Jack Smith Report (Partially) Released

Senator Elizabeth Warren said back in 2019: 

First, a hostile foreign government attacked our 2016 election to help candidate Donald Trump get elected. Second, candidate Donald Trump welcomed that help. Third, when the federal government tried to investigate, now President Donald Trump did everything he could to delay, distract, and otherwise obstruct that investigation. 

That's a crime. If Donald Trump were anyone other than the President of the United States right now, he would be in handcuffs and indicted. Robert Mueller said as much in his report, and he said it again on Wednesday. 

That's why I came out in favor of impeachment after reading all 448 pages of Mueller's report. This is not about politics — it's our constitutional duty as members of Congress. It's a matter of principle.

Warren supported changing the current policy against indicting sitting presidents. She supported a special task force to investigate the Trump Administration when she ran for president. 

I cannot find the exact words but as I recall it would be separate from a normal investigation in the Justice Department. President Warren probably would have appointed a special counsel before Trump ran for re-election (2024). Biden did not do #2 and #3.

Attorney General Elliot Richardson promised Congress he would not fire the Watergate special counsel except for cause. Merrick Garland did not promise Congress to appoint a special counsel to investigate Trump. The Senate Democrats could have made that a grounds for their confirmation vote.

The release of Jack Smith's report related to the election interference case brings to mind these things. In hindsight, at least, a special counsel should have been appointed earlier. But, this is not just about Merrick Garland. The investigation of Nixon was not just about one person either. We need to know the full story to assign responsibility and know how to act in the future. Scapegoating is not advisable.  

One analysis takes a strong potshot -- "dithering coward" etc. -- at Merrick Garland for not changing the policy against prosecuting a sitting president. What good was that going to do in context? 

The policy allegedly is constitutionally required. I disagree but many liberal law types disagree with me. It is not just Merrick Garland. And, if the prosecution continued, Trump would have gone to the courts to try to block it. There was not enough time after the election to prosecute Trump before January 20, 2025.  

Jack Smith's report argued that if Trump did not win the election, that evidence was there to convict. Chief Justice Roberts and his conservative crew slowed things down via Trump v. U.S. The trial could have been over months before the election. 

The impeachment managers in Trump's first impeachment warned that if he was not convicted and removed he would "do it again." He did. As summarized by the Washington Post:

[Trump] pressed officials in key swing states to ignore the popular vote and flip electoral votes from Joe Biden to Trump; tried to submit fraudulent slates of electors from such states; threatened Justice Department leaders to open sham investigations and falsely claim election fraud to get states to join the plan; and pressured Vice President Mike Pence to use his ceremonial role overseeing Congress’s election certification on Jan. 6, 2021, to overturn the results.

The second impeachment involved a charge of insurrection. Others pointed to the 14A, sec. 3. disqualification provision. Jack Smith argued that as a criminal matter, the case was not clear enough to warrant that route. He used other criminal provisions. 

The interference of the electoral count cited in the criminal indictment very well involves the sort of thing that is "insurrection" for purposes of 14A, sec. 3. The provision is not a criminal provision for purposes of the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. 

But, even there, there were seditious conspiracy convictions in a few January 6th cases. There is a clear overlap between insurrection and sedition:

In order to win a seditious conspiracy case, prosecutors have to prove that two or more people conspired to “overthrow, put down or to destroy by force” the U.S. government or bring war against it, or that they plotted to use force to oppose the authority of the government or to block the execution of a law.

Garland did not release the second part of the special counsel's report respecting the classified documents case. First, let us recall the multiple delays there involved different issues than in the election interference case. Garland himself has even less blame in that case for the delay. Judge Aileen Cannon had a large role, for instance, in multiple delays. 

Second, the reason is that two prosecutions are pending involving Trump flunkies involved in the mishandling of the documents. There is a sort of formal reasonableness to that but (1) without Trump, the cases are fairly trivial (2) the Trump Justice Department is likely to drop them. 

(Yes, something to ask the presumptive Attorney General.)

The rest of the report will then likely be stuffed (again, ditto). Why not just drop the two cases and release the report now? I think it is correct to call out Attorney General Merrick Garland (who overall I think is a tragic figure who some people think was there to do one thing) here.

Trump is already a felon for election interference in New York related to the 2016 election. I heard on Fox News (someone else was watching it as I put together a table) an argument that the unconditional discharge shows how the prosecution was phony. 

A confusion of cause and effect. The judge only provided that sentence for the same reason why Jack Smith dropped the prosecutions -- the rules for a sitting you know what. The special counsel's reminder is no less true because of its bad taste:

The Department’s view that the Constitution prohibits the continued indictment and prosecution of a President is categorical and does not turn on the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the Government’s proof, or the merits of the prosecution, which the Office stands fully behind. Indeed, but for Mr. Trump’s election and imminent return to the Presidency, the Office assessed that the admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial.

If you want an assured happy ending, watch a Hallmark Channel movie. But, gaslighting aside, guilt is not washed away with nearly fifty percent of the fraction of the voting population that deigned to vote. 

There are certain safeguards in place when handling dangerous items. Let us remember that when handling things after noon next Monday.  

More July Voting

After the Supreme Court went on summer recess,* lingering Big V related activity still went on. After all, the MLB has yet to begin. But, presidential primaries are running their course, with Biden (even on a lagging tracker) now having enough delegates to win in the first round with superdelegates taking part.  New York and New Jersey continued to count their absentee ballots.  Looks like Sanders (via strength in some district, since his state-wide numbers is under 15%) will get at least two delegates in NJ and around twenty in New York.  Oh, and sometime in late June without us realizing it, someone was nominated to the Life and Liberty Party.

And, Howie Hawkins (like the Libertarian Party nominee, a long term safely bland option) was nominated to the Green Party.  Well, that just happened last weekend.  On Saturday, only around three months late, Louisiana's results came in.  Lots of options, including someone named Robby Wells.  The "others" split around 20% with Sanders and Warren combined getting about half.  So, Biden received all the delegates.  Four "others" split the non-Trump vote, which here was about four percent.   Note for other races, there is one big "jungle primary," which means we might have a run-off in December. Fun fun. 

Puerto Rico Republicans had an online poll of party leaders in early June and selected Trump.  At first, it looked like maybe neither party would have an actual primary, but perhaps pushed by the courts stopping New York doing that, Puerto Rico eventually scheduled the Democratic presidential primary for Sunday.  Recall too that because of our stupid electoral college system, its U.S. citizens residents cannot actually vote for President in November.  This is so even though its approximately four million people is more than multiple state.  This is not getting the attention it deserves and while D.C. becoming a state is actually as close to being a thing as it ever was really should address territorial voting and interests as a whole. 

Anyway, though the 270 to Win etc. only has a few thousand voting, nearly all the delegates have been estimated. The joker here is that Bloomberg (both him and Sanders island-wide got around thirteen percent, but perhaps went over the floor in certain districts, which is also how the floor works)  got a couple delegates this time.  Not sure if this is from long ago ballots or if more recent people voted for him. The last time someone other than Biden or Sanders (putting aside apparently two unaffiliated delegates in Kentucky, maybe) received delegates was March 3rd. 

