Tuesday, May 3, 2016

Hillary News & Views 5.3: Maddow, Math, and Money, Indiana Benchmarks, Policy: Coal Country


Today’s Hillary News & Views begins with coverage of yesterday’s news on the delegate math and fundraising fronts, starting with Rachel Maddow’s takedown of the “contested convention” nonsense.

Blue Nation Review has the clip:
This aggressive strategy is extremely counterproductive to the Democratic Party — and consequently to the progressive cause.
Rachel Maddow is having none of it, calling the Sanders strategy “fantastical” and “radical.”
Daily News Bin has more:
With Hillary Clinton on a certain path to win more than fifty percent of the total delegates ahead of the convention based on the remaining proportional delegates she’ll pick up alone, she’ll mathematically clinch the nomination in late May or early June. Bernie Sanders and his campaign are making the claim that it won’t count because the superdelegates could theoretically all flip to him at the convention, and therefore he’s going to be able to “contest” the convention. But that’s not how anything works, and now even Maddow – who is often excited by the idea of political dramatics – is writing it off.
Maddow, in an overly skeptical tone, pointed out that Bernie Sanders can’t realistically come close to catching up in the delegate count. She referred to his threat of a contested convention as “fantastical” and then she went on to explain that the word doesn’t have the same definition as “fantastic.” So what’s the definition of fantastical? It’s described in the dictionary as being akin to words like imaginary, groundless, impractical and outlandish.
After writing off the Bernie Sanders contested convention threat as fantasy, Rachel Maddow appeared to be aware that she was telling a portion of her audience something they strongly didn’t want to hear. She quipped “Please send your hatemail to…” before rattling off her own email address.

Sanders’ fantastical push to contest the convention and claim that Clinton can’t secure the nomination before then is being ripped to shreds, and rightfully so.

NBC News reports:
In the Democratic race, Bernie Sanders on Sunday vowed that there would be a contested convention in Philadelphia, NBC's Danny Freeman writes. "It is virtually impossible for Secretary Clinton to reach a majority of convention delegates by June 14 with pledged delegates alone," Sanders said at a news conference at the National Press Club. "In other words, the convention will be a contested contest." But here are some important facts to consider:
  • The Democratic nomination isn't determined by just pledged delegates; a candidate becomes the presumptive nominee when he or she crosses the 2,383 magic number consisting of both pledged delegates and superdelegates.
  • In 2008, Barack Obama crossed the magic number with considerable help from superdelegates. And with superdelegates representing 20% of all delegates back then (it's now 15%), Obama certainly didn't have a majority with just pledged delegates alone in that very tight '08 race.
  • But if you want to reduce the Dem race to *just* pledged delegates, Clinton's current delegate lead is THREE TIMES the size of Obama's in 2008 (when it hovered around 100).
And in terms of overall delegates, Clinton holds a 22-point lead over Sanders -- with Clinton at 61% of all delegates and with Sanders at 39%. Sanders has scored some impressive victories this election season. And his performance has been one of 2016's best stories. But folks, the Democratic race isn't close, especially when you consider the party's proportional delegate-allocation system. Here's the current Democratic delegate math:
In pledged delegates, Clinton currently holds a lead of 321 delegates with Washington delegates to still be allocated
  • Clinton 1,641 (55%)
  • Sanders 1,320 (45%)
Clinton must win 35% of remaining pledged delegates to get a majority in pledged delegates
Sanders must win 65% of remaining pledged delegates to get a majority in pledged delegates
In overall delegates (pledged + super), Clinton holds an overall lead of 790 delegates
Clinton must win 19% of remaining delegates to reach 2,383 magic number
Sanders must win 81% of remaining delegates to reach 2,383 magic number
Washington Post reports:
Bernie Sanders has now threatened perhaps more directly than ever before to take the Dem nominating contest all the way to the floor of the convention in Philadelphia in July, arguing that while this may be a real long shot, he can still win the nomination by flipping super-delegates to his side. If Sanders wins in Indiana tomorrow, he’ll likely renew that threat with even more gusto.
But even if you look at the math precisely the way Sanders is asking us to — and unquestioningly grant him the mathematical concessions he is requesting — he is still all but certain not to win the nomination.
Per figures supplied by the DNC, if you give Sanders all of the super-delegates in all of the states he has won so far, the total is around 150. If you give Clinton all of the super-delegates in all the states she won, the total is around 375. If, for good measure, you were to also give Sanders all of the super-delegates in Indiana and in California (both of which Sanders says he has a good chance at winning), Sanders would still be around 100 super-delegates behind Clinton. That would not help Sanders close the gap among pledged delegates, obviously.
To be sure, Sanders also said yesterday that on top of the super-delegates in the states he’s won, he’d also need to win over many other remaining super-delegates, too, which he said he can still do by arguing that he’s the more electable candidate this fall. At his presser, Sanders acknowledged that in order to catch Clinton in pledged delegates, he’d have to win “65 percent” of the remaining ones, which he admitted would be very hard (though he insisted it is “not impossible”). And so, in this scenario, Sanders would be explicitly asking the super-delegates as a bloc to engineer the nomination for the candidate who trails in both the pledged delegate count and the popular vote.
Clinton also did very well in fundraising this month...

