Democrats are at risk of blowing the 2020 Texas US Senate Race

On By The EditorsIn Politics, UncategorizedLeave a comment

Texas Tribune is out with some reporting on the 2020 US Senate race.  MJ Hegar, who had one of the best ads of the cycle last time and nearly defeated John Carter, is contemplating a run.  She may defer to Wendy Davis, though, most famous for being a pro-choice extremist who got crushed by Greg Abbott in 2014.

Wendy Davis would be a horrible mistake for Texas Democrats.  She is an extreme leftist who did nothing to appeal to the middle, and she would lose badly.  Cornyn is already going to be tougher to beat than Cruz (though demographics and probably having Trump on the ballot should help Dems).  Davis would blow all the progress Beto made in 2018, and put Dem House gains in 2018 at risk (hello Lizzie Pannill Fletcher and Colin Allred).

Personally, I tend to think Hegar would not be a bad candidate.  A Texas statewide race is a lot different than a congressional, but she’s a veteran and a political outsider running against a career politician.  She should be able to appeal to Beto voters, particularly with Trump on the top of the ballot.  Another strong choice for Texas Dems would be Beto or Julian Castro if either of them ends up getting out of the Presidential race (or, in Beto’s case, if he passes entirely).  Regardless, if Texas Democrats want to put the Senate seat in play and, in the process, put more Congressional seats in play and maybe even make Texas competitive for a reasonable Presidential candidate, Wendy Davis is the absolute last person they need on the ballot.

How far would John Edwards have gone?

On By The EditorsIn Politics, UncategorizedLeave a comment

I think one of the most significant counter-factuals or alternative universes we can fathom is one where John Edwards doesn’t have an affair in 2006-2008.  Let’s lay out the scenario from there:

Edwards goes on to finish 3rd in 2008.  He mostly disappears for a while as his wifes’ health fails, meaning he probably doesn’t go into the Obama administration.  This leads us to 2016.  Hillary Clinton runs, but what if John Edwards runs as well? He’s 63 at this point, obviously wants to be President, and isn’t his Two Americas message the perfect distillation of Bernie Sanders-like grievances in a form that’s palatable for mainstream Dems?  Does Bernie even run in a race between Hillary and John Edwards?  And seeing Hillary’s weakness in that race, doesn’t it seem reasonable John Edwards wins the Nomination, holds the Midwest/Iron Belt, and is President right now?

Let’s go another direction: Let’s say Edwards either runs and loses the 2016 nomination to Hillary, or passes entirely on 2016.  Isn’t he the perfect candidate to run in 2020.  He’s like a much more mainstream, likable Bernie Sanders.  Hillary supporters probably aren’t as antagonistic to him as they are to Bernie.  He is probably a very strong candidate, and the perfect mix of electability and liberal economic ideas.

I tend to think John Edwards is probably President or our next President if he doesn’t commit infidelity.  It’s amazing to think about what could have been, and how big a mistake one can commit.

Grammys Predictions + Thoughts

On By The EditorsIn Music, UncategorizedLeave a comment

I’m not a deep Music connoisseur, so I’m not familiar with all of these artists.  I do have some favorites in the running, though.  I’m not going to guess for some of the obscure categories, though I have thoughts on the categories I’m more familiar with it.

Best Music Video

Who Should Win and Who Will Win: This is America – Childish Gambino

Best Song Written for Visual Media

Who Will Win: Shallow – A Star is Born

Who Should Win: All the Stars – Black Panther

Best Compilation Soundtrack For Visual Media

Who Should and Will Win: The Greatest Showman

Best Contemporary Christian Music Album

Who Will Win: Look Up Child – Lauren Daigle

Who Should Win: Survivor, Live from Harding Prison – Zach Williams

Best Contemporary Christian Music Performance/Song

Who Will Win: You Say – Lauren Daigle

Who Should Win: Known – Tauren Wells

Best Country Album

Who Should and Will Win: Golden Hour – Kacey Musgraves

That said, there’s not a bad one in this bunch, and I would have no complaints with Ashley McBryde, Chris Stapleton, or Kelsea Ballerini winning.  The Brothers Osborne album was very good as well, but I wouldn’t put it quite at the level of these other releases.

Best Country Song

Who Should and Will Win: Space Cowboy – Kacey Musgraves

“When Someone Stops Loving You” from Little Big Town and “Dear Hate” from Maren Morris are fine as well.  The Blake Shelton, Cole Swindell, and Dan + Shay songs here are thoroughly meh.

Best Country Duo/Group Performance

Who Should and Will Win: Dear Hate – Maren Morris ft. Vince Gill

Little Big Town and Brothers Osborne also earn their nominations here.  FGL and Dan + Shay, well ….

Best Country Solo Performance

Who Will Win: Millionaire – Chris Stapleton

Who Should Win: Butterflies – Kacey Musgraves

This is a loaded category, though.  I would be fine with either of these two or Maren Morris winning.  Loretta Lynn and Keith Urban both have deserved nominations, as well.

Best Rap Album

Who Will Win: Invasion of Privacy – Cardi B

Who Should Win: Daytona – Pusha T

Best Rap Song

Who Will Win: God’s Plan – Drake

Who Should Win: King’s Dead – Kendrick Lamar, Jay Rock, Future & James Blake

Best Rap/Sung Performance

Who Will and Should Win: This is America – Childish Gambino

That said, I wouldn’t complain if “All the Stars” wins here either.

Best Rap Performance

Who Will Win: Nice for What – Drake

“Kings Dead” would be fine here, as well.

Best Pop Vocal Album

Who Will Win: Sweetener – Ariana Grande

Who Should Win: Meaning of Life – Kelly Clarkson

I could also make arguments for Camila Cabello or Shawn Mendes here.

Best Pop Duo/Group Performance

Who Should and Will Win: Say Something – Chris Stapleton and Justin Timberlake

Best New Artist

Who Will and Should Win: Margo Price

Song Of The Year

Who Will Win: All the Stars – Kendrick Lamar ft. SZA

Who Should Win: This is America – Childish Gambino (Though I’d be fine with All the Stars)

Album Of The Year

Who Will Win: Black Panther

Who Should Win: Golden Hour – Kacey Musgraves

Record Of The Year

Who Will Win: Shallow – Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper

Who Should Win: This is America – Childish Gambino

All the Stars would be fine here as well, though.

General Thoughts

Post Malone should not be on these lists nearly as much as he is.  I can assure you “Rockstar” and “Beerbongs and Bentleys” are nowhere close to Record and Album of the year respectively.  To a lesser extent, Drake is overrated in the same categories.  Scorpion is decent, though not Album of the Year nomination worthy.  God’s Plan isn’t even anywhere close to the best song off it, though.

I like Maren Morris and realize you have to put some Pop in Record of the Year, but “The Middle” probably shouldn’t be there.  It is catchy, though.  From the other Pop Nominations, “Say Something”, “Girls Like You”, and “God is a Woman” were probably more deserving.

It will be interesting to see where Childish Gambino wins.  He has a ton of nominations, and I personally believe “This is America” is one of the best records of the year.  That would be one of the more politically charged Grammy winners, but it’s hard to argue with it winning.  Of course, Black Panther was top-notch as well, and the Grammys probably owe Kendrick every award he’s eligible for the rest of his life as justice for giving New Artist to Macklemore his year.

Tennessee is better than Duke. The NCAA Mock Selection Committee Gets it Wrong.

On By The EditorsIn Sports, UncategorizedLeave a comment

There is a myth going around that Tennessee is worse than Duke, and I tend to think it’s based on little but national media and reputation.

Tennessee has the better results so far: Both teams have wins over 2 of the other teams on this list.  Duke lost to the one common opponent, though (Gonzaga), while the Vols won.  Additionally, Duke has a very underwhelming loss to Syracuse.  The Vols’ only loss has been to a #2 at the time Kansas team that is on this list at #10.

Tennessee is the more complete team: Look at these Rosters (Duke and Tennessee, per ESPN):

Duke Stats

Vols Stats

Duke is top-heavy, but doesn’t have the starting 5 or bench depth of the Vols.  The Vols are a complete team that can beat you a variety of ways.  If Duke runs into a team where their top players are contained or having a bad day, it’s going to be an issue.