[NY aside.  Was it worth it to allow New York to have a presidential primary even though the results suggest Biden received most of the delegates and four out of five votes?  Yes.  A large chunk of the voters already would show up for other races.  Many of those who did not resided in upstate areas much less affected by the Big V.  Extended absentee voting was available and the extra work there is likely not excessive.  Things were better by late June, but they also could have limited in person voting even more if necessary.

OTOH, the voting very well could have been done better, including providing means (there was a 15% or so refusal rate by one estimate I saw) to allow correction of errors. The confusion was seen by the people at my polling place not even knowing at the start there were two ballots (the presidential ballot being added after litigation) and a message later in the day suggested that they weren't the only one. 

And, basic democratic principles warranted giving the people a chance.  Finally, not doing so resulted in feelings of being cheated that should be avoided whenever possible.  No other state -- though again Puerto Rico seemed to be thinking about it -- found it necessary to simply cancel the presidential primary.  As is, not having a Republican presidential primary was somewhat dubious.]

Tuesday involved other state races, which will continue into September.  Alabama (Republican) and Texas (both parties) had run-offs and the "let's get rid of Susan [Collins]" Maine congressional primary race.  Susan Collins herself is running unopposed.  Jeff Sessions is in his 70s.  Time to retire, big guy.  The race is ugly and let us recall that the move is (which people expect) to replace Sen. Doug Jones, who is a perfectly respectable honorable senator.  With some troll.  But, it's Alabama, so though I won't give up on it,  it's an uphill battle.

The main race in Maine is Sara Gideon vs. longshots to go after Susan Collins. An interesting bit of news there -- Bre Kidman is the first openly non-binary person to run for US Senate.  Texas has multiple races from earlier on because candidates did not receive a majority of the vote.  This is better really than some races in let's say New York, where a fraction of the voters (a House seat represents around three quarters of a million people) of the district decide things with maybe as low as around a third of the vote determining things.  That is a safe blue seat where the winner of the primary tends to clinch things.  M.J. Hegar or Royce West for senator would be the most important.  Maine has ranked choice voting so avoids runoffs.  BTW, there has been some talk that Biden actually has a chance in hell to win Texas.

[I'll update if there are any surprises in the top races. BTW, Trump's old personal physician is running in a House race in Texas.] 

Okay.  Well, there is now one (Connecticut) primary left in the presidential race but still a significant number of state races. I'll do a clean-up entry next month with the final numbers of races such as New York as appropriate. Bloomberg actually getting delegates suggests even now a bit of news is possible. Of course, the big thing will be who the veep will be.  Will not have scheduled entries for the state races, but they are important in various instances and overall given local government is quite relevant.

---

* As seen by the death penalty cases, and there might be additional ones as more people are executed, summer recess does not mean inaction. So, e.g., the House asked CJ Roberts for accelerated action in the Trump case just decided.  The Supremes also put out the October calendar, basically filled with cases that was postponed from this term (which let us recall does not end until the first Monday in October).

Also, RBG is in the hospital again, raising the usual "OH.MY.GOD" comments.  But, have not seen anything that makes this any different than multiple other cases.  She's 87.  Yes.  But, we have to rely on her hanging in like she has for years.   

July Primaries Begin

We normally have primaries throughout the year into September, but this year we have presidential races pushed back with a few races in July and one in August.  I noted that enough votes have been counted in New York for 270 to Win to estimate that Biden now has enough votes to win on the first ballot even if the superdelegates took part.  OTOH, the AP delegate tracker does not include them [looking Wednesday night, it does now], so we have something to wait for there. Well, for those who are trying to find something to wait for in a race that basically was over in April at the latest.  Anyway, there is some concern that we don't drag this out this long in November.  

The races today are in Delaware (only presidential primary) and New Jersey (all federal races), but since they are mostly by mail, we will have another wait (says here about a week) on our hands.  Delaware has Biden, Sanders and Warren with Roque De La Fuente (who was nominated for three third parties, that I know of) is the anti-Trump option. Meanwhile, New Jersey [over 100 delegates] has Biden, Sanders and uncommitted while Trump is running unopposed.  We also have the Dem turncoat running in New Jersey.

A small sample of the Republican presidential result at 8:40PM actually has over 25% of it going against Trump.  Let's see how that holds, but the usual trend is around five percent with at most ten percent.  And, very early returns have Biden likely to get all or nearly all of the delegates in the two states.  But, we shall update things.  There are a handful of state and presidential races this weekend and next Tuesday.  New York will continue to count during this time.  And, then things skip to August with Connecticut as the last presidential primary state. 

Anyway, good Biden op-ed though the amendment idea is off.

Morning Results: The anti-Trump result in Delaware has dropped to 12%, which is still more than was in place generally.  Republicans have dropped a name, Tom Kean Jr. (his dad was governor, president of Drew University and co-chair of the 9/11 Commission), to regain a House seat.  Most of the races are not close, such as one competed race deemed settled (another Kennedy), but maybe Sanders (12%) still has a chance to win delegates in New Jersey.  Uncommitted is less than a percent there. Sanders received seven percent, Warren three in Delaware in early results.  Will update.

Late June Voting (Early Returns Edition)

And Also: A new "not your grandparents' Perry Mason" version -- e.g., Paul Drake here is a black cop, started last weekend on HBO. Pretty good.  Good cast and 1930s atmosphere.

There was various races today, including a special House primary won by someone not even 25 yet (AOC: senior stateswoman!), the most focus was placed on the two presidential primary states which also had many other races whose winner was more up in the air -- Kentucky and New York. The use of absentee balloting leaves the full results a matter that is pending, but some things can be addressed here.

There was some concerns, especially given a much reduced number of poll places,  that Kentucky (run by a Democratic governor, let us recall)  would be a mess. One account -- by someone less likely to be a kneejerk partisan on that blog -- put forth a mostly rosy accounting.  As I said there, concerns were natural if very well perhaps overheated.  Also, it will take time to fully get a sense of what happened, but if it went well, great -- we should try to focus on the good, to help keep sane and help how to address the bad.  Plus, yes, sometimes "the left" needs to get all reality community focused. And, sometimes, there are kneejerk reactions, especially from politicians [even those we mostly like] who are not closely looking at the details.

Finally, this op-ed suggests we should care about in person voting, absentee voting having some issues (not fraud related though Rick Hasen, while noting the concerns are overblwon, notes that to the limited degree that is an issue, that is a concern. Some people now all gung ho about absentee voting were willing to grant that when calling Republicans hypocrites for being less concerned about fraud there) and one size fits all is unsound.  This includes concern about problems -- I myself fear that I did not sign and date my ballot, thus making it void. There isn't a way to have the errors caught though I guess maybe you can still vote in person if you think the ballot won't be accepted anyways.

One big race is a AOC type affair where some old white vet (thirty years) is being challenged by a younger, more progressive (at least more passionately so ) challenger, again here a POC.   Engel, who seems tired and out of touch, appears to have lost the race. Well, he was there for thirty years (first defeating my senator's grandfather for the seat; she around two at the time ... she eventually changed her mind, and endorsed his opponent).  There was even a few races where a Republican was favored though not a one Republican ran in my own district.  Putting aside the district leaders (male and female), a choice between two people I knew nothing about, the expected people won -- AOC and Biaggi.  AOC actually had three competitors, two of whom nearly no one heard of though Sam Sloan was the last non-lawyer who argued in front of the Supreme Court (winning 9-0). 

