Hindsight Is 2020

[Blackacre]

Saturday, September 27th, 2019
The Third Democratic Presidential Debate: Hosted by CNBC

For the first time, all ten Democratic Presidential candidates shared one stage, meaning that everyone could interact with everyone else and there was no need for a Part Two. However, that was the only part of the debate that was new. For while the problem of a two-night showcase was addressed, ten candidates on the stage meant that the time was stretched thin for everybody. That being said, the debate wasn’t without its moments!

Ron Wyden perhaps got the most mileage out of the night, being the most separated from the others on policy in light of Cuomo and Cantwell’s departures. He also found himself in a heated exchange with Bill de Blasio over the merits of being a Washington insider vs being an outsider, and like most of his exchanges, Wyden didn’t come off too great.

Tammy Duckworth also tried playing the outsider card, but Tammy Baldwin jumped in by calling her an opportunist without any legislative accomplishments. Baldwin went on to talk at length about immigration, with an immigration reform bill that she introduced in the Senate and a strong immigration reform platform on her website. Tom Wolf boasted about his record but Kate Brown cited her own record and her superior approval ratings.

The most interesting portion of the debate was a long back-and-forth related to criminal justice policy. Bill de Blasio, fresh off of his exchange with Wyden, accused the entire rest of the Democratic field of being out of touch on the issue of police brutality and the criminal justice system’s flaws. Sherrod Brown stepped in, pointing out not only his own plan for criminal justice reform, but the fact that other candidates had plans of their own.

“You clearly haven’t read my plan, or Tom Wolf’s plan, or the plans my colleagues Franken and Warren and Baldwin and Booker have on their websites.” Became the new “The American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails!” of Democratic Primary debates.

There were twelve more debates left on the table, but the next one wouldn’t be until late November, after the 2019 elections.

Next time: We get post-debate polling and a delve into two more campaigns!

[Oppo]

That really was a good line by Brown!

[Blackacre]

That really was a good line by Brown!

Thank you! It's hard to know how much willing suspension of disbelief readers will need to believe that a line would work. I'm glad to hear that you didnt need any this time

[America Needs R'hllor]

Enjoying this, like always! Sorry for not being active as a pundit, it's a pretty busy time for me right now.

[Blackacre]

Enjoying this, like always! Sorry for not being active as a pundit, it's a pretty busy time for me right now.

No worries! Do what you can and feel comfortable doing. I'm glad you continue to enjoy this!

[Blackacre]

Monday, September 29th, 2019

If Your State’s Primary Were Held Today, Who Would You Vote For? (Democrats)
Sen. Brown: 16%
Sen. Warren: 15%
Sen. Baldwin: 14%
Sen. Franken: 12%
Sen. Booker: 10%
Sen. Wyden: 7%
Mayor de Blasio: 6%
Gov. Wolf: 5%
Gov. Brown: 4%
Sen. Duckworth: 4%

If The Iowa Caucuses Were Held Today, Who Would You Vote For?
Sen. Brown: 18%
Sen. Baldwin: 16%
Sen. Franken: 12%
Sen. Warren: 11%
Gov. Wolf: 10%
Sen. Duckworth: 7%
Gov. Brown: 6%
Sen. Booker: 6%
Mayor de Blasio: 5%
Sen. Wyden: 2%

If The New Hampshire Primaries Were Held Today, Who Would You Vote For?
Sen. Warren: 18%
Sen. Franken: 16%
Sen. Baldwin: 15%
Sen. Booker: 14%
Sen. Brown: 10%
Gov. Brown: 8%
Sen. Wyden: 7%
Mayor de Blasio: 3%
Sen. Duckworth: 2%
Gov. Wolf: 3%

If the Nevada Primaries Were Held Today, Who Would You Vote For?
Sen. Booker: 15%
Sen. Baldwin: 14%
Sen. Warren: 13%
Sen. Brown: 12%
Sen: Franken: 11%
Mayor de Blasio: 8%
Sen. Wyden: 8%
Sen. Duckworth: 7%
Gov. Wolf: 2%
Gov. Brown: 2%

If The South Carolina Primaries Were Held Today, Who Would You Vote For?
Sen. Booker: 27%
Mayor de Blasio: 20%
Sen. Brown: 18%
Sen. Warren: 12%
Sen. Franken: 8%
Sen. Baldwin: 5%
Sen. Duckworth: 4%
Gov. Wolf: 4%
Gov. Brown: 2%
Sen. Wyden: 2%

Today we’re talking about Cory Booker and Sherrod Brown. Once again, props to Simossad for the images!

 
I know the past few years have been tough. Your taxes have gone up with nothing to show for it. You might have lost your job this year, or you might be at a dead end, or struggling to support your family. Your politicians may be saying that if you worked harder you’d be making more, but you know that’s wrong because you’re working as hard as you can to make what you do. I know what you and millions of people like you are going through, and I’m running for President because I understand what it takes to help you get back on your feet. Join me, and together we’ll fix the problems of today and create a better future. I’m Sherrod Brown and I approve this message.

When we look at Sherrod Brown’s campaign, we’re going to examine two things. One, how he got to a lead in the polls, and two, his plan going forward.

This isn’t the first time Senator Brown has come from behind in the polls. In 2018 he defeated former Governor John Kasich to hold onto his senate seat by less than one percentage point, despite the polls looking like this in May:

If the Ohio Senate Race Were Held Today, Who Would You Vote For?
John Kasich: 55%
Sherrod Brown: 35%

This is what the polls looked like in August:

If the Ohio Senate Race Were Held Today, Who Would You Vote For?
John Kasich: 50%
Sherrod Brown: 42%

And then in mid-October:
If the Ohio Senate Race Were Held Today, Who Would You Vote For?
John Kasich: 48%
Sherrod Brown: 47%

And of course this is what actually happened on election night:

Sen. Sherrod Brown: (D) 48.9%
Gov. John Kasich: (R) 48.1%

The national tides had something to do with it, but credit must be given to Sherrod Brown as a politician; he’s one of the best retail campaigners in the country. Sherrod Brown won his Senate race because he understood what Bill Clinton knew and his wife did not: to win voters, you need to empathise with their struggles. You need to feel their pain.