There really isn’t a good, legitimate reason to put the Devils ahead of the Vols at this point.  Now #BeatFlorida.

https://twitter.com/VolMusings/status/1094302782658670599

 

Donald Trump and the Future of the Pro-Life Movement

On By The EditorsIn Politics, Society, UncategorizedLeave a comment

These past two weeks have made it clear the Democrats have decided to become Abortion radicals.  New York proceeded to legalize abortions up to full-term, and Virginia is considering legislation to do the same.  Virginia Governor Ralph Northam somehow went further than full-term, arguing that already born children could be aborted, but fortunately for them, in a “comfortable” setting.  Gone are the days of Bob Casey and ‘Safe, Legal, and Rare.”  Either due to fear of Planned Parenthood, or because they have been bought and paid for by Big Abortion, the Democratic Party (with a few brave exceptions such as Congressman Dan Lipinski, Governor John Bel Edwards, and Democrats for Life) has determined to jettison any pro-lifers and anyone who has any hesitancy whatsoever concerning Abortion on demand. The extent of the extremism the Democratic Party is pushing towards cannot be overstated.

This should present Republicans a major opportunity to reach pro-life voters and push for the cause of unborn life.  The GOP has taken pro-life votes for granted for so long, though, that they seem to have no interest in moving the ball on this issue.  In a 2-year span with a Republican White House, Senate, and Congress, Planned Parenthood is still funded by our tax dollars and the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion act is still unpassed.  Even looking at judicial nominations, the President passed on a very strong choice in Amy Coney Barrett to appoint Brett Kavanaugh.  Kavanaugh has little track record on the issue, is a DC elite who doesn’t inspire hope he would fully overturn Roe (certainly as compared to Barrett), and whom David French says appears very timid on the issue.  Overall, it seems likely a President Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, or Jeb Bush would have accomplished more or as much on this issue had they been elected.

Even if Pro-Lifers had every pick of judges they wanted, though, that would still not be enough to justify a full alliance with this President.  As Matthew Lee Anderson wrote with foresight in Mere Orthodoxy back in July 2016:

“Suggesting that the thin hope of conservative justices on the courts justifies accepting such cultural consequences also seems to rest on either naivety or hubris. It is hard to know which. Pro-lifers will not be able to distance themselves from Trump’s shenanigans, though they will try: if he is their candidate, they will be made to own everything he does if he is elected President. Political action has a symbolic character: it sets a narrative, and that narrative matters as much for the long-term future of a particular movement as do the judicial opinions that result from it. In this case, it is a ludicrously easy story to tell: Pro-lifers are willing to accept misogyny, divorce, racism, and so on for their political ends.

Pro-lifers will protest that voting for Donald Trump does not mean endorsing everything Trump does. And they would be right. Yet I say it’s either ‘naivity’ or ‘hubris,’ because the pro-life movement hasn’t exactly been stellar at framing its own identity. The cultural and media headwinds they face go a long ways toward explaining the struggle. But in this case, they add to those the fact that their critics will have a serious and legitimate point. Voting for Trump means treating everything else he does as acceptable *on the condition* that he also promises — merely promises, mind you — conservative justices. The pro-life movement can justify supporting Trump only by viewing his character, his known sexual vices, his unrepentant history of supporting abortion, etc. as acceptable side-effects that, in this case, are the cost of their hope for conservative justices.”

Among the items this President has tied to the Pro-Life movement by association includes a Refugee Ban, Racist Sentiments and Actions, Intentionally Separating kids from their families, and a history of mysogny and credible sexual assault accusations.  While the movement has gotten Conservative judges, it has come at a political cost that may not be collected for a while, but almost surely will on this trajectory.

Pro-Lifers have still chosen to go all in on the Trump movement.  On the one hand, this is somewhat understandable due to the radical shift in the Democratic Party on the issue.  That said, the Pro-Life movement did not need to buy in to Trump nearly to the extent it has.  For as little progress as has been made, was it really necessary to make Mike Pence a center-point of every March for Life since Trump was elected? Did having President Trump keynote the Susan B. Anthony List dinner reward or lead to any meaningful pro-life results?  Has all the support for Trump from very vocal pastors led to anything meaningful? The recent March for Life served as a catalyst for some to start thinking about these questions, and despite the Democrats’ radicalism, a shotgun marriage with Trumpism isn’t the prudent response either.