After early April, Biden was basically the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate though some thought that basically after South Carolina.  Still, he did not technically get the number of delegates until earlier this month.  There is another marker that is likely to be passed by the time a full account allows a full breakdown of New York delegates -- when Biden would win even if the superdelegates voted.  This would allow them to vote under the rules in the first round of voting. Biden is around twenty delegates now from that marker.

New York was scheduled to vote in April but the Big V delayed things until the state/local races date in June.  New York allowed absentee voting basically out of fear of obtaining the virus; de facto at will though you had to request a ballot.  There was some difficulties at the polls, including because the often senior poll staff at times did not want to go to work.  I worked at the polls again as I did last November, this time part of a smaller staff (there was not even people to "man" each of the voter check-in tables while in the past, sometimes there were two at a table -- one was a sort of "roving" spot).  The coordinator was late, apparently because trains were out 1-5AM for cleaning, so we were a bit delayed at the 6AM start time.  But, once things got moving, it mostly went smooth at our lazy spot.

(One thing that did not happen during the general was that many people came who were not registered Democrats, even some who were Republicans, and thus could not vote since there were only Democratic races.  Many had no party -- or so was the case in record.  It is far from clear if such people can ask for an affidavit vote.  Also, there is a lot of paperwork you have to do plus a lot of signs to hang up.  And, a lot of things to deal with -- down to multiple plastic ties -- when putting together machines or closing up shop.  Rather tedious.)

Again, a few things are not final -- the big thing that probably stands out in that department is who won the Kentucky Democratic Primary.  The presidential numbers are as expected.  Biden won New York with about 2/3 of the vote with Sanders getting about a fifth.  The ballot had a bunch of also rans receiving the usual small fractions. I got to vote for Warren, who at this point has around 4.4% of the vote.  And, yes, thousands of people voted for the likes of Klobuchar.  No Republican presidential primary.  I still think it was appropriate to allow voters to vote in the presidential primary though the two ballots at first led to some confusion at my polling place  (how this is so is unclear -- how can they not make this clear to the person running the show?).

The current returns for Kentucky are but a fraction of the whole but I'll toss out the numbers.  Sometimes, you see "uncommitted" this year as an option to provide Trump a small opposition.  Thus, six percent did that here. But, it is more unusual to see around 17% in the Democratic primary -- at this point, Sanders is not at the 15% floor.  Biden is at around 60% and the others have the usual fractions.  Again, this is early and the official numbers won't come until at the end of the month.  Our next presidential primaries will come next month. 

Meanwhile, New York City has moved into Phase 2 while various upticks make me worried about baseball coming back next month. Which apparently it really will.  Boo to universal DH!

Biden Clinches and Some More Voting

Biden would have wrapped up the Democratic nomination much earlier, if not for the coronavirus pandemic — 15 states, along with Guam and Puerto Rico, postponed their nominating contests due to the outbreak.

With mail-in ballots taking time to be counted, maybe a prelude to November (but reports also that mail-in voting overall has gone well too), it took until last Friday for the results to come in to give Biden the delegates (1991) needed to officially get the Democratic nomination for President.  The article also notes that he would have gotten here soon if he didn't as an act of comity agree to let Sanders keep many delegates that under the original rules would be lost once Sanders suspended his campaign.  OTOH, without the Big V, Sanders very well might not have done that and continued to actively campaign for delegates.  The pandemic underlined the need to rally around Biden.  If so, I could see this thing extending at least to the late June New York Primary. 

Biden first ran for that office in 1988 and continuously did rather badly.  He did not even win a primary until this year in South Carolina.  But, for these times especially, it makes sense he is doing well.  In the past, he wasn't Grandpa Biden, the feel good former vice president of the first black president with a bit of extra pathos given his son dying.  And, though I really wanted a woman (guess I'll have to settle with the woman who -- knock on wood -- will be the first woman vice president), admit that is the will of the overall electorate and fitting the times.* A few women, especially Warren supporters, are still somewhat bitter, but his actions in recent days overall has gained even their respect.  As to the uncomfortable "too handsy there, Joe" stuff, the TR mess perhaps ironically has led people to feel uncomfortable about bringing that up.  Again, the vp will help. 

My concerns about his age hasn't disappeared.  But, so it goes. Also, the times fit an old comfortable figure as compared to the younger alternatives. As to concern he would be too complacent about Republicans, not totally over that, though others helped ensure his platform will be liberal.  He is after all a median Democrat there and the party has moved left even since the Obama years.  And, at times, he will continue to sound too safe.  But, him winning allows the overall sane brand to win too with more left leaning sentiments etc. getting more of a say and chance of being put in place.  His actions in the last few months suggests concerns about past presidential campaign troubles also only show so much.  He has handled being the presumptive nominee well, and though people will latch on to certain moments, Biden seems to be able to be trusted there.

I misjudged the situation somewhat, the Big V did influence things too, but stick by some of my early talk.  Primaries for people like me include pushing the non-median safe choice and his past campaigns etc. justified some wariness.  Anyway, I'm ready to be Biden2020.  

===

Guam has been in limbo for a while now -- let's not forget about Guam -- but turned out to have a caucus along with the Virgin Islands (who actually was right on time) on June 6th.  It was  5/2 split for Biden/Sanders in Guam with Biden getting all seven in the Virgin Islands. Meanwhile, "In lieu of a primary, the Republican Party of Puerto Rico conducted an electronic referendum among party leaders on June 5, 2020, as the main event in its presidential nominating process."  Note the original rule here is cited as this: "If a Presidential candidate receives 50% or more of the island wide vote, that candidate receives all 23 delegates."  Marco Rubio got them in 2016.  Trump this time and the nature of the "referendum" might explain why the usual small percentage of non-Trump votes are not showing up.

BREAKING NEWS: Voters outraged because they can’t vote. @cbs46
Voting machines are down & systems aren’t working all over #Atlanta
Some people have left the polls because the line has NOT moved since 6 A.M. pic.twitter.com/QfJ8fxz5TQ

— Barmel Lyons CBS46 (@BarmelLyonsTV) June 9, 2020

Georgia (with long lines and rain some places) started early voting as Biden got those final delegates last Friday.  Problems with voting led to some calls that the governor was elected illegitimately.  Rick Hasen has done a bit of concern trolling on that (you are a big election rights advocate, but you can still be wrong about something).  Yes, such rhetoric can be overused (think the margin of victory was too large to deem the 2004 presidential election in doubt even with issues in Ohio).  There is some real issues here, however, especially (shades of Florida 2000) when self-interested parties are involved.  Even if things got better as the day progressed, many would say "the hell with it" and not vote.

(One article suggested a wider problem though Georgia is getting the most attention probably given the numbers and problem is bigger: "Voters encountered long lines in several states because of consolidated polling locations, including Nevada and South Carolina, where some polling places did not open on time and the polling place locator on the state’s website did not work properly, according to voting rights groups.")  