Now, just because Sherrod Brown is really, really good at that doesn’t mean he’s the only one who can do it. Al Franken’s entire campaign is based on listening to people. Tammy Baldwin and Elizabeth Warren have similar talents. All four candidates have a lot of money from small, frequent, individual donations and the latter three can all fill a stadium with supporters. But Sherrod Brown’s been doing well in the invisible primary behind the scenes, because he can make the electability argument. Not because he’s moderate, (he isn’t) but because of the same reasons that made the Kochs like Scott Walker. He’s won three elections in a row in a large, red-purple state that voted for Donald Trump. He has no baggage, or at least, nothing that’s coming to light in the primaries, plus, he campaigns on a purely positive message.

Tammy Baldwin has all of this going for her as well, of course. But there’s one thing Sherrod Brown can claim that Tammy Baldwin can not. He, Sherrod Brown, defeated John Kasich in a statewide Ohio election. Few things sell the electability argument like taking down the most popular Republican in the country. So while Tammy Baldwin has an endorsement from Governor Feingold, Brown has endorsements from Governor Tim Ryan, Michigan Senator Gary Peters, Michigan Governor Debbie Dingell, Montana Senator John Tester, and Indiana Senator Joe Donnelly. It’s not much, but it’s more out-of-state backing than anyone else has in a race where the endorsements are few and far between.

On Monday the 29th, however, Sherrod Brown spent his afternoon campaigning in a strange place for a candidate like himself: South Carolina. Why? Look at the South Carolina polling. That’s not unique in the Southern super Tuesday states. Winning Iowa or New Hampshire is one thing, but if Cory Booker sweeps the South, he becomes the frontrunner. Sherrod Brown is putting resources into ads and campaigning in Southern states, to do what Bernie Sanders never did: reach out to nonwhite voters early. Will it work? Who knows! But speaking of Booker…


With Donald Trump at the helm, America’s faced some dark years. Unemployment is growing, wages are stagnating, the deficit is rising, and hope seems to be withering away. But we cannot give up hope. We cannot accept the state of this country as a new normal. We must fight back! And there’s only one man who can take the fight directly to the source, to Donald Trump:
I’m Cory Booker, and I approve this message

Cory Booker, the last bastion of the old establishment and the candidate who keeps Kyle Kulinski up at night. The Democratic Party of four years ago would be flooding him with endorsements and money and clearing the field for him, but this is 2019. Cory Booker needs to establish on his own that he can beat the field and emerge on top. Some strong debate performances and the advantage of his youth helped him muscle past Bill de Blasio and take a lead in the South, and that’s his path to the nomination.

Forget Iowa, forget New Hampshire, but play strong in Nevada and dominate South Carolina and Super Tuesday. If he can do that, sources say that a strong enough performance would get major endorsers like Chuck Schumer, Jason Carter, and John Bel Edwards on his side. He hasn’t shown up much in Iowa or New Hampshire, states full of white liberals who would reject him, because of the bad publicity that would come with losing so badly there. Good things come to those who wait.

After Super Tuesday, Booker’s plan is to reassemble the Hillary Clinton primary coalition, but with hopefully a stronger performance among younger voters. If it plays right, he could be the next Comeback Kid. If not, well, instead of getting a boost from the major endorsers, he might find himself joining them.

Next time: The 2019 elections are upon us! We go to Virginia, Kentucky, Georgia, Mississippi and Louisiana for some election results!

[Blackacre]

Tuesday, November 5th, 2019

Happy Election Day! While the Presidential election remains a year away, there were still some important races decided tonight. Let’s go through them one by one!

Virginia
Governor Ralph Northam scored a major victory tonight: a friendly legislature. The House of Delegates and Senate, both of which in Republican hands for a long time, flipped to Democratic control tonight. This makes Virginia officially a Democratic-dominated state, allowing Governor Northam to actually pursue more liberal policies in the second half of his tenure. The big one: changing the years when Virginia has its elections.

Kentucky
Matt Bevin was very, very unpopular throughout his term as Governor, and so lost re-election. The new Governor? Adam Edelen, former Kentucky Auditor and Receiver of Democratic Hype.

Fmr Auditor Adam Edelen: (D) 55.4%
Governor Matt Bevin: (R) 42.8%

Control of the legislature didn’t change hands. Dems kept the House, Republicans kept the Senate. Just like Washington DC!

Georgia
The only thing on the ballot here was the proposed amendment to switch the state’s voting system to ranked-choice instead of the manual runoff. There was a spirited ad campaign for Yes that we glossed over, but luckily it worked. The new rules however do not apply to Primary elections.

Yes: 65%
No: 35%

Mississippi
Tate Reeves got a very easy promotion, especially since the only credible Democratic challenger, Jim Hood, decided to secure re-election as Attorney General rather than seek the Governorship.

Lt. Governor Tate Reeves: (R) 70%
Robert Gray: (D) 29%

Louisiana
John Bel Edwards’ decision to seek re-election instead of run for President proved very wise.

Governor John Bel Edwards: (D) 54.2%
Louisiana Secretary of State Tom Schedler: (R) 44.6%

Republicans maintained a non-supermajority control over both houses of the Legislature.

With all that out of the way, here’s the current map of Gubernatorial control:

Governorships: 21 R, 28 D, 1 I (D+1)
30% = Opposite Party controls legislature
50% = Divided legislature, or Independent Governor
70% = Trifecta
Nebraska = Nebraska

Next time: Another debate and some actual news!

[Blackacre]

Our next guest is the host of the show Secular Talk, please welcome Kyle Kulinski!


Great to be here! Even though I'm about as big as a cat.

Stephen Colbert:
So how do you feel about the election so far? Have you decided who you're going to be voting for? Who's impressed you, who's bothered you, etc.

Kyle Kulinski:
Who am I voting for? I haven't decided yet. This year's turning out to be a great year for progressives. We've got Elizabeth Warren, Sherrod Brown, Tammy Baldwin, Bill De Blasio and Tammy Duckworth. I said three years ago after the human cheeto won that it was the time for the Clinton machine to step aside and have progressives move in, and we've seen that this year.

That said, Cory Booker still keeps me awake at night. He just seems like the last gasp of the Third Way Democrats to keep control of the party. Thankfully, this isn't 2016 anymore; he has to shift towards raising money *switches to Bernie Sanders impression* $27 at a time *end of impression* which will only be good for the Democratic Party, because it gives a line of attack on the Republicans. That said, this is a guy who defended Bain Capital and is in favour of school vouchers.

It's pretty apparent I'm not voting for Cory Booker, isn't it?

Stephen Colbert:
It sounds like you'd be scared of a Cory Booker halloween costume.

Kyle Kulinski:
*laughs* Not quite. More nauseous than anything else. *looks to audience* I just want to be clear, I'm nauseous about his politics. Race has nothing to do with it.

Phew. Think I saved face there.

Stephen Colbert:
Are you worried about a contested convention? The DNC Chair is absolutely terrified of having one, do you think his concern is justified?

Kyle Kulinski:
Honestly, it's way too early to even begin speculating about a contested convention. We haven't even had the Iowa caucuses yet, bit I can see where Keith Ellison's coming from. You've got a lot of strong candidates this year from all quarters of the Democratic Party; heck even Bill De Blasio, a Mayor, is proving tough to dislodge, so I can see why he'd be worried. The time to start worrying about a contested convention though I'd say would be after New York votes. If Keith doesn't have an established frontrunner by then, I'd imagine he'd start pissing himself.

Stephen Colbert:
What was going through your mind when Elizabeth Warren and Russ Feingold agreed to do interviews with you? Did it feel weird? Did you get nervous at all about going from just commentary to interviews?

Kyle Kulinski:
It's times like these I wish I could swear on CBS.

Look, I was the most nervous guy on the planet at those points. Before that, I'd just been giving commentary like you said, so it was a bit of a shift. It worked out alright though; I just did what the mainstream media doesn't do *sideways glance at Stephen*

Stephen Colbert:
You mean like telling jokes? Or putting on a wig and dancing on the grave of Andrew Cuomo's political career? It's fun!

Kyle Kulinski:
Well I meant more along the line of asking decent questions, but yeah, that works too. Though I must say, credit where credit's due; there's people in New York who can now go to college because of him.

Stephen Colbert:
With your success on Youtube and with The Young Turks, do you see Youtube as a viable platform for other political commentators going forward?

Kyle Kulinski:
Definitely. The Young Turks, which I'm an affiliate of, is the number 1 internet news source; it's bigger that damn White House. We're right behind the White House ourselves. That's without going into the other affiliates like Humanist Report, Majority Report, TYT Politics and so on. In the future, it's going to become a prime platform for commentators of all stripes, whether you're liberal, conservative, libertarian, whatever.

The point is, new media is on the rise, particularly on YouTube, and the liberal networks appear to be ahead so, *gives thumbs up*

Stephen Colbert:
Do you ever see yourself hosting a show on cable or something to that effect, or is the format you're working in too good to leave?

Kyle Kulinski:
*laughs* If only you knew how much I'd been asked that very question.

My answer's always the same: no. I like what I'm doing too much to even try and go to TV. There's just too many of the things on here that I rail against on a daily basis. I mean, on YouTube, I don't have to worry about trying to pander to advertisers or anything, so I can say whatever I want, basically. Thankfully, that seems to play well with my audience.

As for TV, no I cannot ever see myself doing that. I already sold out to Big Seltzer three years ago; I need to stay decent somewhere.

Stephen Colbert:
That's a good point. It's much easier to make good content when you don't have to pander to companies, like Cheese Nips! *pulls out a box and faces it at the camera* They're delicious!

Kyle Kulinski:
Careful, you might turn into the human cheese nip.

Stephen Colbert:
Maybe! Thanks again for stopping by. Here's his Youtube channel, check it out if you haven't already! *makes the link to Kyle Kulinski's channel appear below him with cable editing magic* Kyle Kulinski everybody!

(Author's note: Seriously, GoTFan, thanks for being awesome!)

[Blackacre]

Saturday, November 30th, 2019
The Fourth Democratic Primary Debate, hosted by CBS

By the fourth debate, there wasn’t that much new for the candidates to talk about, at least not on a stage with ten of them in total. The ratings for this one were the lowest of any Democratic debate thus far.

However, that doesn’t mean substantive issues weren’t addressed. The theme of the evening was infrastructure, or in other words, “Why aren’t you all hypocrites for not letting Trump’s infrastructure bill pass?” All sorts of reasons were thrown around. Sherrod Browns reason was that it wouldn’t have actually created any jobs in his state. Al Franken’s reason was that it would have given America the idea of infrastructure without doing anything but give tax breaks to Trump’s friends. Cory Booker said he liked the bill because it was better than nothing, but McConnell killed the only chance the parties had of coming together and getting something done. Tom Wolf blamed the Senators for preventing the bill from helping his state, but since he was its only defender, that debate didn’t get too far.

The rest didn’t have too much back and forth. Everyone talked about their tax plan and their healthcare plan, but there was little room for anything heated to happen when everyone had to have their turn.

However, that didn’t mean nothing interesting happened in election news. In fact, quite the contrary.

Friday, December 6th, 2019
This was a big day.

The BLS put put their report on the unemployment rate, which had been decreasing from its peak of 8.5% in fall 2018. The report for the November job figures has the unemployment rate hitting 7.8%.



However, not many Americans felt good about the economy. There might be signs of a slow recovery, but the 2017-2018 recession still lingered, and it was very unlikely that the economy would return to its January 2017 state by the 2020 election.

That wasn’t all that happened today, though.


Starting today, the Oversight Committee will be investigating the connections between the Trump Administration and the Trump Organisations, to determine once and for all if any illegal conflicts of interest have been taking place during this administration’s tenure.

House Oversight Committee Chair Elijah Cummings took the plunge and did what Democrats have been urging him to do all year: find out if Trump’s been profiting from his administration’s actions. The affirmative could be grounds for impeachment, at least it’s talked about that way in liberal circles.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions reacted how you’d expect him to.


I’m deeply disappointed in the actions of the House of Representatives. Instead of doing the people’s work and voting on the President’s infrastructure bill or the wall on the Southern Border, they’re conducting a partisan witch hunt against the President of the United States. There will be no cooperation from the Justice Department.

Next time: We’re almost at Iowa! A few words on the Baldwin campaign before we hit the delegates.

[P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong]

Anderson Cooper 360°: Election 2020 edition

~~Image of Anderson Cooper 360°, pretend it's here since I don't have enough posts to include links~~

Coming back from commercial…

COOPER: Welcome back, we're moving on now to talk about the Republican primary duel between President Trump and Texas Senator and 2016 presidential candidate Ted Cruz. On the panel we have Republican CNN contributors Jeffrey Lord, a former Reagan White House official and Trump supporter, Ana Navarro, a Republican strategist and 'reluctant' supporter of Senator Cruz, and Amanda Carpenter, former aide to Senators Ted Cruz and Jim DeMint, and supporter of Mr. Cruz's presidential run. But we'll start with CNN's chief political analyst, Gloria Borger. Gloria, what's the state of the race today?

BORGER: Well, the race is consistently narrowing, that's for sure. National polls show Trump with a sizable lead, but at the rate that Cruz's support is growing, he'll have actually surpassed Trump by the time primary elections are actually held. Clearly, there is growing discontent within the ranks of the Republican electorate with their president.

COOPER: Jeffrey, to what do you ascribe the drop in support within the Republican Party for President Trump. Because, obviously, it's pretty historic for an incumbent president to be challenged like this for renomination, hasn't happened in—what—30 years?

LORD: I remember back in 2016 when the polls said that Hillary Clinton would be the President. Well, where are we now? Donald Trump is making America great every day, so it's a shame if some people don't realize all the work he's doing. Senator Cruz has the benefit of not working such a difficult job as the President, he gets to be a talking head and get more people on his side. Once the President can get out on the trail and win support back, Cruz's support will fall back down to where it was at the start of the year.

COOPER: Amanda, what do you make of the state of the Republican race?

CARPENTER: Republicans are finally beginning to realize the mistake that was made nominating and electing Donald Trump to the Presidency. He is inept at bringing the people together, and the divisions that existed in our country before his presidency have only been exacerbated. It's time a true conservative represented our party at the top of the ticket.

COOPER: Ana, we all know how disappointed you are with the current slate of candidates, what would you like to see happen in 2020?

NAVARRO: You know, Anderson, in Miami we have a saying. "Se hizo un arroz con mango," and that's how I feel about the Republican Party going into 2020. It means, basically, that we've ruined ourselves. We entered the 2016 election with a great opportunity to bring conservative leadership to Washington and help people around the country and the world. We were up against an unpopular Democratic nominee and favorable maps for the House and Senate. Now, our President has awful approval ratings, we've lost both chambers of Congress, and governors and state legislatures around the country are going blue—some of them for the first time in years—all because of the vast unpopularity of our President. Any one of us in this room would be a better Republican nominee than Trump. I had hoped that Hillary Clinton was the only Democrat I would ever vote for, but I've been left no choice. As for what I want to see happen in 2020? A lot more margaritas by the pool.

--

[Blackacre]

This is the last time we’re going to look in-depth at a campaign together before we have a nominee. Ladies and gentlemen and nonbinary folks, the Tammy Baldwin campaign.


Donald Trump has taken America in entirely the wrong direction, and it’s time we the people rise up and demand a government that will set things right. That’s why I’m here. I have plans in place to reform our immigration system, increase social mobility, and prevent you from being fired because of who you are, all things the current President doesn’t think are worth is time. Let’s make the next four years something the history books are proud of, not something to be ashamed of. I’m Tammy Baldwin and I approve this message.

Tammy Baldwin went from an also-ran to a frontrunner after a star debate performance back in August, and amazingly, she hasn’t faded away like Carly Fiorina did four years ago. What’s setting her apart from the rest of the field? After all, in the top tier alone there are two other midwesterners and another liberal firebrand woman. Is being both at once sufficient?

No. But Baldwin has a few other tricks up her sleeve. For one, endorsements. She has support from liberal hero Russ Feingold, and more importantly, from several immigration advocacy groups like the Immigrant Advocates Network and from Senator Catherine Cortez-Mastro of Nevada and Senator Martin Heinrich of New Mexico. She talks about immigration reform a lot at her rallies, more so than any other candidate, and it really is front and centre on her website. She’s also spent a lot on Spanish-language ads and Spanish-speaking staffers, and while the other candidates have too, she’s done the most. As such, she’s in a good position to win Nevada and seems to be assembling a coalition relying on Latino Democrats, a group that hasn’t really been courted by the other candidates. Maybe she can use that to build a coalition that will carry her to victory, or maybe it just won’t be enough to overcome the other candidates.

Next time: The final debate before Iowa, and a brief word about the primary process before we get started!
(Author’s note: yes, when this is all over, there really will be fifteen debates in total)

[Blackacre]

Two quick author's notes:

One, like I said before, there will be a grand total of fifteen debates on the Democratic side. The sheer number is actually a bit overwhelming, which is why all the debates except the first one have quick summaries instead of the more detailed recap the first one had. I try to write all my updates well in advance of me posting them, which is why I can do daily updates now, and writing all of these debates is exhausting. You'll still get all fifteen, but a word to the wise: if you plan on writing a TL yourself, don't be so ambitious with the debate count

Two, since I am writing pretty far in advance, I've gotten to a point where all the delegates are allocated and I just have to go back and fill in the narrative. (debates, Hungry for Power Games, endorsements, etc) Which means that I'm currently also working on a way to handle general election polling. Right now my idea is probably too ambitious for my own good, so consider this an open question to other TL writers: how did you handle general election polling? I seriously need to talk to somebody about how to go about it before we get to that point, so PM me if you can lend a hand.

Tonight's update will be the last one before the Iowa caucuses. Most TLs have that part of the story long before the seventh page, so to my readers who stuck with this story through the tedium of its 2019, thank you. I wanted to capture the feeling of the 2016 election as closely as I could, to set up the characters, including not only the candidates, but also the DNC Chair, new governors like Carter and Feingold, and create a large field with twists and turns that continue into the voting that surprised even me. (Yes, I will elaborate on that once the primaries are over and I don't need to worry about spoilers) To those who saw the slow pace of the story and lost focus, now is the perfect time to return.

Things are about to heat up.

[BuckeyeNut]

What is your elaborate polling plan?

Also: Rooting for Sherrod, hard. And since you brought up criminal justice reform, it should be noted that he's been trying to do work around bail reform, since it falls under his purview as insurance.

(Isn't it fun to say "Ranking on Banking"? Perhaps not as fun as Chairman...)

[Blackacre]

What is your elaborate polling plan?

Also: Rooting for Sherrod, hard. And since you brought up criminal justice reform, it should be noted that he's been trying to do work around bail reform, since it falls under his purview as insurance.

(Isn't it fun to say "Ranking on Banking"? Perhaps not as fun as Chairman...)

