The Real Problem With Vote by Mail: The Counting of the Ballots

With a pandemic still raging, many states have expanded mail-in voting so people do not have to risk their lives going to the poll.  While it is an option I support for this election, let's not fool ourselves.  Mail-in voting is not without problems.  You have the loss of the guarantee that you will be able to cast your vote in secret.  And there is an increased probability of fraud with mail-in ballot, though claims that

voting in that manner lead to widespread fraud are not credible.

Unfortunately about 90% of the attention has been on the CASTING of mail-in ballots.  A lot more attention needs to be on the COUNTING of ballots.  Elliott S. Berke, an attorney who has worked on election issues pens an excellent article discussing the problems with the counting of mail-in ballots.

Berke notes that nearly 150,000 mail-in ballots were rejected in just three states' primary elections this year:  18,500 (1.3% of total) in Florida, 102,000 (1.5%) in California and 23,000 (1.8%) in Wisconsin.  Rejected ballots could be for a number of reasons: arriving late, not being postmarked, missing signature, or signature which doesn't match what voter registration has on file.  It should be emphasized that these rejection rates are during primaries, when the parties are just fighting internally over who their nominee will be.  Mail-in ballots are three times more likely to be rejected than ballots cast in person.  It is going to get much worse with expanded mail-in voting for a highly-contentious general election.

People want to make sure their franchise is protected by having a mail-in option. But what they don't realize is that they can lose their franchise on the back-end, when votes are counted.  I am most concerned about the issue of supposed mismatched signatures.

For years, I have witnessed the Marion County Board of Voter Registration throw out hundreds of supposedly mismatched signatures on petitions to routinely disqualify independent and maverick party candidates from appearing on the ballot.  Thus, I am not confident the signature match requirement won't also be used to throw out scores of mail-in ballots.  This is particularly true as people's signatures evolve over time and Indiana Boards of Voter Registration does not regularly update the voter signatures on file.  Plus, you're going to have lay people, not professionals, comparing signatures in order to determine whether voters are who they claim to be.

Where Berke's article goes off the rails is in his proposed solution.  Although he is, rightfully, concerned about election security, the only solution he gives us is that we need more voter education.  No amount of education is going to matter if election workers are intent on disqualifying votes and can do so simply based on mismatched signatures.  We need other options to validate mail-in ballots besides signatures.

***

OOP's short takes:

• Still waiting for those Congressional Republicans to stand up to President Trump for taking a dump on the Constitution by issuing those executive orders on the economy.  I am old enough to remember when we Republicans complained about President Obama issuing executive orders when Congress did not do what he wanted.  Now Trump has taken Obama's approach and put it on steroids. 
• Have the Republicans not figured out that these executive orders creates a horrible precedent that will be used against them when a Democrat is elected President?  That will happen one day, in fact probably in November of this year.
• Kudos to Republican Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse for calling out Trump's executive orders for being "unconstitutional slop" and telling Trump that America does not have kings.  Of course, Trump attacked Sasse on Twitter.  I have mixed views of Sasse. There was a point, apparently fearful of a primary challenger, that Sasse changed from being a principled conservative to going all in on Donald Trump.  I am pretty sure the devil does not have a return policy on political souls.

Is the Indiana Department of Revenue Misleading Hoosiers Into Paying More Taxes?

I prepare taxes for my elderly mother as well as an older brother, who unfortunately passed away early in 2019.   For both of them, the majority of their income is from pensions.  That income, and any withholding, is reported on 1099-R forms.

In 2019, my mother received a notice from the Indiana Department of Revenue that she had vastly

underpaid her 2018 state income taxes and owed a few thousand dollars.  When I looked at the side-by-side comparison of what I had reported when doing her taxes versus IDOR's calculation, I noticed the Department credited her with $0 withholding for 2018.  I pulled out her one of her 2018 1099-Rs, and there, plain as day, was the line showing my mother had had a couple thousand dollars in state taxes withheld from her pension income in 2018.

I spent considerable time drafting a letter to IDOR explaining that the Department had made a mistake and included the a highlighted 1099-R form showing the taxes withheld.  That apparently satisfied the IDOR.  Although I was curious as to how the Department could have missed the withholding, I quickly forgot about it.

In April of this this year, I filed my mother's taxes.  A couple months later, I filed my brother's taxes.  Guess what?  On both filings, I got a letter form IDOR saying taxes were owed.  When I looked closely at the side-by-side comparison, I saw the Department had, once again, not provided a credit for pension withholding, which appeared prominently on their 1099-R forms.

The exact same mistake made three times in a row cannot be a mistake. Clearly, the IDOR has no system in place for tracking 1099-R withholding paid by Hoosiers.  

How many Indiana residents are getting deficiency notices from the IDOR and then simply paying the amount the Department claim is owed, rather than looking more closely at the numbers and their 1099-R forms?  

The Indiana Department of Revenue needs to get its act together.

Indiana "Young Conservatives" Protest Against Mask Laws While Ignoring Loss of Freedoms from Expanded Executive Power

Today, a group called the "Young Conservatives of Southern Indiana" held a rally at the Indiana Statehouse to protest state and local mandates that Hoosiers wear masks to prevent spread of the the Covid-19 virus which has killed 160,000 Americans.  Many of the protesters wore "Trump" hats and

shirts promoting the President's re-election. This includes Republican State Senator Jim Tomes.

Meanwhile, President Trump was in Washington signing four executive orders on taxing and spending policy, bypassing a Congress that not yet acted.  As I recall, one of the complaints we Republicans had about President Obama was that he believed he could do executive orders whenever Congress failed to act.  

Maybe the "Young Conservatives of Southern Indiana" might take two seconds to consider the potential impact on our freedoms of the precedent of President simply being to adopt whatever policy he prefers by signing an executive order instead a bill passed by Congress.   Maybe members of that organization might consider what this precedent will mean when a Democrat is elected President.

Young Conservatives of Southern Indiana might be "young," but they are certainly not "conservative."

To quote comedian Ron White, "you can't fix stupid." 

Update on Senate Races - Kansas, South Carolina and Texas; Biden's "Diversity" Gaffe

I wanted to update readers on the status of Senate races:

Kansas:  The Republican Party believes it dodged a bullet when the unpopular former Kansas Secretary

of State lost the Senate GOP primary to Congressman Roger Marshall.  Democrats believed they could beat Kobach, but doing so against any other Republican be difficult.  After Marshall's victory, Democrats seemed willing to write off the state and focus on other states.   Kansas though may still be in play.  A post-primary poll released by Public Policy Polling today shows Democratic challenger Barbara Bollier, a state senator and former Republican, only trailing by 1 point.  A PPP poll in March showed Marshall beating Bollier by 10 points.  While Bollier may win, it is more li.kely to be a result of a Democratic "rising tide raises all boats" victory rather than Democrats pouring in resources to try to win the State.  

South Carolina:  The good news for those of us who want to see Trump enablers voted out of office is that Senator Lindsey Graham appears to be in real trouble.  A highly-regarded Quinnipiac poll today has Democrat Jaimie Harrison tied with Graham, and Trump leading by only 5.  That poll is not an aberration.  On Wednesday, a Morning Consult poll had Graham up by 1 point and Trump leading by 5.  Two polls in late July had Graham up 4 and 2 points.  With President Trump in office, Graham abandoned his principles and traditional independence to engage in unending presidential bootlicking.  Turns out South Carolina voters are not enamored with Lindsey Graham 2.0.