Anyway, Hasen has flagged problems in Georgia and it is something to worry about.  This is one theme here -- primaries provide tests to the more important elections in November.  Who is to know how the Big V will affect things there. Maybe, better, the same or whatever.  After all, the numbers of voters and stakes are higher.  There are multiple swing states where Republicans can cause problems in 2020 though Democratic governors will be of some assistance. There is still the unclear breadth of legislative power in presidential elections, which the faithless electors cases might confuse only more. What if some broad language regarding state power over electors is cited?  Or would it be "legislative"?  Over recent years, just what that means (is it an overall process with a governor's veto?), has been a greatly disputed issue up to the Supreme Court.

Trump fairly comfortably (50/45, poll data suggesting that sort of thing might be much more tight this time) won Georgia, but there are other concerns here.  One major race there is for one of the two U.S. Senate seats decided in November, the other a special election for the full term of the seat now held by tainted Kelly Loeffler.  Georgia is one of multiple June presidential primaries that were pushed back, including New Jersey that was originally June but was still pushed back until July.  Not that it will be the latest -- the final primary is Connecticut, in August!

Georgia and West Virginia has their postponed primaries today with New York and Kentucky having theirs in two weeks. Georgia would have likely been pro-Biden originally, shades of South Carolina while West Virginia might have been a place where Sanders had some success like in 2016.  OTOH, Biden could have appealed to the more conservative leaning Democrats there that chose the most conservative Dem in the Senate.  Various zombie candidates (including Deval Patrick) are on the ballot in today's two presidential primary states and the loose rules in West Virginia also brings some guy named David Rice (who ran before).  One thing all those candidates do is hurt Sanders' shot to get that 15% floor.

Looking at 270 to Win, all the precincts (to be careful, this might not mean all the votes are counted with paper ballots) reported in West Virginia and the split between the top two is 65/12 with Biden getting all twenty-eight delegates. David Lee Rice seemed like a sort of "none of the above" with eight percent of the vote.  Various others (Warren received three percent) split the rest, even Deval Patrick (.5%) gaining 1% if you round up.  This suggests, with the fifteen percent floor (otherwise, each delegate could have broke down to about 3% of the vote), some sort of instant run-off voting (using the term roughly) would have given a more accurate breakdown.  Many of that 35% might still have voted for Biden, but probably someone else would have received delegates  as well.

For completeness, have also tried to find Republican presidential primary numbers.  West Virginia shows old friend Joe Walsh is gone but not forgotten (he has endorsed Biden, right?), edging out Bill Weld a bit (splitting 3.5% of the vote) with others splitting 2%.  Recall there are other Republican races, if one wants to know why around 195K people are showing up to vote for Trump at all.   I don't see Georgia numbers yet but will update if I do.  As to the Dems there, listed at about 85% of the precincts reporting but the split is 83/10 there as a whole and the estimate is that of the 105 delegates, at least 97 will go to Biden.  I guess we can talk about instant run-off here too (can mean 10 or so delegates) but over 80% seems less notable here than not even a 2/3 floor.

[It looks like no one else but Trump was on the ballot in Georgia and there was no write-in option.  Only a few states, including New York, cancelled the Republican presidential primary.  The state rules for write-ins generally are harder than many states.  Also, by the end of Wednesday, Biden was estimated to get all 105 Georgia delegates with nearly 98% precincts with a 84/10 split with Warren getting the bronze with 2%.] 

Also of special note is that Jon Ossoff, who just missed getting another to win a majority for a special election in Newt Gingrich's all district but then lost a close head-to-head run-off, is the clear favorite in the Democratic senator primary.  But, there are so many also rans that even with a 48% plurality (as of now), he might still need a run-off. The next two both have 14% or so of the vote. IRV, please! (Looks like he did break the majority line. Now win it all!) Unlike the last time, it is hard to see him not winning a two person run-off, but it would be big waste of time with that breakdown.  We can imagine a different split (such as a real three person race) but that's just silly.  The Republican winner of the House race lost in 2018 but has a rematch (one of several), herself winning the primary yesterday.

I have focused on presidential primaries here but as seen last time there are also states voting for only non-presidential races too (New York normally would have split things up, e.g.).  Thus, Nevada, South Carolina and North Dakota are also voting today.  And, a few of the local races as a whole were fairly close, one or more of special interest to some.  The next presidential primary is in two weeks and will involve New York and Kentucky. That is also the date of a few other southern state races. I see none that are scheduled before then though early voting is in place

Onward.

----

* My wish was a woman candidate and went for Gillibrand, Harris and Warren there. Maybe, Kamala Harris will be v.p.  But, Gillibrand showed she wasn't really presidential material, Harris was green and never caught fire and Warren was a niche candidate that some really loved (while others at best saw her as a reasonable back-up).

Then, there were a bunch of also rans, one or more (like Castro) rather appealing but not likely.  A few -- when Biden looked like a goner -- latched on to Bloomberg, which on some level was more desperation than anything else.  Imagine that guy as the nominee with his stop and frisk policy this week.  Ha ha.  And, then there was Sanders, who some wrongly assumed was a lock but turned out again to be the gadfly with some important things to say while not really being ideal as a nominee.

In hindsight, Biden seems a lock here.  I admit to have been misled by his past failures, my own concerns/wishes and the belief another candidate would gain fire.  Kamala Harris seemed the best bet there though Warren did have some potential.  But, with special help from the black vote in South Carolina and other places, Biden was the one.  I accept it. 

Ohio Primary

And Also: Other than correcting two typos in opinions (one involving the word "edit"),
 we have details on the upcoming telephonic arguments, including questioning by seniority.

When NY is getting some criticism, we will not likely to be too impressed by any Republican governor's response to the Big V, but a few cases at least probably can be found. Gov. DeWine (remember him from the Gang of 14?) is getting some kudos. When Mike Pence, the head of the task force after all (remember?), cannot wear a damn mask when he visits the Mayo Clinic, the governor wearing one in a picture found in the NYT itself is notable.  And, his move somewhat aggressively (including in the face of a judicial order, if not the state supreme court like Wisconsin), to delay the primary election on March 17th is part of that.

Finding sane Republicans in Congress might be a tad harder and we have months to see what Mitt "2012 Republican POTUS Nominee / sole impeachment conviction vote" Romney does regarding endorsing Trump and/or Biden.  Rep. Justin Amash is no longer a Republican and has decided to seek out the Libertarian Party nomination, LARP-ing about being "president" and bringing decency back or something.  One hopes this won't really matter and there was going to be a LP nominee for people to vote for regardless.  Unclear this guy adds many votes there in any real degree, but it still is egotistic assholery.  The link suggests any value will be anti-Trump, but the guy is implying that neither nominee is the decent choice.  Both sides do it!  Enough with that shit NOW.

Anyway, there was a primary, mostly by mail.  Talk about "beauty contests," there actually by this count more Republicans voting for Trump than Democrats for Biden and company.  The website has Ohio as a swing state, okay, though it has been comfortably Republican for a time.  There are more mail-in votes to count (as long as they are postmarked in time) but that count has Biden about 72% and Sanders at 16.6% (there is a 15% floor and with 2/3 votes in, he had something like 15.2%, so obtained a bit of a safety margin there). A late "surge" also helped Warren overtake Bloomberg, both with a little over 3%.   Bronze is bronze.

