adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Politics

Why Supreme Court politics in 2020 look way different from 2016 or 2018 – CNN

Published

 on


We don’t know what the ultimate effect of any Supreme Court battle will be on the 2020 election. Still, we can look at the playing board. It suggests the 2020 electoral calculus has fundamental differences with the electoral math of 2016 and 2018 when it comes to Supreme Court nominations.
Yesterday, I noted that more of former Vice President Joe Biden’s supporters have said the Supreme Court was important to their vote than Trump supporters. That’s very different from 2016, when Trump backers said the court was more important to their vote than Hillary Clinton backers.
The contrasts go deeper than that, however.
Trump often struggled with rallying the base in 2016. There were points in that cycle when he was receiving only about 75% of the Republican vote in polls. A Supreme Court nomination was the perfect way to get the base to support his cause.
Trump, though, has centered pretty much his entire presidency around appealing to his base. He’s done so, oftentimes, at the expense of bringing in more moderate voters to his cause. It’s paid off for Trump.
Republicans are backing Trump at very high numbers now. A NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist College poll out on Friday put Trump’s support at 94% among likely Republican voters. Our last CNN/SSRS poll showed that 99% of very conservative Republicans were supporting Trump.
In other words, Trump already has the base behind him in a way he didn’t at many times in 2016. Any more gains he could make with them would be very limited.
There are distinctions between the 2018 and 2020 Supreme Court nomination showdown as well.
You may recall Republicans picked up four Senate seats and lost two for a net gain of 2 in 2018. This came after Kavanaugh was nominated in late summer and confirmed early that fall.
It does seem like the Kavanaugh nomination was a boon to a number of Republican Senate candidates. Republicans knocked out Democratic senators in Indiana, Missouri and North Dakota. In all of those states, a majority of voters who said that Kavanaugh was a factor in their vote cast their ballots for the Republican Senate candidate. Those who said it wasn’t a factor either split their vote or a majority went for the Democratic nominee.
All of those seats were in states where Trump won by 19 points or more in 2016. That is, they were very red states.
The Kavanaugh hearing, if anything, rallied the Republican base in red states.
In the only purple state where Republicans defeated a Democratic senator (Bill Nelson in Florida), voters who said his vote against Kavanaugh was a factor in their decision were actually slightly more likely to back the Democratic nominee.
The 2018 House elections tell a similar story. Unlike in the Senate, where a limited number of seats is up every cycle, every House seat was up for election in 2018.
House Republicans were not helped by the Kavanaugh hearings.
Democrats’ advantage on the generic congressional ballot was in the high single digits before the Kavanaugh hearings and remained as such through the election. Democrats ended up with a net gain of 40 seats in the House.
The 2020 presidential race will be fought on, if anything, more favorable terrain than the 2018 House elections. Democrats don’t need to worry about winning a majority of congressional districts. They only need to win a majority of electoral votes.
Likewise, the 2020 Senate terrain is totally different. Only one of the seats Democrats are defending is in deep red territory. That Alabama seat was already in major danger of flipping prior to any Supreme Court battle.
Meanwhile, the Democrats’ easiest path to a Senate majority runs through purple states. Democrats’ easiest pickup opportunities are in Arizona (a state where the same Republican Senate candidate lost in 2018), Colorado and Maine. Biden is clearly ahead in the polls in all of these states.
The other two best pickup opportunities are in states where Trump is likely either up by a point or two (Iowa) or down by a point or two (North Carolina). In neither state is the Democratic Senate nominee running too far ahead of Biden.
The bottom line is that, while any estimates of what the upcoming Supreme Court fight means for the election are just guesses, 2016 and 2018 are not good road maps to understanding the dynamic in 2020. The situations are quite different.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Politics

Vaughn Palmer: Brad West dips his toes into B.C. politics, but not ready to dive in – Vancouver Sun

Published

 on


Opinion: Brad West been one of the sharpest critics of decriminalization

Get the latest from Vaughn Palmer straight to your inbox

Article content

VICTORIA — Port Coquitlam Mayor Brad West fired off a letter to Premier David Eby last week about Allan Schoenborn, the child killer who changed his name in a bid for anonymity.

“It is completely beyond the pale that individuals like Schoenborn have the ability to legally change their name in an attempt to disassociate themselves from their horrific crimes and to evade the public,” wrote West.

Advertisement 2

Article content

Article content

The Alberta government has legislated against dangerous, long-term and high risk offenders who seek to change their names to escape public scrutiny.

“I urge your government to pass similar legislation as a high priority to ensure the safety of British Columbians,” West wrote the premier.

The B.C. Review Board has granted Schoenborn overnight, unescorted leave for up to 28 days, and he spent some of that time in Port Coquitlam, according to West.