Iowa:  Speaking of Trump bootlickers, Iowa Senator Joni Ernst also appears to fighting for her political survival.  Two polls released yesterday, show Ernst trailing her Democratic opponent Theresa Greenfield by 2 and 4 points.  A more highly respected pollster, Monmouth University, published a poll early in the week showing Ernst leading by 3 points.  That poll also had Trump only with a 3 point lead in Iowa.  In many ways, the situation in Iowa is like South Carolina in that you have two incumbent Republican Senators who went all in on Trumpism only to find out that Trump has lost considerable support in the state since he won it handily in 2016.  (Trump won South Carolina by 14.2 points and Iowa by 9.4. in 2016.)

Kentucky:  For those of you who desperately want Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell defeated, don't get your hopes up.  While Quinnipiac shows his opponent Amy McGrath within 5 points of the Senate Majority Leader, most other polls show McConnell with a much larger lead.  Perhaps more importantly, unlike South Carolina and Iowa, Trump remains very popular in Kentucky.  

****

OOP's short takes:

• So Joe Biden put his foot in his mouth yesterday.  The Democratic gaffe-machine said that unlike Latinos, African-Americans are not diverse.  Biden since has had to clarify that comment.   Biden no doubt was talking about political diversity among the two groups.  In the United States, when one discusses Latino voters, you're talking about Cuban-Americans, Mexican-Americans and Puerto Ricans.   The first group votes Republican, particularly in Southern Florida.  While Mexican-Americans vote Democratic, some Republican candidates have been able to get nearly 50% of the Mexican-American vote.  Puerto Rican voters, on the other hand, vote heavily Democrat.  So to do African-Americans.  That no doubt is the "diversity" Biden was referring to.  But a political speech is not the forum to make casual observations about voting patterns.  Not surprisingly, Biden's words were mischaracterized as a slam on African-Americans.
• Trump supporters no doubt believe they can take advantage of Biden's gaffe to entice more African-Americans to vote for the President.  Yeah, good luck with that.  On Election Day, Trump's support among African-Americans will not reach double figures. However, there is a danger to Biden is that if he continues such slip-ups he will be seen as taking African-American voters for granted causing a significant percentage to stay home on Election Day Week Month.  I highly doubt it will happen, but Biden's gaffe certainly increases the possibility that he chooses an African-American running mate
• Turns out Republican operatives are helping rapper Kanye West get on the ballot.  I know how many of my Republican colleagues think. They have the simple-minded view that if you offer African-Americans the opportunity to vote for a black candidate, they will vote for that candidate instead of a white Democrat.  In my entire time in politics, I've never seen that strategy work.  What is really sad is that Republicans are so eager to exploit a man who is well-known to have serious psychological problems.  Have they no sense of decency?
• Indiana reported the most ever new Covid-19 cases yesterday.   That record of 1,040 lasted one day. Today, Indiana reported 1,239.   I knew a virus surge would eventually make its way to Hoosierland.  It may now be our time in the barrel.  Stay safe.

Indianapolis City Leaders Want to Expand Convention Center, Put Taxpayers on Hook for 25 Years to Pay for Bond

Shocking news out of the 25th floor of the City-County Building!   Indianapolis city leaders want to use your tax dollars to expand the convention center.  Okay, not shocking news as every few years the City expands the convention center to lure bigger and bigger conventions, and draw more people downtown...supposedly.  We taxpayers of course end up paying for that.

But taxpayers subsidies don't stop there  As the great late blogger Gary Welsh pointed out, we taxpayers also get stuck subsidizing hotel rooms to lure these conventions to Indianapolis.

The Indianapolis Star reports:

Mayor Joe Hogsett is asking the City-County Council to approve a 25-year bond for the long-anticipated $150 million expansion of the Indiana Convention Center. 

The mayor's office plans to use tax revenue largely from two proposed Hilton-

brand hotels to fund a 300,000-square-foot addition to the convention center onto Pan Am Plaza, featuring the state's largest ballroom at 50,000 square feet. A skywalk over Capitol Avenue would link the new space to the rest of the convention center.  

Meanwhile, Kite Realty Group — which owns Pan Am Plaza — will pay for and build two hotels in between Capitol Avenue and Illinois Street, adding 1,400 hotel rooms to the downtown tourism scene. 

The timing might seem odd given the economic downturn resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, but Chief Deputy Mayor Thomas Cook argues the project essentially will be a stimulus package for Downtown Indianapolis hitting right when the outlook is less grim.  

"We're in this scenario metaphorically right now where the big Downtown boat has taken on water and we’re aware of that and we’re bailing it out as fast as we can and were plugging the leaks," Cook said. "But this is building a really big sail, because when that wind comes back, we want to be able to capture that energy better than any other convention city in the country." 

... 

"We're in the midst of the worst situation to ever hit hospitality — worse than the Great Depression," said Mike Wells, president of the REI Investments company that co-owns the downtown Marriott. "And you know, for us to have to spend time to talk about this while we're fighting for our lives, it just seems surreal." 

...

Let's deal with the claim (simply repeated by the Star as true) that new revenue from the two hotels will, mostly, pay for the 25-year bond.  They are talking about using tax-increment financing, TIF money.  The hotels and the convention center are in the downtown TIF.  The idea behind TIFs is that development causes an increase in property tax revenue which increase can then be used to subsidize more development.  It's magic money!  But TIFs have a serious downside.  TIFs freeze property tax revenues for basic services at their pre-TIF level, even though cost of public services like schools, fire and police protection do not stay flat.  Also, if TIF property tax revenue is not sufficient to cover the cost of the borrowing against anticipated property tax increases, the bonds still get paid out of the property tax dollars base, which then drains yet more dollars from being used for  the aforementioned public services.   Several years ago, blogger Pat Andrews did a study of Marion County TIF districts and found most were running in the red.

Further, the city's leaders want to borrow money for 25 years to expand the convention center when they are expanding the convention center about every 5 years?  That reminds me of when the city took out something like a 30 year bond to pave roads which have to be paved every five years or so.  Ridiculous.  It is so much easier to borrow money in order to spend money today and leave the debt for our children.  But that is not a fiscally responsible thing to do.

Then there is the timing.  Not only are we in the midst of a pandemic, the convention business has been going downhill for some time.  Businesses, professional associations and organizations are getting away from the idea of large national conventions.  The expansion appears to be the City using taxpayer money in a desperate effort to claim a larger piece of a rapidly shrinking pie.

But what this is really about is corporate welfare.  It is the same old story of Indianapolis politics:  politicians using their positions to allow powerful developers, politically-connected contractors and law firms to make money off of taxpayers.  It does not matter if Democrats or Republicans run Indianapolis politics.  There is only one party in Indianapolis politics - the Green (as in $$$) Party*.

*Credit goes to Mark Small for coming up with this moniker to describe how both political parties in Indianapolis enthusiastically support corporate welfare.