Originally, Booker had a few votes and Yang none -- he couldn't get on the ballot and was fighting for a write-in campaign -- but as of this writing it is the other way around.  I think this is an error -- the NYT results has Booker with votes.  Anyway, since 11% are split around for also rans, which does amount to more than that in delegates, instant run-off voting has value here too.  Plus, yes, there are some other races though most of them were not competitive either.  Still, at least one of the house races were competitive. And, even then, you have effects when you have multiple candidates.

It is appreciated that we can have elections in these times though this is not actually you know WWII or something. Or, the Civil War, where we even had elections in places in the South in the middle of things. Let's have one of those presidential primary things in New York, huh? Think we can handle it.

Wyoming Primary (Caucus) Results etc.

"The most important thing right now is to save lives and contain the spread of COVID-19. But we will take all necessary actions to guarantee the right to vote in an event of great importance for the Nation and Puerto Rico," said Rodríguez in a statement.

With the Big V (amusing photos) postponing so many primaries (Puerto Rico was postponed twice and has not been rescheduled yet; multiple ones became all mail-in), on paper the primary season is far from over. OTOH, Sanders and now Warren both endorsed Biden as did all of the leading candidates and multiple also rans (did anyone not do so?).  So, though Sanders made some noises regarding getting delegates to have inflence at the convention (his 900 or so would not anyway?) and to keep his message alive, we are sorta going thru the motions. 

Nonetheless, voting began when it was still a competitive race and state Democratic Party officials say they’ve taken pains to ensure the votes will be counted and delegates will be allocated fairly.

The latest, with results coming out days after the final date for mail-in votes, is Wyoming. At the end of the month, we will have Ohio, which was originally going to come a month ago.  But, Ohio is actually governed by one of the more sane Republican governors, one that unlike Wisconsin was not blocked by the courts.  Wyoming was originally going to be some mix of caucus and primary with ranked choice voting mixed in with a 15% floor (thus avoiding the possibility of some states where a significant chunk of voters weren't counted since they supported also rans).  Fourteen delegates doesn't matter much but the key is running things sanely.

Meanwhile, though who knows how important it is, there is talk of Biden picking a running mate.  Some people really want Warren though this to me seems a heart over head deal -- so, e.g., two "rules" are set that to me seem questionable to meet (does Biden really want to power share?). Warren seems best where she is with a younger and more checking some box (and maybe someone Biden is more comfortable in) candidate more appropriate. As to doing it sooner, he is 77, this is a pandemic and it can fill in the lag in the months of not much happening.  Sanders endorsed him, so he is not stepping on any toes, right?  And, talk of him announcing other people (such as potential Cabinet names) to reassure and cause excitement.  We shall see how that goes, but probably rather the v.p. picked soon.

And, thus we wait, with a lot of races postponed until June, including New York being done along with state races in late June.  One thing that this can all do is to get a sense of how mail-in voting works, including dealing with any possible problems.  The clock to start the process there is running out.  Debate can be continued regarding fixing the rules and ultimately the goal should be some sort of national legislation. This also brings up concerns about funding of the post office.  And, as touched upon in links found here, the House at least looks to be changing rules to allow more proxy and remote voting. 

As to the Wyoming results ... results were released about noon local time today.  Biden won in a 72/28 split which would be 10/4 delegate-wise if it is split purely by percentage.  Various places also factor in specific district wins.  Sanders won 56/44 in the 2016 Wyoming caucuses.  I realize on some level, this is a bit silly but there is a certain charm to watching the results as would be the case with let's say looking at baseball scores even when the playoffs is not a possibility.  And, respect for the overall enterprise, including the simple act of voting and taking part in the system of republican (small 'r') government (voting but a part) is advanced as well.

ETA: Checking later on, 4/22, a 12/2 split is estimated. 

RIP: John Pine, Sanders' campaign & Wisconsin Electoral Legitimacy

Stephen Colbert, who had a great interview with Conan last night in part bonding over their scientist fathers, recently wished this singer well as he was reportedly put on a ventilator.  Unfortunately, he has died.  I was not familiar with his work, but can see why he received so much respect.

==

(The young photographer had a moment of fame.) 

The main blame for the election f-up in Wisconsin yesterday ultimately is in the hands of the Wisconsin legislature, who had a chance to work with the governor to address the situation, particularly by agreeing to postpone. The U.S. Supreme Court and probably to a lesser extent the state supreme court worsened the situation, but they were dealing with an imperfect means to address the problem that the legislature created and aggravated.  This should be remembered in November and as more is done on the federal level to help address and prepare for the problems that in some fashion will arise  in the November elections. This was bad.  A major FU to democracy and basic decency.

===

Sanders suspended his campaign today, perhaps pushed by talk that Biden is vetting vice presidents and the clusterfuck of Wisconsin.  Listened to his statement, followed by a nice statement from Biden. 

He spent most of the time promoting his message and saying it has had success in the polls among younger voters. Then, he dealt with the reality of him not having a realistic chance of winning & suspending his campaign.  He did note he will stay on the ballot (and the rules as I understand it require that if he already registered though someone told me Warren sued to remove her name in one state) and that collecting delegates is important to have a voice.

This last part rubbed me the wrong way since it encourages bad mouthing of Biden and risky trips to the polls by some of his supporters.  Anyway, thanks Sen. Sanders and hope you and your supporters will, as you say, deal with the threat of Trump and help Biden and other Democrats win in November.  We need to focus on Biden winning and stop whining about how we are upset he is the nominee (I get it) and his problems.  OTOH, I do kinda still want to vote for Warren in June.  Give me that. 

===

A small reminder of just what is at stake is the new press secretary (though not sure what they do now -- the last one had not a single press conference; guess was mostly crafting troll press releases) and baseball wife (Sean Gilmartin used to be a Mets AAAA reliever).  A taste from that article:

For instance, in a video of Ms. McEnany on the Fox Business show “Trish Regan Primetime” from Feb. 25, circulated by Andrew Kaczynski of CNN, the new press secretary said, “We will not see diseases like the coronavirus come here, we will not see terrorism come here, and isn’t that refreshing when contrasting it with the awful presidency of President Obama?”

Since Ms. McEnany made that statement, about 400,000 people in the United States have been infected with the coronavirus.

She has at times trafficked in the type of “othering” of President Barack Obama that Mr. Trump once did by promoting a lie that the first black president, whose father was Kenyan, was not born in the United States. “How I Met Your Brother — Never mind, forgot he’s still in that hut in Kenya. #ObamaTVShows,” Ms. McEnany tweeted in 2012.

The old "press" secretary will now work with Melania Trump.

Presidential Race Continues

There is talk that Sanders should just drop out given the virus and concerns about voting. But, I still think it is okay to have him debate with Biden as means of engaging with him (just saw that Biden basically signed on to Warren's plan that would make their big split over the bankruptcy bill old news; that happens because he is getting pressure from his left and he's trying to support a median position). Sanders dropped basically a sort of home test at the end of his post-Baby Super Tuesday remarks, talking about what he will ask Biden about. Fine.

And, though Sanders very well might ride this to the convention, which to me is a bit much unless it is somewhat pro forma (especially with some of his more bothersome supporters actively bashing Biden hard), it is fair really to give him some time when there is a lot more voting. Yes, this is true even though there is little chance he will catch up, especially with zombie supporters who endorsed Biden providing nearly 100 delegates in reserve. It's really part of the process. Could be a lot shorter, but acceptance is a process.

We saw people impatient with Biden doing well in South Carolina alone being key. March as whole has a lot of delegates and not just on "Super Tuesday." This Tuesday actually has more delegates than last with Florida alone over 200. Today Sanders won Northern Marianas Islands, 4 delegates to 2 (sorry Tulsi, Biden got both). After Tuesday, there is Puerto Rico at the end of the month. Perhaps, get back to me regarding Sanders on April 1.

Baby Super Tuesday

Eleven Democrats have filed paperwork to appear on New York’s presidential ballot. Under a Democratic Party rules change for 2020, presidential hopefuls cannot request to have their names removed from the ballot after filing with the state Board of Elections, according to New York election officials.

So, it sounds like Elizabeth Warren will still be on the ballot when there is a presidential primary at the end of next month. Michael Bennet will be as well, but not Kamala Harris. Seems silly to not allow these also rans to take their name off, but presume it might cause problems somehow to do that.

The article references Bill Weld trying to get on the Republican presidential ballot, but he did not meet the rules, so there will not be a Republican presidential primary.  My suggestion was that Michael Bloomberg should have ran a primary challenge to provide a protest vote mechanism to harm Trump and (New York isn't the only state that cancelled the primary here in effect based on a minimum support test)  probably would have qualified most places.  This is how things went in the past, such as Uncle Pat running in the 1990s.  And, we really needed something like this in 2020. In 2016, even near the end, people still had a shot to vote for John Kasich or something.  As I recall, you did have a few cases where a quarter or whatever of the voters did not vote for Trump even in May and June.

There will be special elections on that day, which as the article notes, bothers (at least officially; who knows if they really think it matters) some who figure the absence of Trump will limit turnout (as if special elections ever really have significant turnout).  Though New York streamlined things somewhat, having state/federal elections on the same day, the presidential election cycle does add another layer. Alabama, e.g., had the federal senator race on Super Tuesday (resulting in a run-off) while New York (and places like Maine) have a separate set of elections, late June here.  Some state races of note there. 

Elizabeth Warren suspending her campaign, but not endorsing anyone yet (Cory Booker is the latest for Biden; Marianne Williamson is still for Sanders while Tulsi Gabbard is still running) led the Working Family Party to need to make a choice as well.  They chose Sanders, which is not too surprising though I personally would not go that route.  Since Warren has yet to endorse, and her supporters seem to if anything split down the middle, it might have at best been worthwhile to stay neutral.  But, particularly with important races right away (Michigan being cited as a sort of last ditch by some), guess the party felt a need to do this.

Okay, having written the above beforehand, let's go to the results. They are mostly as expected.  Biden did very well in Michigan, Missouri and Mississippi.  (The bad odds for Sanders is suggested by Sanders winning Michigan 52/48 in a different environment in 2016; Biden won 53%, Sanders 36% with the rest split.)  He won Idaho while Sanders won North Dakota.  The leaves Washington, which is basically split in thirds now (Biden/Sanders/other with Warren/Bloomberg/Other again splitting things three ways).   The proportional voting makes the wins less complete but it also makes it rather hard to see Sanders (a wash in many remaining states is asking a lot, especially delegate rich places like Florida) catching up even if the delegate differential (under 200) looks not hopeless. Remember too that "zombie candidates" who endorsed Biden have nearly 100 delegates too.

As some note, it is likely a bad idea to simply decide to "end things now" for a variety of reasons.  For one thing, like Warren not endorsing anyone right away, a greatly divided electorate needs time to move on.  Plus, we are around fifty percent of the voters having their say so far.  Why wouldn't the rest, at least in the short term, want to have their chance to make their wishes known?  Elections are not just about winning the final count or the losing side in safe districts would have little reason to vote.  As to concerns about the coronavirus, that is a reasonable thing, but there should be a way to allow people to vote.  Absentee voting is broadly allowed many places. Some ad hoc mechanisms can also be passed to deal with the emergency. 

It also seems logical to let Biden and Sanders debate at least once more.  Let them engage.  The voters are strongly split, including by age, and a means to engage like that makes sense. Yes, Sanders should try not to make it too ugly, just as Biden last night welcomed his support and said it wasn't over. That he would aim for every vote.  And, yes, voters can be emotional more than rational.  Talking about odds will not settle the day there.  It is good to push for unity and respect.  Yes, it is tedious to hear about how Sanders is god's gift to things like cheaper health care as if this wasn't something promoted by the left wing of the party, or the party as a whole (note the meaning of "PPACA"), for years now. 

One person provided an in depth discussion of how our primary system holds back candidates unfairly, but net, it is unclear how much that really mattered.  A range of candidates (hey look! Sestak got some votes in Michigan)  had little route to success in the end as a whole even if we had a better system. Which I'm sure we can have -- a shorter and more evenhanded by region primary season seems quite possible -- but Sanders was a dubious candidate as a whole.  Sanders supposedly was aiming for a "30%" strategy of getting a plurality and having the rest split the difference. That isn't a great path to coalition building, I think, especially since he could not obtain a basic part of the Democratic coalition (blacks). 

Biden had various strengths there even if I didn't like him in various respects.  And, Warren didn't have his long term security (including as Obama's vice president) among other things. Yes, sexism hurt her. But, it wasn't the only problem. I still would have liked to see a Biden v. Warren match-up.  She very well might have still lost since the people as a whole are cautious and saw Biden as a safe experienced kindly grandfather type while Warren is newer, more wonky and basically more of a risk. Sanders was running a second time.  Sexism alone doesn't make that a plus.

Anyway, the path was apparent before yesterday's "Baby Super Tuesday" races with only a little room for improvement (if the same basically happened and Sanders did better in Michigan, a sliver of votes in one state matters how much?). Some made out that Sanders was the frontrunner for a time.  A rather small time, if one was careful.  Other than Nevada, what warranted that?  South Carolina was rather predictable. Other than Nevada, there clearly was a strong "not Sanders" movement and it was just a matter of how united it would be.  Warren helped show Bloomberg was surely not the answer there.  Buttigieg/Klobuchar were not really likely.  That left Warren, but though some did in their heart see her as a good second choice, they were cautious and she like Sanders couldn't get that black vote either.

The path forward seems apparent -- Biden will be even more so be seen as the presumptive candidate which will help in those states more divided while states like Florida will go to him naturally.  The proportional drawn out system in place will mean this will take time.  Two-thirds of the delegates will be allotted by the end of this month, but Biden at this point needs over 1000 delegates more.  The time can be spent promoting his message and working to unite the party behind him.  Biden as a median figure is helpful there since it will mean the left will get some stuff in the deal.  A (black) woman vice president also will help with Warren supporters.  Of whom, I'm one ... I vote the end of April.

Abortion Case, Schumer and Elizabeth Warren Drops Out

Yesterday was the big abortion oral argument and Chief Justice Roberts was by accounts (unlike the Kansas Supreme Court -- which had a big abortion case last year -- of course, there is no video) not very supportive of the state's side.  This doesn't mean Louisiana will lose, or lose fully, but it's something.  Alito and to some extent Kavanaugh (who wrote a dissent to the stay in this matter that Roberts joined and was chosen in part for his abortion positions) were mostly alone, Gorsuch staying on the sidelines. 