CNN reports:
Clinton's campaign said Monday that they brought in $26.4 million in primary funds in April. Clinton, who is slowly starting to turn her focus to the general election, starts May with $30 million in the bank. The Sanders campaign did not release that number.
Clinton's operation, through a joint fundraising venture, also raised $9.5 million for the Democratic National Committee and state parties in April. Much of that money was raised at two fundraisers with George and Amal Clooney in California, events that Sanders' campaign sought to turn into a liability for Clinton. 
Robby Mook, Clinton's campaign manager, said Monday that Clinton "has always made it a priority to help Democrats up and down the ballot which is why we are proud to be helping to fund the coordinated campaign that will make up the heart of the Democratic organizing efforts for local, state and federal candidates this fall."
..leading to an outrageous, contemptible charge from the Sanders camp.

CNN reports:
Both Democratic campaigns have signed joint fundraising efforts with the Democratic National Committee, allowing the presidential campaigns to raise money for the Democratic committee and a host of state Democratic parties. Because of federal election rules, campaigns are allowed to raise upwards of $350,000 from individuals for joint fundraising efforts. 
But Clinton has been the only candidate to use it, raising, according to her campaign, $46 million for the DNC and state parties through the Hillary Victory Fund, the Clinton campaign's joint fundraising effort. 
"Secretary Clinton is looting funds meant for the state parties to skirt fundraising limits on her presidential campaign," Jeff Weaver, Sanders' campaign manger, said in a statement Monday. "We think the Clinton campaign should let the state parties keep their fair share of the cash." 
Weaver added, "If Secretary Clinton can't raise the funds needed to run in a competitive primary without resorting to laundering, how will she compete against Donald Trump in a general election?" 
A Clinton campaign aide refuted some of Politico's report Monday, arguing that $4.5 million has already been transferred to state parties and that an additional $9 million "will be distributed over the coming months as state parties ramp up for the general election." 
They also said the transfers between state parties and DNC are to pay for campaigns that "will coordinate with local, state and federal Democratic campaigns to work to elect progressives across the country in November." 
Those coordinated campaigns will also help Clinton, should she be the nominee. 
"Funds raised through the Hillary Victory Fund are now being used to fund and staff organizing programs in Ohio, Virginia, Florida and states across the country that will register voters, recruit volunteers and organize Democrats to turn out and support candidates up and down the ballot," said Josh Schwerin, a Clinton spokesman.
Melissa McEwan writes for Blue Nation Review:
In a campaign press release, Bernie Sanders, who has raised no money for down ballot races, cites a Politico story suggesting that the Hillary Victory Fund is functioning as a “money laundering” operation and quotes Sanders campaign manager accusing Hillary of “looting” donations.
Accusing Hillary of “money laundering” and “looting,” despite the fact that the Hillary Victory Fund has already given approximately $4.5 million to state parties and will distribute an additional $9 million “as state parties ramp up for general,” is truly a new low for the Sanders campaign.
This is a profoundly deceitful insinuation.
That there are people who are upset they’re not getting a big enough piece of the pie doesn’t say anything about Hillary in particular. I have seen similar complaints during every election for as long as I’ve been covering politics.
What I have not seen, however, is another Democratic campaign send out a press release under the pretense that this is some unique devilry that is the sole responsibility of their opponent. That accuses their opponent of “money laundering” and “looting.”
This would be an incredibly dishonest and unfair attack against virtually any Democrat who’s ever mounted a presidential campaign, but to levy it against Hillary Clinton, who has spent the last 40 years trying to build the Democratic Party, is utterly gobsmacking.
If this is Bernie’s idea of not running a negative campaign, well, suffice it to say, he’s not doing a very good job of it.
Back in the real world, Clinton is talking about the role former President Bill Clinton might play in her White House.