My plan rn is to have 5 pollsters total, with all of them covering the national race and the most important swing states, and then to have some but not all of them cover the less important states. So you'd have everyone on board for Wisconsin, four pollsters covering Minnesota, three handling Texas, two covering NE-02, and only one pollster doing, say, Kentucky. The pollsters would all have different results and would update periodically with each new post in a sort of polling hub that I would either have on here or in a different topic, and that I'd link to in my signature so it would be always available.

Then I would have two pollsters (chosen at random for each contest) cover the most important Senate races, with one pollster covering the others, and each gubernatorial race would only get one pollster. The idea would be to have a situation where there is a lot of polling, no contest is ignored, and the quantity of polling would create some suspense as to what the real state of the race is, which I couldn't do with just one pollster. However, it's a very time-consuming plan that would take a long time to even set up, let alone keep updated, so I'm not sure how much of it will be intact when it comes time for the general.

Also: Good to know! That (the bail reform bit) will help bolster his case to the voters who care about that issue Thanks!

[mjwatts1983]

Great thread

Gives me some hope for the future though a little disappointed to not see more of the other D women senators elected from 2016 (Harris, Matso, Hassan).

Curious about some individual races in Colorado. Did DeGette (CO-1) retire and was replaced by now-state speaker Crisanta Duran? Were Ds successful in unseating Coffman in 6 or was it wait until redistricting to draw him out?

When you do the Colorado Presidential Primary keep in mind of Amendments 107 and 108. They were passed via ballot in 2016 to allow for unaffiliated voters to participate in presidential primaries. Speaking of which, did any states reform their party affiliation deadlines? That was an issue from the Sanders folks and fueled the "THE DNC WAS RIGGED" fire.

Also.... what role does Obama play in the primaries? What has he done since 20 January 2017? When does his book/audiobook come out? How is his museum coming along? What is Michelle and the kids up to? Has he done any other television interviews since leaving the White House?

[Blackacre]

Great thread

Thank you!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's more on me than on them; I didn't have the energy to do a larger field. The Dem primary electorate also probably won't have an appetite for senators without at least a full term under their belts.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

DeGette did retire, and Duran is now Rep. Duran. Coffman did narrowly lose his seat in 2018.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So it's an open Primary, understood. New York did reform its deadline; it's now a month before primary day, so primary voters will have to have their registration changed by mid-march.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Obama won't endorse until the primaries are over. Since he left office Obama has been working on his Presidential Library, he's done a few interviews, but he's also done some organising and was a great help in 2018.

[Blackacre]

Saturday, January 25th, 2020?
The Fifth Democratic Presidential Debate: Pre-Iowa Edition

The ten Democratic Presidential candidates gathered in Des Moines, Iowa for a debate, hosted by NBC News and featuring Iowa Governor Michael Fitzgerald. For some of the candidates, this might be their final debate, and they knew it.

However, not all that much really happened. Everybody talked about farm subsidies, everybody talked about climate change, everybody talked about poverty. None of the candidates really broke new ground. There was one memorable exchange on the subject of immigration, which is the only highlight that really stood out.

Tammy Duckworth:
I co-sponsored an immigration reform bill in the Senate that would do the opposite of what Donald Trump wants. My plan would make it easier for people to go through the immigration process…

Tammy Baldwin:
That’s my bill, Senator. Why are you trying to take credit for a bill that I proposed?

Tammy Duckworth:
It’s a good bill and it’s something I would push for as President.

Tammy Baldwin:
I appreciate that, but you were trying to pass off my bill as yours. That’s not leadership. That doesn’t inspire confidence in the American People.

Tom Wolf needed a breakout performance and didn’t get anything memorable. Duckworth needed a breakout performance and got… that. The debate didn’t really change the dynamics of the race. And speaking of the dynamics of the race…
________________________________
Before Iowa: A word about the Primaries:

A few states have moves their contest dates from 2016. Tuesday states will have their contests moved to the nearest Tuesday, same with any state holding its contest on a weekend. Also, DC will hold its primary on the same day as California and company. There are exactly two changes to the Democratic nominating process from 2016. One, superdelegates have been reduced to 5% of the grand total instead of 15%. In practice, this means that all states will have 1/3 the unpledged delegates that they had in 2016, and a few more pledged delegates.

The second change is a concession to the old establishment: caucuses are nearly gone. The only state remaining that uses a caucus instead of a statewide primary on the Democratic side is Iowa. Nevada, Colorado, and others switched from caucuses to primaries. Even in Iowa’s case, the system has been altered to use raw votes instead of state delegate equivalents. This will increase turnout and make the nominating contests more democratic, and Ellison being on board took the wind out of the sails of any Bernie backers upset with the change. Besides, the shortening and neutering of superdelegates is a much bigger deal. However, no closed primary moved to being open. Only in New York did the rules change; the deadline to register as a Democrat to participate is now a mere one month away from primary day, as opposed to half a year.

When allocating delegates, only candidates who either placed in the top two or got at least 15% of the vote will get delegates, and those delegates will be awarded proportionately to all qualifying candidates. No state conventions required for the sake of my sanity. In addition to the delegates obtained in primaries, (and Iowa) there are also the aforementioned superdelegates. They have been instructed to all support the candidate with the most pledged delegates, though there are some exceptions that might be addressed if they become relevant. There are also the delegates of candidates who have dropped out, and the candidates can do with them what they please.

The system is designed to, as well as possible, avert a contested convention while still giving everybody a level playing field. If there must be wrangling among delegates and candidates, or negotiations between the establishment and grassroots, Ellison has openly stated that he’d rather see that happen in the summer months before the convention, so that when the party meets in Atlanta in August, they will have a definitive answer. It doesn’t matter to the DNC if the answer is someone they privately supported or someone who ran against them as an insurgent; what matters is that the answer exists and is clear to everyone before Atlanta.

Keep in mind that since every contest on the Democratic side awards delegates proportionately, while I will be keeping an updates map showing who won what state, that map could be a deceptive indicator of who’s in the lead. I’ll keep track of how many delegates each candidate got from each contest, and how many delegates each state has in total, starting with Super Tuesday. The early states won’t, because you need over 2,000 delegates to secure a win and nobody will clear a hundred by South Carolina.

I will be approximating delegates as well as I can, using the 2016 numbers but also adding 2/3s of the superdelegates in each state to the pledged delegate count. If I mess up, don’t hesitate to PM me. I’m no NHI when it comes to delegate allocation. With that being said, next time, the Iowa Caucuses set the stage for the actual primaries to begin!