Should Trump Enablers in Congress Be Given a Pass in the Post-Trump GOP?

As Donald Trump's chances of re-election spin downward, a premature debate has broken out about what the GOP will be like post-Trump.  Some argue Trump will remain influential in the Republican Party.  Others argue that, especially if he loses in a landslide, Trump's influence on the GOP will quickly fade into nothingness.  I believe the former.  People who joined the personality cult just don't all overnight set down the Kool-Aid and go back to their lives.

Then there is the question as to what to do with those Republican members of Congress who have

Mega Trump Enabler, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC)

refused to hold Trump accountable and have instead chose to enable Trump to trample over the Constitution and traditional conservative principles. Those members of Congress, and Trump's supporters in the media, have allowed Trump to do untold damage to the future of the GOP and the conservative movement.  Do you give those enablers a pass because you want them in position to check President Joe Biden?  People who harbor those beliefs, people like David French and leaders of Republican Voters Against Trump, think the Republican Party will return to traditional conservative values once Trump is gone.

I don't agree.  Trump is just the symptom of the problem. Trumpism is the problem.  Defeating Trump, without defeating Trumpism, means that the GOP will just anoint new substance-free, Trump-style politicians as leaders of the party and advancing traditional conservative principles and winning general elections, will not be a priority.  The Republican Party will be in the permanent minority.

On a Bulwark Podcast this week, I heard Charlie Sykes interview an early 70s something Texan grandmother about the upcoming election.  The woman had voted for Trump in 2016 chiefly because she did not like Hillary Clinton and didn't want Bill back in the White House.  While she had concerns about Trump, she was confident that her state's Republican Senators, Ted Cruz and John Cornyn, would keep Trump in line and make him a better President.  To her horror, for 3 1/2 years she watched Cruz and Cornyn enable the very worst instincts of Donald Trump and refused to hold him accountable for anything he did, no matter how outrageous.   She, needless to say, is in the "Burn the House Down" camp of Never Trumpers who want to destroy Trumpism to save the party.

And so am I.  The enablers in Congress and the conservative media must be held accountable.  If that means a Democratic Senate, so be it.  There need to be consequences for those Republicans refusing to do their job to check the President who constantly tramples on the Constitution, and undermines the democratic values and conservative principles they claim to support.   A President who regularly gives aid and comfort to America's enemies while undermining our allies.  A President who has thus far done absolutely nothing after learning that Vladimar Putin was likely paying bounties to the Taliban for every American soldiers killed.  A President who has has invited foreign powers to meddle in our elections.. 

Those Republican members of Congress had the opportunity and the duty to hold President Trump accountable and they instead chose to do nothing.  That is not acceptable

Burn it down.

****

OOP's short takes:

• Trump tweeted this week that the Election should be delayed because voting by mail will lead to fraud.  Surely he knew that had to be approved by Congress, which would never happen.  So what was his motive.  Was he laying the groundwork for challenging the Election?  Probably.  But I would not rule out the possibility that Trump might drop out a month or two before the Election.  I know that people think being a "quitter" would be a worse offense to his psyche than losing, but I don't agree.  If he quits, claiming the election was going to be rigged against him, 95% of his followers would believe him..  If he goes through with the election and loses in a landslide, his reputation as a "winner" is forever tarnished.   Of course dropping out would require him to put down the rose-colored glasses and admit to himself he's losing badly right now. While I doubted that would happen, I am now convinced that Trump has accepted he's behind.
• Those who are worried about mail-in ballots being allowed during the pandemic focus exclusively on the CASTING of those ballots.  They need to be a lot more concerned about the COUNTING of those ballots.  In many states, Indiana included, mail-in ballots are validated by comparing signatures on the ballot envelope with what voter registration offices have on record for that voter.  They don't use trained handwriting analysts to do the comparison.  Plus many states, Indiana included, do not regularly update the signatures people have on file.  People's signatures change over time, often dramatically so.  According to a Washington Post article (behind a paywall unfortunately), tens of thousands of mail-in ballots were tossed during the primaries for signatures not matching.  What do people think is going to happen in a highly contested general election featuring Donald Trump and Joe Biden?  

Republican Senate Candidates Alter Images of African-American, Jewish Opponents; Trump Wants Election Delayed

In politics, altering the image of a political opponent in an advertisement is considered to be crossing an ethical line.   This is even more so true when the alteration is being done to exploit racial attitudes.  I remember a number of years ago when the GOP ran attack ads against then Indianapolis congresswoman Julia Carson, an African-American, in which her face was darkened.  The tactic was roundly criticized in the media and, as I recall, prompted an apology from the Republicans.

I guess we shouldn't be surprised in the era of Trump that some Republican candidates have chosen to cross that ethical line and exploit voters' prejudices.  The Hill reports on Trump's No. 1 enabler, South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham using the tactic against his African-American opponent, Jamie Harrison:

Democrat Jaime Harrison hit Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Wednesday for running a Facebook ad that features an apparently darkened image of the Senate hopeful in the background, suggesting that the ad carries racist undertones. 

“Lindsey Graham is playing a part in a 400-year history of an Old South that had no

room for people who looked like me,” Harrison, who is Black, said in a statement, later adding that “Lindsey Graham might have darkened my face — but it’s Lindsey who the people of South Carolina can’t recognize.”  

The ad, which began running on July 23 and cost less than $100, according to Facebook’s ad library, features an image of comedian Kathy Griffin superimposed over a darkened background and a photo of Harrison. The effect used on the photo makes Harrison’s skin tone appear darker. 

In Georgia, Republican Senator David Perdue, another huge Trump supporter in the Senate, is squaring off a Jewish candidate, Jon Ossoff.  Since the Ossoff's name is not a tip he is Jewish, how could Perdue get the message across to Georgia voters? Why, of course, make Ossoff's nose bigger!  If the voters still miss that Ossoff is Jewish, just add in a better known Jewish politician to the ad.  CNN reports:

Republican Sen. David Perdue's campaign took down a Facebook ad that appeared to make Democratic candidate Jon Ossoff's nose bigger, following accusations of anti-Semitism.

The Facebook ad, showing Ossoff next to Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer,

said, "Democrats are trying to buy Georgia!"  

The Ossoff campaign noted that both he and Schumer are Jewish.  

"Sitting U.S. Senator David Perdue's digital attack ad distorted my face to enlarge and extend my nose. I'm Jewish. This is the oldest, most obvious, least original anti-Semitic trope in history," said Ossoff.

The Perdue campaign deleted the ad following a report by the Jewish publication The Forward. A Perdue campaign spokeswoman said the size of Ossoff's nose in the ad was an "unintentional error" caused by an "outside vendor" who applied a filter that "distorted the image."

First, I'm not sure what type of "filter" makes a Jewish candidate's nose appear larger.  Second, Trying to blame the tactic on an "outside vendor" is pretty silly since the campaign screens and approves those ads before they are published.   But at least the Perdue campaign apologized and took the ad down, two steps that Graham's campaign has thus far refused to take.  

Returning to the Graham ad, some readers will say the darkening of Harrison's skin is irrelevant because voters already know he is African-American. Vesla Weaver, who teaches political science at Harvard University, has studied the impact of the darkness of one's skin on their electoral chances.  She concluded that it is not just the race of the candidate which matters, but also how dark one's skin is: 

Color in this study had a large, unambiguous effect that was independent of race. The magnitude of the effect of race on candidate evaluation depended primarily on color. With few exceptions, darker skin magnified the effect of race, exacerbated stereotypical beliefs about candidates, and made certain categories of voters more or less likely to support the candidate. Light-skinned black candidates were more immune from race effects in both directions (bias for and against). Like race and gender cues in electoral politics, skin color also operated as a shortcut in candidate evaluation. Sensitivity to skin color was especially likely when subjects were not aware of differences based on racial categories. In the situation of a same-race election between black candidates, the effect of darker color was consistently associated with negative reactions. Candidates who shared the same race were nevertheless treated and evaluated quite differently. Future studies might build on this research by evaluating the impact of color for minority voters.  

Historical norms and legal precedents that evolved to treat blacks as all of a group and ignore internal variation by mixed ancestry and color prescribed the understanding and practice of race in ways that meant that color did not become a salient identity, even while large intraracial disparities and color bias persisted. This study, like others in sociology and psychology and economics, has shown that intraracial variation by color has an unmistakably large impact on voters’ perceptions of candidate quality. However, studies of racial cues, audit studies of discrimination, and racial stereotyping continue to design their studies that treat race as a binary category and racial groups as internally consistent, potentially missing a source of racial bias that operates without awareness of egalitarian norms. Continuing to ignore an important form of racialized perception risks damaging our studies. For example, experimental studies that alter the race of the target and measure policy preferences may find that their results are improved by being attentive to the phenotypical variation among blacks. 

Color has recently emerged in several studies as an important influence on cognitive perception and behavior, such that the extent to which a person appears ‘‘stereotypically Black’’ influences judgments of character, criminality, and whether a victim of a natural disaster exacts sympathy, as well as shaping actual life chances and experience, such that the outcomes of minorities are further stratified by color. However, the possibility that color may play a role in racial bias has been a central deficit in studies in race politics. The point of this exploration confirms that skin color bias is an understudied, albeit significant, aspect of white racial attitudes.

OOPs Short Takes:

• In April, Joe Biden was ridiculed by the Trump campaign for suggesting the President would try to delay the election.  Yesterday, Trump tweeted his support for . . . you guessed it, delaying the election.  Trump's reasoning is that  the use of mail-in ballots will lead to widespread fraud.  I suspect the tweet was more about undermining the legitimacy of the election rather than obtaining a postponement.   If Trump truly wanted to delay the election, and was smart (which he clearly is not), he would emphasize the danger of having people go to the polls in the middle of a pandemic. Nonetheless, moving the election back would require a vote of Congress and even Trump's biggest sycophants in the House and Senate do not appear interested in doing that.
• Sadly, former presidential candidate Herman Cain died today of Covid-19.  Cain, a former presidential candidate, was head of "Black Voices for Trump."  Cain, who was 74 years old, attended Trump's Tulsa rally
• State presidential polls released today include Florida, Arizona, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, Virginia and New Hampshire.  Biden leads in all those states by 7 points or more, with the exception of Florida and North Carolina.   The two Florida polls have Biden leading by 4 and 7 points, while two North Carolina polls have Biden trailing by 2 points and ahead by 1.
• U.S. Senate polls in Arizona and North Carolina released today show Republican incumbents losing by 18 and 11 points respectively.   A poll out of Michigan shows John James, once considered a top GOP challenger, losing by 17 points.  FYI, a second North Carolina poll does show the race between Republican Senator Thom Tillis and his challenger Cal Cunningham to be even.

Major League Baseball Struggles to Deal with HIPAA Privacy Obligations as More Players and Coaches Come Down with Virus

Last week, major league baseball finally started its Covid-19 shortened baseball season.  Unlike the NBA and NHL, MLB did not choose to play the games in a "bubble" or "bubbles" to limit travel and exposure in hotels, restaurants, etc.  But extensive precautions were taken nonetheless, including daily testing w/immediate results.  It thus far has not worked as several MLB players, coaches, and other personnel have contracted the virus.  This includes the Miami Marlins which had at least 15 players and other personnel returned positive tests, resulting in the, at least, week suspension of the Marlin's season.

My Cincinnati Reds have not been spared.  One game into the season, backup infielder/DH Matt Davidson was placed on the injured list for testing positive.  Two games into the season, the Reds lost centerfielder Matt Senzel and second baseman Mike Moustakas.  The Reds though were being real cagy about saying why Moustakas was placed on the IL and Senzel disappeared from the lineup.  Moustakas and Senzel are integral to the Reds' success this season.  Unfortunately, members of the

Reds bullpen, which has proven to be horrific this season, have been spared the virus.  Sorry, bad joke.

When Senzel and  Moustakas went down, I looked for an explanation as to what happened to them.  It was several days later that the news leaked that both players had self-reported Covid-19 symptoms.  (It is unclear whether they actually tested positive for Covid-19.)  They are both appealing the league mandate that they sit out games. 

Why did that information about players sitting for Covid-19 concerns have to "leak out" instead of being reported publicly when it happened?  Because MLB, which provides health care services for its players, is considered a provider under HIPAA, which protects patient's privacy.  While players have waived HIPAA confidentiality restrictions as to baseball-related injuries, they have not waived those confidentiality provisions when it comes to an illness, which may, or may not, be related to playing baseball.  While Health and Human Services has indicated it is waiving HIPAA fines as to certain situations when Covid-19 information is released, those situations are very limited and do not include the dilemma MLB faces in reporting.

Obviously, not being able to reveal which players test positive for Covid-19, makes it hard to do contract tracing for others who were exposed to the virus.   Players should have been required to waive the confidentiality rule as to Covid-19 test results as condition to participate in the baseball season.  Nonetheless it remains that, for the general population, HIPAA remains a major obstacle to controlling the virus.  While reporting general numbers about the spread of Covid-19 is helpful, it is much more helpful to know the exact individuals who test positive so people who come into contact with them can be notified.  Many people infected with Covid-19 are not going to waive the confidentiality provisions of HIPAA.

****
OOP's short takes:

• Speaking of Covid-19, guess who in Congress has now tested positive?  Louie Gohmert.  The Texas Republican has been adamant about not wearing a mask, claiming he did not need one because he was tested regularly for the virus.  He told CNN in June, that if he gets Covid-19, he will never be seen without a mask.   Gohmert is running neck-to-neck with Florida's Matt Gaetz for dumbest person in Congress. Both are attorneys.  Gohmert is even a former judge.  Does not speak well for my chosen profession.
• Yesterday, Donald Trump admitted he has never brought up with Russian President Vladimir Putin intelligence he has received that Putin had paid Taliban fighters bounties for every American soldier killed in Afghanistan.  This included eight phone conversations with Putin, including a call last Thursday, long after the bounties was publicly reported.  During the Axios interview, Trump also defended Putin's arming of the Taliban to kill American soldiers using the "we do bad things too" defense.  Can we please stop pretending Donald Trump is some sort of "patriot" and is putting America's interests first.  Donald Trump is a traitor.
• News this morning is that Trump is sending federal law enforcement officials to quell violent crime in three cities, Milwaukee, Detroit and Cleveland.  What is the common thread with all those three cities?  They are all heavily Democratic cities in swing states - Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio - that Trump needs to win the election.
• Regarding the presence of federal law enforcement, most crimes are governed by state law. My understanding is that federal law enforcement officials sent to these cities have to be protecting federal buildings or federal monuments, or somehow enforcing federal criminal law.  Are they straying from that mission?  Is the Pope Catholic?
• Attorney General Bill Barr said he will leave his position if the election result is "clear."   Is anyone else bothered by that answer?  As I've said before, there is no more contemptible person in the Trump administration than Attorney General Bill Barr. 