Politico reports:
During a discussion in Kentucky about manufacturing and jobs, the Democratic front-runner talked up the need for a manufacturing renaissance and suggested that her husband would be a big asset in that department.
"I’ve told my husband he’s got to come out of retirement and be in charge of this, because you know, he’s got more ideas a minute than anybody I know," Clinton said, as people smiled and laughed. "Gotta put people back to work and make it happen. So we’re going to give it all we’ve got, absolute full-in 100 percent effort, because I worry we won’t recognize our country if we don’t do this.”
Another man voiced concern that despite the region's economic and geographic advantages, it lacked a partnership in government. Clinton pointed to her husband's New Market Tax Credit program, implemented in 2000, as one possible example.
"I know how disappointed people are in government and politics," Clinton said. "I know, people think, OK you come and you talk to us, you ask for our votes, and what do you do? You never produce. So I’m going to tell you what I’m going to do so you can hold me accountable."
Clinton continued, telling those present that "it's not rhetoric way up here and then nothing happens" that will bring about a positive difference, adding that it is necessary for partnerships and good ideas to be shared, and suggesting that her husband could play a helpful role.
CNN reports:
The trip, through areas where coal was once king, has highlighted past comments Clinton has made about the energy source, including saying in March that, as president, she was going to "put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business." 
In one of the more intense interactions Clinton has had on the trail, Copley -- growing emotional at times -- pressed Clinton for her past statement and asked her, "How you can say you are going to put a lot of coal miners out of jobs and then come in here and tell us how you are going to be our friends?" 
As protesters outside chanted within earshot of people inside, Clinton went on to apologize for her past comments. She argued that while she believes the comments were taken out of context, she acknowledged it was a "misstatement." 
"I don't know how to explain it other than what I said was totally out of context for what I meant because I have been talking about helping coal country for a very long time," Clinton said. "It was a misstatement because what I was saying is the way things are going now, they will continue to lose jobs. It didn't mean that we were going to do it. What I said is that is going to happen unless we take action to help and prevent it." 
Clinton said her visit was an attempt to show the people of Appalachia that she cares about them and their issues. 
"I'm running in this primary because I still want to compete in West Virginia," Clinton said, adding that people close to her advised her to skip West Virginia and head to California. "I'm here because I want you to know whether people vote for me or not whether they yell at me or not, it's not going to affect what I can do to help because I feel like that's a moral obligation."
Clinton’s visit to Appalachia is a great time to revisit her coal country policy proposals:
Hillary Clinton’s Plan for Revitalizing Coal Communities 
From Central Appalachia to the Powder River Basin, coal communities were an engine of US economic growth for more than a century.  Coal powered the industrial revolution, the 20th century expansion of the middle class, and supplied as much as half of US electricity for decades. The hard-working Americans who mine, move, and generate power from coal put their own health and safety at risk to keep our factories running and deliver the affordable and reliable electricity we take for granted. 
But today we are in the midst of a global energy transition. The shale revolution, low-cost renewable energy, energy efficiency improvements, and pressing concerns about the impact of coal combustion on public health and the global climate are reducing coal demand both in the US and around the world. Coal now accounts for only one third of US power generation, with domestic consumption falling by 25% over the past ten years. In China, nuclear and renewable energy are growing three times faster than coal-fired power , with more wind and solar capacity added last year than the US and Europe combined.  
Building a 21st century clean energy economy in the United States will create new jobs and industries, deliver important health benefits, and reduce carbon pollution. But we can’t ignore the impact this transition is already having on mining communities, or the threat it poses to the healthcare and retirement security of coalfield workers and their families. This is particularly true in Appalachia, where production has been declining for decades, but impacts are beginning to be felt in the Illinois Basin and Western coalfields as well. And it’s not limited to mining communities: reduced coal shipments impact barge and railroad workers, and power plant closures can contribute to local job loss and economic distress.  
Hillary Clinton is committed to meeting the climate change challenge as President and making the United States a clean energy superpower. At the same time, she will not allow coal communities to be left behind—or left out of our economic future. That’s why Clinton announced a $30 billion plan to ensure that coal miners and their families get the benefits they’ve earned and respect they deserve, to invest in economic diversification and job creation, and to make coal communities an engine of US economic growth in the 21st century as they have been for generations.