[mjwatts1983]

Not to get morbid, but what are the statuses of prior POTUSes as of January 2020?

I'd say definitely still alive
Obama: 58
Clinton & W: 73

Maybe still alive...
Carter & HW: 95

I think you addressed this in a previous post, but SCOTUS is still 5-4 conservative with the seat vacated by a Trump appointee, correct?

Any other prominent political figures (domestic, international) that I should be aware about?

[Blackacre]

Not to get morbid, but what are the statuses of prior POTUSes as of January 2020?

I'd say definitely still alive
Obama: 58
Clinton & W: 73

Maybe still alive...
Carter & HW: 95

I think you addressed this in a previous post, but SCOTUS is still 5-4 conservative with the seat vacated by a Trump appointee, correct?

Any other prominent political figures (domestic, international) that I should be aware about?

Yeah, SCOTUS is still 5-4. The only one Trump replaced is Scalia. No former Presidents have died

[mjwatts1983]

Monday 27 January 2020, The Rachel Maddow Show A-block



Chris Hayes: That's it for "All In." "The Rachel Maddow Show" starts right now. Good evening Rachel.

Rachel Maddow (RM): Thanks Chris my friend!

And thank you for joining us tonight. Happy Monday!

We have a lot to get to tonight. We are 8 days away from the Iowa Caucuses and we will have a recap of the recent Iowa Democratic debate that happened over the weekend. (clips of candidates participating in debate) There is a moment that I think a lot of people didn't notice but should gain a lot of attention as we get closer to caucus day and in races after Iowa.

Meanwhile, it's not just Democrats who are caucusing next week but also *Republicans.* A new Des Moines Register poll came out over the weekend & they asked Republican caucus goers who they planned to support & it is not favorable to President Trump's odds of a dominating victory for previous incumbent presidents. (split-screen shot of Trump and Cruz) We have an interview with a reporter from the Des Moines Register about how much credence this poll has and what this could mean going forward.

(cut to RM at desk) But first...

(screen behind her, picture of Barack Obama, “Mr. Popularity”)

There are currently 5 former living presidents: Obama, both Bushes, Clinton, & Carter (picture of previous presidents). Each have taken different paths in party politics in their post-presidency years. Carter sort of shunned it and focused primarily on his humanitarian work. (Carter working on house building)

Poppy Bush was almost absent in the 1996 campaign only to re-emerge when his son George W. ran in 2000 & his re-election in 2004. George W pledged to support the party standard bearer in 2008 by promising to hit the trail for John McCain (shot of W & McCain press conference when McCain clinched the nomination) only to be absent from the trail when the then-incumbent president’s poll numbers took a nose dive. In 2012, the only way people knew that W Bush supported Romney was as the former president blurted out his endorsement while the elevator door closed (screen shot of Atlantic article). During the general election, the most recent two-term Republican president was absent from the campaign trail. In 2016, neither Bushes indicated their support for Donald Trump.

On the Democratic side, Bill Clinton has embraced party politics. Many cite his absence from the 2004 campaign due to heart surgery as one of the reasons why Kerry lost. He campaigned vigorously for his wife during her presidential bids in 2008 and 2016. In 2012 (Clinton and Obama embracing at DNC) he gave an impassioned speech defending Barack Obama’s record and was a key surrogate for him.

Since leaving the White House, Obama has done the standard post-president stuff. He has given speeches on the circuit that has drawn near-capacity crowds (Obama at Morehouse, fall 2017). He attended the high school graduation of his youngest daughter and followed it by a huge welcome home rally in Chicago (Obama returns to Chicago, 2018). The President Obama Library and Museum is scheduled to open in summer 2021. His book (picture of Obama’s book) was an immediate #1 on the New York Times best seller’s list and remained there for several weeks.

Then there is the non-standard post-presidential stuff…

(SNL clip, Obama delivers the show’s opening line ending the cold open, 2017 season premier)
(Interview with Colbert, doing Big Questions With Even Bigger Stars, 2018)
(guest voice on The Simpsons talking to Lisa, 2019)
(presenting the Oscar for Best Picture at the 2019 awards ceremony)
(Facebook live videos)

Obama, like Clinton, still remains very popular.

(bar graph of presidential approvals)

When Clinton left office in January 2001, his approval was 65% according to Gallup. In 2017, Obama’s was 55%. Since leaving office in their respective time periods Clinton’s has remained steady but Obama’s has gone up to 75%.

And this is especially true among Democrats and likely Democratic primary voters. According to PPP, Barack Obama has almost unanimous favorability among this group at 92%. He is higher than Bill Clinton who among Democrats is at 85%.

(cut back to RM)

2020 is the first presidential election where there is not a Clinton or Obama running for any federal office. The last time neither of these Democratic dynasties were running for federal office was 1988 when Bill was governor of Arkansas (archive footage of Bill Clinton as Arkansas governor) and Obama beginning law school at Harvard (picture of Obama at Harvard).

The question is: with the Democratic nominating contests upon us, what role will Obama play in them? Joining us tonight to answer that question is Presidential Historian Michael Beschloss (cut to MB, in studio)

Michael, it’s great to see you again.

MB: As always

RM: Did I leave anything out in that setup?

MB: No

RM: Good. So, what role do previous presidents play in nominating contests from a historical context?

MB: Well, the presidential primaries are a fairly new concept in American politics. The most known example of a former president engaging in a nominating contest was when Teddy Roosevelt attempted to take the Republican nomination away from his hand-picked successor Howard Taft in 1912. It was also the first time that instead of party bosses choosing the nominee, it was done by voters translating into delegates. Roosevelt brought those delegates to the 1912 convention and when denied the nomination left the convention and ran as a third-party candidate.

RM: (nods)

MB: Roosevelt gained more electoral votes than Taft but due to splitting the vote, it was Woodrow Wilson who won the presidency.

We are in a fairly unique time right now where there are five former living presidents. The last time that happened was in the period from when HW left office in January 1993 until the death of Richard Nixon in April 1994.

RM: Nixon was still a sort of a pariah at that point.

MB: Though time did heal some of the wounds from Watergate. And Ford didn’t escape that label either in part due to pardoning Nixon. He, like George W. Bush, sort of faded into the background and did not get involved in party politics again.

