Democrats are getting confident

There is some good news for Hillary Clinton

Trump is attempting to moderate his image, attempting to show he isn't crazy or a racist.   He is doing a classic swift boat attack strategy on Hillary Clinton: attacking her for being guilty of those exact presumed weak spots of his own.  He is saying she is the crazy one: "unhinged."   She is the racist one: "You're a bigot."

Meanwhile, Trump created muddle on the immigration issue and so far the Trump reset is not working well for him.   Trump is attempting to appeal to two groups.   Trump had identified and nurtured the anti-immigration sentiment among Republicans.   His argument was not simply economic.  It was also racial/ethnic/cultural, and he slammed the other Republican candidates for attempting to be less than resolute in excising this economic and cultural enemy of white native born Americans.  Trump was their champion.  But in attempting to win back traditionally Republican voters who do not want to be identified as racist he is suggesting compromise and "working with" these longstanding residents in good behavior.

"Betrayal."  That is how some of Trump's best supporters define the reset.  Early GOP candidate victims of Trump's no-compromise position are pointing this out as the very policies they advanced in the beginning.   Trump taught Republican voters that they could demand mass deportation because it was both practical and morally correct.  They chose Trump over Jeb or Rubio or Graham because of that policy.  Trump created a political monster: an intransigent minority voting bloc.

Worse, in attempting to appeal to both intransigents and moderates he created confusion and muddle, which is coinciding in time with campaign errors that may keep Trump off the Minnesota ballot.  It send a message of managerial incompetence which directly undermines the Trump brand of can-do business efficiency.

Things are looking good for Hillary.   Democratic voters have been going to Real Clear Politics and Five Thirty Eight to give themselves a jolt of comfort and joy.   Hillary is ahead in the polls nationally and in plenty of swing states.  She has a firewall.  Hillary will win this.

(Of course, Republicans have their refuge.  Republicans who like Trump--or at least who hate Hillary--have talk radio and Fox News to assure them that Hillary's campaign is imploding, that she will probably be imprisoned shortly, and that Trump's multitudes of supporters won't talk to pollsters because they dare not voice aloud that they really agree with Trump.  Trump is actually ahead.  Trump will win this.)

I append below a letter I received from an Oregon elected official who prefers to stay anonymous.   I consider his reflections a primary source: observations and opinions from a person who lives in a happy bubble of progressive politics in a liberal college town, where "diversity" is considered a good thing, where Sanders is considered a centrist and Hillary a corporate conservative sellout.  

Democrats are counting their chickens.   

Guest Post observations from a progressive, surveying the happy results of a solid Hillary Clinton victory:

Although Peter Sage is still saying “Trump could win this election,” many news outlets apparently believe that it is in the bag for Hillary.  The New York Times is heavy on political forecasting.  On Wednesday, “the Upshot” predicted that the Democrats have a 60% chance of retaking the Senate.  New York Times article

In the same piece, "The Gray Lady" puts the The Donald’s chance of winning the Presidency at only 11%.  With those odds, all the speculation by political prognosticators should shift to “down ballot” races. 

Senate Dems are defending only 10 races this season, while Republicans have to defend 24, so on those numbers alone, without any polling, Dems would be expected to do well.  The bottom line is links back to 2010, when seven GOP Senators were elected to liberal leaning states, including Wisconsin, Illinois, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Missouri, and Ohio.  The Times calls 2010 a “wave” election.

What are the chances the Dems would retake the House?  Slim.  Dems would have to win 30 seats.  The Times says 36 Republican House seats are tossups or leaning Republican.  Even with a Clinton Electoral College landslide, the Republican seats are on enough of high ground to withstand any breaking “wave.”  

Who will head the Democratic controlled Senate?  Harry Reid is retiring.  Some say Patty Murray of Washington or Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. Others say Charles Schumer of New York, who has been endorsed by Reid, has the inside track.  Schumer currently holds the No. 3 position in Senate Democrat leadership.  That Murray and Warren are being considered points out that gender will play a big role in 2016 (huuge?).  Many women are eager for the first chance in history to vote for a woman president.  Hillary polls less well with older, white male, Trump’s core strength.

In my community a woman is running for State Senate, which would be her first elected office.  Although her opponent will be a Republican male with elected experience as a Mayor of a small liberal town, my money is on the woman.  My bet is that the Person of the Year for 2016 will be a woman, and that this will translate to down ballot local races.

What about the third branch of government, the Supreme Court?  With the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, the Court is currently equally split 4-4 on conservative/liberal ideological lines.  Some speculate that if Hillary wins, expect that Merrick Garland, Obama’s middle of the road nomination, will be approved by the lame duck Congress, which might fear a more liberal nominee will be put forward by Clinton.  As Trump’s fortunes sink, Garland’s tide rises.

 

Many also consider the ability of candidates to appoint future Justices when considering their vote for President.  Ruth Bader Ginsburg (“the Notorious RBG,” in some circles) is 83.  

Kennedy (80) and Breyer (78), also on the liberal wing, are older than, or at, the average age at which Justices retire, 78. 

There is a good possibility that President Clinton II will be able to influence the direction of the Court for years to come by appointing three Justices, perhaps in her first term.  Clinton’s potential picks include several women and people of color. 

With a 5-4 majority of liberal Justices on the Supreme Court, and Senator Bernie Sanders attempting to maintain his progressive movement with “Our Revolution,” it is likely that the future holds more liberal policy choices than the past.