So, if the Democrats are purging virtually anyone who does not express complete devotion to the Abortion lobby, and Trumpism provides no meaningful reforms while associating completely unacceptable baggage with the Pro-Life movement, where does that leave us?  99% of the Democratic Party is anathema to our views on this issue, and there are only a handful of candidates on that side the movement could ever seek to promote.  On the other hand, a continuing bond with Trump positions the Pro-Life movement poorly for the future.  From an electoral standpoint, most groups of Americans who will determine the direction of the Country are moving from away from Trump.  Minority groups and Millennials are actually not particularly hostile to the pro-life position, but becoming too tied to Trumpism could change their feelings and hurt the movement’s long-term prospects.  The Pro-Life movement gains when we our helping women in crisis, promoting adoption, and caring for life at all stages.  Trumpism in perception is the social Darwinist opposite, and it’s easy to see where in reality the perception comes from.  Even beyond electoral politics, it’s simply inconsistent to reconcile a pro-life ethic with intentional family separation, bragging of sexual assault, and other vices Trump inevitably encompasses.

The correct direction combines the political and non-political sides of the Pro-Life movement.  Outside politics, we should continue to provide assistance to expectant mothers, help our local Crisis Pregnancy Centers, support adoption and families that adopt, and speak out for justice at all stages of life.  That is how we most tangibly show our communities that we care about the unborn, and that they should as well.  Politically, except for those who are called to support the few pro-life Democrats there are and to push the party away from radicalism, the best option is to support pro-active, pro-life Republicans who do not antagonize the pro-life ethic on other issues outside Abortion.

We need Republicans, of whom there are far too few right now, who will fight and expend political capital for a 20-week abortion ban, defunding Planned Parenthood, passing the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion act, and nominating the Amy Coney Barrett’s of the world to the high court.  These same Republicans should be people of character who believe in united families, racial justice, and a respect for the equality of women.  If the Pro-Life movement can pull away from Trumpism and support candidates who espouse these virtues at all levels of government, we can save our long-term political prospects of success and not compromise the soul of the movement in the process.

J.T. Realmuto goes to the Phillies

On By The EditorsIn Sports, UncategorizedLeave a comment

Politics has gotten stupid this week, so we’re going to talk some more about Baseball.  The Marlins are currently trying to become as bad/low-cost as possible, so one of the major story lines has been if they will trade JT Realmuto.  I’m not sure Realmuto is one of the best players in the game (which seems like where the Marlins had him valued most of the off-season), but he is one of the best Catchers in the game in a Catcher drought.

I think my basic take is this: I’m glad the Braves didn’t trade for him, but I’m disappointed the Phillies ended up with him.  The Marlins initial asking price initially included Ozzie Albies, which is obscene.  I saw some speculation that the Marlins were trying to make-up for undervaluing Giancarlo Stanton last year, and I’m glad AA didn’t fall for that.  Supposedly the Braves later said no to Ian Anderson and Austin Riley once the price came down later.  I have no problem with that, as they are both high-ceiling players who I wouldn’t want to play on a division rival down the road.

At the same time, the Phillies continue to improve, and you have to think they’re probably still going to add either Bryce Harper or Manny Machado.  That line-up is going to be tough to knock off this season.  I don’t know what AA still has up his sleeves.  Maybe Craig Kimbrel is still in play if the price settles down. Maybe there’s another move to improve the pitching staff or bullpen we don’t know about yet (Madison Bumgarner? Corey Kluber?).  I’m glad the Braves didn’t overpay to get Realmuto, but it still feels like unless everything happens to fall together perfectly with this line-up, they still have some moves to make if they’re going to repeat as Division Champions in 2019.

So, what would this current line-up need to repeat as is? It probably involves at least most of:

  • Dansby Swanson would need to hit better or risk Camargo taking over SS.
  • Ozzie Albies would need to improve his R/L splits.
  • Nick Markakis looks like his early 2018 instead of basically the rest of his tenure in Atlanta.
  • Sean Newcomb needs to shake off his second-half stuggles from last year.
  • Find solid production at Spots 4 and 5 in the rotation between Julio Teheran and the young guys (Mike Soroka, Max Fried, Bryse Wilson, Luiz Gohara, etc.
  • More overall productivity out of the bullpen.

Is all of that possible.  I think so, since all of those players except Markakis and Teheran are young and conceivably have room for development.  Is it reasonable to assume all of these things will happen though?  I obviously don’t know what to expect from these players, but that seems like a very uncertain notion.  I would guess AA thinks more teams will be sellers at a better price once we’re in the season and thinks this team can wait until then, and that seems like a fair guess.

Baseball is Mostly Fine As It Is

On By The EditorsIn Sports, UncategorizedLeave a comment

Rob Manfred is out rattling cages again:

Full article is here (ESPN)

Let’s take these one at a time:

  • When to use Relief Pitchers and Pinch-Hitters is an important part of the strategy of the game that a 3-batter minimum rips away.
  • Watching Pitchers bat is fun, and the dividing the DH between AL and NL as it stands right now gives us the best of both worlds.
  • Having a late trade deadline allows more time for wheeling and dealing and gives teams a better chance to determine if they’re buyers or sellers, thus creating more deals.
  • The pitch clock isn’t inherently bad, but the lengths of games isn’t a huge issue right now.
  • I don’t have a problem with light active-roster expansion either, but let teams split the roster spots however they want instead of a Pitcher maximum.
  • Something needs to be done about tanking, but rewarding winning teams in the draft just creates more parity.
  • The mound is fine as it is.
  • Looking into two-sport athletes signing Major-League deals is perfectly fine.  It is the one good idea on this list.

Baseball is a perfectly fine sport.  It has a long established tradition, has some fun young up-and-comers, and doesn’t cause life-altering head injuries.  If we’re trying to make Baseball more appealing to more people, how about doing something about racist owners, players who commit domestic violence, and colluding owners who won’t sign some of the sports best players and spend money?

If I were to become the Commissioner in my own little world, here is what I would do:

  • More youth outreach to recruit young players based around the idea that Baseball is a safe, accessible sport.
  • Pay Minor League Players a living wage.
  • Create a Salary floor for teams to prevent small markets selling off all their marketable players for money and prevent collusion in free agency.
  • Move the start of the season up a week (and take a week off Spring Training) to create more off-days in the season and try to prevent wear and tear.
  • Expand the Wild Card to Best of 3 and Division Series to Best of 7.
  • Try to cluster inter-league games more in the Summer to break up the monotony of the schedule.

Super Bowl Links + Prediction

On By The EditorsIn Society, Sports, UncategorizedLeave a comment

Colin Kaepernick and his influence on the NFL

From the Atlantic, Football and the NFL are facing White Flight

Tony Romo is Ready

I’ll be rooting for the Rams.  Obviously the Patriots are the worst, but John Kelly also provided one of the very few bright spots in UT’s 2017 season.

Also, for Atlanta fans, the thought of the Patriots winning a Super Bowl on their home field 2 years after 28-3 is just too much.  I say between a big performance from Aaron Donald and an advantage in Special Teams, the Rams take this one 37-31.

Analyzing a 2020 Republican Primary, Part 4

On By The EditorsIn Politics, Uncategorized2 Comments

This is the last part of my series on the 2020 Republican Primary.  In Part 1, I looked at where things stand right now as far as prospects for a contested primary are concerned.  In Part 2, I looked at what an ideal candidate would look like to have the best chance of success.  In Part 3, I examined which individuals would have the incentives to make a run against Trump.  Here, I am going to look at 15 individuals, in alphabetical order, who may due to some combination of the points I made prior may warrant a look.

Let me go ahead and make one broad statement about this list: With very few exceptions (and noted where made), these candidates all fit three of the criteria I mentioned in my last post about incentives to run.  Basically all of them have expressed displeasure with the President at some point on some issue. Almost all of them have no pending reelections, no higher offices they are likely to seek, and would not be better served by waiting for another election cycle if they decide they are interested in the Presidency.  Because of that, some of these names are not stars, but they are the candidates who it would actually make sense for right now to consider running.  If Trump’s numbers fall further for one reason or another, the incentives may shift for higher-caliber candidates to consider a run.

Congressman Justin Amash (MI)

Why – Justin Amash is about as “Anti-Swamp” as anyone in the United States Congress.  He consistently rails against both parties, and is often on the fringe minority of votes.  He is probably the Republican member of Congress most willing to criticize Trump as well, and has made it clear he is not a fan.  Finally, while he’s not the person to want to climb the political ladder for the sake of it, he doesn’t have many other options at this point to advance.  He has slim chances of winning statewide office in Michigan, and his willingness to rail and vote against his party gives him no chance of advancing in House Leadership or Committee Status.  If he wants to make as big a mark as possible on the national dialogue, this might be his best chance.