Trump Tells a Lie as People Die; State Polls; and Senate Enablers

Okay, I had to make the first part of that headline singular so it would rhyme.  After all, if something rhymes, then it has to be true. (Remember from the O.J. Simpson trial  "If it doesn't fit (the glove), you have to acquit.")  Of course, Trump has not told a solitary lie...he's lied more than 20,000 times since he's been President, and is now up to nearly 24 lies per day.

This lie involves the President retweeting a video in which "doctors" standing on the steps of the United States Supreme Court (not sure why they were there) saying masks were not needed because there already was a cure to Covid-19, hydroxychloroquine, the anti-malaria drug Trump had earlier touted as being effective against the virus.  So, according to the "doctors" there is a conspiracy to withhold the Covid-19 "cure" from Americans so more will die and sink the Trump presidency.  So much for Trump turning over that new leaf and approaching the pandemic like a responsible leader.

Today, Dr. Fauci, the apparent leader of the conspiracy, pushed back on the nonsense peddled by

Dr. Fauci

Trump:  “The overwhelming prevailing clinical trials that have looked at the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine have indicated that it is not effective in [treating the] coronavirus disease.”  

On a somewhat related note, remember how the New York Yankees invited Dr. Fauci to throw out the first pitch.  Dr. Fauci's tossing the first ball received a lot of attention and he even got a top-selling baseball card out of it.  A day or two after Fauci walked off the mound, Trump announced that he had accepted the Yankees' invitation to throw out the first ball at the August 15th game against its mega rival, the Boston Red Sox. 

I was actually surprised, not that Trump was invited (after all, it is a longstanding tradition for Presidents to toss out the first ball), but that Trump had accepted the invitation.  While it is an honor to throw out the first ball, it can also prove to be very embarrassing, a fact Dr. Fauci found out when his "pitch" dribbled wide left into a different zip code.  I could not imagine that Trump, who claims to have been the best baseball player in New York during his youth (at the same time Mickey Mantle was playing for the Yankees), would risk the derision that would come should he throw a Fauci-like pitch off a major league mound.   It was not more than a couple days later though that Trump announced he was too busy dealing with the pandemic to throw out the first pitch.

That excuse, which allowed him to back out, raises the question then as to why Trump accepted the Yankees invitation in the first place.  Well, turns out the Yankees did not invite Trump to throw out the first ball on August 15th.  It was all a lie.  Apparently Trump was so jealous of the attention Fauci was receiving for his first pitch, Trump made up his own invitation.  Trump has the temperament of a five year old.  My apologies to five year old children everywhere.

***
OOP's short takes:

• Rich Lowry of the National Review has launched an attack on the anti-Trump Republicans running the Lincoln Project who have targeted for defeat not only President Trump, but also several GOP Senators.  Lowry says those Senators have done nothing wrong except have an "R" by their name.  Lowry, who after Trump's election, sold his conservative soul to go all in on Trumpism, ignores the fact those Republican Senators enabled Trump to undermine the Constitution, conservative values, and the the future of the GOP.  They did NOTHING as Russia placed bounties on the heads of American soldiers, and Trump used his position to engender the worst sort of corruption in government and invited foreign interference into our elections.  Those Republican Senators had the power to stand up for conservative and democratic values, as well as ethics and integrity, but they instead chose to bow down to Trump in an act of incomprehensible fealty.  I'm not saying those Republican Senators are as responsible for Trumpism as Trump.  I'm saying they are more responsible.   The "Republican" enablers in the U.S. Senate need to pay a price.  So too should Trump sycophants like Rich Lowry who sold out their conservative values to make money off Trumpism.  
• Numerous state polls released today,   Let me address them separately by pollster below:
• Morning Consult:  Biden +7 in Wisconsin; Biden +11 In Virginia; Biden +2 in Texas; Biden +8 in Pennsylvania; Trump +3 in Ohio; Biden and Trump even in North Carolina; Biden +3 in Minnesota; Biden +10 in Michigan; Biden +1 in Georgia; Biden +3 in Florida; Biden +13 in Colorado; Biden +7 in Arizona
• Public Policy Polling:  Biden +3 in North Carolina; Trump +5 in North Carolina; Biden +11 in Maine; Trump +1 in Iowa; Biden +1 in Georgia; Biden #13 in Colorado; Trump +6 in Alaska
• Good news for Trump in the above polls is that he may still have a shot in Minnesota, which would offset his losing a states he won in 2016, such as Michigan which increasingly seems out of reach.   Also, swing states such as Florida and North Carolina, must wins for the Trump camp, are well within reach. Finally, Trump remains competitive in the second tier swing states like Iowa, Texas, Ohio, and Georgia.  Of course, those are all states Trump won in 2016 and and he should not have to worry about in 2020.  So the fact they are close is not good news.
• The Lincoln Project released an ad mocking the "Try Something New" program started by  Ivanka Trump as a solution for those out of work by her father's bungled handling of the pandemic.  It's pretty funny.  In the contest among Don, Jr. Eric and Ivanka for dumbest Trump kid, Ivanka is definitely in it to win it. 

Weekend Polls Results Continue to Bring Republicans Bad News; Reagan Foundation Does Not Want to be Associated with Trump

Last column was on Friday.  I wanted to update on the weekend state presidential polls as well as those released, thus far, today.

Presidential Race (in parenthesis is Trump's winning margin in the state in 2016):

North Carolina:  +7 Biden (Trump +3.6)
Ohio:  +1 Trump (Trump +8.1)
Michigan:  +6 Biden, +12 Biden (Trump +0.3)
Florida:  Biden +5 (Trump +1.2)
Arizona:  Biden +4, Biden +5 (Trump +3.5)
Pennsylvania: Biden +3 (Trump +0.7)

Meanwhile, the Trump campaign continues to flounder in its effort to find a 2020 message.  First, the "Sleep Joe" nickname proved  counterproductive as voters seem interested in a nap after four years of

Trump chaos.  So then Trump tried "Dementia Joe" only to find the nickname put under the microscope his own cognitive abilities, which polls show voters are more worried about than Biden's.  Then it's "law and order," an attempt to somehow blame urban unrest on Biden even though its occurring under his watch.  That message does not seem to be working either.

There are two poll results for Trump that are devastating.  One is the number of people who say they will absolutely not vote for Trump under any circumstances. That number is running around 50%, a devastating figure for any candidate, much less an incumbent.

