In “To win over seniors, Harris should highlight her support for Social Security” at The Hill,  top Social Security experts Nancy J. Altman and William J. Arnone write: “A formerly reliable segment of the Democratic Party’s electoral coalition, voters aged 65 and older have leaned Republican since 2000. The Harris-Walz ticket has an excellent opportunity to bring these voters back. Even if the Democratic presidential ticket does not carry older voters, just reducing the margin of loss might well decide the election….We call older voters “always-voters,” because it is only a small exaggeration to say that they always vote. They have disproportionately high turnout rates, including in the seven battleground states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin….In 2020, older voters had a turnout rate of 71.9 percent, compared to an overall turnout rate of 67 percent. In Arizona and Georgia, older voter rates were 20- and 17-percentage points higher, respectively….In 2020, voters aged 65 and older were 22 percent of the total electorate. Voters age 50 and older comprised over half of all voters….the Harris-Walz ticket is underperforming with older voters. The most recent polling indicates that the ticket is losing voters 65 and over by seven percentage points. Before withdrawing from the race, President Biden was winning this segment by three percentage points….The problem is that recent polling shows that the American people do not know where the parties stand. And the Harris-Walz campaign has yet to run ads making the contrast clear.”….Moreover, Trump’s record shows he is no protector of Social Security. As president, he proposed Social Security cuts in every single one of his budgets.”

From “This election, a struggle for the soul of American Christianity is key: That’s why battleground North Carolina will be ‘ground zero for a faith war’” by Washington Post columnist E. J. Dionne, Jr.: “Religion has created a coalition management challenge for Democrats whose ranks include large majorities of Jewish and Muslim voters and an overwhelming share of voters — particularly among the young — who left organized religion altogether…..But political scientist David Campbell, co-author of “Secular Surge: A New Fault Line in American Politics,” argues that the party still has ample room for appeals to religious voters….“We don’t see any evidence that [secular voters] are hostile to Democrats who use religious language,” he told me. “It’s a myth that because they have a secular world view, they are hostile to religion. What they don’t like is the establishment of religion by government, government stepping over the line between church and state.”….Harris seems to take this view to heart. She speaks often about her Baptist faith, routinely dropping religious references into speeches and at times offering detailed accounts of its influence on her worldview. Faith, she said in a 2022 address to the National Baptist Convention, taught her “to believe in what is possible and what can be, unburdened by what has been.”….But there is a more basic reason that religion is unavoidable in this election. It has nothing to do with any “God Gap” or political calculation. Augustine is right: There is an ongoing struggle for the soul of American Christianity between brands of faith that embrace democratic inclusion and extreme forms — particularly white Christian nationalism — that promote exclusion. It’s an argument that North Carolina might be called upon to settle for the nation.”

Should Democrats fund and run more women candidates? Read “How the news media cover women in politics: 5 recent studies to know” by Clark Merrefield at Journalists Resource for a perceptive take. As Merrefield writes: “By 2023, 25% of U.S. senators, 29% of Congress, 33% of state legislators and 24% of governors were women….As women have occupied more positions of political power, so has news framing and language used in media coverage become more scrutinized….The “likability trap,” as it’s known, refers to women in positions of power having to be both highly qualified and broadly likable to colleagues and clients in the corporate world, and to voters in the political realm. It’s similar in concept to the “gender double bind,” in which women in leadership positions are expected to be both competent and warm, according to research out of the University of Michigan.” In 2016 we witnessed the first presidential election in which a woman presidential candidate received a healthy majority of the nation-wide popular vote. If Kamala Harris wins the presidency this year, expect a dramatic uptick of women candidates for elective offices throughout the U.S. And it seems reasonable to expect an significant improvement in the quality of news coverage about their campaigns.

Be not suckered by Speaker Mike Johnson’s low-key demeanor and bland persona. As Nicole Lafond writes in “Now Mike Johnson Is Hedging On Whether The Election Will Be Certified” at Talking Points Memo: “The speaker is leaving town after prevaricating on whether Congress should play its normal role in certifying the results of the election. When asked during a press conference on Tuesday if he’d “commit to observing regular order in the certification process of the 2024 election, even if Kamala Harris beats Donald Trump,” Johnson hedged….“Well of course — if we have a free, fair, and safe election, we’re going to follow the Constitution. Absolutely. Yes. Absolutely,” he said….That big “if” fits alongside the various other cryptic, intentionally vague lines that Trump and his allies have been employing for months as they dodge questions about accepting the results of the election. Trump has said repeatedly that he will only accept the results if the election is “fair.” In other words, Democrats should anticipate the certainty of Republican “leaders” doing Trumps’ bidding by challenging vote counts in swing states. Johnson is every inch a shameless Trump lapdog and a dictator-enabler, who clearly has no commitment to democracy in general, nor integrity in the  certification process in 2024 in particular.