Josh Marshall
We’ve spoken a number of times about the Republican ground game, or Get Out The Vote efforts. Just to review again, the Trump campaign made the decision to take GOTV operations away from the RNC and outsource it to a series of pro-Trump super PACs. The question now is: did the gamble pay off? Have the super PACs been able to field a solid ground operation or perhaps create one even better than the one the RNC would have created?
Read MoreI get this question a lot: are right-wing pollsters flooding the zone? So I thought I would answer it generally in a single post.
Are they? Yes, they definitely are. But there are some important caveats and qualifiers to know to make sense of the whole story.
Just to review the basics: There are a series of Republican or right-wing pollsters who are overtly partisan, use questionable or floating methodologies and pretty clearly release polls not as a predictive enterprise but to produce friendly numbers for Republican candidates. The worst offenders are places like Rasmussen, Trafalgar, InsiderAdvantage. We know this from a mix of a lack of transparency about methodology, general behavior that betrays a goal of shaping election perceptions and outcomes rather than measuring public opinion, and extreme “house effects” — the tendency to favor a particular party’s candidates over the other’s relative to what most pollsters are finding — that support their agenda. After those, there’s a larger penumbra of often less-known pollsters who don’t appear to be as flagrant, but generally seem to be in the same category.
Read MoreThere’s deeply cynical and then there’s things which might be illegal. In the first category we have an Elon Musk-funded PAC microtargeting Jewish and Arab communities with diametrically opposed ads about Kamala Harris’s support for Israel or Palestine. Amazingly cynical. But then you have what I’m going to describe next, which comes from another Musk-funded dark money operation. They have set up fake sites impersonating the Harris campaign using fake policy positions and then sending out text messages also impersonating the campaign which aim to drive voters to the fake site. (A lot of potential legal and regulatory questions turns on word like “fake” and “impersonating,” which we’ll return to in a moment.)
Read MoreReuters has a story out reporting missed targets and internal investigations of inflated or faked doorknocking numbers at America PAC. That’s the Elon Musk PAC which now appears to be running most of the pro-Trump ground operation. Oddly, one of the sources in the Reuters piece is Alysia McMillan, an America PAC canvasser who was profiled in the Post just the day before yesterday. The story doesn’t totally have the goods — internal complaints about not meeting their election target, one Elon deputy investigating inflated numbers. Hard to know precisely what that means in the context of an operation involving tens of millions of dollars across multiple states. But it’s in line with lots of smoke and red flags about the whole operation.
There appears to be a scam text operation targeting ACTBLUE donors in which the text basically tries impersonate or imitate the kind of text you might get from your credit card company if there’s a suspicious transaction. If you’ve gotten one of these please let us know as soon as you can.
I wrote a lot earlier in the month about the questions marks surrounding the Republican and Trump ground operations in this election. To recap, the campaign outsourced most of its efforts to a series of super PACs, which has ended up mainly being Elon Musk’s America PAC. The initial driver of the whole thing was Turning Points Action, which critics rather presciently predicted didn’t have the organizational heft or experience to do something at that scale. The Trump campaign itself has focused on what is at least a pretty unconventional approach, largely ceding conventional ground operations in favor of focusing on Trump-identified non-voters. My read on that whole question is that there are lots of red flags and lots of smoke. But just what it will all mean or the impact it will have I’m not sure. TPM Reader CH wrote in today to ask me what is going on on the Democratic side. Do we assume Harris has a strong ground operation or is that a wobbly assumption?
Here’s what I told him.
Read MoreThis new piece in The Atlantic captures what the article’s author, Ron Brownstein, portrays as the current air of pessimism, or at least deep sobriety, within Democratic campaign and political operative circles. The general gist is that Harris hasn’t sealed the deal with voters, hasn’t closed the sale, whatever metaphor you choose. And the shortcoming is that in her effort to build up a positive brand, she hasn’t focused voters enough on the horrors of another Trump term. (Of course, one of the earlier lines was that it wasn’t enough to demonize Trump. There had to be a positive agenda. So that seems to have changed. Let’s not worry about that difference of opinion.) I’ve always been of the mind that the other guy being scary and dangerous is among the best reasons to vote. (In medicine, “first, do no harm” is seen as a pretty good general approach.) In any case, that’s the idea, the emerging argument, that Brownstein picked up among Democratic insiders. He fleshes this out by noting a series of recent polls showing voters have a rising perception of retrospective Trump approval — in other words, how they remember their approval of Trump’s presidency, even if their recollection of how they felt is actually substantially more positive than it was at the time. There’s no denying there is a small but measurable movement in the poll averages in Trump’s direction. But it’s less clear whether that tilt is picking up a real change in the situation on the ground. And I think it’s even less clear whether outside observers know why it’s happening, if indeed it is. Mostly people are reading their pre-existing assumptions and fears into bumpy data, the drivers of which are largely inscrutable.
Read MoreThe DeSantis administration lawyer who sent out those letters threatening TV stations with criminal charges and jail time over pro-choice ads himself resigned shortly after sending out the letters. The Miami-Herald got a hold of his resignation letter and it appears he didn’t feel like he could back the policy. John Wilson, former chief lawyer of the state Department of Health, wrote: “A man is nothing without his conscience. It has become clear in recent days that I cannot join you on the road that lies before the agency.”
Read MoreThe first I heard of this was late this afternoon from TPM Reader EM. But even after EM shared a link verifying the story, I still couldn’t quite believe it was true. But it really does seem to be true. Not only have reporters from multiple local news outlets covered it, they also have pretty clear photographic evidence. Mailers going out in support at least of Colorado’s GOP House candidates Gabe Evans and Jeff Hurd are being sent and paid for by the Arizona Republican Party.
So here’s the deal. The Colorado GOP appears to be under the control of one weird dude, Dave Williams, who spent most of the party’s money on preventing people from firing him as party chair, trying and failing to get himself nominated for a House seat and … oh yeah, one other thing, Lauren Boebert. Other Colorado Republicans tried to oust Williams but a judge ruled against them. El Paso Country District Judge Eric Bentley ruled against state party chair pretender Eli Bremer and confirmed that Williams is in fact the chair of the Colorado Republican Party. In any case, the point is that, for the moment, the Colorado GOP is basically the personal property of this guy Williams. Once that happened, Coloradans in at least two congressional districts started getting mailers for the local Republican candidate coming from the Arizona state Republican Party.
So what’s going on here? Why is the Arizona Republican Party, which has a contested Senate and presidential race, among others, funding campaigns in Colorado?
Here’s what appears to be happening.
Read MoreI was just replying to a note from TPM Reader RG who was telling me about the situation in New Mexico’s 2nd Congressional District. It reminded me to remind you just how helpful I find these updates and additionally how much I enjoy reading them, especially in these final weeks of a general election campaign. I know about that race in the most general way; I know who the candidates are. But RG got me down into the details on who’s spending, what the ads look like, what the media markets are, etc. And we’re not talking about inside information. I don’t have the sense that RG is a political professional in any way, though he appears to be volunteering with one of the campaigns, just a politics-focused concerned citizen who knows his neck of the woods politically. In other words, probably like you and so many other TPM readers. So if you, like RG, have information I’d really love to know. There’s probably more going on if you’re from a swing state or in a state or district with other contested races. But let me know regardless.