The second number is the "double hater" poll result.  That looks at who voters that dislike both candidates say they will vote for.  In 2016, Trump won that category against Hillary Clinton.  But in 2020, double hater voters heavily favor Biden over Trump.  That means Trump running up Biden's negatives, won't move the needle much.   What Trump desperately needs is to not run down Biden, but improve his own favorabilities.   He needs to find a way to be seen as more competent, more empathetic, more likeable.  I just don't see how he can pull that off.

The Trump campaign will also try voter suppression.  No, not the made up "voter suppression" Democrats are screaming about, things such as voter ID laws, purging non-voters, and less early voting.   I mean real voter suppression like trying to force people to risk their lives by going to the polls to cast a ballot in the middle of a pandemic instead of allowing the option, albeit an  imperfect one, of mailing in their ballot.

Trump will also no doubt welcome, again, foreign interference into the presidential election, as long as that interference is on his behalf.  But if the election does not appear like it's going to be close, Russian President Vladimar Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping might decide to sit this one out instead of getting on the wrong side of the incoming Joe Biden administration.

***
OOP's short takes:

• The Reagan Foundation is telling the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee to stop using Reagan's likeness to raise money.  Good.   As a Republican, I find nothing more offensive than the worst President in American history, Donald J. Trump, being associated with one of the best, Ronald Reagan.  Trumpism is a stain on the Republican Party and I hate to see it used to drag down one of its icons.
• The Trump campaign responds that the Reagan Foundation earlier accepted the assistance of the Trump family in raising money.  That's a good point.  It also tried to allege that the Reagan Foundation took its position because the CEO of the Washington Post is on the board of the Reagan Foundation and former GOP Speaker Paul Ryan is on the board of Fox, which is issuing "suppression polls."  Okay, that's just stupid.
• I am afraid the MLB season may not make it to the end.  Several players have already tested positive for Covid-19.  So many on the Miami Marlins tested positive that the team had to cancel its next two games, including tonight's home opener.  If baseball, which has some social distancing built into the sport, can't make it, I can't imagine how the NFL season is going to happen.  You can't social distance and be a good football player. 
• The initial thinking was the Republican might lose four Senate seats (Arizona, North Carolina, Nevada and Maine) while gaining a seat in Alabama.  While Alabama still looks like it will be flipped in the GOP's favor (even though the primary produced a weaker Republican candidate), it looks like the Democrats might win 6-8 seats.  It could go even higher.

Members of DC Bar Ask for Ethics Investigation of Attorney General William Barr; More Bad Trump State Polls

Politico reports:

Four former presidents of the D.C. Bar Association have signed a letter calling on the group to investigate whether Attorney General William Barr has violated its rules. The District of Columbia Bar authorizes lawyers to practice in the city and has the power to punish them for breaking its rules and to revoke their law licenses. 

The complaint argues that Barr has broken Washington's ethics rules by being dishonest

and violating his oath to uphold the Constitution, along with other charges. And it highlights four episodes in Barr’s time as attorney general to make the case: his characterization of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on Russia’s 2016 election interference, his criticism of an inspector general report on the Russia probe, his criticism of FBI officials in a TV interview, and his role in the disbursement of peaceful protesters from Lafayette Square, outside the White House. A spokesperson for the Justice Department declined to comment.   

“Mr. Barr’s client is the United States, and not the president,” the letter says. “Yet, Mr. Barr has consistently made decisions and taken action to serve the personal and political self-interests of President Donald Trump, rather than the interest of the United States.”Barr’s early description of the Mueller report and his handling of protesters in Lafayette Square have long drawn pointed criticism. But his comments on the inspector general report on the FBI’s Russia probe hasn’t drawn as much attention. In an NBC News interview after the report’s release, Barr called the FBI’s basis for opening the Russia probe “very flimsy.” The letter argues that the criticism was dishonest. 

...

The letter also argues that Barr broke the D.C. Bar’s rules when he criticized former FBI officials’ decisions regarding the Russia probe and suggested they could be prosecuted. The letter focused on a comment Barr made in a CBS News interview: “Just because something may even stink to high heaven and ... appear [to] everyone to be bad, we still have to apply the right standard and be convinced that there’s a violation of a criminal statute.” 

The letter argued the statement could unfairly influence potential criminal proceedings against those officials and that Barr should have followed the standard DOJ practice of declining to comment on ongoing investigations....

Unfortunately disciplinary investigations take a long time and Barr is likely to be long gone from the Attorney General position long before such an investigation could be concluded.  Nonetheless, an ethics investigation is certainly warranted.  In his role as Attorney General, Barr has repeatedly lied in legal proceedings and to the American people.  He has politicized the Department of Justice and trashed the rule of law.  Even though the United States and the American people are his clients, not President Trump, Barr has repeatedly used his position to advance Trump's political and personal agendas.

Trump threatened to withhold congressionally-appropriated military aid Ukraine needed to counter Russia's advances, unless Ukraine would help him politically by announcing a fake investigation of Joe Biden.  For that, Trump certainly deserved impeachment.  But as bad as Trump's behavior was, Barr's misconduct is much more extensive and knowing.    In Trump's defense, he is not a bright man and often, I truly believe, has no concept that what he is doing is wrong, or illegal.  Barr on the other hand knows what he is doing is legally and morally wrong and does it anyway.  Of all the Trump enablers out there, Attorney General William Barr is the absolute worst...and the most dangerous.  He is corrupt to the core.

***
OOP's Short Takes:

• Still in shock after late yesterday's release of the Quinnipiac poll or registered voters showing Biden leading by 13 points in Florida.  Biden does not even need Florida to win the election.
• If yesterday's Quinnipiac poll was not bad enough, then came the Fox News poll showing Biden down, among registered voters, 11 points in Pennsylvania, 9 points in Michigan, and 13 points in Minnesota.  Minnesota, for the record, was won by Hillary Clinton by 1.5% of the vote in 2016.  With its mostly white and rural makeup, Minnesota has been at the top of the list of 2016 blue states that the Trump folks thought they could win in 2020.
• Gravis Marketing, a usually friendly Trump poll, released results today showing Trump down by 9 points in Michigan and 8 points in Wisconsin.
• As far as the U.S. Senate races, polls released today show Republican incumbents in North Carolina, Maine and Arizona all losing from between 5 and 9 points.  Two polls came in on the Michigan Senate race where the GOP's best hope for a pickup (not including Alabama) John James is desperately fighting the Trump's unpopularity.    They both show incumbent Democrat Gary Peters beating James by 10 points.
• Cook Political Report now concludes that the Democrats are favored to win control of the U.S. Senate.
• In terms of the Electoral College, Cook Political Report has 308 electoral votes in the Solid, Likely and Lean Democratic category and 187 electoral votes on the Republican side of the ledger.  Arizona, Georgia, Maine 2nd CD and North Carolina are listed as toss ups.  I would probably still list Georgia and North Carolina as "Lean Republican."  Cook also lists Ohio as "Lean Republican."  I have seen enough polling in that state to believe it deserves at least "toss up" status if not "Lean Democrat."   Interestingly, Cook Political Report at t some point downgraded Indiana from "Solid  Republican" to the "Likely Republican" label.  Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball also moved Indiana to a more competitive category.  What polling are they looking at?  While I suspect Indiana may end up being more competitive than the Trump people expect or want, I just haven't seen any polling yet to support my suspicions.

