Tag: republicans
Can Democrats Come Back? They Already Are

Can Democrats Come Back? They Already Are

During a summer when the popularity of Donald Trump fell to abysmal lows — and strong disapproval of his presidency achieved record highs — those dire warnings were mostly brushed aside. What received far more intense and sustained attention were the awful numbers registered by the Democratic Party, with analysts bemoaning its "historically" weak condition.

The occasion for all the funereal commentary was the release in late July of a Wall Street Journal poll that any honest Democrat had to find alarming. According to that survey, 63 percent of voters said they hold an unfavorable opinion of the party, while only 33 percent said their view of the party is favorable, the lowest rating ever for Democrats in a Journal survey. The party's net unfavorable was 19 points worse than the Republican Party, an unprecedented gap.

Such troubling findings can't be dismissed or waved away, even though the Journal poll was much worse than recent polls by other media outlets, which showed a mere 10-point ratings advantage for Republicans. Before we start putting up black crepe around the Democratic headquarters and drafting documents of surrender, however, there are some numbers that deserve our attention as well. For although the Democrats currently languish under a burden of public disfavor, those sour feelings may have almost no impact on their ability to defeat Republicans and achieve power again.

How can that possibly be? The real question in upcoming elections is not whether voters like the Democratic brand (or the GOP brand) but rather which party's candidate they will choose when marking their ballots. So far this year, despite the bad branding suffered by Democrats, the party is overperforming in dozens of special elections across the country and appears almost certain to win the two major statewide elections this November in New Jersey and Virginia. Polls in Virginia have showed Democratic gubernatorial nominee Abigail Spanberger beating her Republican opponent by double digits, and her New Jersey counterpart Mikie Sherrill is ahead of the Republican by nearly as much in some polls.

Special elections are not necessarily predictive of a general election outcome, as we learned last year. Yet the results in many races this year have been startling, dating back to Wisconsin's state supreme court contest last April, when Elon Musk and right-wing organizations spent nearly $40 million to defeat liberal Democrat Susan Crawford. The Tesla zillionaire made news not only with his brazen attempt to buy the election but by declaring its outcome decisive "for the future of Western civilization."

All that money and publicity drove unusually high turnout for an off-year judicial election — which Crawford won by 10 points, a landslide humiliation for Musk and a repudiation for the Republican far right (including Trump).

The trend kicked off by Crawford's victory continued across the country over the ensuing months, including races and places considerably less hospitable to Democrats than the purplish Badger State. In Iowa, for instance, the Democrats have picked up not one but two state senate seats in specials this year — the first in January, when Democrat Mike Zimmer won in a district that Trump had carried by 20 points only two months earlier, and the second in June, when Democrat Catelin Drey won by 11 points in a district that Trump took by an equal margin last fall — a turnaround of 22 points in less than a year.

Such encouraging results for Democrats have been commonplace across the country in 2025. According to The Downballot, a website that compiles and analyzes election results across all nonpresidential races, Democratic candidates in 34 special elections this year have run about 16 points on average better than 2024 presidential nominee Kamala Harris in the same districts.

Does that mean Democrats will win next year's midterms? It is far too early to make any such happy prediction.

But even that grim Journal poll demands a deeper look before anyone descends into gloom. As pollster G. Elliot Morris, formerly of FiveThirtyEight, explains on his Substack, it is very possible for voters to say they disapprove of the Democratic Party — and then cast their votes for Democratic candidates. That same poll found Democrats ahead in the generic ballot for 2026, measuring which party voters plan to support in the midterm, by three percentage points.

"That's a six-point swing from their last poll in 2024," notes Morris, "and would be large enough for the Democrats to win somewhere around 230-235 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives." Depending on specific circumstances in the states, it might even mean a change in control of the U.S. Senate.

The negative atmosphere surrounding the Democratic Party and its public image arises from dissatisfaction and even anger among the voters in its own base, furious over the feckless leadership that led to the 2024 debacle and the hesitant response to Trump's first months in office. Their reaction is understandable and predictable after a national defeat — but their more recent victories are a signal of hope on the horizon.

Joe Conason is founder and editor-in-chief of The National Memo. He is also editor-at-large of Type Investigations, a nonprofit investigative reporting organization formerly known as The Investigative Fund. His latest book is The Longest Con: How Grifters, Swindlers and Frauds Hijacked American Conservatism (St. Martin's Press, 2024).

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Labor Day weekend shootings across Chicago

Where Does Chicago's Murder Rate Actually Rank?

The New York Times released a story on Wednesday afternoon about crime rates in various cities. Its headline? “Crime Festers in Republican States While Their Troops Patrol Washington.” It pointed out that cities like Kansas City, St. Louis, and Springfield, Missouri; Birmingham, Alabama; Cleveland, Dayton and Toledo, Ohio; Tulsa, Oklahoma; Memphis and Nashville, Tennessee; Houston, Texas; Little Rock, Arkansas; Salt Lake City, Utah; and Shreveport, Louisiana have crime rates comparable to Washington’s, where federal troops have been patrolling for the past few weeks.

Why isn’t the Times taking a close look at Chicago, which faces a federal invasion? The truth is that my home city is on pace to have its lowest murder and violent crime rate in four decades. Where does it rank in terms of cities when it comes to murders? It turns out Chicago doesn’t even make the top 20. How about cities in Republican run-states? Eleven out of the top 15 have Republican governors.

This list comes from Newsweek magazine (data reflects murders per 100,000 population; cities in bold have Republican governors):

  • Birmingham, Alabama (58.8)
  • St. Louis, Missouri (54.1)
  • Memphis, Tennessee (40.6)
  • Baltimore, Maryland (34.8)
  • Detroit, Michigan (31.2)
  • Cleveland, Ohio (30)
  • Dayton, Ohio (29.7)
  • Kansas City, Missouri (27.6)
  • Shreveport, Louisiana (26.8)
  • Washington, D.C. (25.5)
  • Richmond, Virginia (24.2)
  • South Fulton, Georgia (22.2)
  • Cincinnati, Ohio (21.8)
  • Louisville, Kentucky (21.7)
  • Indianapolis, Indiana (20)
  • Oakland, California (18.6)
  • Albuquerque, New Mexico (18.4)
  • Montgomery, Alabama (18.1)
  • Minneapolis, Minnesota (18)
  • Lancaster, California (17.7)
  • Little Rock, Arkansas (17.6)
  • Hartford, Connecticut (17.6)
  • Chicago, Illinois (17.5)

Of course, facts do not matter to the Trump regime. When the president posted on Truth Social that Chicago is the “murder capital of the world,” it wasn’t even close to the truth.

Reprinted with permission from Gooz News.

Russ Vought

'Dictator' Cancels Congressional Authority -- And Republicans Roll Over

Russell Vought is the ultimate Trumper. The head of the Office of Management and Budget just anointed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio to wind down the U.S. Agency for International Development ("wind down" being one of his favorite words) had a new stunt to try out this week to subvert constitutional separation of powers. You remember — Congress has the power of the purse. It must be on the citizenship exam. The answer should have an asterisk for President Donald Trump.

Trump's new trick this week is called the pocket rescission. The beauty of this one, unlike your usual rescission (of PBS funding, for instance) is that Congress doesn't have to do anything. The president just asks for the money to be rescinded — which freezes it automatically for the next 45 days, and if that should coincide with the end of the fiscal year, the money goes poof! And Congress' power of the purse is rendered a nullity.

So sayeth Mr. Vought:

"Last night, President Trump CANCELLED $4.9 billion in America Last foreign aid using a pocket rescission," the White House Office of Management and Budget posted on X.

Even some Republicans spoke up. "Congress has the responsibility for the power of the purse," Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), the Senate Appropriations chair, said in a statement. "Any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law."

The funds Trump canceled were largely intended for USAID, a global peacekeeping and anti-poverty agency that Trump has done everything he can to destroy; so it continues.

This was the script for the second term, and it is being carried out in every quarter. Accumulate power in the executive. Use it aggressively. Make of it a veritable show. Belittle and cast doubt on the courts and their authority. Undercut their esteem. Play chicken. And, of course, Congress. Play chicken and win.

Watching it, day-by-day, trick-by-trick, it is easy to miss the whole picture.

Is this what it looks like when a dictator moves in to take over?

Trump has been musing, aloud of course, about himself as dictator. "The line is that I'm a dictator, but I stop crime," Trump said during a Cabinet meeting, "So a lot of people say, 'You know, if that's the case, I'd rather have a dictator.'"

He later added: "Most people say ... if he stops crime, he can be whatever he wants."

Not that Trump wants to be a dictator. He made that clear, sort of, the night before, albeit still fascinated with the idea that people might prefer dictators.

"'He's a dictator. He's a dictator,'" Trump said of his critics. "A lot of people are saying, 'Maybe we'd like a dictator.' I don't like a dictator. I'm not a dictator."