Why Not – While Name ID isn’t everything, Amash’s may be too low to even attract earned media and give him a chance to grow recognition.  Additionally, his more Libertarian views may place him outside the party mainstream that, if anything, is shifting towards a larger role of government.  While he may attract small-dollar donors from the same people who Ron Paul enthused in his Presidential runs, his ability to fundraise enough to seriously compete is in question.

Former US Senator Kelly Ayotte (NH)

Why – Ayotte was your fairly typical Republican US Senator during her six years in office, and she has good relationships with mainstream Republicans as well as the infrastructure on the Right.  She is from New Hampshire, and would have an excellent chance of beating Trump there and possible generating early momentum.  She opposed Trump following the Access Hollywood tapes, and has spoken out against him before and after the Election.  She probably would have won reelection with Rubio or another candidate on the top of the ballot, so this would be the ultimate revenge.  Finally, while she could run for US Senate again or possible Governor in the future, this could very well be her best chance of going further.

Why Not – Much like Amash, her Name ID is very low nationally, and it would take a lot of earned media and dollars to fix that.  Additionally, it’s unknown if she has any desire to be President or to slog through a Presidential campaign with unknown odds of success.

Former Governor Jeb Bush (FL)

Why – He has ran before, so he’s obviously interested in being President.  He very clearly dislikes Trump, brings instant Name ID, and can raise serious dough.  Finally, as long a shot as it would be, it’s doubtful he would do any better in a crowded Republican field in 2024 or 2028 than he would 1:1 with Trump.

Why Not – While his stock is probably higher than it was in 2016, the Republican base is still very anti-Establishment.  Perception is reality, and the perception is he is moderate and too insider.  While boring competency might get him some more votes, it’s probably not enough to be competitive.

Former Governor Chris Christie (NJ)

Why – He wants to be President, he’s mad at Trump, and he won’t do any better another year.

Why Not – He’s probably more moderate than anyone on this list not named Kasich.  Additionally, it would be difficult for him to lay out a vision for running beyond “I want to be President”, and that doesn’t sale.

Former US Senator Bob Corker (TN)

Why – He has expressed openness to running and has serious Foreign Policy credentials.  He has shown willingness to clash with Trump, and he’s probably never going to get a better opportunity.

Why Not – He’s viewed as too DC/Establishment from his 12 years in the Senate, and it’s hard to say if he would be able to separate himself from that perception.

Former HP CEO Carly Fiorina (VA)

Why – Carly Fiorina, in my opinion, is currently the most complete candidate on this list to challenge Trump.  She is a strong Conservative who isn’t going to be able to be labeled a RINO.  She is an anti-politician like Trump and can run on a drain the swamp message.  She has ran for President before and has Name ID from it.  Finally, she has high favorables among Rubio/Cruz/Carson voters, but would probably still struggle to stand out in a crowded field in the future.

Why Not – The main reason she should not run would be if she just no longer desires to be President or to go through another campaign. Other than that, she should run.

Former UN Ambassador Nicki Haley (SC)

Why – I mostly put Haley here because people keep bringing her name up.  She is a Conservative who is not the Establishment.  She does seem to have national ambitions, and is probably connected enough to be a serious fundraiser.  She also starts with substantive Name ID and might attract almost Trump-like Earned Media.  Finally, she has credibility with Trump’s base and could possibly peel off support there.

Why Not – I just don’t see how her individual incentives line up to make a 2020 run prudent.  She’s shown minor concerns with Trump decisions, but she doesn’t appear to be nearly as concerned with another Trump term as the other people on this list.  Perhaps most importantly, she’s one of a very select group of people who you could easily see being a serious contender in a future Election if she holds her fire.  Running in 2020 puts all of that at risk.

Former Governor Bill Haslam (TN)

Why – He’s from outside DC and could define himself as a problem-solver who got things done as Governor and left office with very strong favorables.  He’s not going to stand out in a future election cycle.  He probably has the most money to play with of anyone in this list, possibly including Mitt Romney.  He chaired RGA two different election cycles as well, and could probably fundraise off that too.

Why Not – His Name ID is very low nationally, and it’s doubtful he has a desire for the job or campaign that comes with it.  Most importantly, with Lamar Alexander’s retirement, he has a US Senate seat he could very well clear the field for if he wants it.  It would be tough to justify a low-probability Presidential bid with that option on the table.

