Search This Blog

Divided We Stand

Divided We Stand
New book about the 2020 election.

Thursday, October 3, 2024

Harris Campaign Organization


Michael Scherer at WP:
Shortly after Kamala Harris took control of Joe Biden’s campaign, her top advisers began holding senior staff meetings unlike any that had happened before.

New strategists appeared on Zoom calls with the Wilmington brass, and a transformed decision-making process took over. The competing power centers that had defined Biden’s world — a headquarters staff, a White House operation and a coterie of Biden loyalists who operated with one foot outside both structures — had been flattened into a single high council, reporting to a single boss, campaign chair Jen O’Malley Dillon, who spoke most days with the candidate.

Harris blessed the unified structure, giving O’Malley Dillon the power to hire and direct a new layer of top talent from Barack Obama’s and Hillary Clinton’s campaigns for president. The vice president also gave marching orders: I don’t care where you are coming from, she told the new team, according to a person familiar with the statements. We don’t have time for drama. We will just do what we need to do.
Tyler Pager at WP:
As former congresswoman Liz Cheney repeatedly and publicly spoke out over the last year about the dangers of a potential return to the White House by former president Donald Trump, Jen O’Malley Dillon, chair of the then-Biden campaign, quietly reached out to her.

Over multiple phone calls, she conveyed to Cheney, a Wyoming Republican and staunch conservative, how much the Biden campaign appreciated her comments and tried to gauge whether she would be open to publicly supporting the Democratic nominee. Then Vice President Kamala Harris rose to the top of the ticket and the campaign leadership felt an endorsement was within reach, so Harris called Cheney herself.
As former congresswoman Liz Cheney repeatedly and publicly spoke out over the last year about the dangers of a potential return to the White House by former president Donald Trump, Jen O’Malley Dillon, chair of the then-Biden campaign, quietly reached out to her.

Over multiple phone calls, she conveyed to Cheney, a Wyoming Republican and staunch conservative, how much the Biden campaign appreciated her comments and tried to gauge whether she would be open to publicly supporting the Democratic nominee. Then Vice President Kamala Harris rose to the top of the ticket and the campaign leadership felt an endorsement was within reach, so Harris called Cheney herself.
And there was a bonus for the Harris team: Two days later, Cheney announced that her father, former vice president Dick Cheney, would also be voting for Harris.

...

O’Malley Dillon has worked to cultivate relationships with Republicans like former congressman Adam Kinzinger (Ill.), a vocal Trump critic who has endorsed Harris. The Harris campaign has hired Austin Weatherford, Kinzinger’s former chief of staff, as its national director for Republican engagement, tasked with coordinating outreach and engagement with conservatives.

“The Harris-Walz campaign has been putting Republicans front and center in our GOP outreach to explain, in their own words, why they are putting country first and supporting Vice President Harris,” Weatherford said in a statement. “Those Republican voices are critical to create a permission structure that allows conservative-leaning voters to feel more comfortable voting for a Democrat for president.”





 

Wednesday, October 2, 2024

Veep Debate

Our most recent book is titled Divided We Stand: The 2020 Elections and American Politics. Among other things, it discusses the state of the partiesThe state of the GOP is not good.  And neither is the selection of J.D. Vance as its vice presidential candidate. -- despite a slick performance in his debate with Walz.

Sean Craig at The Daily Beast:

Fox & Friends host Steve Doocy couldn’t help but let his voice slip up a quarter of an octave as he read out the results of a Politico/Focaldata snap poll that showed likely voters were split 50/50 over who won Tuesday’s debate between vice presidential candidates JD Vance and Tim Walz.

Republican commentators and MAGA spectators alike rejoiced Tuesday evening after Vance submitted a polished performance, seemingly expecting a public groundswell of support would emerge for former president Donald Trump's running mate.

...

“Politico just published a snap poll… people found it a tie, a 50/50 tie,” he said, his voice trending high and befuddled. Even worse for the onetime Jimmy Carter supporter turned Republican Trump voter was that Walz appeared to clean up with independents.



Andrew Prokop et al. at Vox:

The vice presidential debate between Tim Walz and JD Vance on Tuesday was something of a stalemate, though it did feature several striking moments and offered an interesting preview into what presidential politics might look like once Donald Trump is off the stage.

It isn’t clear yet how genuinely undecided voters responded to the debate — a CBS poll afterward showed 42 percent of debate watchers thought Vance won and 41 percent thought Walz did, while 17 percent thought it was a tie. A CNN poll showed 51 percent thought Vance won and 49 percent thought Walz did (CNN didn’t offer the “tie” option).

Scored purely on affect and debating technique — without regard to factual accuracy — Vance did a bit better. He stuck to his two-pronged strategy: first, to blame Kamala Harris for everything voters don’t like that has happened under the Biden administration; and second, to put a reasonable-seeming face on Trumpism.

In doing so, though, Vance said many misleading or totally untrue things, such as that Donald Trump saved Obamacare, that immigrants caused the US housing crisis, and that Trump was merely peacefully discussing “problems” with the 2020 election rather than blatantly trying to steal that election from the rightful winner, Joe Biden.

Walz’s performance was rockier, and while he had his moments — he spoke effectively about health care, abortion, and Trump’s threat to democracy — his answers were less disciplined and more scattershot. He seemed flatfooted by a question regarding his past, reportedly untrue claims to have been in Hong Kong at the time of the Tiananmen Square crackdown in 1989 – not exactly the most important and pressing issue of the day, but something he probably should have prepared a better answer for.

So, on points, Vance may have won by a nose. But he did so in a way that is unlikely to matter very much, if at all, for the presidential contest. In general, vice presidential debates very rarely impact the polls. And this particular debate lacked any breakout moment likely to dominate headlines for days in what’s become a very crowded October news environment (Middle East escalation, Hurricane Helene, the port strike).

Tuesday, October 1, 2024

Trump and Vance

Our most recent book is titled Divided We Stand: The 2020 Elections and American Politics. Among other things, it discusses the state of the partiesThe state of the GOP is not good.  And neither is the selection of J.D. Vance as its vice presidential candidate.  (Dem oppo folks are doing well.)

Peter Jamison at WP:
Vice-presidential nominee JD Vance has a go-to explanation for his evolution from outspoken critic to impassioned defender of Donald Trump: He says he was converted by Trump’s achievements in the White House.

Vance has said watching the former president enact his populist agenda for left-behind Americans transformed him from a “Never Trump” conservative in 2016 to a Trump supporter in 2020.

But Vance privately expressed a very different verdict on Trump as the former president’s first term was nearing its end, previously unreported messages obtained by The Washington Post show.

In the direct messages — sent during Trump’s final year in office to an acquaintance over the social media platform then known as Twitter — Vance harshly criticized his future running mate’s record of governance and said Trump had not fulfilled his economic agenda.
“Trump has just so thoroughly failed to deliver on his economic populism (excepting a disjointed China policy),” Vance wrote in February 2020.



Anthony Scaramucci on the Trump-Vance relationship: