Whatever Donald Trump’s ever-escalating Islamophobia is doing to the Republican presidential nominating contest, it’s creating some abiding problems for the GOP itself. I wrote about that yesterday at New York:

If you want to understand the exquisite dilemma Republican leaders not named Donald Trump are in right now, look no further than the new online Bloomberg Politics/Purple Strategies survey that asked Americans about Trump’s proposal to ban Muslims from entering the country temporarily. It showed likely Republican primary voters favoring it by a 65-22 margin (with 13 percent saying they don’t know). But among likely general-election voters, opposition to the proposal led by a 50-37 margin (again, 13 percent didn’t know).
This is a classic situation where politicians need to choose between the views of the party base and those of general-election swing voters on a highly emotional issue that probably isn’t going to go away. Indeed, if international reaction to Trump’s “idea” continues to grow louder and angrier, we can expect that to strengthen antipathy to the entry-ban concept among general-election voters, while GOP base voters, steeped recently in American-exceptionalism rhetoric, may not budge or could even become more defiantly attached to Trump’s style of nationalist “strength.”

It’s a problem no post-convention “etch-a-sketch” can quickly erase.

So which measures to reduce income inequality attract the most support? Suzy Khimm reports at The New Republic: “A recent study conducted by economists from Princeton, Harvard, and University of California, Berkeley professor Emmanuel Saez–one of the most prominent researchers on inequality–put the political challenges of the issue in sharper relief. Based on a survey of 10,000 Americans, the study found that those who received more information about inequality were more likely to believe that economic disparity was a problem. At the same time, “they show no more appetite for many government interventions to reduce inequality”–such as an expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit and food stamps–“with the notable exceptions of increasing the estate tax and the minimum wage…The study hypothesizes that Americans are more comfortable with government solutions when they’re narrowly targeted or otherwise limit government involvement. That suggests that any kind of broad government intervention will be a hard sell to the broader public, even if the public believes the scales are unfairly tipped because of government policies.”
At The Monkey Cage Kyle Dropp’s “This new tool puts 50,000 poll questions and 100 demographics at your fingertips” reports on an early Xmas present for political opinion wonks: “This year, we at Morning Consult have addressed that problem by building out a platform called Morning Consult Intelligence. This free platform allows anyone to search and analyze over 50,000 current and historical survey questions from top polling organizations.”
Bill Cotterell, correspondent for the Tallahassee Democrat has an insightful update on Democratic electoral prospects in Florida. Among Cotterell’s observations: “Democrats figure to pick up two, maybe three, seats in the Florida congressional delegation under the redistricting plan approved last month by the state Supreme Court…When a state in which Democrats outnumber Republicans in registration has 17 Republican and 10 Democratic members of the U.S. House, that’s no accident. Not coincidentally, Republicans are the controlling party of both chambers of the Legislature – the same people who fought the “Fair Districts” amendments all the way…All things being equal – which they’re not – Democrats would probably deserve a 14-13 majority in the state’s congressional delegation and Florida’s two U.S. Senate seats would be equally divided – which they are – by the parties.”
As for the sleazier tactics Republicans use to suppress pro-Democratic votes in the Sunshine State, check out Spencer Woodman’s excellent post at The Intercept, “Thanks to Republicans, Nearly a Quarter of Florida’s Black Citizens Can’t Vote.” Woodman explains, “No other state has a larger number of disenfranchised citizens than Florida, where more than 1.5 million people have lost the right to cast a ballot on Election Day, according to the Sentencing Project, a nonprofit prison reform group. Nationwide, nearly 6 million Americans are barred from voting due to felony convictions. Although most states restrict the voting rights of imprisoned felons, Iowa currently is the only one that joins Florida in imposing a lifelong disenfranchisement on ex-felons.”
Tony Monkovic reviews the pros, cons and realities of strategic voting at The Upshot, and notes “Research shows that the rate of so-called party-crasher voting in primaries is generally low. Voters in open primaries, in which you can vote in the primary of either party, are more likely to pick a candidate they like. He notes one failed example: “…Radio host Rush Limbaugh’s “Operation Chaos” to help Hillary Clinton defeat Barack Obama did not prevent an Obama presidency.”
Hard to wrap your head around it now, but there was a time when the GOP hoped to benefit from the Muslim vote in the U.S. David A. Graham has the story at The Atlantic.
A new AP/GFK poll indicates Trump’s xenophobic take on immigration is shared by too many, even though the poll was conducted before his latest call for a ban on Muslim immigration to the U.S.: “…54 percent of Americans, including about three-quarters of Republicans, about half of independents and over a third of Democrats, said the United States takes in too many immigrants from the Middle East…By contrast, 46 percent of Americans, including 6 in 10 Republicans, slightly under half of independents and 3 in 10 Democrats, said the U.S. takes too many immigrants from Latin America…Just 28 percent of Americans said the same of immigrants from Europe, with little variation by party identification.”
If Trump wins the GOP nomination, what would his Republican rivals do? The New York Times editorial board offers this clue: “After his remarks on Muslims, how many of Mr. Trump’s rivals have said they would reject his candidacy if he won the nomination? As of Wednesday, none.”
You probably can guess who says “I. Will. Never. Leave. This. Race.”

Republicans are sweating bullets when asked to repudiate Donald Trumps bigotry toward Muslims and Mexicans, and so far have only provided limp criticism of Trump’s call. But voters who want to uphold America’s best values about tolerance and brotherhood can take some comfort that one party, at least, refuses to give Trump’s bigotry an easy pass, as evidenced by recent statements from Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley.
Hillary Clinton has just posted a strong statement against Donald Trump’s bigotry and his GOP rivals weak response on her campaign web page:

Donald Trump has made a name for himself in this election by trafficking in prejudice and paranoia. Now he says he wants to stop all Muslims from entering the United States. It’s a shameful idea. It’s also dangerous. At a time when America should be doing everything we can to fight radical jihadists, Mr. Trump is supplying them with new propaganda. He’s playing right into their hands.
Now some Republican candidates are saying that Donald Trump’s latest comments have gone too far. But the truth is, many GOP candidates have also said extreme things about Muslims. Their language may be more veiled than Mr. Trump’s, but their ideas aren’t so different.
Ben Carson says that a Muslim shouldn’t be president. Marco Rubio compares Muslims to members of the Nazi Party and refuses to rule out monitoring and closing of mosques. Jeb Bush and Ted Cruz have suggested that we implement a religious test for Syrian refugees–one that only Christians would pass. Chris Christie says not even 3-year-old Syrian orphans should be let in. And they insist on using the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism”–in fact, they criticize anyone who says anything else–even though it drives the exact narrative the jihadists want to advance: that we’re at war with an entire religion.
When you take a step back and see what the Republican field as a whole says about Muslims–not just one or two candidates for President, but nearly all of them–it’s hard to take seriously their attempts to distance themselves from Mr. Trump. He’s just articulating the logical conclusion of what the rest of them have been saying. As Mr. Trump said in an interview this morning, “They condemn practically everything I say, and then they always come to my side.”

Sen. Bernie Sanders has also made his contempt for Trump’s bigotry clear, as noted by John Wagner at Post Politics:

“What somebody like a Trump is trying to do is to divide us up,” Sanders told host Jimmy Fallon. “A few months ago, we were supposed to hate Mexicans. He thinks they’re all criminals or rapists. Now we’re supposed to hate Muslims. And that kind of crap is not going to work in the United States of America.”
…”Throughout history, you’ve had demagogues trying to divert attention away from the real issues,” Sanders said. “This country today faces some enormous problems. You know, we have a middle class that is disappearing. We have almost the wealth and income going to the top 1 percent. We have climate change. We have a corrupt campaign finance system.”
“I think what the American people understand is, given the problems we face, we’ve got to stand together, come together and create a decent life for all of our people and stop the scapegoating of one group or another,” Sanders said.

Former Maryland Governor and Democratic presidential candidate Martin O’Malley was equally-strong in condemning Trump’s fear-mongering, reports Maryalice Parks at abcnews.com:

“Let me ask you this. Who is next? Catholics? Trade unionists? Artists? We’ve seen this road before, and it does not lead to a good place,” he said.
“Panic and political opportunism are a toxic mix — a mix that can often precede fascism or the plunging of our republic into a security state,” O’Malley added. The audience jeered and booed at his references to Trump.
After the speech, reporters pressed O’Malley on whether he thought Trump himself was a fascist. O’Malley would not say so explicitly, but said the language Trump uses is similar.
“When he pushes things like registries and ID cards based on things like religion, I do believe that is the sort of appeal that historically has often preceded fascism,” he said. “We should not think that we are so superior as a nation that we cannot ourselves fall victim to those sorts of appeals.”

Clinton added,

He’s also taking aim at our values. Our country was founded by people fleeing religious persecution. The notion that here, people are free to practice their faith, whatever it is, is one of America’s most cherished principles…Nearly 3 million Americans are Muslims. They’re our family, our friends, our neighbors, and co-workers. They serve in the military, save lives as doctors and nurses, and serve our communities as police officers, firefighters, teachers, and civic leaders. They’re patriots–proud Americans, just like the rest of us. They deserve better than this.”

Clinton called on Trump’s fellow Republican candidates to come forward and speak out against hate-mongering and scapegoating: “Now is the time for all of us–especially Republican leaders–to stand up to hateful, dangerous words and deeds.”
Given the GOP candidates’ sorry record thus far, it could take a while.

Associated Press reports on a study showing that Utah counties that permit voting by mail are seeing huge increases in turnout:

According to a report released by the Utah Foundation on Wednesday, all 70 cities in Utah that chose to vote my mail increased turnout compared to municipal elections in 2013 and 2011.
The report shows that voter turnout has dipped in recent decades, setting a record low in 2014 with only 28.8 percent of the state’s eligible voters participating in the general election.
Cities that saw major increases in voter participating include Salt Lake City, where canvass results show turnout was 54 percent — up from 13 percent in 2013 and 24 percent in 2011; Green River with 65 percent, up from 35 percent; and Moab with 62 percent, up from 16 percent.

Scott Keyes comments on the Utah study at ThinkProgress:

Researchers found that the effect was particularly pronounced in smaller communities rather than larger cities. Still, some cities saw major gains as well. Salt Lake City, for instance, saw its turnout rate soar to 55 percent in 2015 from 13 percent in 2013 and 24 percent in 2011.
“It’s been smoother on our end; it’s been smoother on (voters’) end,” Salt Lake County Clerk Sherrie Swensen told the Deseret News after a primary election in August of this year. “We’ve just had a great response.”
Why is this election reform so successful? “Vote-by-mail can increase awareness about smaller elections and potentially have larger turnout in localized issues,” the report concluded. In addition, the convenience factor, especially for workers who can’t take time off on a Tuesday in November, can’t be overlooked. Further boosting vote-by-mail’s case is the fact that it saves states millions in taxpayer dollars by eliminating the need for in-person polling places.
Some caveats do apply. The authors acknowledged that vote-by-mail could have benefited from a “novelty” effect that may fade over time. In addition, whether mail-in voting would have the same outsized effect in non-municipal elections, such as those for Congress or governor, remains in question.
Three states currently conduct all their elections by mail: Oregon, Washington, and Colorado, which just recently joined the club. All three consistently rank among the top states by turnout, and far outperform neighboring states.

No doubt, Republicans will do everything they can to kill reforms which would expand voting by mail, wherever they can. But Democrats should not let this fact discourage them from making voting by mail a top priority. If mail voting can be instituted in communities in overwhelmingly Republican Utah, it can be done anywhere.
And, would it be too much to ask local media to force Republicans to explain their opposition to this much-needed reform? If the media won’t do its job, then local groups of citizens who care about saving American democracy should dog the obstructionists at every public appearance, and make them explain to their constituents on camera why they are against voting by mail.