Honoring Our Commitments 

Clinton will ensure that we honor our commitments to the coal miners, transportation and power plant workers, their families and their communities, who have given so much to our country.
  • Ensure health and retirement security. Weak global coal demand and a sharp drop in global coal prices have pushed a number of mining companies into bankruptcy. Clinton has fought, and will continue to fight, against attempts by these companies to use bankruptcy proceedings to shirk the healthcare and pension commitments they’ve made to their retirees, many of whom suffer from black lung disease and other job-related illnesses. As part of this promise, Clinton will put in place a federal backstop that ensures retirees get the benefits they have earned and deserve, building on the bipartisan leadership of Senators Manchin, Capito, Casey and Brown, and will expand these protections to any power plant or transportation company retiree who loses his or her benefits due to a coal market-related bankruptcy. 
  • Reform the black lung benefit program. Clinton supports sweeping reforms to the federal black lung benefit program to prevent coal company-funded doctors and lawyers from withholding evidence or willfully misdiagnosing patients in order to deny medical care to sick miners. She will empower those who have been wrongfully denied benefits to reopen their cases, help miners secure legal representation, and adjust black lung benefits to reflect cost of living changes.  
  • Safeguard funding for local schools. Coal mining and power plants are a major source of public school revenue in many coal communities, and a decline in coal production or a power plant closure can leave local school districts with a significant funding gap. To address this, Clinton will establish the Secure Coal Community Schools (SCCS) program. Similar to the Secure Rural Schools program that helped offset lost local revenue from a decline in timber sales on federal lands, the SCCS will mitigate declines in coal-related revenue until alternative sources of local tax revenue arise through economic growth. 

Investing for the Future

Coal is not the only resource mining and power plant communities possess. From Appalachia to the Uinta Basin, coal communities have rich human and cultural capital, diverse natural resources, and enormous economic potential.  Clinton will partner with the local entrepreneurs, community leaders, foundations and labor groups working to unleash that potential, making federal investments that help people to find good jobs without having to move and build a strong, diversified economic future.
  • Build infrastructure for the 21st century. The infrastructure in coal communities today was built to mine, ship, and burn coal. Unlocking new drivers of economic and employment growth in these communities will require new infrastructure that connects workers to new jobs and companies to new markets. Clinton’s infrastructure investment program will include a focus on economic diversification and revitalization in coal communities, building new roads, bridges, water systems, airports and transmission lines, including completion of the Appalachian Development Highway System. She will also work with the Department of Transportation and the railroad companies to develop a strategy for leveraging available rail capacity previously used to ship coal to support broader economic development in coal-producing regions.
  • Repurpose mine lands and power plant sites. With rich soil and abundant water, abandoned coal mines can provide prime real estate for new investment – whether in forestry, agriculture, or manufacturing. But significant remediation, site preparation, and infrastructure development is often required before this land can be successfully repurposed for new economic activity.  Clinton will unlock existing unappropriated resources from the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund to help finance this work. Clinton will provide similar support for redevelopment of retired coal power plant sites to attract new investment, such as Google’s plans to build a data center on the site of a recently closed coal plant in Alabama.  
  • Expand broadband access. In the 21st century, reliable high-speed internet access is as economically vital as traditional infrastructure like roads, rail and bridges. Many coal communities lag far behind the rest of the nation in level of internet connectivity. Clinton will increase high-speed broadband access and adoption in coal communities, improving education and healthcare delivery and connecting local entrepreneurs and workers to the global economy. 
  • Expand clean energy on federal lands and from existing dams. Most Western coal production takes place on federal lands, but coal is far from the only energy resource these lands possess. For example, Wyoming is the nation’s largest coal producer, but also has the richest wind resources in the Western electrical grid. Clinton will work to capture this potential by streamlining federal permitting both for the renewable energy projects themselves and the transmission lines required to get that renewable energy to market. Existing dams are another large source of clean energy potential. The Department of Energy estimates 12 gigawatts of generation capacity could be added to these dams, enough to power Alaska, Delaware, Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont combined. More than half of this potential is in large coal-producing states. Clinton will launch a major public works project aimed at electrifying existing dams in partnership with the Army Corp of Engineers, private hydropower developers, local utilities and labor unions.
  • Increase public investment in research and development. To help seed the next wave of innovation and industry creation, Clinton will increase public investment in research and development at universities, national labs and other institutions in coal-producing regions. Given the important role that carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology can play in meeting long-term global climate change objectives, Clinton will support CCS R&D and demonstration projects, both in the electric power sector and in industry.  
  • Attract private investment through an improved New Markets Tax Credit and zero capital gains taxes. Complementing the public investments in infrastructure, land, energy, and innovation described above, Clinton will attract new private investment by extending and expanding the New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) program so all communities suffering from a decline in coal production or a coal plant closure qualify. The NMTC program has steered billions in investment to low income neighborhoods since it began in 2000. Clinton will also offer companies a chance to eliminate capital gains taxes on long-term investments in hard-hit coal communities.  

