are too complex for any mere mortal to understand.
If the court rules against him — particularly in the Mazars case — there is a very high likelihood that voters will get at least some glimpse of Trump’s financial standing (how much he is really worth, where he owes money, etc.) before the election.
If the court, on the other hand, sides with Trump on the Mazars case and rules against him on Vance, then the financial records will be released only to a grand jury — and the general public will almost certainly see nothing of them before voting this November.
Of course, thanks to Trump, wearing a mask has become political. He has refused to do so when around cameras — and at his Tulsa rally on Saturday night, masks were handed out but not required.
So, what now? The virus isn’t gone, no matter how much Trump wishes it was. How does he — and governors, mostly Republicans, in the states where Covid is on the rise — handle this resurgence? Ignoring it isn’t an option.
The timeline of events is a testament to how not to handle a high-profile firing.
Berman released his own statement around 11 p.m. Eastern making clear he was not, in fact, resigning. And he showed up to work Saturday morning.
By Saturday afternoon, Barr had sent Berman a letter firing him; “Because you have declared that you have no intention of resigning, I have asked the President to remove you as of today, and he has done so,” Barr wrote.
Asked about the move shortly after, Trump said this of Barr: “That’s his department, not my department. I’m not involved.”
Uh what? Talk about the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing!
There’s no question that this debacle will — and should — draw the scrutiny of congressional investigators.
But on an even more basic “Politics 101” level — how the hell does the US Attorney General announce that the head lawyer of the Southern District of New York is resigning if said guy hasn’t made a specific pledge to do so? And how the hell does the AG say the President told him to fire Berman only to have the President say he wasn’t involved?
The message being sent here is that no one knows what is going on. Which isn’t a good message five months before an election.
1. Does Trump have a plan B?: President Trump made no secret of the fact that he viewed Saturday’s campaign rally in Tulsa as a jump start to his fading political fortunes. He hyped it up on Twitter. His campaign flew in elected officials and top surrogates from around the country.
And then, well, it flopped. Saturday was dominated by news that six Trump staffers on the ground in Oklahoma had tested positive for Covid-19. The speech itself was long and all over the place — and it was delivered to a less-than-full arena.
So, what now? The rally clearly didn’t create the spark — in Trump or the campaign — that they were hoping for. In fact, it may have had the opposite effect, especially when you consider that Trump’s line that he told his “people” to slow down testing for coronavirus because they were getting too many positives will be fodder for Democratic ads for the rest of the campaign.
The attempts by the Trump campaign to suggest that the rally was a giant success (they sent out a press release afterwards touting how many people had watched it online) suggests that the President is very unhappy with how it went and trying to change history on it.
That’s a losing proposition. The rally was a dud. Anyone who watched any part of it could see that. The problem for Trump is he has no obvious answer to the “what now?” question. If rallies won’t save him, what will?