In her Labor Day article, “Both Trump and Harris claim to support the working class: Where do they stand on labor?,” Kinsey Crowley writes at USA Today: “While Trump performed better than expected among Union workers in 2016, some of that support shifted back to President Joe Biden in 2020. Experts say that Biden’s popularity among union workers is likely to carry over to Harris. And unlike 2016, unions may be energized by the recent wins from several major strikes….”It suggests labor’s got some muscle and some fire in their tank,” Bob Bruno, director of the Labor Education Program at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, told USA TODAY in an interview. “If you think you can win…you’re really gonna push a whole lot harder….The Harris campaign seems to tout Biden’s record as a pro-union president to justify the labor movement’s draw to Harris, and Celine McNicholas, policy director at nonpartisan research organization Economic Policy Institute Action, agrees….”There are parts of the Biden administration… (his) record on benefiting workers that I think Harris deserves unique credit on, because she was essentially the tie-breaking vote,” said McNicholas said….Harris also chaired the White House Task Force on Worker Organizing and Empowerment aimed at reducing barriers to unionization….The Harris campaign memo on working with unions detailed her pro-worker record dating back to her time as California Attorney General, when she addressed wage theft. While in office as a U.S. Senator, she walked picket lines in two strikes….if elected, Harris would pass the Protecting the Right to Organize Act. Known as the PRO Act, the bill would give workers more power to organize, and has passed the House multiple times but has not been signed into law.”

From an e-blast, “New GQR poll shows Americans want Increased Oversight on Corporate Greed”: “A recent GQR survey for More Perfect Union Foundation of 1,700 likely voters in seven battleground states—multimode survey in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin (multimode survey taken August 9-15, 2024; margin of error +/- 2.38– demonstrates broad support for government action to break up corporate monopolies and stop the price gouging that has raised the cost of every from groceries to rent to prescription drugs.
Key findings include:

• Voters still struggle with costs and majorities struggle to afford groceries (56 percent) and health care costs like premiums, deductibles and copays (51 percent).
• However, they are more likely to blame corporate greed and price gouging (61 percent) than high costs (51 percent) for inflation and rising costs.
• An 81 percent majority are “concerned that big corporations and businesses are becoming too powerful.”
• Huge majorities of voters support Biden’s efforts to rein in corporations including “right to repair,” reducing costs of cancer drugs, investigating big oil and breaking up monopolies.  However, few voters know about these efforts.
• Voters respond better to an economic narrative that centers in controlling corporate concentration than a conservative nationalist argument.”

“The Latino vote has transformed over the last 15 years — and it’s now disproportionately younger than other groups, explains Mark Hugo Lopez from the Pew Research Center,” Adrian Carrasquillo writes at Politico. “Nationwide, 21 percent of young eligible voters in the U.S. are Latino. But in critical Southwest states, the numbers are even greater: Latinos comprise 39 percent of all 18 to 29 year old eligible voters in Arizona and 36 percent of those young voters in Nevada, according to Pew data from 2022….Today, of the roughly 4 million new Latino voters since 2020, about 3 million are U.S.-born Latinos who have come of age and are eligible to vote in 2024….Harris must now take a Hispanic voter engagement plan built for an 81-year-old white man and retrofit it on the fly for a lesser known, 59-year-old woman of color. Control of the White House could depend on that rebuild.” Carrasquillo cites “early data showing Harris far ahead of Biden with those [younger] voters. [Pollster] Barreto showed internal polling that had Harris’ net favorability advantage over Biden at 24 points with 18 to 24 year old Latinas, plus 17 with Latino men of the same age, plus 18 with Latinas aged 25 to 29, and plus 12 with Hispanic men 25 to 29….“This is extremely important,” Barreto later explained. “Younger Hispanic men looked problematic for Biden. They don’t look problematic for Harris. They start out pretty open-minded about her….In an expansive August 14 survey of 2,183 Hispanics, the polling firm found Harris leading Trump 56 percent to 37 percent across seven battleground states. Harris’ support among Latinos under 40 was especially robust — 17 points higher than Biden.”

In his article, “Kamala Harris Has Got a Game-Changing Plan for Labor in Her Hands. As vice president, she helped devise an ambitious blueprint to advance unions. Now she just needs to make it a bigger part of her campaign” Timothy Noah writes at The New Republic: “The biggest substantive change since candidate Joe Biden stepped aside in favor of candidate Kamala Harris, at least where domestic policy is concerned, is much less discussion of labor unions. As Labor Day approaches, Harris needs to shore up her bona fides. As it happens, Harris herself has already created a plausible blueprint for organized labor’s path forward. With the hard work done, all she needs to do now is talk about it….in her speechannouncing the plan Harris did allow that “you should be able to join a union if you choose”….Walz has a stunningly good labor record as governor, especially in passing last year of a sort of mini–PRO Act, S.F. 3035, which banned captive meetings by management during union drives; required a minimum of six paid sick days for full-time employees; and banned noncompete clauses in employment contracts….no Democrat has ever won the White House without a working-class majority, going back 100 years. There is one exception: Joe Biden in 2020. But that occurred under the unusual circumstance of his opponent visibly mismanaging a deadly epidemic (a fiasco that the voting public, sadly, no longer seems to remember). As I’ve further pointed out, unions are more popular today (with approval levels of 67 to 68 percent) than at any time since the 1960s. Even affluent suburban voters support a more leftist economic agendathan anything we’ve heard from Harris….Harris created a useful blueprint on labor issues. That was the February 2022 report of the White House Task Force on Worker Organizing and Empowerment,….Harris should talk up the Federal Trade Commission’s ban on noncompete clauses in employment contracts, which a federal judge recently blocked. It’s a letter-perfect example of the Democrats’ new mantra that they, and not the GOP, are the party of freedom. Just as women should be free to decide whether to carry a pregnancy to term, men and women should be free to work wherever they choose….Madame Vice President: You’ve done a splendid job persuading Democrats not to be fearful of your opponent, but rather to embrace a more joyful (and less weird) vision of government. Please don’t let linger any fear of labor’s enemies among the donor class. You have a record on organized labor, and in large part the task force report is it. Don’t let that be a secret.” Read the whole article for more details.

As long as you are at The New Republic you might as well give a listen to Greg Sargent’s “the Daily Blast,” in which he interviews one of the sharpest Democratic strategists, James Carville, who shares his insights and hunches about the presidential election, which have a way of coming true. You can also listen to it on Spotify and Apple Podcasts.