Locally-Driven Economic Development

Every coal community is different and successful economic diversification and revitalization must be locally driven and comprehensive in scope. Promising community-based initiatives have begun to take shape, including SOAR in Southeastern Kentucky and Reconnect McDowell in West Virginia. Unfortunately most existing federal economic development programs available to coal communities are complex, fragmented, and overly prescriptive. Those that are the most successful, like the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC), are severely underfunded. Clinton will improve coordination across existing federal programs and establish a Coal Communities Challenge Fund that awards new competitive grants in the following areas through qualified local entities with integrated economic development strategies:
  • Entrepreneurship and small business development. Nationally, small businesses are the leading source of new job creation, and that holds true for coal communities as well. Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) and other federal programs have a vital role to play in providing the capital small businesses need to grow, but many new entrepreneurs first need support in preparing their business for that growth. Clinton will increase funding for technical assistance for entrepreneurs and small businesses in impacted coal communities, through programs like the Innovation Center at Ohio University in Athens.
  • Education and training. Job training programs are of little use if they are not paired with job creation. That’s why the Coal Communities Challenge Fund is focused on both. Community colleges play a critical role in providing marketable skills, and under Clinton’s New College Compact, students will be able to attend tuition-free. Clinton will also increase federal support for local education and training programs designed as part of a comprehensive economic development strategy, expand successful models like Coalfield Development Corporation’s “33-6-3” program in West Virginia, and offer businesses a tax credit for every apprentice they hire.  
  • Health and wellness. Building strong communities starts with supporting healthy families. Coal communities have higher than average rates of diabetes, addiction and other diseases. In addition to her national plans to provide high-quality and affordable health care and address the quiet epidemic of substance abuse, Clinton will award competitive grants to community health centers that develop holistic public health and economic development strategies like the Williamson Health and Wellness Center in West Virginia. Clinton will also support the growing number of local food and agriculture businesses in Central Appalachia and other coal communities that are improving public health and strengthening local economies.
  • Arts and culture. A community’s artistic and cultural capital can be as important in attracting new jobs and investment as its roads, rail lines and bridges. The rich cultural history in Appalachia and other coal communities is a unique asset that can be leveraged for economic growth.  Clinton will increase funding for the local arts and culture programs that are designed to support broader economic development, like the Crooked Road project in Southwestern Virginia.  
  • Housing. Attracting new jobs and investment to America’s coal communities will require upgrading local housing stock. Energy efficiency improvements are particularly important given the high share of household income many families in coal communities spend on their electricity and natural gas bills. Housing upgrades can also be an important source of job creation and economic growth in and of themselves. Clinton will award competitive grants to programs that improve the quality and energy efficiency of local housing, building on and expanding successful models like the How$mart program in Eastern Kentucky
Clinton’s plan for revitalizing coal communities is just one pillar of her comprehensive energy and climate agenda, which includes major initiatives in the following areas:
  1. Clean Energy Challenge. Develop, defend and implement smart federal energy and climate standards. Provide states, cities and rural communities ready to lead on clean energy and exceed these standards with the flexibility, tools and resources they need to succeed. 
  2. Modernizing North American Infrastructure. Improve the safety and security of existing energy infrastructure and align new infrastructure we build with the clean energy economy we are seeking to create.
  3. Safe and Responsible Production. Ensure that fossil fuel production taking place today is safe and responsible, that taxpayers get a fair deal for development on public lands, and that areas that are too sensitive for energy production are taken off the table.
  4. Energy and Climate Security. Reduce the amount of oil consumed in the United States and around the world, guard against energy supply disruptions, and make our communities, our infrastructure, and our financial markets more resilient to climate-related risks.
  5. Collaborative Stewardship. Renew our shared commitment to the conservation of our disappearing lands, waters, and wildlife, to the preservation of our history and culture, and to expanding access to the outdoors for all Americans.
Clinton used her campaign stop in Indiana to rally against their rollbacks on reproductive rights.