Really? Asking permission to rescind is all that it takes?

Russell Vought, a self-described Christian nationalist, had this same job at the end of the first Trump administration. He was a key contributor to Project 2025, which as you recall was all about this, and some of us didn't want to believe it then, so here it is again. He said then that his final goal of Project 2025 was to "bend or break the bureaucracy to the presidential will" and use it to send power from Washington, D.C., back to America's families, churches, local governments and states. He has said that he wants to "traumatize" federal employees. He comes from the Heritage Foundation.

Just this week's stunt. Just $5 billion in aid. I wouldn't bet against him. And I can only imagine what's next.

Susan Estrich is a celebrated feminist legal scholar, the first female president of the Harvard Law Review, and the first woman to run a U.S. presidential campaign. She has written eight books.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.



California's Redrawn Congressional Map Triggers GOP Hypocrisy

California's Redrawn Congressional Map Triggers GOP Hypocrisy

Multiple GOP lawmakers this week accused California Democrats of corruptly trying to redraw their state’s congressional districts, even though the Golden State is moving to redraw its maps only to counter the naked power grab Republicans pulled off in Texas with their mid-decade gerrymander.

House Speaker Mike Johnson—who supported the Texas redraw that could boot as many as five Democratic House members—said California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s planned redraw is "a slap in the face to Californians who overwhelmingly support the California Citizens Redistricting Commission."

"Gavin Newsom should spend less time trampling his state’s laws for a blatant power grab, and more time working to change the disastrous, far-left policies that are destroying California," Johnson wrote.

Funny, you could say basically the same thing about Texas GOP Gov. Greg Abbott, who was more focused on rigging the midterms for Republicans and his dear leader, President Donald Trump, than helping his state recover from devastating flooding that killed dozens of people.

Other House Republican leaders also slammed California’s redraw while ignoring Texas’.

“The NRCC is prepared to fight this illegal power grab in the courts and at the ballot box to stop Newsom in his tracks,” National Republican Congressional Committee Chair Richard Hudson said in a statement, accusing Newsom of “disenfranchising voters to prop up his Presidential ambitions.”

But when he was asked earlier in August about Texas’ gerrymander, Hudson demurred.

“Well, it’s up to the states. I mean, I have nothing to do with it. I found out about it when you all wrote about it,” Hudson told reporters, adding later that he was “not “concerned” about California’s redraw.

“Some of the states, they can do what they want to do,” Hudson said—before it was clear just how serious California was about countering Texas’ power grab.

Other Republicans cooked up their own criteria to claim that Democrats gerrymander more often than Republicans do, when the opposite is true.

Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz, who comes from the state that fired the first shot in this latest redistricting war, also slammed California without taking a look in the mirror.

"Newsom & Obama are lying and they are hypocrites," Cruz wrote in a post on X. "The most egregious gerrymanders in the country are virtually ALL Democrat."

Cruz then made up a metric he thought would prove his point, asking Elon Musk's AI chatbot Grok to "Examine states with six or more congressional seats. Compile a list of the five most egregious gerrymanders, defined as the biggest delta between the percentage of the congressional delegation a party wins & the percentage that party wins statewide."

"Which party is it?" Cruz asked Grok.

But Grok's response showed that Republican-run states also have gerrymanders that are "egregious" based on Cruz's metric, including Tennessee and Wisconsin. Not to mention, Cruz limiting the list to states with six or more districts leaves out a number of Republican-run states that heavily gerrymander their seats, including Oklahoma, Arkansas, Utah, and Iowa, among others.

Republican Rep. Kevin Kiley, whose House seat would be nuked if California voters allow the state to redraw its congressional map, also made the rounds on cable news shows to whine.

"When elections are fair, Republicans win. That's why we should end gerrymandering and establish Voter ID nationwide. And it's why Newsom is trying to permanently rig our elections by making himself Gerrymanderer-in-Chief," Kiley said.

Of course, Democrats would love to end gerrymandering nationwide. It's why it was in the first bill House Democrats introduced in 2019 after they took back control of the House in the 2018 midterms. Not a single Republican voted for the bill, and the GOP controlled Senate never brought it up for a vote.

Republican Rep. Ken Calvert, who would also be drawn out of his House seat in the California plan, also complained about California's redistricting effort without complaining about what Texas did first.

"There is zero transparency as Sacramento Democrats scheme to eliminate the power of the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission," Calvert moaned.

At the end of the day, Republicans are merely getting a taste of their own medicine in the redistricting wars. And it looks like they don't like it.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World