Governor Gary Herbert (UT)

Why – His profile is similar to Haslam’s.  He has a track record of getting things done outside DC, and has one of the highest approval ratings in the County.  He has contrasted with Trump on some issues, and if he has any interest in the idea of being President, this is his best chance.

Why Not – Also like Haslam, his Name ID is very low, and he’s not known to be interested in the job.  While he doesn’t have an immediate Senate race on the table, he could be a potential US Senate candidate or Republican cabinet pick in the future if he sits out.

Governor Larry Hogan (MD)

Why – Hogan has shown the most interest of anyone recently in the idea of challenging Trump.  He could run as a DC outsider, and he has already started contrasting his record with the partisanship in Washington.  He’s term-limited out of office in 2022, and he’s never going to get a better chance to run than now.

Why Not – His Name ID is very low.  Most importantly, though, he has an extremely Moderate record on Abortion, Gun Rights, and other issues important to the Republican base.  He might be to the left of John Kasich, which is saying something.  He might be one of the most willing candidates to run, but I think he has one of the worst chances of success of anyone on this list.

Former Governor John Kasich (OH)

Why – He wants to be President and doesn’t like Trump.

Why Not – He has antagonized the Republican base at every opportunity, and there is no appetite among voters for what he is offering.  He is disliked by almost every segment of the party for one reason or another.

Former Congresswoman Mia Love (UT)

Why – Conservatives like her for her willingness to speak out as one of the few African-American elected officials who are GOP.  She’s spoken out against Trump as well, though.  Additionally, Trump probably cost her election (that seat is probably a lot less competitive under President Rubio).  Like Ayotte, there’s something of a revenge factor.

Why Not – Even though she lost, she may still have a future in elected office.  Would she really want to put that on the line with a long-shot Presidential run?

Former Governor Susana Martinez (NM)

Why – She’s one of the original, 2010 Tea Party class and has credibility with the Right.  She’s now out of office and probably wouldn’t get a better chance if this is something she’s interested in.  Additionally, New Mexico is about as far from DC as you can get, so it’s hard to peg her as “The Swamp.”

Why Not – Low Name ID and no known desire to run.

US Senator Mitt Romney (UT)

Why – He has as much Name ID as anyone on this list, and clearly (at least at one point) has a desire to be President.  He can probably fundraise more money than anyone on this list, as well as self-fund.  He doesn’t care for Trump, and at his age, there’s probably no better time to run than now.

Why Not – Conservatives are still suspicious of him and whether he is too moderate.  Additionally, two presidential campaigns takes a toll, and he may very well have no interest in a third.

US Senator Ben Sasse (NE)

Why – Last on this last, Sasse is well-liked by a lot of the higher-up Conservative institutions.  His Name ID is decent due to his frequent Trump criticism.  While he contrasts with Trump, it’s hard to see him standing out among a crowded field of “normal” Republicans in the near future, but …

Why Not – That being said, he’s young and I’m not as confident he wouldn’t get another chance several cycles down the road.  His desire to run is suspect, and he’s perceived by some as Establishment (even though nothing could be further from the truth).  Finally, his Senate seat is up in 2020, and if he wants to keep it (which is uncertain at this point), a Presidential run would very much imperial that.

Who Did Ed Gillespie’s Oppo?

On By The EditorsIn Politics, UncategorizedLeave a comment

What a week for Ralph Northam.  It all came to a head this afternoon with revelations per the Virginian-Pilot that he appeared in his Med School yearbook in either blackface or a KKK hood.  Both, needless to say, are bad and recommend resignation.

Lots of people are asking why didn’t Ed Gillespie find this in the 2017 campaign? This led me to VPAP, which chronicles money flows in all Virginia state elections.  We can make two possible guesses off what we see there:

  1. A $10,200 payment to Old Dominion Research Group for “Research Services”.  According to their website, oppo research is their main service.  On the other hand, the payment occurs in January 2017.  They could have been doing research on Northam and Tom Perriello at that point, but it could also have very well been on Corey Stewart.
  2. There’s also a $9,075 payment to the RGA in June 2017 for “Research Services.” The RGA does a lot more than oppo research, but it’s very possible that Gillespie is primarily outsourcing oppo after the primary to the RGA.  That is what would make the most sense to me.  Considering that the RGA is also responsible for services for all GOP Gubernatorial candidates nationally, it would be good to know how much of the blame rests on them.