RM: The only comparable person on the Republican side to Obama’s popularity was, of course, Ronald Reagan whom Republicans continue to praise and seek to emulate to this day.

MB: (nods, smiles) Reagan’s activities were sort of similar to Obama’s – minus the Facebook and late night comedy programs – where he wrote op-eds and tended to his foundation. He made an appearance at the 1992 convention to deliver a keynote. It was his first and last appearance post-presidency at a political convention because as you know he was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s in August 1994 and his public appearances were reduced.

RM: Is it possible that the Democratic contest could turn into who is the inheritor of the Obama presidency?

MB: Well, I am the wrong person to answer that question since I am a presidential historian not a political analyst.

RM: (smiles) Do your best.

MB: The best historical comparisons is of course Teddy picking Taft as his successor in 1908 only to challenge the incumbent Taft four years later and ending up destroying the party in the general election. A further comparison is who would succeed George Washington.

The election of 1796 resulted in John Adams, the vice-president, being promoted to president while Thomas Jefferson, who was of the opposite political party of Adams and was Secretary of State in the early part of the Washington administration, became vice-president. The two did fight over who would become the successor of Washington’s legacy culminating in the contested 1800 election that Jefferson eventually won.

In a way both did with Adams ceding power to Jefferson after the election and Jefferson establishing his own presidency as well as continuing the tradition of serving two terms that remained in effect until Franklin Roosevelt.

RM: So back to my original question

MB: There is certainly historical precedent for a former president to choose a successor but in the recent era, the role prior presidents play when entering party politics is they allow the process to play out and then when it is time for the convention they become the headliner for the party’s nominee. As shown in 2008, Bill Clinton was a surrogate for his wife’s presidential bid but when it came time to rally around the nominee – Barack Obama – he acted as a party loyalist and campaigned for his party’s nominee.

RM: Presidential Historian Michael Beschloss

Thank you for being here tonight

MB: A pleasure (shakes hands)

(cut camera to RM, speaks): Plenty of show to go. Stay tuned.

(commercial break)

[Blackacre]

Saturday, February 1st, 2020
The Iowa Caucuses

Iowa Caucus Vote Count: (Democrats)
Sen. Brown: 22%
Sen. Baldwin: 20%
Sen. Warren: 19%
Sen. Franken: 17%
Gov. Wolf: 7%
Sen. Booker: 5%
Mayor de Blasio: 4%
Sen. Duckworth: 3%
Gov. Brown: 2%
Sen. Wyden: 1%
(bold indicates the candidate received delegates)


Today, we have sent a message to Washington. Our voice was heard loud and clear. We are sick of broken promises! We are sick of tax cuts for millionaires that we’re expected to pay for! We are sick of substituting hatred for policy! We will not back down!

Sherrod Brown has won the Iowa caucuses, giving him a headstart in the delegate battle and a new status as the Democrat to beat. However, he wasn’t the only one with cause to celebrate. Baldwin, Warren, and Franken all passed the 15% threshold to receive delegates, and all of them are outperforming Brown in New Hampshire.

American Samoa
Americans Abroad
Northern Mariana Islands
Guam
US Virgin Islands

Senator Sherrod Brown: 14 Delegates
Senator Tammy Baldwin: 12 Delegates
Senator Elizabeth Warren: 12 Delegates
Senator Al Franken: 11 Delegates
Unpledged: 3 Delegates
2,382 To Win

Iowa Caucus Vote Count: (Republicans)
President Trump: 75%
Sen. Cruz: 25%

 

Well, that wasn’t really true. Donald Trump had been out on the campaign trail in the two months we’ve skipped over, including in Iowa. While polling did show Cruz clearing 30 in the state, Trump actually beat his polls and did very well tonight. That isn't good news for Cruz going forward.

American Samoa
Americans Abroad
Northern Mariana Islands
Guam
US Virgin Islands

President Donald Trump: 22 Delegates
Senator Ted Cruz: 8 Delegates
1,237 To Win

Next time: Let us pay tribute…

[MAINEiac4434]

This is so, so good. Pulling hard for my man Al.

[Blackacre]

Tuesday, February 2nd, 2020
Hungry for Power Games: The Duck and the Wolf


As the candidates head toward New Hampshire, it’s important to take a minute and remember how hard it must be for them. They’re always on the move, always putting all of their energy into every event, and for what? So that we in the media can judge them and laugh at their mistakes. It really is a ruthless blood sport. It’s like the Hunger Games. No, it’s more costly than that. It’s…!




Yes, yes! Welcome to the Hungry for Power games. Tributes, assemble! Oh, there’s still so many of them! So many Democrats vying to be the latest addition to Donald Trump’s trophy room. Aha! But sadly, the man-eating monster known as Iowa has come, and it’s taken some tributes with it. Starting with Pennsylvania Governor and your assistant Principal Tom Wolf! Tribute Wolf seemed like a vicious beast, a ferocious wolf who won twice in a state that Trump carried, and was one of the only contenders to have executive experience. But while he blew down the house of Tom Corbett, and the house of sticks, he could not budge the house of corn. The other tributes ate the piggies before Tom Wolf even got there! So without a single delegate to his name, Tom Wolf did the only thing he could do: try to choose which tribute will eat his corpse.


To those who supported me, I’m sorry our campaign couldn’t go any farther. But the candidates who remain are all great potential standard-bearers for my party. There is one person left in the race who truly has what it takes to defeat Donald Trump, and for that reason, I’m proud to stand today with my friend Sherrod Brown!

Colbert:
Aw, how cute! But as unlikely as it sounds, Wolf wasn’t the only midwesterner with a last name containing an animal to drop out today and endorse somebody else. He was joined by Illinois Senator and Iraq war veteran Tammy Duckworth. She seemed like a strong candidate at first, with military experience and literally the same Senate seat as the last Democrat to win the White House, Barack Obama. But with no major legislative accomplishments, limited campaign funds, and a lack of media coverage, Senator Duckworth was like a duck out of water. She didn’t even leave an endorsement on her way to the big debate stage in the sky!

But, for the eight tributes who remain, the show continues in New Hampshire! So let us pay tribute, to the fallen!

THE FALLEN
TOM WOLF
DISTRICT: BLOWING DOWN

THE FALLEN
TAMMY DUCKWORTH
DISTRICT: QUACK

Next time! The eight remaining candidates have a debate before the new Hampshire primaries!