Washington Post reports:
“I will defend a woman's right to make her own health-care decisions,” Clinton said to a few hundred supporters packed into a sweltering recreation center. “I’ll tell ya, I’ll defend Planned Parenthood against these attacks. And I commend the women of this state, young and old, for standing up against this governor and this legislature.”
Clinton doesn’t need to win even one more primary to clinch the nomination, so she’s stopped running ads in the remaining states. But that hasn’t stopped the predictions from coming in.
Benchmark Politics reports:
Expected Baseline: 51% Clinton - 48% Sanders
After stringing together five wins in the last six contests, Hillary Clinton has essentially wrapped up the democratic nomination. This does not mean the primary in Indiana serves no purpose however. Senator Sanders has put a good amount of time and money into not only Indiana but all the remaining states in the contest as he looks to spread his message of progressive, anti-establishment politics. Secretary Clinton on the other hand will be looking to build upon her already massive delegate lead as she starts to pivot towards the general election while the republican party is still divided. From a demographic standpoint, Indiana is quite favorable to Senator Sanders. The lack of minority voters outside of Marion and Lake county combined with an overall low income state wide plays very well into Sanders core voter bloc. Clinton comes out ahead ever so slightly in the model however due to her strong performances in the highly populated, diverse counties. Because the demographics are so much more favorable for Sanders, any sort of poll closings will change the projected winner. Follow @benchmarkpol closely leading up to Indiana for any late changes.
Circling back to Maddow...

Sirius XM reports:
Is MSNBC journalist Rachel Maddow in awe of Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton?
“She’s intense, and I sort of want to be worthy of the moment,” she explained. “It took me eight years for me to get an interview with her. I did not get an interview with her for the entire 2008 cycle. I tried to get an interview with her many times, including offering to go to war zones with her when she was secretary of state. I would have done anything. It wasn’t until pretty far into the cycle this year that finally she would consent to be interviewed by me, and I always assume it’s the last time, so I think what you’re seeing is my intensity of like, ‘I must get the most out of this moment.’ And I’m always trying to ask her something that I really don’t know how she’s going to answer.”
“She looks really intently with me when I’m asking her a question, because she doesn’t know where it’s going. And she knows it’s something she hasn’t been asked before. She has really, really, really bright blue eyes, and she like tractor-beams you,” she added with a laugh.
“The one thing I will say that’s totally different about her than other candidates I have interviewed is that she’s more like a president than any other candidate,” she said. “When you talk to her, it is like you are interviewing somebody who is already president. She talks the way that [Bill] Clinton did when he was president. She talks the way that Obama does now that he’s president. There’s something about her experience that makes her basically behave in a presidential manner.”
...and money…