Judge Orders Michael Cohen Released, Finds Order Returning Him to Prison "Retaliatory"; Florida and GOP Infighting

MSN reports:

A federal judge on Thursday ordered the release of Michael Cohen to home confinement, agreeing with his lawyers that he was wrongly sent back to prison after making public statements critical of President Donald Trump. 

...

Cohen began serving a three-year prison sentence last year for financial crimes and lying to Congress. But when the pandemic hit, he was released in May as part of a nationwide program allowing federal inmates to be transferred to other prisons or confined to their homes.... 

A week after tweeting that he was finishing a tell-all book about Trump, Cohen was told by a probation officer that he would have to agree to a complete ban on speaking in public, including by publishing a book, as a condition of continued home confinement, according to court documents. He was asked to sign a form that included this provision: "No engagement of any kind with the media, including print, tv, film, books, or any other form of media/news. Prohibition from all social media platforms." 

... 

"I've never seen such a clause in 21 years of being a judge and sentencing people," said federal District Judge Alvin Hellerstein. "How can I take any other inference but that it was retaliatory?" 

Cohen's lawyers said when they asked if that provision could be modified, they were told that the officers would need to discuss it with their superiors. But a short time later, Cohen was placed in handcuffs and shackles and sent back to Otisville."Michael Cohen refused the conditions of his home confinement and as a result, has been returned to a BOP facility," prison officials said in a public statement. But his lawyers said he never refused to sign anything. 

Sending him back to prison was an effort by the Trump administration to censor criticism of the president, Cohen's lawyers told the judge. They cited previous court rulings which held that prisoners retain the First Amendment right to write and publish articles critical of government officials 

... 

In a declaration filed in court, Cohen said his book will describe his experiences working as a lawyer for Trump before and after the presidential election, including "graphic and unflattering details" about Trump's behavior.

Is there any doubt that the order to re-incarcerate Cohen when he refused to stop speaking out publicly against the President came from the highest levels of the Justice Department?  The obvious explanation for the unique gag order on Cohen's speech is that Attorney General Bill Barr was doing Trump's bidding by trying to stop the publication of a tell-all book by Cohen before the election.  Barr has proven time and time again that he is utterly corrupt.

***

OOP Short Takes:

• Poll out of Florida by StPetePolls.org of show Biden with a 6 point lead in the state.  In late May, StPetePolls only had Biden with a 1 point lead.  That increase might have been even more substantial than 5 points though as the May poll relied on "registered voters" while the July poll focused on "likely voters," a metric that usually improves Trump's numbers by a few points.
• Interesting to watch Trump-friendly members of Congress attack Wyoming Congresswoman Liz Cheney for not being sufficiently supportive of Donald Trump.  What ultimately set off the backlash, which will no doubt pass to Trump sycophants in the "conservative" media if it hasn't already, is that Liz Cheney dared to publicly support Dr. Fauci.    Basically, 100% Trump supporters, like Matt Gaetz are attacking Cheney who "only" supports Trump 97% of the time.  Now, by tweet, Donald Trump is joining in the the attack on Cheney.  Supposedly this is an initial skirmish in the war for the soul of the GOP that will take place if Trump loses in November.   Trumpers shooting other Trumpers.  Not sure that is a bad thing. 
• Meanwhile in the anti-Trump GOP camp, you're seeing a quiet battle taking place between Republican Voters Against Trump and the Lincoln Project.  Very simply, RVAT believes that Trump is the problem and once he is gone the GOP can return to its longstanding conservative principles.  As part of that mission, RVAT shuns attacking Trump's GOP enablers in Congress.  To the Lincoln Project though the enablers are the problem, maybe even a bigger problem than the President. .  The organization aggressively targets Trump enablers in Congress who for 3 1/2 years failed to exercise their independent authority to check the president, inaction that exacerbated Trump's assault on conservative values and democratic norms.  For the Lincoln Project, Trumpism and not just Trump, is the problem. For the record, I completely agree with the Lincoln Project. 
• It appears that today Indiana will be reporting the highest daily total of new Covid-19 cases since the 949 cases it reported on April 27th.  It seems that with this pandemic, every state eventually gets its time in the barrel with a surge of Covid-19 cases.  I think our time is soon coming.
• On a related note, Governor Holcomb issued a state-wide mask mandate.  Shortly after the mandate, Attorney General Curtis Hill, who recently lost his renomination bid, issued an advisory opinion that Holcomb did not have the authority to issue the executive order.   A quick review of Hill's reasoning seems to be that the legislature cannot delegate to Holcomb the authority to adopt a mask mandate, that that would require a law passed by the Indiana legislature.  The extent to which a legislature can delegate its legislative authority to the executive is a very gray area of law.  I do not know enough about it to have an opinion on whether Hill is right about the law.  
• UPDATE:  Holy crap.  Quinnipiac, which does top notch polling, just issued a Florida poll of registered voters showing Biden up 13 points in Florida.  During 2016, Hillary Clinton never had a double figure lead in any Florida poll and, in fact, Trump had the lead in several polls including most of the final ones before the election.

"Proactive Arrests" in Portland; New Polls Show Biden Leading in Texas, Arizona and Georgia

Charles Wolf, acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security ("acting" because he couldn't get confirmed by the Senate), explained why law enforcement officials from his department have to be in Portland:

The Department, because we don’t have that local law enforcement support, we are having to go out and proactively arrest individuals. And we need to do that because we need to hold them accountable. This idea that they can attack federal property and law enforcement officers and go to the other side of the street and say, “you can’t touch me,” is ridiculous.

"Proactive arrests?"  What?  Didn't they make a movie about this?  Minority Report, I believe is its name.

Wolf, who has no law enforcement or legal background, was also asked about whether the federal agents had "probable cause" to arrest the individuals.  It is clear from his response that he has no clue what "probable cause" means:

This is a very difficult environment to work in. You have 500, 600 violent individuals, violent criminals across the streets that try to inflict harm on your property and law enforcement officers. We do our best to identify who they are using probable cause. What we don’t do is we don’t go into the crowd. We don’t try to go into a violent crowd of 400 people to arrest people.

Writing on the blog, Above the Law, Elizabeth Dye, shreds the legality of what DHS law enforcement officials are doing in Portland:

There is no such thing as a “proactive arrest.” There is no such thing as a “noncustodial arrest” where an individual is transported to another location and detained. There is no such thing as probable cause because a person was standing in a group of several hundred people, five or six of whom are suspected of committing a crime.

Maybe more troubling is Wolf characterizing all the Portland protesters as violent because a few of them are engaging in violent conduct.  Here is what Wolf's DHS's stormtroopers agents did to one Navy veteran:




While Wolf justified the crackdown on the Portland protesters because they were going to commit violent crimes, one of Trump's 2020 Advisory Board Member came up with an even kookier justification - the protesters were Communists!  Appearing on the local radio show Hammer & Nigel (who between them have never had an independent thought in their lives and spend their entire show working off Trump talking points), Steve Rogers, who supposedly has a law enforcement background, justified the crackdown because the Portland protesters were not only violent but they were also Communists!  Not kidding.  Rogers called them "Communists" multiple times.  I thought my radio had somehow transported me back to the red scare era of the 1950s, but it was not the case.  