Meanwhile, Senator Schumer said something about Gorsuch and Kavanaugh specifically that got pushback (I think it advanced goals big picture-wise, but otherwise, this article is mostly on point).  As to Roberts' reply see here (including comments).  Note his reply was released to the media but not posted on the website's page for us peons. Finally, again, abortion needs to be seen as legitimate on social media, tv/film etc. The author nicely thanked me for comments I posted on Twitter.  Edith Windsor's (second) wife also retweeted my tweet about her book and how her finding love again was a nice optimistic moment.  Ah Twitter.

(As Orin Kerr, who I don't like at times but do respect for on the record voting for Hillary Clinton in 2016, thanked Schumer for taking back part of what he said and said it's time to move on.  I agree.  Meanwhile, some Senate Republicans are pushing for a censure vote.)  

====

As basically expected, though it's sad, Elizabeth Warren (like Kamala Harris, who some wanted to endorse Biden before the big California primary, not endorsing anyone) has dropped out.  Charles Blow, who early on said "don't you dare vote for Bloomberg," wrote a good op-ed that touched upon Warren (partially blames sexism) and Sanders.

Key point: "In the end, I believe that voters are coalescing around an idea: While they admire the revolutionaries, they are more comfortable with slow and steady progress."  Deep down, though I am supportive of Warren, that to me is a respectable position.  And, Sanders specifically is too blunt and "gnomes will get us to the revolution" about things and nasty about "the Establishment" which apparently includes a lot of black voters.  AOC tweeted that "the revolution" needs to be more inclusive.

Plus, Sanders needs the youth vote and to bring in new people, which doesn't seem to be happening.  Burdens to young voters (26A!) should be noted, but I do not think that is all that is to it since many others are burdened too. There is no perfect candidate but a general election presidential candidate does need  to have some uniting function and in this country also it helps if there is some celebrity-like hook. Obama in various ways had that while being too "Establishment" for some people (talk Sanders wanted to primary him in 2012).  Biden being a sort of Reagan figure might be unpleasant to some, but yeah, that might be why he wins.

Knock on wood.  Sigh though.  I was for Gillibrand. Out.  Harris. Out.  I wasn't really for Klobuchar but early on thought she was a maybe unity type candidate.  Out.  I was wary about Warren but at some point she was just too good to not support especially after Harris left.  Out.  Never for Marianne Williamson. (Not even in photo.)  Never for Gabbard though with one delegate, I believe she is qualified to be at the next debate.  Maybe, for kicks, with my "got to vote for a woman ..."  Nah.  It is not the first time I voted for someone in New York who already left the race.

===

To toss it in, there is another troubling execution scheduled for today and I'll update later.   

Update: There was a bit of notice when Justice Thomas -- in charge of the circuit -- stayed the execution but those in the know realized it was probably just so the others could have a chance to look at the record.  Though it appears that the facts make it more notable than some others, no justice dissented or even commented on record.  Though Sen. Doug Jones supported delay and a close relative of a victim opposed the execution, Nathaniel Woods was executed by lethal injection.

I am of the mind that any execution warrants at least a brief statement on why the final challenges do not warrant a stay/review, but there are a certain subset that warrant particular notice.  This from what I gather is one such case and it is depressing that neither Breyer or Sotomayor, the two most open and vocal on death penalty matters, did not do so.  Like there was a recent execution of someone who was on death row for around three decades.  That is Breyer's concern though maybe a murder in prison is not the best avenue.  The facts here are a lot more ripe to use as a red flag on its own and for the death penalty itself. 

Instead, crickets.

Super Tuesday

And Also:  India Citizenship Law. John Oliver recently talked about India's leader (Trump guy) and its anti-Muslim leanings of late; went to a lecture about the troubling new citizenship law yesterday.  India was founded on secular and equal protection principles; this more is troubling.  This ruling about a Hindu holy site was flagged too.  The lecturer also was involved in big sodomy case that was mentioned on Gay USA.  So, you know, I can say that I have limited knowledge about these things.  India has over a billion people, so is of some interest.

(A discussion of United States constitutional law on Twitter flagged the diversity of constitutional law world-wide, India being a notable example.)

===

My sentiments remain: Elizabeth Warren is the best option of the pool if we care about basic competency, but that isn't all that matters, obviously.  Also, I wanted to wait at least to Super Tuesday, not relying on about four percent of the delegates.  (There remains over 60% even once California is counted.)  A bit naive, I guess, since Biden's strong South Carolina win was a bit of a dominoes falling moment.  Steyer dropped out (yawn) but then Buttigieg/Klobuchar did (and, hey, it's Beto! remember him?), endorsing Biden. Plus, Warren never showed much viability in actual contests, even if in their hearts, she might have been at least the second choice for Democratic voters. 

I early on said that I didn't like Biden as a nominee. My reasons were mostly substantive. I was wary about his ability in the general election, wariness that really hasn't completely changed, but it was not my primary concern. I opposed him on certain substantive matters. I also really wanted a woman nominee. Yes, I can see various reasons why Biden would realistically be the nominee. My primary image now is a kindly caretaker who can get us past Trump while allowing Dems to operate some including by picking judges. Plus, his vice president might be more notable than usual especially if we have a woman vice president. And, hey, a black woman on the Supreme Court.  At some point, maybe women Warren supporters will not be THAT pissed off.

(There is talk the Warren campaign is considering things -- doing badly in your home state will do that -- but there is a reasonable case that this can help Biden. On policy, she is more inclined to support Sanders, but Biden very well might be more likely to help actually get things done there. If Biden's people can craft a deal, Warren very well might prudently decide that she is better off -- eventually -- going his way. A bit soon though.

Warren was seen by some as the "moderate" candidate if Biden/Bloomberg was a no-go and in comparison to Sanders, this does make sense.  The "Warren VP" talk is simplistic -- don't risk the Senate seat and she would be more productive in her current spot.  Anyway, there is some bad blood between her and Sanders as seen in the whole "you can't win" deal.)   

I found it hard to see Sanders as a general election nominee. I respect the movement he supports, noting that doesn't mean certain flags should be ignored. But, as an actual general election candidate? Hard for me to see it. And, key people, not just "extreme online Bernie Bros," hurt him there. Including he himself.  Many actual on the ground activists can tell you how actual change comes with help of "the Establishment," for one thing. Then again, Sanders is a member of it -- unless some well off white guy in the U.S. Senate is not it.  Sanders and/or his supporters too often come off as angry assholes that do not do enough to address the hard work and compromise necessary for change.  Some are involved there but Sanders does not to me represent who we need on the actual ticket.  Gadfly.

Anyway, yes, hard to see how Sanders will win it even if there are 60% of delegates left. Biden got a plurality in Texas. Sanders got one in California,* but his margin is smaller than the Bloomberg vote.  Bloomberg has now endorsed Biden.  Sanders might do well delegate-wise without it really reflecting his popular vote numbers being handicapping.  RIGGED!  He will have trouble in Florida, another major delegate state. I hope Warren still will have a productive role here. I'll probably vote for her in New York. 