The Huffington Post reports:
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton raised a record-setting $2.4 million for her presidential campaign during the last three days of April. And she has Donald Trump to thank for it.
“If Hillary Clinton were a man, I don’t think she’d get 5 percent of the vote,” Trump said in a victory speech last Tuesday. “The only thing she’s got going is the woman’s card.”
Clinton’s response was swift“If fighting for women’s health care and paid family leave and equal pay is playing the woman card, then deal me in!” 
Within hours, Clinton’s campaign had released a “woman card.”  
From April 28 to April 30, more than 115,000 individual donors contributed to Clinton’s presidential campaign. Forty percent of them, or around 47,000, were first-time donors to Clinton’s White House bid.
And finally, it’s not just fundraising help that Trump is giving to the Democrats.

Ralston Reports reports:
I have said and written many times that registration is not destiny. But those numbers mean something -- and 2016 is starting to look like 2012 and 2008 in Nevada, presidential years in which the Democrats did very well.
The latest numbers show the Democrats padded their statewide lead by about 5,000 voters in April, out-registering Republicans by a 2-to-1 margin. This came despite the herculean efforts of the conservative registration outfit, Engage NV, which is trying to make up for the biennial ineptitude of the state GOP and a surging Democratic Party eager to atone for the 2014 wipeout.
The numbers tell an ominous story for the GOP:
►Democrats now have a 64,635-voter lead over the GOP, or more than 5 percent (40-35). Democrats have added 47,606 voters this year; Republicans have added 30,583. Thus, the Democrats have increased their lead by about 17,000 voters. So the Democrats, mostly because of same-day registration for the Feb. 20 presidential caucus, have made up for recent losses because of voter roll attrition. These gains have been felt in congressional districts and legislative districts, too, widening Democratic leads or cutting into GOP edges. (See below.) For instance, in Clark County, the Democrats now have a nearly 113,000-voter edge -- that's a 13 percentage point edge.
In 2012, when President Obama won the state, the Democrats led by only 37,000 voters at this point; they ended up with a 90,000-voter edge by Election Day. In 2008, when Obama won the state, Democrats had a 51,000-voter edge at this point; they ended up with a 100,000-voter lead by Election Day. Republicans can point to Rep. Joe Heck and Sen. Dean Heller holding on despite the Democratic wave in 2012, but flawed Democratic contenders helped. And look how far ahead of those 2008 and 2012 paces the Democrats are.



  1. Jane Sanders was on Chris Hayes right before the Maddow show, and she outright lied, said that it was a contested convention when Obama was running against Hillary. And Hayes corrected her and she did not bat an eye. He also asked her about the 'con game' narrative that has him raising money by claiming he has a chance, and she said no one had ever thought he had a chance, as if that had ever been proved wrong. And the 'you never know what could happen' glee, as if she's drunk the email-indictment Kool-aid.

    And Maddow ended with - bring on the hate mail and the swearing, it hurts her feelings but makes her stronger, which was a great joke.

    Did anyone happen to see the 'with all due respect' yesterday? Nicolle Wallace was on, and she has been openly wondering why Bernie is treated with kid gloves and the answer was that Hillary needed his supporters, but she suggested it was just sexist, and she's right, the man 'must be given respect' because running against a more qualified woman is castrating.

    To prove it, the NYT put it's editorial about Bernie on the on-line front page, 'bernie sander's gift to his party,' and it isn't 'take his turd and put it in our pocket,' which would have been metaphorically accurate, but the tired false narrative that Bernie moved Hillary to confronting issues, 'strong helpful Bernie,' and that anyone can raise money from small donors. As if anyone can run on free tuition, legal pot and veiled misogyny even if they're not running against a famous powerful woman, and if they don't spend big on fund raising with the targeted one-issue one-click donation personalized prejudice messages, and as if it's smart to take over-the-legal limit and foreign contributions and then have to keep running the con to stay ahead of the creditors?

    Nicole Wallace, a Republic woman, is the only one to notice Hillary wasn't treated like that when she was running against Obama, and to call it sexist. And John Heilemann agreed with her.

    and Maddow goes to 'no real path' and she thinks that's brave.

  2. I have heard of it before but your blog was really detailed to this topic. I believe, for best fundraising websites for help are necessary.Give taxfree.org is something alike. it helps to raie funds taxfree.