This despite the board being notified that “in the last two years there have been 15 reported incidents where Schoenborn demonstrated aggressive behaviour.”

“It is absolutely unacceptable that an individual who has committed such heinous crimes, and continues to demonstrate this type of behaviour, is able to roam the community unescorted.”

Understandably, those details alarmed PoCo residents.

But the letter is also an example of the outspoken mayor’s penchant for to-the-point pronouncements on provincewide concerns.

He’s been one of the sharpest critics of decriminalization.

His most recent blast followed the news that the New Democrats were appointing a task force to advise on ways to curb the use of illicit drugs and the spread of weapons in provincial hospitals.

Article content

Advertisement 3

Article content

“Where the hell is the common sense here?” West told Mike Smyth on CKNW recently. “This has just gone way too far. And to have a task force to figure out what to do — it’s obvious what we need to do.

“In a hospital, there’s no weapons and you can’t smoke crack or fentanyl or any other drugs. There you go. Just saved God knows how much money and probably at least six months of dithering.”

He had a pithy comment on the government’s excessive reliance on outside consultants like MNP to process grants for clean energy and other programs.

“If ever there was a place to find savings that could be redirected to actually delivering core public services, it is government contracts to consultants like MNP,” wrote West.

He’s also broken with the Eby government on the carbon tax.

“The NDP once opposed the carbon tax because, by its very design, it is punishing to working people,” wrote West in a social media posting.

“The whole point of the tax is to make gas MORE expensive so people don’t use it. But instead of being honest about that, advocates rely on flimsy rebate BS. It is hard to find someone who thinks they are getting more dollars back in rebates than they are paying in carbon tax on gas, home heat, etc.”

Advertisement 4

Article content

West has a history with the NDP. He was a political staffer and campaign worker with Mike Farnworth, the longtime NDP MLA for Port Coquitlam and now minister of public safety.

When West showed up at the legislature recently, Farnworth introduced him to the house as “the best mayor in Canada” and endorsed him as his successor: “I hope at some time he follows in my footsteps and takes over when I decide to retire — which is not just yet,” added Farnworth who is running this year for what would be his eighth term.

Other political players have their eye on West as a future prospect as well.

Several parties have invited him to run in the next federal election. He turned them all down.

Lately there has also been an effort to recruit him to lead a unified Opposition party against Premier David Eby in this year’s provincial election.

I gather the advocates have some opinion polling to back them up and a scenario that would see B.C. United and the Conservatives make way (!) for a party to be named later.

Such flights of fancy are commonplace in B.C. when the NDP is poised to win against a divided Opposition.

Advertisement 5

Article content

By going after West, the advocates pay a compliment to his record as mayor (low property taxes and a fix-every-pothole work ethic) and his populist stands on public safety, carbon taxation and other provincial issues.

The outreach to a small city mayor who has never run provincially also says something about the perceived weaknesses of the alternatives to Eby.

“It is humbling,” West said Monday when I asked his reaction to the overtures.

But he is a young father with two boys, aged three and seven. The mayor was 10 when he lost his own dad and he believes that if he sought provincial political leadership now, “I would not be the type of dad I want to be.”

When West ran for re-election — unopposed — in 2022, he promised to serve out the full four years as mayor.

He is poised to keep his word, confident that if the overtures to run provincially are serious, they will still be there when his term is up.

vpalmer@postmedia.com

Recommended from Editorial

  1. B.C. Premier David Eby.

    Vaughn Palmer: Premier losing control of daily political agenda

  2. B.C. Attorney-General Niki Sharma.

    Vaughn Palmer: Businesses that toe the line have nothing to worry about

  3. B.C. Premier David Eby.

    Vaughn Palmer: Don’t be surprised if B.C. retreats from drug decriminalization before the election


LIVE Q&A WITH B.C. PREMIER DAVID EBY: Join us April 23 at 3:30 p.m. when we will sit down with B.C. Premier David Eby for a special edition of Conversations Live. The premier will answer our questions — and yours — about a range of topics, including housing, drug decriminalization, transportation, the economy, crime and carbon taxes. Click HERE to get a link to the livestream emailed to your inbox.

Article content

Comments

Join the Conversation

This Week in Flyers

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Fareed’s take: There’s been an unprecedented wave of migration to the West – CNN

Published

 on


Fareed’s take: There’s been an unprecedented wave of migration to the West

On GPS with CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, he shares his take on how the 2024 election will be defined by abortion and immigration.


05:22

– Source:
CNN

Adblock test (Why?)

300x250x1

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Haberman on why David Pecker testifying is ‘fundamentally different’ – CNN

Published

 on


300x250x1

New York Times reporter and CNN senior political analyst Maggie Haberman explains the significance of David Pecker, the ex-publisher of the National Enquirer, taking the stand in the hush money case against former President Donald Trump.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending