[ad_1]
Hey, need money for food? Don‘t sweat it, it’s getting held up for a good reason. WaPo:
In unprecedented move, Treasury orders Trump’s name printed on stimulus checks
The unprecedented decision, finalized late Monday, means that when recipients open the $1,200 paper checks the IRS is scheduled to begin sending to 70 million Americans in coming days, “President Donald J. Trump” will appear on the left side of the payment.
It will be the first time a president’s name appears on an IRS disbursement, whether a routine refund or one of the handful of checks the government has issued to taxpayers in recent decades either to stimulate a down economy or share the dividends of a strong one.
Because, don’t you see, the entire pandemic is about him. And if you think holding up the money isn’t as politically important as having Trump’s name on the check, and that all the showmanship will work, I have a judgeship in WI to sell you on.
Speaking of targets, Trump is running out of them. He’s afraid of China, so he thinks attacking WHO will work (NY Times).
The governors (see the entire thread):
That’s how it is done.
The Speaker (see the entire thread):
That’s how it is done.
That’s how it’s done.
PS:
We have an election to win and yes, your life may depend on it.
Parker Malloy/Media Matters:
By reframing Trump’s incoherent, inaccurate ramblings as bland political copy, journalists are carrying water for the president
Reality TV journalism for a reality TV president doesn’t cut it
ournalists are much like the Apprentice producers who weeded through 300 hours of footage before deciding which clips would be used to make an hour of television. No matter the subject, reporters and editors are forced to condense large events into short, digestible articles and segments. In many cases, this is fine. Not every question asked during a press conference will be relevant to a reporter’s story, and not every word that escapes the president’s mouth needs to make it into print. The problem with how this type of editing applies to Trump is that, whether they intend to or not, journalists often end up creating the impression of a more palatable version of the president than actually exists.
And this approach is far from limited to Trump’s response to COVID-19; mainstream media have portrayed Trump as a thoroughly normal leader throughout his presidency. In August, a man shot and killed 22 people inside an El Paso, TX, Walmart. The shooter’s manifesto showed that he was inspired by the white supremacist “great replacement” conspiracy theory and that he carried out the murder as a way to fight back against what he called the “Hispanic invasion,” echoing rhetoric frequently pushed by far-right media outlets. In response to the shooting, Trump placed blame on “mental illness and hate” and read a statement off of a teleprompter to say “our nation must condemn racism, bigotry, and white supremacy.”
On the heels of an AZ poll with Biden +9:
Upset Victory in Wisconsin Supreme Court Race Gives Democrats a Lift
A liberal challenger’s surprise triumph over a Trump-backed incumbent demonstrated strong turnout and vote-by-mail efforts for the Democrats in a key general election state.
Wisconsin’s map on Monday night looked like a dream general election result for former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., the presumptive Democratic nominee — stronger than typical for Democrats in the suburbs and a respectable showing among the state’s blue-collar white voters in rural counties. But officials from both parties cautioned against overinterpreting the Supreme Court results, given the bizarre circumstances surrounding the high court race.
The challenger for the court seat, Jill Karofsky, ousted the conservative incumbent, Justice Daniel Kelly, in a contest with broad potential implications for voting rights in Wisconsin’s November general election. Justice Kelly became just the second incumbent State Supreme Court justice to be ousted at the polls since 1967. President Trump had boasted that his endorsement of Justice Kelly had unnerved Democrats in the state.
Charlie Sykes/Bulwark:
What Happens in Wisconsin May Not Stay in Wisconsin
Are Republicans sick and tired of all the #winning yet?
State Republicans wagered that the horrifically bad optics would be worth it, if they could just save Kelly’s seat.
They failed in spectacular fashion.
When they finally got around to counting the votes from last week’s pandemic election, Kelly’s liberal challenger Jill Karofsky beat him by more than 10 percentage points—which translates to more than 120,000 votes. It was a blowout in a state that has become notorious for its close elections. Despite their efforts to make voting as difficult as possible, Republicans were overwhelmed by a tsunami of mail-in votes.
Although state court races in Wisconsin are technically non-partisan, races for the high court have become nakedly red-versus-blue affairs. As I wrote last week in Politico: “It’s hard to overstate the degree to which the fight over control of the state Supreme Court has become a partisan and cultural flashpoint in Wisconsin, as the campaigns have become increasingly contentious, polarized and expensive. In some respects, the scorched-earth fights over the Wisconsin bench presaged the most vitriolic battles at the federal level…”
Adding an extra fillip of toxicity to this year’s race was the Trumpfication of the contest. Trump repeatedly tweeted his support for the “non-partisan” incumbent.
Nate Cohn/Upshot:
Why Biden’s Polling Lead vs. Trump Isn’t as Solid as It Looks
Consider two important measurement differences: battleground states versus other states, and registered voters versus likely voters.
Even under ordinary circumstances, with seven months to go until the election, there would be plenty of time for the race to change. This cycle, the country also faces a pandemic and a severe economic downturn with the potential to upend the race.
Still, the point of the story is that Biden does, in fact have a lead. But at least the quoted part allows for the possibility that it might get worse for Trump. And it might.
Edward H. Kaplan and Dr. Howard P. Forman/USA Today:
End the coronavirus outbreak with aggressive screening to find and isolate infected people
We have just a few weeks to plan for our best and possibly only way to stop this pandemic before it destroys our economy and health care system.
A different public health goal is to learn the actual prevalence of infection — the fraction of the population that is infected and where they are — to help steer the targeted screening suggestions above. Learning the prevalence of an infection normally calls for random sampling in a community to ensure representative coverage, and thus seemingly conflicts with the goal of finding as many infected persons as possible. Yet these two approaches need not conflict, and indeed with just a little additional information gathering, targeted screening can complement learning community prevalence.
Here’s something happy:
