{"id":40930,"date":"2024-09-08T10:43:58","date_gmt":"2024-09-08T15:43:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/huewhite.com\/umb\/?p=40930"},"modified":"2024-09-08T10:43:58","modified_gmt":"2024-09-08T15:43:58","slug":"the-2024-senate-campaign-updates-22","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/huewhite.com\/umb\/2024\/09\/08\/the-2024-senate-campaign-updates-22\/","title":{"rendered":"The 2024 Senate Campaign: Updates"},"content":{"rendered":"

Out with the old<\/a>, in with the new….<\/p>\n

Will The Apalachee High School Tragedy<\/strong><\/a> Affect Senate Races?<\/h3>\n

It can, but it must handled with delicacy by those candidates willing to take the risks. Republicans, in general, take the position that nothing can prevent these tragedies, and thus the only appropriate response is “thoughts and prayers.” Any sort of gun control measure is verboten<\/em>.<\/p>\n

But tragic events, such as the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor or the killing of union members by union-busters, are important signals that something in society is structured improperly. The chaos of never knowing if the next person through the door will be shooting a gun is deleterious to everyone in society, and deputizing part of society just to function as a patch, a bandage, on a bad policy decision – a public security force, if you will<\/a> – is inefficient. Costly, if you prefer.<\/p>\n

And don’t get me going on the hoary old arguments about self-defense and that rot. I used to argue for them on social media myself, thirty years ago, but not anymore<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The basic question: Is it better to be dodging bullets or giving up your guns? And then it comes down to policy: all guns? All but hunting guns? That’s local politics.<\/p>\n

Bitterness Is Part Of Republican<\/del> MAGA<\/strong> DNA<\/h3>\n

This WaPo<\/strong><\/em> article<\/a> concerning the fall of Congressional Freedom Caucus<\/em> founder Rep Bob Good (R-VA) in a bitter primary fight illustrates one of the prime features of an extremist voter<\/em>, regardless of left or right: A pig-headed certainty that they are right, everyone else is wrong, and No, We Won’t Close Ranks!<\/em><\/p>\n

To be clear, the last clause, above, isn’t entirely bad. A truly unacceptable candidate who, somehow, manages to gain the nomination to the general election should be shunned – and, as the Republican population of the House demonstrates, unacceptable successful candidates are shockingly rife. At least such shunning is a message that this candidate is seriously flawed; at best, it may help eliminate them from an important position, and if that’s a hit to the Party, once again, it’s a message<\/em>.<\/p>\n

However, the expressed bitterness is an important indication that norms of behavior and politics, that exist for very good reasons, are really going to pieces in the Republican Party, and if it continues then the Democrats, with all their positives and negatives, will end up in control of the Legislative and Executive Branches. Given the reprehensible behavior of the Republicans ever since Newt Gingrich (R-GA) was Speaker, it’s hard to be against such an outcome, but it’s certainly a situation that merits pause and, hopefully, a replacement Republican Party that does not accept such folks as Greene, Gaetz, Gosar, McConnell, and, for that matter, Good, into its ranks.<\/p>\n

What’s This About Pollster CNN\/SSRS<\/strong><\/em>?<\/p>\n

I’m not sure about this pollster name. No pollsters are listed by FiveThirtyEight<\/strong><\/em><\/a> in their pollster rankings as CNN\/SSRS<\/strong><\/em>; however, there is an SSRS<\/strong><\/em> listed, with a rating of 2.0, sort of middle of the road. Since CNN<\/strong><\/em> is a news source, I would not expect them to also be a pollster, although, of course, there’s the famous The New York Times\/Siena College<\/strong><\/em> (3.0) pairing, so it’s not out of the question.<\/p>\n

For the nonce, I’ll consider this a mistake by FiveThirtyEight<\/strong><\/em>: the pollster is, I’m thinking, SSRS<\/strong><\/em>, and the sponsor is CNN<\/strong><\/em>.<\/p>\n

And their polling seems more conservative than other polling: for example, in Arizona<\/a> they give Rep Gallego (D-AZ) a 47%-44%<\/a> lead over Republican Kari Lake (R-AZ), while highly respected pollsters place his lead in the double digits.<\/p>\n

Good, Bad, And The Indifferent<\/h3>\n