My entire life the Republican Party has been the party that has defended federalism.   While I am certainly not surprised that President Trump does not understand or care about federalism, I find it shocking how many Republicans are throwing away their support of federalism to defend what President Trump is doing in Portland and is threatening to do in other cities.  Anyone who defends such nonsense should turn in their Republican card.

****

OOPs short takes:

• Turns out the reporter who supposedly called White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany a "lying bitch" in response to a followup question, actually said "okay, you don’t want to engage."  This is confirmed by the White House's own transcript of the exchange.  I, however, was never bothered by the slur, because technically it was an accurate description of McEnany.
• Trump's coronavirus press conference yesterday didn't turn out to be the train wreck I expected.  He mostly stuck to the script.  Of course, Trump told a number of lies about how the federal government is handling the virus, but that's come to be expected.  Trump did manage to "wish the best" to Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein's former "girlfriend" and alleged co-conspirator on the rape and molestation of of scores of underage girls.  Trump, as did many rich and powerful people, socialized with Epstein and Maxwell over the years.
• Highly rated pollster Quinnipiac released a poll today showing Biden up 1 point in Texas.  Two other polls show Biden up 4 points in Arizona and Georgia.  All three are states Trump won fairly easily in 2016.   Biden probably does not need any of the three states to win the Electoral College.

Why Screening for "Likely Voters" in 2020 Polls is Not that Important, and Perhaps Counterproductive

Confronted with national and swing state polls showing President Trump running well behind challenger, former Vice President Joe Biden, Trump supporters point to the fact many of the polls are faulty because they are not screening for "likely voters."

Polls that screen for likely voters show Trump doing better, albeit still substantially behind nationally and in most swing states.    So, does the Trump campaign have a point about the need for pollsters to

screen for "likely voters?"  No, not really.

The reason pollsters screen for likely voters is that elections often only feature voting by a small percent of the registered voters.  Turnout in mid-term elections tend to be much substantially less than presidential elections.  Off-year elections have even lower turnout.  Indianapolis has off-year municipal elections that sometimes only result in a 20% turnout of registered voters.

In these lower turnout elections, more than half the battle of the pollster is trying to figure out which voters will show up on election day.  To make that determination, pollsters ask a series of questions including how much thought they've given to the election, whether they plan to vote, did they vote in this election four years ago, do they know where to vote, etc.  They respondent then is rated according to his/her answers and a determination is made as to whether that person is a likely voter.

To say determining "likely voters" in lower turnout elections is a difficult task for pollsters is an understatement.

Presidential elections though are a different matter entirely.  Turnout is typically much higher when presidential candidates are on the ballot.  This is especially true in the era of Trump when both the Republican and Democratic electorates are energized.  Heavy turnout by both parties is almost a certainty come this fall.

In presidential elections, especially those in which heavy turnout is expected, likely voter screens can be counterproductive, resulting in the weeding out scores of voters who will undoubtedly be voting.  In such situations, registered voters is the better metric to use than the hit or miss method of determining a much smaller subset via the "likely voter" screen.

****

OOP's short takes:

• Roy Den Hallender, the men' rights attorney suspected in the shooting federal judge Esther Salinas' son and husband, had penned a memoir "Stupid Frigging Fool" published online in which he discusses at some length his lifelong poor experiences with women, including his mother to whom he dedicated the book with the line "May she burn in Hell."   Hallender had volunteered in the Trump campaign and filed a RICO action against members of the media for reporting unfavorably and dishonestly on candidate Trump.  The case was dismissed. Hallender had a particular gripe against Judge Salinas, who he derided for "being a lazy and incompetent Latina judge appointed by Obama", because she had supposedly delayed ruling on a lawsuit he had filed to have the all-male military draft ruled unconstitutional.  When he was diagnosed with cancer, Hallender turned the litigation over to other counsel, but continued to bear the grudge of what happened in the last case he was to handle as an attorney.  Hallender committed suicide as law enforcement were closing in.  
• The Covid-19 press conferences are set to resume today, featuring Prresident Trump!   Except nobody from the Covid-19 task force is scheduled to be at the conference.  In fact, Dr. Fauci apparently was not even told they were starting up again.  Trump's approval on his handling of the virus has been plummeting and the renewed press conferences are an attempt to show President Trump aggressively leading the response to the pandemic.  Unfortunately for Trump staffers, they had to agree to let Trump talk about other, non-virus topics during the press conferences.  What could possibly go wrong?  The press conference is scheduled for 5 pm, expect car crash at about 5:05.
• My Mary Trump book is scheduled to arrive tomorrow.
• Why are we Republicans defending what's going on in Portland?  Imagine if President Obama had sent unidentified federal law enforcement officials into a city to seize Tea Party protesters and throw them in unmarked vans to be whisked away for questioning.  I'm pretty sure we conservatives would have a problem with that.  What happened to federalism?  This tribal nonsense deserves to die a painful death on November 3rd.

Unidentified Federal Law Enforcement Officials Descend on Portland, Throw People Into Unmarked Vans for Questioning

Federal law enforcement officials in masks, with no identification and wearing camouflage, throwing them people into unmarked vans to be whisked away for questioning at some unknown location.  When I first heard the story, I assumed t it had to be some third world country.  Uh, no.  That is what is going on in Portland, Oregon.  Time reports:

Federal law enforcement officers, dressed in camouflage and driving in unmarked vehicles, have been detaining protestors in Portland, Ore., according to local reports and videos shared online. Demonstrations have been ongoing in Portland since the police killing of George Floyd in late May.   

Federal agents have detained and forced individuals into unmarked vans in recent days, two demonstrators in Portland told Oregon Public Broadcasting (OPB) on Thursday. Mark Pettibone, a demonstrator detained on Wednesday, told OPB he was taken to a federal courthouse and later released, but that he was not given any official notice of the arrest.
... 

Officers from federal agencies have been present in Portland since at least July 2, according to the Department of Homeland Security, which has sent units to the city. Law enforcement has also been deployed by the U.S. Marshals Service and other agencies. Per OPB, federal officers in unmarked vehicles have detained protestors since July 14.  

...

Footage posted online by protestors show others being mistreated in the same way. In one video that has circulated widely online, two federal officers walk up to a demonstrator and put them into an unmarked minivan before driving away. They say nothing to indicate why they’re detaining the protestor.  

In another email referring to the individual in the video posted online, DHS said that agents with U.S. Customs and Border Protection “had information indicating the person in the video was suspected of assaults against federal agents or destruction of federal property.” 

According to DHS, the agents identified themselves and were wearing insignias for CBP during the incident, but that their names were not displayed due to risks of doxxing. 

While it is unquestionable that authorities need to get control of what's happening in Portland, unidentified law enforcement officials can't just snatch people from the streets and throw them into unmarked vans to be hauled away for questioning because they "suspect" a person had committed an  crime.  Apparently at least some of the officers were from the Customs and Border Patrol and from an admittedly cursory examination of their powers does not seem to support their being involved in a law enforcement action in Portland, Oregon.