It never ends with you know who, the convicted felon presidential candidate. Kyle Cheney and Josh Gerstein report in “Trump indicted again in election subversion case brought by Jack Smith” at Politico that “A federal grand jury in Washington, D.C. has reindicted Donald Trump on four felony charges related to his effort to subvert the 2020 presidential election….The 36-page indictment, secured Tuesday by special counsel Jack Smith, is an attempt by prosecutors to streamline the case against Trump to address the Supreme Court’s ruling last month that concluded presidents enjoy sweeping immunity from prosecution for their official conduct….The new indictment removes some specific allegations against Trump but contains the same four criminal charges, including conspiracy to defraud the United States. It’s a signal that Smith believes the high court’s immunity decision doesn’t pose a major impediment to convicting the former president.” However, “The development is unlikely to alter the reality that a trial in the case before the November election looks impossible. In fact, the new indictment could drag the case out further — defense attorneys often seek delays after prosecutors revise criminal allegations.” Further, “The new indictment seeks to rely on a distinction the Supreme Court drew between a president’s private actions (which can be the subject of criminal charges) and actions that stem from a president’s official powers (which now carry a large degree of immunity)….In addition to the election subversion case, Smith has also charged Trump in Florida with hoarding classified documents and obstructing justice. Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, dismissed that case last month — a decision that Smith is appealing….Trump also faces criminal charges in Georgia for interfering with the 2020 election results in that state. And in May, he was convicted in New York of falsifying business records to cover up a hush money payment to a porn star.” If you are thinking that increasing numbers of America’s swing voters would like to put his mess behind them, you are not alone.

The Daily Kos staff has sharable post, “Trump bores his supporters, while Harris racks up Republican endorsements,” which includes, “The list of pro-Harris Republicans just got over 200 new names.”On Monday, a group of over 200 former Republican officials endorsed Kamala Harris for president. These officials—who worked for the late Sen. John McCain, Sen. Mitt Romney, former Vice President Mike Pence, and Presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush—represent the last three Republican administrations and the two Republican presidential candidates before Trump… They all share a single message: “[R]e-electing President Trump would be a disaster for our nation.”….Despite the way some Republicans want to spin this, those endorsing Harris aren’t all junior clerks from some obscure agency. They are chiefs of staff, press secretaries, legislative directors, campaign chairs, and top advisors. They are high-ranking agency officials, U.S. attorneys, and a former director of the National Security Council…. These are people who worked closely with former Republican presidents and past candidates, all lining up to say that Trump isn’t worthy of the office.” According to their statement, “We’re heartfully calling on these friends, colleagues, neighbors, and family members to take a brave stand once more, to vote for leaders that will strive for consensus, not chaos; that will work to unite, not divide; that will make our country and our children proud. Those leaders are Vice President Kamala Harris and Gov. Tim Walz.”….In the meantime, Trump cannot muster the endorsement of his former vice president, defense secretary, chief of staff, White House national security adviser, Homeland Security adviser, or White House communications director. These are people who worked directly with Trump. They saw how he behaved in office and know how he treated the responsibility of being behind the Resolute desk. They are not supporting his attempt to return to that office.”

From “Early Voting Set to Begin in the 2024 Election: What to Know” by Aneeta Mathur-Ashton and Julia Haines at U.S. News: “Election Day is less than 80 days away, but voters in more than a dozen states will be able to vote as early as next month….In Pennsylvania, a key battleground state, voters can cast their ballots as early as Sept. 16, less than 10 days after Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump face off for a debate, the first since she took over the Democratic ticket in July. The candidates are circling a second debate, reportedly in October, that could potentially occur after early voting has begun in some states….The landscape of the race has changed dramatically in the last few weeks and voters in these states will fill out their ballots well before millions of other Americans, with other states starting early voting later in October. Some offer early voting in person, while others offer the option by way of absentee ballots.” Here’s the skinny on three possible  swing states, which have early voting dates in September: “All elections in Arizona must support early voting, including ballot-by-mail voting and in-person early voting. Early voters receive a ballot at their voting location and must not take the ballot away from the location….Voters on the Active Early Voter List can request to receive a ballot by mail. The completed ballots can be dropped off at official ballot drop-off sites or voting locations throughout the county that issued them and have to be received by 7 p.m. on Election Day, Nov. 5….The last day to register to vote in the state is Oct. 7….Voters in Pennsylvania can cast a ballot as soon as Sept. 16. Voters can pick up their ballots at county election offices and have the option of filling them out there, mailing them in or dropping them off later. The last date to apply for a mail ballot in person is Oct. 29 at 5 p.m., and the last date to drop it off is 8 p.m. on Election Day….Matt Heckel, press secretary for the Pennsylvania Department of State, says the state handles early voting differently than other states….“Once a county’s ballots are finalized and printed, a registered voter can apply for their mail ballot in person at their county election office, complete it, then submit it all in one visit,” Heckel says….Voters in the [VA] commonwealth will have the chance to cast their ballots in person and by ballot drop-off as early as Sept. 20, according to Andrea M. Gaines, external affairs manager with the Virginia Department of Elections….Voters can apply to vote by mail and, after receiving a ballot, can return it by mail, in person to a local general registrar’s office by 7 p.m. on Election Day or to a drop-off location. If returning a ballot by mail, it must be postmarked on or before Election Day and received by the office by noon on Nov. 8.”

Among the  numerous articles about the effects of RFK, Jr.’s endorsement of Trump, here’s what G. Elliott Morris and Mary Radcliffe write about it in “How much momentum will RFK Jr.’s endorsement give Trump?“at ABC News via 538: “Kennedy’s bid failed to garner enough support to contend in any state, and support for him in national polls fell by nearly half after President Joe Biden dropped out of the running to be the Democratic Party’s nominee….Our analysis of the polling data suggests Kennedy’s endorsement of Trump will have a minimal impact on the race. Kennedy, who has consistently polled around 5 percent since Vice President Kamala Harris became the presumptive nominee, was drawing roughly equally from both Trump and Harris, with that support coming from both traditionally Democratic and traditionally Republican groups. His endorsement of Trump may marginally help the Republican among white, male, and older voters. But the effect of his departure on overall support for either candidate will be small.” Morris and Radcliffe deploy a couple of wonky methods to crunch available polling and demographic numbers to reaffirm their argument that the effect will be small. But sometimes small effects swing elections.

Nebraska is not considered a swing state at the moment. But it could be consequential in the presidential election, as Ed Kilgore recently noted. Meanwhile,  Margery A. Beck of Associated Press reports that “Nebraska voters will choose between two competing abortion measures to either expand abortion rights or limit them to the current 12-week ban — a development likely to drive more voters to the polls in a state that could see one of its five electoral votes up for grabs in the hotly contested presidential race….Nebraska Secretary of State Bob Evnen announced Friday that the rival initiatives each gathered enough signatures to get on the November ballot, making Nebraska the first state to carry competing abortion amendments on the same ballot since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022….Nebraska also becomes the last of several states to put an abortion measure on the November ballot, including the swing states of Arizona and Nevada where abortion ballot measures could drive higher voter turnout. Others are Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Missouri, Montana and South Dakota. New York has a measure that supporters say will effectively guarantee access, though it doesn’t mention abortion specifically….One of the initiatives, like measures on ballots elsewhere in the U.S., would enshrine in the state constitution the right to have an abortion until viability or later to protect the health of the pregnant woman. Organizers said they submitted more than 207,000 signatures….The other measure would write into the constitution the current 12-week ban, with exceptions for rape, incest and to save the life of the pregnant woman. Organizers said they submitted more than 205,000 signatures….It’s possible voters could end up approving both measures, but because they’re competing and therefore cannot both be enshrined in the constitution, the one that gets the most “for” votes will be the one adopted, Evnen said.”

At The American Prospect David Dayen addresses an important, but largely ignored question of consequence , “Will the Senate Take Off the Handcuffs?” As Dayen writes, “In the Democratic National Convention hall, in side events in hotel ballrooms and conference centers, and on the campaign trail, lawmakers and candidates are promising big change. They have promised to codify Roe v. Wade and end the assault on reproductive rights. They have promised to end gerrymandering and voter suppression in a pair of consequential voting rights bills, the For the People Act and the John Lewis Freedom to Vote Act. They want to address affordable housing, and child care, and paid family and medical leave, and child poverty; they want to transform the tax code; and so on….To accomplish all of this, or at least to make it unencumbered by artificial constraints and rules and processes, they need to end the circumstance whereby a minority of members in the U.S. Senate get a veto over everything the chamber does. At the heart of the entire agenda that this convention’s pitch is predicated upon is the imperative to reform the filibuster….Republicans will not vote for abortion rights or voting rights; under a 60-vote Senate, those bills will fail. You could technically get tax reform and care economy investments done the way it was done in 2022 in the Inflation Reduction Act, by using budget reconciliation. But that carries with it complicated rules about spending limitations within the ten-year budget window….The only way to ensure the full agenda can be passed without constraints is by ending the filibuster….“The two folks who have been most opposed to filibuster reform are Manchin and Sinema, and both are retiring from the Senate,” said Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI), chair of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), at a pen and pad briefing on the sidelines of the DNC. The inference is that, with Manchin and Sinema out of the way, the Senate can get on with doing the people’s business….The filibuster has evolved into a constant block on progress. Democrats are promising to change the world, but will they change the Senate rules to make that happen?” All of which presupposes that Dems hold their Senate majority in November.

E, J, Dionne, Jr. explains how “Harris can seal the deal this week by being new, improved — and loyal” at The Washington Post: ““New and improved.” It’s one of marketing’s most hallowed slogans. The idea behind it is doing wonders for Vice President Kamala Harris and the Democratic Party. Hanging on to the benefits of offering a brand-spanking new choice to Americans while remaining loyal to President Joe Biden is one of Harris’s central challenges at her party’s convention this week. Getting it right will make her president….What’s remarkable is that switching candidates has also reduced Democratic vulnerabilities on issues that were working for Trump. In a poll from the Financial Times and University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business released last week, 42 percent of voters said they trusted Harris more to handle the economy, compared with 41 percent for Trump. That’s a seven-point improvement over Biden’s July numbers….So, on one of most vexing issues facing Democrats, Harris has room to level the playing field or tilt it in her favor. She’s trying to do this by offering fresh policies and emphasizing issues that had slipped from the top of Biden’s agenda — notably family leave, child care and elder care.”

Kyle Kondik reports that “North Carolina Moves to Toss-up, Setting Up November Battle for Magnificent Seven Swing States” at Sabato’s Crystal Ball: “The polling bolsters the case for North Carolina to be a Toss-up, given that the race there is basically a tie right now, and its polling is broadly in line with the other 7 states (although there is, of course, variation). The familiar 2000-2020 electoral pattern of Arizona, Georgia, and North Carolina being redder than Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin is also present in the polls. It is perhaps a little surprising to see Nevada polling among the redder group (at least in the “average of averages”), although Harris is actually slightly ahead in 2 of the 3 averages in Nevada. Regardless, Nevada is the one state on this list where we have a fair amount of experience with polls understating Democrats. On the flip side, Democratic margins were routinely and often heavily overestimated in Wisconsin polls in both 2016 and 2020, so it being the second-bluest state in these averages merits a little skepticism too….We do think Michigan is still the best candidate to be the bluest state among these in 2024 again, and North Carolina the best candidate to be the reddest, but it wouldn’t take much to change this alignment in some way. It’s not a stretch to imagine Arizona moving to the left of Nevada, given that the latter is more working-class and thus perhaps more amenable to the current GOP than historically Republican but more suburban-focused Arizona. We addressed the differences between Georgia and North Carolina above. Again, we’re skeptical North Carolina will be more Democratic than Georgia, but there’s also not a ton of daylight between the pair, currently. And all 7 of these states are close enough that we think they should be grouped together in our ratings, at least at the moment….Now that the election is getting closer and we are almost past the conventions, the polls probably should carry more weight, imperfect instruments though they are. We’ll be watching to see if Harris can maintain or build upon these polling numbers after the Democratic National Convention concludes. If so, it may be that one or more of these “Magnificent Seven,” to borrow the famous movie title, won’t be Toss-ups anymore.”

 In “The New Silent Majority that will deliver a Blue Wave” J. Nash Bowie writes at Daily Kos: “Yes, polling shows a close race. I think the polls are wrong (in terms of percentages—the trends are probably more accurate). I think there is a new Silent Majority in this country who are ready to move beyond the chaos, hostility, and division. They are young adults who don’t answer pollsters. They are suburban and rural wives who don’t want to make waves by coming out in support of Democrats but who know how important it is to elect them. It is Black and Latino voters who had tuned out over the last couple of years but who will come home in big numbers. It is disaffected Republicans who can’t stand Trump (a lot of whom voted for Nikki Haley in the primary) and who recognize the dangers of Project 2025. I strongly suspect that polling is not capturing these voters….This is not just wishful thinking or naive “unskewing”. Over the last two years, we’ve seen polling consistently miss outcomes that favor Democrats and liberalism. The last example is just a few days ago in Wisconsin when the GOP tried to slip in two constitutional amendments to disempower the Democratic governor in a petty act of revenge—polling had those amendments passing by 3-10 points and they ended up going down to defeat, one 57-43 and the other 58-42. There are dozens of examples like this, and almost none going the other way….I know that predicting a Democratic win evokes the horror of 2016 and the hand-wringing mantra, “Don’t get complacent!” (nevermind that 2024 is almost nothing like 2016). The win I’m predicting is based entirely on the expectation of hard work, a large volunteer army, smart strategy, flush campaign coffers, and high energy. And so far, this expectation is bearing out in ways far beyond my wildest dreams. As far as I can see, Democrats are the polar opposite of complacent right now.”

As a admirer of RFK and his brothers, this report, “RFK Jr. expected to drop out of race by end of week, plans to endorse Trump: Sources” at abcnews.com and many others like it at various news outlets, felt like a gut punch. The extended Kennedy family, which includes Sargent Shriver, who ran as a vice presidential candidate on McGovern’s ticket, played such a storied role in the modern Democratic Party. JFK brought a rare spirit of hope to the nation before he was assassinated. His brother and campaign manager, RFK, enhanced the party’s commitment to compassion and eloquence before he was assassinated. Teddy Kennedy was a tireless Democratic senator who led his party’s opposition under Republican presidents. All were strong, no-nonsense Democrats, leaders of vision who built bridges of hope, not walls of division. Along comes RFK, Jr. to pervert this great legacy. If he endorses Trump it will be a sad, twisted conclusion to his family’s remarkable role in history. I remember thinking as recently as a few weeks ago, ‘surely he will drop out and endorse the Democratic ticket.’  I hope he reconsiders his endorsement.

Some signs that Georgia is already confounding Trump’s electoral college strategy from “1 big thing: Trump’s devil-in-Georgia problem” by Jim Vandehei and  Mike Allen: “Polling released yesterday by the N.Y. Times and Siena College showed Harris opening up a Sun Belt route through the fast-growing, diverse states of Arizona, Georgia, Nevada and North Carolina. That gives her an alternative to the Blue Wall states of Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, which were President Biden’s only plausible path….Harris had narrowed Trump’s lead among likely voters in Georgia to 4 points (50% to 46%, with a margin of error of ±4.4 points). In the Times-Siena poll in May, Trump enjoyed a 9-point Georgia lead….Between the lines: Harris’ rise in the state is partly, but not entirely, due to Black voters, who make up one-third of the state’s electorate….Harris is a more effective messenger on reproductive rights in a state with a controversial ban on abortions after about six weeks….A top Democratic operative told us Harris “is just a much better fit than Biden for the Georgia electorate, which has younger and more Black voters. Much easier to see Stacey Abrams and [Sen. Raphael] Warnock firing up the pews” for Harris than for Biden….As The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported, Trump’s campaign and biggest aligned super PAC spent four times as much on TV ads in the Peach State in the two weeks after Harris became the presumptive Democratic nominee than in the rest of 2024 combined….Of the $37 million in ad buys the Trump campaign has placed over the next week or so, almost $24 million (65%) are in Georgia, Democratic campaign strategist Doug Sosnik points outin The New York Times….The growing urgency of Georgia can also be seen in the Trump campaign’s long-range ad buys. The Trump campaign’s share of TV spending planned in Georgia doubled from 21% in August to 43% in September and 46% in October, according to calculations for Axios by the ad-tracking firm AdImpact….Trump has placed advance ad buys for this fall in only two states. Wait for it … Pennsylvania and Georgia.”

At The New Republic Greg Sargent reports that a “Brutal New Poll for J.D. Vance Reveals a Big Trump-MAGA Weakness,” and observes regarding Vance ”

• He is viewed favorably by only 24 percent of independents, versus 39 percent unfavorably.
• He is viewed favorably by only 23 percent of self-described moderates, versus 41 percent unfavorably.
• He is viewed favorably by only 22 percent of 18- to 39-year-olds, versus 44 percent unfavorably.
• He is viewed favorably by only 32 percent of women, versus 40 percent unfavorably (interestingly, Vance fares a tad worse among men).
• He is viewed favorably by only 28 percent of Hispanics, versus 39 percent unfavorably.
• He is viewed favorably by only 9 percent of Blacks, versus 50 percent unfavorably.
• He is viewed favorably by only 32 percent of suburbanites, versus 42 percent unfavorably.
• He is viewed favorably by only 33 percent of college-educated whites, versus a striking 55 percent unfavorably.

Unsurprisingly, Vance is viewed positively by non-college whites (+9 points), rural voters (+13 points), and white evangelicals (+37 points)….To be fair, Vance has more time to improve his image, as large percentages of voters still have no opinion of him.”

Here’s an encouraging graph:

“Kamala Harris, as widely previewed, gave her first major economic address today,” Robert Kuttner writes at The American Prospect. “Two key themes were cutting housing costs and resisting corporate price-gouging of consumers. She also proposed restoring the refundable Child Tax Credit and topping it up to $6,000 a year for new parents in the first year, as a baby bonus. Take that, J.D. Vance….The toughest of these policy areas is housing. Unless the federal government spends massive sums to increase the supply of affordable housing, the cost of both rental and owner-occupied homes will continue to outstrip incomes….In the absence of a supply strategy, Harris’s proposal of a $25,000 subsidy for first-time homebuyers, though beneficial, will bid up prices. Her commitment to build three million new affordable units over four years, using a mix of tax incentives and grants to local governments for innovative approaches, is a decent start, but only a start. Two other good housing ideas that chime with her attack on predatory corporations are measures to remove the tax advantage from Wall Street speculators in housing and stopping predatory AI tactics for raising rents….Harris’s general emphasis on price-gouging is a policy area where government can make a huge constructive difference without spending large sums. It is good economics and smart politics on several counts….First, it vividly connects with the issue of inflation where ordinary people feel it. Grocery store prices have increased only slightly over the past year, but consumers remember exactly what a quart of milk or a dozen eggs cost before the supply shocks of the pandemic. In addition, supermarket profits are notably higher than before the pandemic, which means that prices should have moderated more….Second, the plan reframes the issue from whether Biden or Trump was better at containing an abstraction known as inflation to how corporate concentration opportunistically drives price hikes. The right remedy for that ill is not slowing the economy generally, as the Federal Reserve has done, but going after the root cause. This is also a useful shot across the Fed’s bow…Third, the approach recasts the struggle as ordinary people vs. predatory corporations rather than impersonal forces, with Harris in the role of champion of beleaguered consumers….There has been a lot of chatter about whether Harris is positioning herself to the left of President Biden and whether that is a good idea. Supposedly, by moving left, Harris risks alienating swing voters. But swing voters also buy groceries. The only voters whom Harris risks alienating by championing consumers are large corporations and their allies. They have few votes.”

Caitlin Jewitt and Geoffrey Skelley address a question of interest, “Will Harris’s late start help or hurt her in the general election?” at 538/abcnews.com, and write that “there is also a school of thought that long, competitive nomination contests like the 2008 Democratic primary can energize the party base, generate excitement and enthusiasm, and help the eventual candidate create campaign infrastructure across the states….Harris’s campaign, with its unusual circumstances, may still feature aspects of both a short and long nomination fight. Not unlike past nominees who secured their spots after lengthy primary campaigns, Harris has had to quickly pivot to a general election campaign relatively late in the election calendar. Yet the 2024 cycle for Democrats actually had many trappings of a short nomination battle, exemplified by the party’s efforts to rally to Biden and a lack of serious opposition to him in the primaries and even the fact that Democrats were already looking to speed up the vote to confirm Biden as the nominee when his candidacy began to come apart after his poor showing in the June 27 debate….Democrats’ moves to unify quickly behind Harris ensured that it did not result in the type of prolonged infighting sometimes characteristic of lengthier primary races. The party even set a new precedent to confirm Harris as quickly as possible — though the Democratic convention doesn’t begin until next week, Harris has already officially become the party’s nominee, by virtue of a virtual vote of delegates to nominate a candidate….This expedited timeline — prompted in part by concerns about ballot access laws in a few states, the time needed to vet a vice presidential candidate, and guarding against Republican legal challenges — also likely insulated Harris from other challengers materializing..”

Jewett and Skelley continue, “Harris’s situation differs in other key respects, too. For one thing, because she did not wage a primary campaign, she was not battered by attacks from party rivals in the ways Ford or Mondale were, which can give the other party fodder for attacks heading into the general election….She was able to raise record amounts of money in a short timeframe as her candidacy energized Democratic voters. Plus, she has been able to more easily utilize the already-existing Biden-Harris campaign infrastructure, unlike the alternative choices Democrats may have considered….Ultimately, it’s unclear if there’s a meaningful relationship between when a candidate becomes the presumptive nominee and their success in November: Out of the eight races that were settled in June or later (excluding the 2020 and 2024 races because they didn’t have protracted nomination fights), the nominee went on to win the general election in three.” I like the late winning of the nomination for a different, but related reason: Campaigns get stale. even I, a  partisan Democrat, simply got tired of hearing all about the ‘excruciating minutiae’ of campaigns. to cop a phrase from Seinfeld. There is more political news coverage now than ever before, and it is only a matter of time before your favored candidate chucks in a distracting gaffe, or some reporter magnifies a trifling incident, which has little or nothing to do with major issues and gets an insane amount of coverage (e. g. Hunter Biden). There is such a thing as too much political news, which is why a lot of voters don’t pay much attention until October. The truncated campaign also makes candidates seem fresher, while the years-long slog has the opposite effect. Democrats ought to re-design their process to take this phenomenon into consideration. Let the Republicans have long, constipated campaigns, while Democrats do quiet organizing and fund-raising behind the scenes, do localized videos instead so much travel and have our candidates lay comparatively low as much as possible until late Spring or Summer. It might also result in less wear and tear on our candidates.

The “no tax on tips” idea favored by both Trump and Harris sounds like a pro-worker idea on the surface. But is it really? Abdallah Fayyad argues against it at Vox: “….The policy doesn’t really hold up under any scrutiny. And that’s because at best, “no tax on tips” looks a lot less like a tax cut for low- and middle-income families, and a lot more like a subsidy for big businesses….“I’m not at all saying that workers won’t get anything,” said Heidi Shierholz, president of the Economic Policy Institute. “But I think that a meaningful share of the [federal] expenditures on a tax exemption like this will go to the employers of tipped workers.”….That might be why industry lobbyists have backed the proposal. “It’s not a surprise that the National Restaurant Association loves this,” Shierholz said, referring to the lobbying group that represents many of the country’s major restaurant chains….At worst, the tax policy might even put a downward pressure on service sector wages by allowing employers to keep their workers’ baseline pay low because the tax cut could instead raise the workers’ take-home pay….“I think there is no question that it would” weigh wages down, Shierholz said. The only question, she says, is just how much….So while “no tax on tips” might make for a good sound bite or campaign slogan, it doesn’t necessarily translate to wise policymaking.” That’s the nut of the strongest argument against it – that it would encourage employers to keep the hourly wages low, currently just $2.13, although a handful os states have abolished the subminimum wage for tipped workers.” (See also this WaPo editorial).  Who could fairly blame tipped workers for not reporting all their tipped income? Many people are also unaware that some foreign restaurant owners split tips with workers, a practice which is not uncommon among restaurants that hire servers from different countries. One of the political problems associated with the “no tax on tips” idea is that it may piss off other low-wage workers, like cashiers who gain nothing from the proposal. There are 3.6 million of them the U.S., one of America’s most common jobs, compared to about 2.7 million wait staff. The Democratic presidential nominee should not get distracted by Trump’s boutique ideas, and hold firm to raising the minimum wage and union membership as the best ways to improve the living standards of all American workers.

Courtenay Brown explains why the “Latest CPI report confirms inflation is easing” at Axios: “For more than two years, the economy’s big problem was inflation — it was the key irritant for policymakers, the White House and American consumers….Wednesday’s Consumer Price Index report confirms that is no longer the case: Prices are no longer rising rapidly, which means the battle to kill inflation appears all but over….Why it matters: Inflation looked to be coming down alongside a still-flourishing economy — until recently. The string of upbeat inflation data is all but certain to allow Fed officials to more comfortably shift their attention to the weakening labor market and lower interest rates….What they’re saying: “[T]he cumulative improvement in the overall inflation data over the past year now gives the Federal Reserve cover to move into risk management mode with the intent of protecting and preserving the soft landing,” Joe Brusuelas, chief economist at accounting firm RSM, wrote Wednesday….By the numbers: Overall CPI rose 2.9% in the 12 months ending in July, dropping below 3% for the first time since 2021.

• Core CPI, which excludes food and energy prices, rose 3.2% — the smallest increase in three years.
• By a different measure, inflation looks more benign. Over the last three months, core CPI rose 1.6% on an annualized basis, down from 2.1% in June….
• Grocery costs have been rising at a mild pace since February, including a 0.1% increase in July. Prices are up just 1% compared to the same time last year.
• Used vehicle costs fell 2.3% in July, a bigger drop than that seen the previous month. New vehicle prices fell 0.2%, the sixth-straight month of price decreases.

The intrigue: The bad news was in the housing sector, where prices have kept upward pressure on inflation….The shelter index is a huge component. It accounted for over 70% of core CPI’s 12-month increase through July, the government said….The sector is “solely responsible for core inflation remaining above the Fed’s 2% target,” Preston Caldwell, senior U.S. economist at Morningstar, wrote Wednesday….In the CPI report, the rent index rose 0.5%, up from 0.3%. Owner’s equivalent rent, which the government uses to account for inflation in homes that people own, rose 0.4% after slowing in June….”This is now a labor data-first Fed, not an inflation data-first Fed, and the incoming labor data will determine how aggressively the Fed pulls forward rate cuts,” economists at Evercore wrote in a note Wednesday morning.”….Yes,  many voters will continue to grumble about the high prices for meat, gas and housing. But Dems can at least be assured that they have done nearly all they can to contain inflation. They should now continue to inform the public about the good statistics under Biden-Harris and the price-gouging by agribiz and big oil through social media memes, articles and word of mouth. Those who hold fast to Trump’s doom and gloom preachments are not going to change – they are the die hard MAGA voters. Dems should focus their anti-inflation messaging on the persuadable voters in the swing counties and states. Meanwhile, pundits should give President Biden and the Democrats high marks for economic management and making the best of a tough situation.

In his syndicated column, “Harris is beating Trump by transcending him: The vice president and her running mate are achieving a radical shift in messaging,” E. J. Dionne, Jr. writes at The Washington Post: “The sudden and radical shift in the trajecto ry of the 2024 campaign owes to more than the replacement of President Joe Biden with Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic candidate. To a degree that’s still not fully appreciated, Harris has embraced an entirely new strategy: She’s not just pushing back against Donald Trump’s politics of cultural division. She’s bidding to transcend it….Choosing Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate reinforces the move away from clichés about “coastal politics” and “cultural elites.” Instead, she wants to fight on specific, practical measures government can take to improve lives, from family leave to expansions of health coverage. Both Harris and Walz are speaking a soothing and — to pick up on Democrats’ favorite virtue these days — joyful language of patriotism and national unity….You could tell the Trump campaign was thrown off by the Walz pick when the GOP’s vice-presidential candidate, JD Vance, attacked the camo-wearing, gun-owning, small-town Midwestern schoolteacher as a “San Francisco-style liberal.”….Never mind that Vance lived in the Bay Area for about four years while Minnesota’s Walz visited the place for the first time only last month. The tired misfire speaks to how dependent the GOP is on stereotypes about who “liberals” are and what “liberalism” means.” Dionne concludes, “When Harris says, “We love our country,” pay attention to those words “we” and “our.” Harris and Walz are waging war on “inflammatory symbolic politics.” And, yes, it’s a joy to watch.”

Thom Hartmann reports that “A Tsunami of Right-Wing Dark Money Is Barreling Toward Harris and Walz” at The New Republic. No, Hartmann is not implying that the Democratic ticket is going to receive any of that ‘dark money; he is warning that they and down-ballot Democratic candidates are in danger of being crushed by it. As Hartmann writes, “Get ready: Massive pools of dark right-wing money are soon going to clobber us. Will Democracy survive this onslaught by the morbidly rich?….The official beginning of the election season is still almost a month away, and the big money pledged by right-wing and neofascist billionaires hasn’t even shown up yet….While over a hundred million pissed-off women and the widespread concern that Trump and the GOP are determined to destroy the American system of government seem like a powerful force, history tells us big dark money could overcome even those substantial tailwinds.” Hartmann notes that AIPAC political contributions have been used to primary and defeat incumbent Democratic House members, and adds, “But AIPAC is a piker compared to what’s going to be coming down the road as the tech, banking, insurance, and fossil fuel billionaires and their companies weigh in to the presidential race this fall….A previous campaign by the fossil fuel industry is instructive, particularly since that industry sees Harris and Walz as enemies; Harris signed off on the largest climate legislation in world history, and Walz has required the utilities in Minnesota to be 100 percent carbon-free by 2040, a mere 16 years from now.”

Noting another lavishly funded and successful effort to defeat a modest carbon tax in Washington state, Hartmann explains, “This is the brave new world Clarence Thomas’s tie-breaking vote brought America when the Supreme Court, in its 2010 Citizens United decision, legalized both political bribery and massive intervention in elections by corporations and billionaires….Prior to Thomas’s vote on that decision, Harlan Crow—who helped finance the original Swift Boat attacks on John Kerry in 2004—and other billionaires had lavished millions on Thomas and his family….Ever since Citizens United legalized literally unlimited contributions to the new category of political action committees it created (super PACs), just in the 15 months from January 2023 to April 2024, over $8.6 billion has been raised for this year’s federal campaigns with over 65 percent of that money—$5.6 billion—running through PACs. And, as noted, they’re just getting started….So get ready. It’s going to get ugly. There’s not a competitive House or Senate race anywhere in America that’s immune from massive dark money that’s been thrown together at the last minute to remain untraceable….As Senator Elizabeth Warren noted, echoing a position held by 72 percentof American voters, “Our democracy shouldn’t be bought and paid for by the wealthy and powerful.”….If Democrats survive the onslaught that’s coming and emerge victorious at the federal level, the first order of business next year must be to strip the cancer of dark money out of our body politic.” The bottom line for all Democratic candidates is that they are going to need more contributions to survive the GOP’s well-funded ad tsunami.

Here is the new Harris-Walz campaign ad re immigration.  I think Dems need an ad with stronger emphasis on the fact that Trump and Republicans killed a solid immigration reform bill. What do you think?

Let’s hear it for joyful older white guys. That’s one of the beneficial vibes MN Gov. Tim Walz brings to the new Democratic ticket, and a lot of Americans are feeling it after his electrifying introduction to the 2024 political campaign Tuesday night.  Steven Greenhouse points out in a recent tweet that Walz is also notable as the most pro-worker governor in America. Greenhouse links to an article he wrote about Walz more than a year ago at The Guardian, which noted: “Minnesota’s Democratic governor and legislature has enacted one of the most pro-worker packages of legislation that any US state has passed in decades which includes paid family and medical leave, prohibits non-compete clauses, bars employers from holding anti-union captive audience meetings, and strengthens protections for meatpacking workers and Amazon warehouse employees….Minnesota’s new legislation mandates paid sick days, allows teachers’ unions to bargain over educator-to-student ratios and creates a statewide council to improve conditions for nursing home workers…“Paid family and medical leave is extremely popular, not only in Minnesota, but nationally as well,” [state Rep. Ruth] Richardson said. “It’s one of those issues that are incredibly bipartisan. I believe that passing paid family and medical leave is possible in blue and red trifecta states and in everything in between…Minnesota’s commissioner of labor and industry, Nicole Blissenbach, said the new laws “truly make Minnesota the best state for workers and their families”.” It is estimated that there are at present about 3.8 million teachers working in the U.S., and their incomes are roughly analogous to that of skilled and semiskilled blue collar workers. Add to that number millions of retired teachers and all the voting family members from nuclear families of teachers and former teachers, and you have a sizable occupation-related group. Walz was an extraordinary, empathetic teacher by all reports, and is also married to a teacher. Ask friends if they were influenced in some positive way by a good teacher, and watch them light up. Walz and his ticket-mate Harris are in position to become the electoral beneficiaries of those feelings.

Timothy Noah emphatically concurs with the argument that Walz is a draw for working-class voters for the Democratic Ticket. As Noah writes in “Tim Walz Is a Dream Pick for the Labor Movement: He’ll help Kamala Harris make up for lost time courting the working class” at the New Republic: “Kamala Harris entered the presidential race with a worrisome deficit of working-class support. In an average of matchups after the June 27 presidential debate, Trump led Harris among voters who did not graduate from college by 11.6 percentage points, a slightly larger margin than the 11.2 percentage points by which Trump led Biden (whose conspicuously poor debate performance was the reason for doing such polls in the first place). For a brief while it looked as though Harris might worsen her standing among working-class voters by choosing Arizona Senator Mark Kelly, whose record on labor was not good. Instead, she chose Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, who has strong working-class appeal….In 2020 President Joe Biden, with an excellent record as a friend of labor, won 56 percent of union households. Two years later, Walz, running for reelection as governor, won nearly 60 percent of union households. In 2020, Biden won 32 percent of the white working-class vote, defined conventionally as white people who lack a college degree. In 2022, Walz won 44 percent….In a July 29 letter urging Harris to choose Walz, 26 Minnesota labor leaders noted that Walz

enacted paid family and medical leave for all families, provided unemployment insurance to hourly school workers, expanded the collective bargaining rights of Minnesotans, provided free school meals to every Minnesota student, appointed a labor lawyer to lead the state Department of Labor and Industry, signed a tough law against wage theft by corporations and developers, and made it illegal for employers to force working people to attend anti-union meetings.

….Walz left Congress with a lifetime score from the AFL-CIO of 93 percent, compared to 90 percent for the average House Democrat. Harris left the Senate with a 98 percent lifetime score, which sounds better but matches the score for the average Democrat in the Senate, where labor bills get voted on less frequently.”

But after the sugar high from Tuesday night fades, there is the stark reality that Vice Presidents are more often ribbon-cutters and funeral-attenders, who occasionally cast an important tie-breaker vote in U.S. Senate deliberations. But they are also potential presidents in training, as is the case with Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris. In that context, LBJ and Harry Truman did well, when history called. The selection of vice presidential candidates also reflects on the quality of judgement of the presidential nominee. In that context, Harris looks a whole lot better than her Republican opponent, whose venture capitalist ticket-mate is most famous for condescending comments about childless women. For a metric of the success of the Harris-Walz ticket roll-out, consider that their campaign raised $36 million in contributions within 24 hours of the announcement. It is expected that they will keep raking it in during their tour of swing states, including WI, MI, NV and AZ on this leg. But no one should take reports of Democratic superiority in fund-raising over Republicans too seriously. Trump’s campaign reportedly pulled in $137 million in July. Through their network of SuperPacs and billionaire sugar-daddies, the Republicans will have enough to be competitive in ad-buys by the time early voting starts. Democrats are going to need more contributions all the way to Election Day, and donations can be made up and down the Democratic ticket right here.

At Sabato’s Crystal Ball, J. Miles Coleman notes some new electoral college rating changes, including: “….it appears that at least in the short term, Harris has reversed the slippage—or has at least been able to stop the bleeding—that Democrats have seen since the Biden-Trump debate in June. Looking nationally, Harris currently leads in all national polling aggregators….Before this week, one of the more recent changes we made to our Electoral College ratings was when we downgraded Democrats’ prospects in Walz’s Minnesota. Our reasoning was that the Gopher State was just not that much bluer than Michigan, a state we simultaneously moved in the Toss-up column. But some recent Fox News polling was telling: while Harris was tied with Trump in Michigan, her 52%-46% lead over Trump in Minnesota was close to what Biden carried the state by in 2020. Shortly after that Fox poll came out, a KSTP/SurveyUSA poll gave Harris an even more comfortable 50%-40% lead in Minnesota. So, from what we can tell, while Michigan (along with Pennsylvania and Wisconsin) remain on a knife’s edge, Minnesota is true to its usual form, as a state that typically leans a few points bluer than the nation as a whole….Though we wrote last week that vice presidential candidates, on average, deliver only marginal home state boosts, we feel that Walz’s placement on the Democratic ticket, combined with recent polling, provides more than enough justification to move the state into a firmer rating category. We are moving Minnesota from Leans Democratic to Likely Democratic….Harris is somewhat unproven in the Midwest, one of the upsides of her candidacy, at least so far, is that she’s seemed to re-open Democrats’ Sun Belt path. While Biden had basically been stuck in the low-40s in Georgia for at least the last few months of his campaign, Harris’s numbers have typically been higher and she has run close to Trump in recent surveys. For his part, Trump has, at minimum, likely not helped his standing in Georgia by re-airing some of his long-running grievances against two of his favorite intraparty foils: Gov. Brian Kemp (R) and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R), both of whom are broadly popular in the state. So, with all this, we feel that Georgia is more of a legitimately competitive state than it was prior to Biden’s departure—we are moving it back into the Toss-up column from Leans Republican. Here is the latest Crystal Ball map of the current electoral vote leanings:

I hope you tuned in to the Harris-Walz Rally in Philly, and saw the barn-burner speeches by Governor Shapiro, Democratic presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris and vice presidential candidate Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota. In the euphoric aftermath of the rally, however, please focus your attention on what the Republicans are up to, because it merits attention. The following article, “A red flashing light at the dumpster fire” by Tom Baxter cross-posted from  Saporta Report explains it well:

It can be hard to sort out what’s news in the middle of a dumpster fire.

There were a lot of storylines stemming from former President Donald Trump’s Atlanta rally Saturday, beginning with Trump’s bitter attack on Gov. Brian Kemp, his congratulating Vladimir Putin for last week’s prisoner swap, his swipes at Georgia State University, and somewhere in there, his shots at Vice President Kamala Harris.

But in the midst of all this clickbait, something really serious happened, and it hasn’t received the attention it deserves. Trump publicly recognized three members of the State Election Board, who were sitting right in front of the speaker’s podium.

“They’re on fire. They’re doing a great job,” Trump said to cheers from the audience. He said the three board members, Janice Johnston, Rick Jeffares and Janelle King, were “all pitbulls, fighting for honesty, transparency and integrity.”

The first line in the election board’s code of conduct states that members “shall be honest, fair, and avoid any appearance of conflict and/or impropriety.” If sitting on the front row of a major rally basking in praise from a presidential candidate doesn’t look conflicted and improper for an election board member, what does?

Here is why this is a much, much more important story than the crowd size at a couple of rallies or a self-defeating spat over the last election.

Four years ago, the election board was chaired by Secretary Of State Brad Raffensperger. The legislature stripped that job from him because he wouldn’t contradict the outcome of three recounts and “find” the votes Trump asked him for. All five current members — appointed by the governor, the House, the Senate and the Democratic and Republican parties respectively — joined the board after the 2020 election.

That puts a majority of the board — Johnston, the Republican Party appointee; Jeffares, the Senate appointee; and King, the House appointee — in the hands of people who have questioned the thrice-recounted results of the last election, and implicitly Raffensperger’s conduct. Already, because of their votes, the election board has been warned by the attorney general’s office about running afoul of the open records law and sued by a citizen’s group, causing it to walk back a controversial action.

This doesn’t appear to be just a small part of Trump’s strategy for winning Georgia. On the contrary, after his speech Saturday it looks like most of it. For all the talk there’s been about the Trump campaign losing no time in defining Harris, the candidate didn’t seem too focused on that Saturday. He mispronounced “Fani” more than he did “Kamala,” which is one indication where his mind was wandering.

If Trump had been narrowly focused on getting the most votes in Georgia this November, he wouldn’t have veered into a lengthy attack on Kemp, who has what is hands-down the best voter turnout operation in the state.

A word, incidentally, about Trump’s seemingly gratuitous swipe at Marty Kemp. For a few months there’s been a rumor, not substantial enough to make much of, that the Kemp camp was taking a look at how the state’s first lady might fare if she rather than her husband challenged U.S. Sen. John Ossoff.

Could Trump have gotten wind of the same rumor? Anything’s possible, when you’re getting advice about Georgia politics from Bill White, the former New Yorker and current Floridian who headed the failed Buckhead City movement. According to Greg Bluestein of the AJC, White, who held sway briefly in Atlanta as a sort of Northside Nigel Farage, was among those who got Trump stirred up about Kemp before the speech.

In a statement published Monday, the Georgia League of Women Voters, not exactly a fiercely partisan group, voiced its frustrations with the board over the new rules it wants to impose.

“Our State Election Board, the very body empowered to back up that guarantee (of fair elections) with rules and procedures, now seems bent on undermining it. Over-complicating an already complicated process does nothing but introduce potential failure points. Making it harder does not make it better,” the statement said.

Also, two Republicans, former U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss and former Gov. Nathan Deal, and two Democrats, former Gov. Roy Barnes and former Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin, have formed the Democracy Defense Project, part of a national effort to restore trust in the election process.

Saturday’s rally was a flashing light warning that these efforts haven’t come a minute too soon.

If there are similar improprieties going on in other swing states, now would be a good time for investigative reporters to expose them.

From “Trump seems to forget it’s not 2016 anymore. And he’s frustrated” by E. J. Dionne, Jr. at The Washington Post: “Enter Harris, 59, who instantly flipped the age issue against Trump. His often-disjointed screeds suddenly felt like the ravings of a grumpy old man, not entertaining breaks from politician-speak. Trump had always fed on the energy of his crowds. “Low energy” is a favorite Trump epithet against his foes. Now Harris has the energy, and her audiences seem positively rapturous….Harris was not afraid to put aside a decorousness that came naturally to Biden, first elected to the Senate in 1972. She has gone after Trump hard, thrilling her crowds even more. “I know Donald Trump’s type”became a T-shirt-worthy battle cry for Democrats weary of feeling like punching bags. Worst of all, from Trump’s point of view, Harris shoved him out of the lead spot in the campaign news. She was new, and her identity as a biracial woman excited many constituencies, especially younger voters who had been checking out of politics before her arrival….But here is why 2024 may be Trump’s undoing: We have been here for nine long years. When Trump went after Hillary Clinton in 2016, the media didn’t know what to do with him, and Democrats did not know how to respond. Journalists debated for years over whether Trump’s lies should, in fact, be called lies. (Pretty much all outlets finally decided a lie is a lie.) In 2016, Democrats underestimated Trump right to the end. There’s none of that now….Trump’s act has grown tired and often boring, as his Republican convention speech showed….Trump and the media will make a big mistake by fighting and covering the last war.”

Some nuggets from “Kamala Harris must lean in: The left doesn’t have to pick between woke and working class” by Michele Lamont at Salon: “Conservatives have already begun attacking Vice President Kamala Harris as an unqualified “DEI hire,” language that evokes the broader right-wing narrative that the left has become too “woke” and no longer represents the average American. With Harris’ ascension to presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, many political commentators have expressed fear that voters may buy into the idea that liberals have, indeed, become too woke to connect with voters in the swing states needed to secure an Electoral College victory. But this election doesn’t have to be a clash of the “woke” versus the working class, and liberals don’t have to sacrifice one to win over the other….Americans without a college degree have steadily moved to the right in recent decades, resulting in a diploma divide where political views are largely split along educational lines. In 2021, progressive groups surveyed working-class voters in five swing states and concluded that “‘woke,’ activist-inspired rhetoric is a liability” to winning them over – a perspective echoed by other recent analyses….Our media praises entrepreneurs for disrupting the status quo and CEOs for creating jobs. For a fleeting moment during the Covid-19 pandemic, essential workers were celebrated, but that quickly faded. Working-class people were back to feeling invisible and undervalued….Unions have traditionally been the biggest source of working-class dignity. They’ve also been a reliable supply of left-leaning voters. With unions on the decline for decades in the U.S. (the rate of union membership among workers is half what it was in the 1980s), it is high time for the left to forcefully refocus on shared dignity as an electoral strategy….Liberals should use their movement-building magic – and the Gen Z passion for social justice – to build a movement that prioritizes the humanity of all people, including the working class.” Lamont goes on to discuss “four strategies hey can take from past successes,” and you can read about them right here. Lamont concludes, “Progressives know how to stand up for the dignity and respect of different groups and create a big tent where everyone feels valued. It’s time to do that for the working class.”

Wondering about the future of health care under the different presidential candidates? Then read “Obamacare is stronger than ever. Trump and Vance vow to kill it” by Joan McCarter at Daily Kos. As McCarter writes, “Republicans will never stop trying to destroy the legacy of our first Black president. Despite a decade of failure in repealing the Affordable Care Act, and the fact that the law is stronger than ever, gutting it still looms large in their aspirations. And this week, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, Donald Trump’s running mate, is banging the repeal-and-replace drum….“Well, I think we’re definitely gonna have to fix the health care problem in this country,” Vance told the news outlet NOTUS this week. “The problem with Obamacare is that for a lot of people, it just doesn’t provide high-quality health care, right? So you have a lot of people paying out the ass, paying very high prices for health care that isn’t high quality.”….As a matter of fact, premium costs for people with subsidized ACA plans have decreased 44%, or $705 per year, according to a recent analysis by KFF, a nonpartisan organization focused on health policy. That’s 21.4 million people with Obamacare plans who have enjoyed those lower costs thanks to President Joe Biden and the Democratic Congress that increased those subsidies….While Trump kept up the fiction that he was working on a plan to replace the ACA, that plan never materialized. On top of that, his Department of Justice was arguing before the Supreme Court, trying to get them to overturn the law—and yes, that included ripping coverage away from people with preexisting conditions….In this election cycle, Trump has regularly talked about getting rid of Obamacare, even though Republican lawmakers want him to stop talking about it. (Again, the law is popular.) While he might not find much congressional support to repeal the law, that doesn’t mean the ACA would be safe in Trump’s hands if he wins this November….When he couldn’t repeal it during his administration, he did everything he could to sabotage it through executive actions. Biden had to undo that damage, and it worked—there are more people enrolled in its plans than ever before. But that doesn’t mean it’s safe.” McCarter concludes, “There are still necessary improvements to the ACA, and to the health care system in general, but who would you trust to oversee that?”

By now, no one should be too surprised by the information contained in the headline “Half of Trump’s former Cabinet secretaries haven’t backed his 2024 bid: During Donald Trump’s term, 42 people served in his Cabinet. Nearly half of them haven’t endorsed his 2024 candidacy. There’s no precedent for this” by Steve Benen at MaddowBlog. As Benen explains, “Imagine you were an employer looking to hire someone for your workplace team. You’ve collected some résumé, but to help make a decision, you decide it’s best to check with applicants’ references. After all, to get a sense of how someone would perform on the job, it makes sense to ask those who’ve worked with him/her in the recent past….Then imagine you reach out to an applicant’s former colleagues, and when you ask whether they’d extend their support, nearly half of them hesitate. In fact, some are quite explicit in warning you not to hire the applicant….Would you hire the person anyway?” Probably not, is my guess. Benen adds, “By the Post’s count, 42 people, at some point between January 2017 and January 2021, served in Trump’s Cabinet. Based on the latest tally, 24 of them — roughly 57% — are publicly supporting their former boss’s ongoing candidacy.”….The rest either won’t take a position or have declared publicly that they won’t support the Republican Party’s 2024 nominee….this is an exceedingly tough dynamic for Republicans to defend. Indeed, one of the reasons I’ve been preoccupied with this angle for quite a while is because it simply has never happened before: Presidents have been known to clash from time to time with individual members of their administrations, but Trump is unique in facing so much opposition from his own team.”….As ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos recently summarized during an appearance on MSNBC, “His secretary of state called him a ‘moron.’ [Former Defense Secretary James] Mattis says he doesn’t even respect the Constitution. John Kelly says he’s the worst person he ever met. Think about that applying to any other president of the United States at any other time….“Their chief of staff, their defense secretary, their secretary of state, their national security adviser are the ones who had the most damning judgments of his competence and character. That is chilling.” Thoughtful swing voters, moderates and Independents ought to give this reality due consideration. This election is not only about defending democracy; it is also about avoiding global catastrophe.