If it's Biden, again, this is the thumbnail take: "Kindly old caretaker who will get us past Trump, pick decent judges and sign some legislation while running things in a matter that isn't that embarrassing. Oh, maybe a black woman vp."  Hopefully, he will be the sort various powers that be, including in the media, are comfortable with, which will help somewhat.  And, yes, he will look old and frail at times. But, apparently, (insert latest reason here) a better woman is not a good fit.

Does Warren have a plan to help?  I vote in late April.

---

* It will take a while to count California, but trends seems to be visible. Bloomberg did badly as a whole, but here and there his vote count is notable. Take Colorado, one of the places Sanders won. Bloomberg received 21%. with Biden/Bloomberg approaching 50% numbers.  Bloomberg's big win was American Samoa with Gabbard getting a delegate too.  That is a bit tongue in cheek, but this is a footnote.

(Talking Points Memo has voter totals so you can have fun with obscure also rans getting a few votes. Also notable: Jeff Sessions, still being bad-mouthed by Trump, will need to face some former football coach in the Alabama senatorial primary.  I really hope Doug Jones has a real shot at hanging on.) 

South Carolina Primary / What is At Stake

Next week is Super Tuesday, which provides to me a real sense of where we are in the presidential race since unlike February, we are talking about a third or so of the delegates necessary to win. The first few races provide more limited evidence with around four percent.  Nevada provided some evidence of Sanders' support in a state with some diversity while today's South Carolina Primary is promoted as a sort of "firewall" for Biden.

I am strongly supportive of Elizabeth Warren, somewhat wary of her assumed negatives earlier on, thus supportive to some degree the likes of Kamala Harris.  But, we are past that moment, and even if I'm willing to imagine a Amy Klobuchar compromise (flagged that as a possibility early), doubt she has much of a shot even if she is the NYT "moderate" co-endorsee. More so than other years, I'm actively wary about the alternatives.  Was I ever so against a possible option as Bloomberg?  I don't recall so.  Yes, I'm aware of needing to support the ultimate nominee. When wasn't that a thing?  The stakes are higher now, but when was that not really a thing?  Other than a limited (if notable) number of Sanders caucus/primary voters, people readily say they will do so. 

But, let's keep in mind that the stakes shouldn't be as high as they are.  The clown show responding to the virus that some confuse with Corona beer just is the latest example of it being simply horrid that it isn't more widely accepted that Trump simply cannot be elected in a sane universe.  I saw reference to a somewhat more limited reason this should be so.

Two important things to note about the DOJ's support for the Free Speech claim of a wedding photographer against public accommodation law: 1. A new way of describing the claim 2. The erasure of eradicating sex discrimination as a compelling government interest. /1 Thread

— Liz Sepper (@lsepper) February 28, 2020

A strong support of this variety of discriminatory law should be something that leads some Republican minded sorts to oppose Trump as well.  Some other (we aren't lacking examples) policy related reason might be a better option pragmatically, but let's cover this.  It has a familiar ring.  Among the blogs that no longer allow comments (Concurring Opinions no longer exists) is a conservative leaning Catholic law related one that I and others pushed back upon in cases of this sort. 

Prof. Sepper notes that the Administration argues that even race is "maybe" enough to justify antidiscrimination laws, moving past even the counter to those who say race, sex and sexual orientation should be treated the same.  When the Supreme Court punted (about the best realistic option there even though the reasoning is dubious) in the cake case, this sort of question was left open. Now, we have the Kavauangh Court and even with more sane people in the White House, the constitutional test is up in the area.  Kennedy was the fifth vote in Hobby Lobby, as one recalls, and was the only conservative there that didn't merely grant the compelling interest to protect contraceptives rights.

Equality sanity as well as the courts are at stake in November.

Road to 2021 Continues ...

It really didn't pop up in my social media but yesterday was Mardi Gras and today Ash Wednesday, which means we are entering Lent. We are having pre-season baseball games, the Yankees have another major injury and Super Tuesday is soon.

OTOH, with less than 4% of people voting, there is some talk the primary season is about over anyways though even with Bloomberg looking bad in two debates (one yesterday with the "Biden firewall" South Carolina primary this Saturday), he is somehow ($$$ ... damn, another stupid commercial) is still a thing. What? Debates are stupid and candidates who are trying to win are not just kumbaya with Trump the enemy? I get it, but maybe calm a bit down too?

We basically have people saying that Warren would be the best POTUS, but you know, as things go, it might not be enough. Her job is to do the work (attack Bloomberg; hey, why not make her VP?) and let some old white guy (Kloubuchar beating Buttigieg Mortal Combat style) have it. Anyway, Harvey Weinstein convicted. Justice does occur, somewhat.

Nevada Caucus

I'll note that I haven't called Sanders abusive. People who work for him have, and that tends to get disappeared down the memory hole because it conflicts with people's preferred narratives about him just being "passionate." pic.twitter.com/unfz0Oejo7

— Sady Doyle (@sadydoyle) February 22, 2020

One thing people think when they think Amy Klobuchar is her alleged bad relationship with employees. But, huh. Anyway, overall, I'm troubled with the idea of Sanders as the nominee. It really depresses me in part since I think Elizabeth Warren is a great candidate. I wish she was doing better though 3% or so of the delegates isn't enough for me (as some seem to be doing) convince me it's like nearly over or something. That's ridiculous. If Bloomberg hates Sanders, why doesn't he admit this and toss his support her way, giving her an edge? The split of the not-Sanders vote is helping him and slivers add up. Buttigieg especially.

Meanwhile, Mets lost their Grapefruit League openers. Just a flag it begins. Somewhat depressed about them though have a shot. 2015 was nice but ended badly. Then, more of the same. Nats won it all. So, guess it will rest on how strong other teams in NL East are and maybe other wild card options. Various question marks. If things click, Mets can do very well.

Election 2020 Update

Yesterday's Democratic debate was big since Michael "how in the hell is he a thing?" Bloomberg was involved. The general conclusion is that he did horrible with Warren really leading the way (though others joined and she didn't just "go after" him). Good thing. The necessary "he's better than Trump" aside, he has too many "Trump-lite" qualities. It is ridiculous to think of him as a credible general election Democratic candidate in 2020. And, I fear it, including turnout. Sanders, frontrunner, came out looking good. But, long term, his issues -- including a ceiling -- stands. Let's see how things work out after early March.

After it all, what was the value of the late intervention in support of Roger Stone that tainted the Justice Department and even scared some federal judges enough to make it public they were talking about such things? Loyalty to Trump and a message to others, not just the immediate Trump co-conspirator (key line by the judge: “He was not prosecuted, as some have complained, for standing up for the President, he was prosecuted for covering up for the President.”). Meanwhile, a crony moves into a key intel position, reaffirming Trump's mentality there. If one thinks about it, it's scary, and Republicans totally own it.

Trump also did his usual favored crowd pardons, including reportedly letting an old friend from NYC free of over 100K left on his fines. Ha ha. On some level, one can argue the corrupt governor from Illinois served enough time etc., but we aren't taking these on a vacuum. His pardons overall were trolls and/or benefiting friends. Net, this is a bad path for justice.