NPR/PBS/Marist Poll Shows Democrats With An Electoral Advantage

 

These charts are from the NPR / PBS News / Marist Poll -- done on September 14th and 15th of a nationwide sample of 1,280 registered voters, with a 3.8 point margin of error.

Texas Democrats Have Their Best Chance In Three Decades

The chart above is from the ReconMR Texas Poll -- done between September 8th and 11th of a sample of 614 likely Texas voters, with a 4.3 point margin of error. 

Texas Democrats have not won a statewide race in over 30 years. There have been some years when hopes were high, but they have never been able to get over the hump.

This year looks very different. Several polls have shown Democrat James Talarico leading Republican Ken Paxton in the race for the United States Senate - and most knowledgeable pundits now rate the race either as a toss-up or slightly favoring Talarico.

But the real surprise is happening in the race for governor. Until recently, most people were ignoring this race - assuming that Governor Abbott would easily win, as he had several times in the past. But polls are now showing that race has tightened. This poll has Democrat Gina Hinojosa with a slight lead, and several others have shown her wishing the margin of error.

Most pundits still give Republican Greg Abbott the better chance to win, and I think they are probably right. But this is not a normal election year. Democrats are fired up, Republicans are disappointed in Trump and the economy, and Independents seem to be breaking mostly for Democratic candidates.

I think Talaraco is going to win the senate race. And if there is a massive turnout, Hinojosa (and possibly some other statewide Democrats) could pull off a surprise and win.

As a life-long Texas Democrat, I'm excited.

Polls Show Democrats Extending Their Generic Ballot Lead

The chart above is from the Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between September 11th and 14th of a nationwide sample of 1,461 registered voters, with a 3.3 point margin of error.

The charts above are from the Marquette Law School Poll -- done between September 2nd and 9th of a nationwide sample of 864 registered voters (including 581 likely voters). The margin of error is 3.6 points for registered voters and 4.3 points for likely voters.

Trump Will Spend His PAC Money To Support His Favorite Politician

 Robert Reich tells us the politician Donald Trump will spend his PAC money to support:

With the midterm races officially beginning this week, a big question hanging over the Republican Party is how Trump will allocate his giant stash of super PAC money. As of July 31, MAGA Inc. had more than $400 million on hand, larger than the cash reserves of any of the major party committees.

But he’s barely spent any of it yet. Why not?

 

Is he waiting to see where his stash can do the most good for Republicans during the peak campaign season?

 

I doubt it. He’s already missed the chance to lock in airtime at lower advance rates and define candidates before attitudes harden.

Is he using the stash as a means of silencing criticism in the Republican ranks or holding back support until a candidate lavishes praise on him?

Also doubtful. Republican candidates who believe they need to criticize his war or his economic policies to stay viable won’t restrain themselves because of his possible campaign cash.

Maybe he’s conserving the money to discipline Republican candidates in the 2028 primaries and general election, when he’ll use the stash to penalize disloyalty and reward loyalty?

Possibly, but he’s already practically a lame duck. 

Is he conserving the cash to pass it on to his chosen presidential successor — Vance or Rubio or a third selection as yet unknown?

Probably not. That’s a long way off.

 

None of these theories holds water because they don’t figure in Trump’s towering malignant narcissism.

 

I think he’ll be putting the money behind his favorite politician — the person he most admires, who represents everything he believes in, who he considers the single most important and talented living person in the entire flaming firmament of the known universe. 

Himself. 

He’s going to use his campaign cash to make himself look good, or at least far better than he looks now. Multiple public and private polls show Trump’s approval rating now mired in the mid-30 percent range — at or near historic lows for a president facing a midterm election.

So he’ll launch a campaign to regain the adulation he’s lost, to recast himself as the hero he believes he is, to reclaim the mantle of savior to which he thinks he’s entitled. 

In other words, it will be a campaign to promote, glorify, and exalt Donald J. Trump. 

The nonprofit arm of Trump’s political operation, Securing American Greatness, has already spent about $1 million on its first midterm ads set to air nationwide, featuring video clips of Trump talking about tax breaks in his domestic spending legislation and lower prices for eggs and prescription drugs. 

In early August, according to The Atlantic, Trump told advisers they should follow the same strategy as the Democrats — making the election all about him.

But as Karl Rove, who was senior adviser and deputy chief of staff for George W. Bush, notes in The Wall Street Journal, given how unpopular Trump is, making the election even more about him only helps the Democrats.

 

Trump also plans to travel all over the country to hold rallies like he did during his presidential elections. Fox News’s senior White House correspondent, Peter Doocy, reports hearing “whispers of a ton of Trump travel in October, possibly as much as a Trump rally a day” in competitive states and districts. 

It begins this week when Trump hosts an unprecedented midterm party convention in Dallas, centering on his accomplishments. From there, he’ll head all over America, campaigning like mad — for himself.

 

Rove warns: “Trump is never disciplined. He’ll have no script, saying whatever comes to mind. His crazy comments will dominate the news, locally and nationally. Republican candidates will constantly have to fend off questions about whether they agree with his latest insult or half-baked idea. The narrative won’t be on anything positive about them or the GOP.”

Presumably this is why some battleground Republicans told Trump’s staff that they’d prefer he not visit their districts ahead of November, according to Republican operatives involved in the conversations, as reported by Politico. Meanwhile, Republican pollsters have told candidates in tight races to limit their references to him.

Rove and other Republican functionaries are urging Trump to “act more presidential” by using his vast super PAC funds to support Republican candidates rather than finance a campaign about himself. 

But they’re yelling into the wind of Trump’s ballroom-sized ego.

 

Such is Trump’s epic narcissism that he’ll dedicate the next two months to promoting himself rather than Republican candidates. Then he’ll treat a Republican defeat on November 3 not as a repudiation but as a compliment — saying they lost because he wasn’t on the ticket.

As almost everyone in the world knows by now, Trump cares only about himself. That’s been his MO forever.

Bad news for Republicans in the midterms, good news for Democrats, a continuing catastrophe for America.

Democrats Still Leading The Generic Congressional Poll

 

The charts above are from the Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between August 21st and 24th of a nationwide sample of 1,379 registered voters, with a 3.3 point margin of error.

The 3 Reasons Trump Won't Change Or Mitigate His Policies To Help GOP Candidates

Donald Trump's poll numbers are worse than any other modern president, and they keep going down. One of the main factors is the affordability issue. His tariffs and unnecessary war in Iran have insured that inflation remains high - and too many families, who were already hurting financially, find themselves falling further behind every week.

And because the congressional Republicans refused to oppose or try to mitigate those Trump policies, they find themselves in electoral trouble in the coming election. Only those in the reddest districts are likely to survive - and a few of them might even get defeated. They are all worried, because it looks like the House is lost and maybe even the Senate.

Most presidents, finding themselves in this position, would try to at least mitigate their policies to lessen the damage to their party. Donald Trump won't do that. Why?

First, he is not very intelligent. That was obvious when he threatened his high school and university with lawsuits if they released his grades. He claims to be a genius, but a genius would be happy to have his grades revealed. Trump has screwed up the economy due to his low intelligence, and he's not smart enough to know how to fix it.

Second, he exists is a bubble. The people he surrounds himself with are all sycophants who won't tell him the truth. They don't want to anger him, so they just keep telling him what he wants to hear (that he is doing a great job and doesn't need to change anything).

If the GOP candidates all got together and put some pressure on Trump, they could probably get him to change some things. But there is a third thing that they can't overcome - his pathological narcissism. He not only doesn't want to admit he's made some mistakes, but he is psychologically unable to do so.

He's been this way throughout his life. Instead of admitting error and making a correction, he just finds someone else to blame.

Trump will never mitigate his policies to help Republicans survive the 2026 election. He's not smart enough, knowledgable enough, or psychologically able to do so. 

The Issues Voters Care Most About Favor Democrats

The chart above reflects the results of the Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between Ausust 14th and 17th of a nationwide sample of 1,450 registered voters, with a 3.2 point margin of error. 

Are We Seeing The Demise Of Corporate Democrats?

Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich comments on why Democrats are voting for progressives this year:

Most discussions about the Democratic Party in this election cycle focus on the remarkable rise of progressive Democrats (such as Florida state Rep. Angie Nixon, a democratic socialist who yesterday scored an upset win in the Democratic contest for the Florida Senate).

An equally big story is the remarkable decline of corporate Democrats. 

Some Democrats worry about this. My old friend Democratic strategist James Carville compares the current wave of progressive primary wins to progressive campaigns in 2016 — especially that of Bernie Sanders — that he believes fractured the Democratic coalition. 

“Bernie Sanders is the reason that Donald Trump is president,” Carville said recently, claiming that Bernie’s primary challenge to Hillary Clinton convinced voters in battleground states that establishment Democrats were no different from establishment Republicans, thereby weakening her prospects in the general election.

Even if James is right about 2016 (and I don’t believe he is) his assessment is irrelevant now because we’re at a radically different point in American politics than we were 10 years ago.

The silver lining on the dark storm cloud of Trump and his detestable regime is that it has exposed the greed, venality, cupidity, and corruption of America’s corporate elite.

 

Trump has allowed the CEOs of giant corporations and the titans of Wall Street to do whatever they want as long as they suck up to him. And he’s providing all sorts of corporate welfare to those who generously bribe him — no-bid government contracts, exclusive licenses, tax loopholes, tariff exemptions, use of public lands, and permission to become even bigger monopolies. 

Trump has thereby unveiled a truth about corporate America that for many years has been hidden behind a soothing blanket of corporate PR bullsh*t about social responsibility, corporate charity, and “trickle-down” economics.

 

That truth is the captains of corporate America are so rapacious that they’re willing to throw average working Americans under the bus to make billions more. 

Corporate avarice under Trump has become so blatant and corporate America’s contempt for the needs of average Americans so flagrant that most Americans are now catching on. 

They’re voting for progressive Democrats not because they want socialism, support the Democratic Socialists of America, or reject candidates called “moderate.”

 

They’re voting for candidates whom they believe will fight to make housing, food, healthcare, and childcare affordable to average working families. And who’ll take on Trump’s billionaire backers, CEOs, and Wall Street titans who are rigging the economy against them. 

Much of the corporate media won’t tell this story. When Dr. Abdul El-Sayed won Michigan’s Democratic primary over Haley Stevens, the media overflowed with accounts of how much smaller El-Sayed’s margin of victory was than polls had predicted. 

Yet the most remarkable thing about El-Sayed’s victory was that he won despite being dramatically outspent by super PACs arrayed against him. 

Stevens benefited from tens of millions of dollars in outside spending, including the largest investment in a senatorial race ever made by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which traditionally supports pro-Israel candidates but in recent election cycles has supported candidates most favored by corporate America. AIPAC’s ads in favor of Stevens and against El-Sayed never even mentioned Israel. 

Outside super PACs poured an estimated $54 million to $60 million into backing Stevens and opposing El-Sayed, compared to only about $5 million for El-Sayed. Pro-Stevens groups outspent El-Sayed on TV advertising alone by more than 12 to 1 ($26.9 million to $2.1 million) in the closing weeks. An average of $95 was spent for every vote against El-Sayed versus just $9 per vote for him. 

The race between Stevens and El-Sayed was a proxy fight over the future of the Democratic Party. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer backed Stevens and encouraged donors to back her campaign, as did other corporate-aligned politicians such as Michigan senator Gary Peters. On the other hand, Sen. Bernie Sanders and U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez supported El-Sayed, as did progressives such as Sens. Chris Van Hollen and Elizabeth Warren. 

El-Sayed justifiably made a campaign issue out of how much corporate money was backing his rival. He argued that Democrats should reject corporate influence and embrace an agenda that helps average Americans. His campaign centered on providing Medicare for All, lowering prescription drug costs, and banning corporate PAC money. “We’re in a situation right now where the rich keep getting hyper-rich on the backs of figuring out how to monetize everyday people,” El-Sayed told AP during a Sunday afternoon march, as his supporters chanted behind him, “Money out of politics! Money in your pockets!”

El-Sayed’s victory marked a turning point for the corporate wing of the Democratic Party. 

I saw the start of the corporate Democrats in the early 1980s, when Democrats in congress began drinking from the same campaign funding trough as the Republicans, mostly from big corporations.

“Business has to deal with us whether they want to or not” crowed Democratic Rep. Tony Coelho, who then headed the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. 

Democrats had controlled Congress since 1955, and assumed they’d continue to run the House for years. They thought they could take advantage of their seemingly permanent power to raise cash for their campaigns. 

Coelho’s Democrats soon achieved a rough parity with Republicans in contributions from corporate and Wall Street campaign coffers, but it proved a Faustian bargain as big corporations and Wall Street gained increasing influence in the party. It is a truism in politics as in nature: One dares not bite the hands that feed. 

Corporate Democrats thereafter stopped the Democratic Party from pursuing an agenda that would have dramatically helped America’s working class.

 

To be sure, over the last three decades Democrats have scored some important victories for working families — the Affordable Care Act, an expanded Earned Income Tax Credit, and the Family and Medical Leave Act, for example.

 

Yet they’ve done little to alter the widening economic inequalities that have taken a huge toll on working-class families. 

Both Clinton and Barack Obama ardently pushed for free-trade agreements, for example, but didn’t provide the millions of blue-collar workers who thereby lost their jobs means of getting new ones that paid at least as well.

They also stood by as corporations hammered trade unions, the backbone of the white working class. Clinton and Obama failed to reform labor laws to impose meaningful penalties on companies that violated them, or to enable workers to form unions with a simple up-or-down vote.

In his 1992 campaign, Clinton promised such reform but once elected didn’t want to buck corporate Democrats by spending political capital on it. In his 2008 campaign, Obama made the same promise but never acted on it.

Partly as a result, union membership sank from 22 percent of all workers when Clinton was elected president to fewer than 10 percent today, and the working class lost bargaining leverage to get a share of the economy’s gains. 

The Obama administration also protected Wall Street from the consequences of its gambling addiction through a giant taxpayer-funded bailout but left millions of underwater homeowners to drown.

Both Clinton and Obama allowed antitrust enforcement to ossify — with the result that large corporations have grown far larger and major industries far more concentrated.

 

And they turned their backs on campaign finance reform. In 2008, Obama was the first presidential nominee since Richard Nixon to reject public financing in his primary and general election campaigns. And he never followed up on his reelection campaign promise to pursue a constitutional amendment overturning Citizens United v. FEC, the 2010 Supreme Court decision that opened the floodgates to big money in politics.

What happens when you combine free trade, shrinking unions, Wall Street bailouts, growing corporate monopoly power, and the abandonment of campaign finance reform? You get an economy favoring the wealthy and a political system favoring the powerful, while workers without college degrees suffer declining real wages and dwindling job security.

John F. Kennedy was the last Democratic president to depend on the votes of working-class Americans while losing the votes of white, college-educated Americans by 2 to 1. Sixty years later, Joe Biden depended on the votes of college-educated Americans while losing the votes of the white working class by 2 to 1. Kamala Harris lost the working class by an even larger margin.

Trump has exposed the venality and cupidity of corporate America, while large swaths of the working middle class struggle to make ends meet. As a result, Republicans appear likely to face some major defeats in the midterm elections. Corporate Democrats are on the defensive because their campaign cash isn’t working the way it used to. 

Now, finally, the Democratic Party has an opportunity to once again become the party of working Americans, as it was under Franklin D. Roosevelt, rather than the party of corporate America. It is more urgent than at any time since the Great Depression that Democrats act on this opportunity. 

Independents Will Decide The Election - And They Don't Like Trump Or The Economy

The chart above is from the Gallup Poll. It shows that most Americans now call themselves Independents (43%), rather than Democrats (30%) or Republicans (25%). Most Polls have shown the Democrats with an enthusiasm advantage over the Republicans, but even with that there are not enough Democrats. That means the election, like most elections will be decided by the Independents.

In the 2024 election, Independents pretty closely split down the middle - allowing Trump and the Republicans to eke out a win. But if the polls are correct, that's not going to happen in 2026.

Most pundits think this will be an election on either affordability (the economy) or a referendum on Donald Trump. I think it will be a bit of both. And that's good news for Democrats. As the charts below show (from the Economist/YouGov Poll), Independents are not happy with the job Trump is doing, and they are just as unhappy with the economy.

If these numbers are anywhere close to correct (and I think they are), then Democrats should do very well in November.

A Democratic Voter's Message To Party Leaders

First, let me say that I appreciate the job that DNC members and other Democratic leaders are doing. 

You were chosen to run the day-to-day activities of the party, recruit candidates for the party, raise campaign money for the party's candidates, and forward/defend the party's positions - and for the most part, I think you do a great job.

But sometimes you go a bit too far. 

The Republican Party is a top-down party. Trump (and party leaders) say froggie, and the base asks how high to jump. This even extends to what candidates the leaders prefer.

The Democratic Party is not that way. We are (and pretty much always have been) a bottom-up party. The party's base voters decide what issues are important, and what candidates they want to address those issues and represent the party on the November ballot.

It is NOT the job of the DNC (or other party leaders) to choose the party's candidates. That is the job of the party's primary voters. They know better than anyone the problems and issues in their state, and the best candidates to address those problems and issues.

It is a mistake for party leaders (sometimes called the "establishment") to favor one Democratic candidate over another - to use their party position to favor a candidate or to fund one candidate over another. It is not your job to decide who is the better candidate or who should not represent the party. That is the job of the primary voters.

And it is not your job to complain about the candidates chosen by primary voters. That just creates dissension within the party, and lessens to chance of victory on Election Day.

Accept the decision of the voters. Then vocally and financially support ALL of the party's candidates.

We have a golden opportunity to flip Congress this year - maybe both houses. Don't blow it!