[America Needs R'hllor]

The Plog- Tal Schneider's Political Blog

Monday, February 3rd, 2020



The Road to the Presidency

Hello, readers, welcome to The Plog. The Iowa Caucuses came and went, and we still don't have a clear image of Democratic primary. Yes, Senator Sherrod Brown won, but only narrowly- Senator Baldwin, the runner-up, came within two percents of victory, Warren and Franken closely following. But we also have some big losers tonight, and two candidates were cleared from the field. Additionally, Ted Cruz's major loss in the caucuses might be an early death for his campaign, after he won it on 2016. For more of this, let us inspect The Road to the Presicency.

As always, I will link to the first part of this segement, which serves as a reference to the various candidates' starting positions: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=252835.125

  President Donald J. Trump- 40%
President Trump, after beginning the Republican primaries as a shaky incumbent, with a major primary challenge, now seems almost assured a victory. His landslide victory in Iowa makes Cruz's opposition much weaker, but he's still assured a very tough general election campaign, which makes his chances lower.

  Senator Sherrod Brown- 15%
After his important victory in Iowa, Senator Brown's chances to win the presidency shot up. He's still in no way assured to win the Democratic nomination, but his victory in Iowa, as well as his focus on trying to build a wide primary coalition that includes African American, progressive and white working class voters, make him the frontrunner.

  Senator Elizabeth Warren- 12%
Senator Warren might have lost her status as frontrunner, but did much better than expected in Iowa, outdoing the polls by around ten percentage points. Add to that the fact that Iowa was never crucial for the Warren campaign, and you get a campaign which is certainly not dead yet. She has to do well in New Hampshire, but if she can outdo the polls by even a third of the amount she outdid them in Iowa, she will win there.
Still, my gut feeling from months ago remains my prediction- Senator Warren will lose to Brown. She has been in public eye for too long, and people tend to perfer new faces. Brown is not only a new face, but with much bigger appeal to the white working class people who the Democrats so sorely need back.

 Senator Cory Booker- 10%
As the establishment lane clears more and more and the progressive lane remains crowded, Cory Booker's chances get better. He's also poised to do well in the coming contests in Nevada and the southern states, so the nightmare of progressives might yet be fulfilled- Cory Booker might become the next nominee.

  Senator Tammy Baldwin- 8%
In the last part of our series, we put the focus on Senator Baldwin. We said then, that Iowa is a crucial first step for her to win in order to be the nominee, and we still do- thus, Brown's victory there presents her campaign with a very big question mark. Can she recover and gain victories elsewhere? Only time can tell, but she's still an undoubtedly popular candidate, and her chances cannot be ruled out.
After the Iowa loss, we've sent a question to the Baldwin campaign, and they've responded as expected:
"The Iowa caucuses have been widely regarded as a very important roadblock for your presidential campaign. After losing it, will you continue your campaign? And if so, what is your strategy going forward, despite the loss in a more favourable territory for you than the next states?"
Answer from the Baldwin campaign: "We finished second in Iowa, a result that we're proud of. Going forward, we have reason to be optimistic in New Hampshire and Nevada. We won't be scared off just from a single loss!"

  Senator Al Franken- 7%
Senator Franken is in the same position as Baldwin, but while she was the runner-up in Iowa, he only came fourth. We cannot tell if this will impact him negatively, but his name will naturaly be mentioned less in the news when the Iowa results are reported, and he will not be able to paint his showing there as very strong, so his chances were probably harmed more than hers.
We've sent the same question we sent the Baldwin campaign, to Al Franken's campaign. Here is their answer.
Answer from the Franken campaign: "While a victory in Iowa would have been nice for our campaign, we always accounted for the possibility of losing it. We intend to continue spreading Al Franken's message as long as we have a path forward."

  Mayor Bill de Blasio- 4%
De Blasio was one of the frontrunners last year, but now he seems to be no more than a road bump for the five frontrunners. He did very badly in Iowan, and is not expected to do much better in New Hampshire, so his chances seem to rely soley on winning in the south. With Corey Booker doing much better than him in debates, this doesn't seem very likely, but if he manages to win in South Carolina, his chances will soar.

  Governor Kate Brown- 2%
The only governor in the democratic field seems like a chanceless candidate. She doesn't seem to have any particular base in the party, with the women, lgbt, and progressives mostly supporting other candidates, and her debate performances aren't too bright. She's polling among the last in almost every early state (other than New Hampshire) and in national poll, so her only chance to win is a great debate performance and a victory in the Granite State.

  Senator Ted Cruz- 1%
Initially, Ted Cruz was rising in the polls and threatening Donald Trump. But Iowa was to be the crown jewel of his upset victory, and he had everything going for him there- he won it in 2016, was still popular with the evangelicals who gave him this victory, and Trump is unpopular. Still, he didn't even reach the 30%, and this seems to be a deathblow to his campaign.

  Senator Ron Wyden- 1%
A dismal showing in Iowa didn't change it much for Ron Wyden- his ideology doesn't fit the modern democratic party. He does manage to articulate his vision well though, and Maria Cantwell's withdrawal leaves him as the only candidate in that lane of the party, so that slightly increases his chances.

 Governor Tom Wolf- 0%

 Senator Tammy Duckworth- 0%

 Senator Maria Cantwell- 0%

 Governor Andrew Cuomo- 0%

[mjwatts1983]

Dallas Morning News, Wednesday 5 February 2020


Editorial Board: Time for Choosing Senator


During the 2018 Senate campaign, Senator Ted Cruz pledged on the debate stage that he would serve a full six-year term. Instead Cruz decided nearly a year ago, to break that promise and again make a run at the White House.

Texans deserve a full-time senator, not someone who gets a wild hair during the presidential nominating season and decides to throw their hat into the ring. It appears that the only time that Cruz makes an appearance in the state he should represent is for a photo opportunity or when a disaster strikes as it was with the case of the Guadalupe River flood of June 2019.

Cruz’s campaign schedule has resulted in him missing several votes almost equaling the totals of either Senators Sherod Brown, Tammy Baldwin, Al Franken, or Cory Booker. A most notable example was him almost missing a key infrastructure bill that provided much needed funding for our highways due to a December blizzard that impacted travel out of Iowa.

Cruz was not elected to spend all of his time in Iowa. He was elected to represent Texas and our interests.

If he wishes to run for president, he may do so on his own time and give Texans a senator who will represent their interests; not his aspirations for higher office.