On Politics: A Big Florida Poll, Nevada Tightens, Trump on Defense: This Week in the 2020 Race

As new polling continues to give clues toward the states in play for the presidential campaign, Pres

View in browser|nytimes.com Continue reading the main story September 12, 2020 0 By Annie Karni and Astead W. Herndon Welcome to our weekly analysis of the state of the 2020 campaign. President Trump said he was putting a moratorium on offshore drilling at an event in Jupiter, Fla.Doug Mills/The New York Times The week in numbers In good news for President Trump, the Cook Political Report made two changes to its elections forecast, moving Florida from “Lean Democrat” to “Toss Up,” and moving Nevada from “Likely Democrat” to “Lean Democrat.” Trump advisers view Florida in particular as must-win. The shifts reflect Mr. Biden’s potential weakness with Latino voters, and Trump’s poll numbers stabilizing after months of protests after the killing of George Floyd. The Biden campaign continues to dominate the airwaves, spending $32 million on broadcast television over the past week, while the Trump campaign spent only about $10 million. Spending is nearly even on Facebook, as the Biden campaign spent $3.7 million over the past week while the Trump team spent $3.2 million on the platform. A Monmouth University poll released this week showed Biden holding a seven-point lead over Trump among likely voters nationwide. Among all registered voters, just 37 percent said they were certain they would vote for Trump, versus 43 percent who were sure they would be voting for Biden. But an NBC News/Marist College survey of Florida offered some rare positive news for the president on the polling front: He and Biden were tied at 48 percent each among likely voters in the state, with Trump supported by 50 percent of Latino voters (albeit a particularly hard demographic to accurately poll). Catch me up For the president, the week began with him defending himself against a report in The Atlantic and ended with him defending himself against a report by the veteran journalist Bob Woodward. Both story lines — one about his alleged disrespect for the military, the other, about purposefully playing down the deadly nature of the coronavirus — threatened to undermine his standing with voters whose support he is counting on, especially servicemembers and seniors. Mr. Trump, himself, was once again the story, less than 55 days away from the election — a time when veteran political strategists said the person who the race is a referendum on is frequently the person who is losing. Mr. Biden, the Democratic presidential nominee and former vice president, tried to capitalize on the negative news reports during an appearance in Michigan, where he blamed the president’s handling of the pandemic for the ongoing recession. In contrast, Mr. Trump, also in Michigan, tried to push a message about a great American comeback, complete with the revival of packed, old-school Trump rallies he’s now holding regularly at airport hangars in battleground states. Nothing sticks to this president, but with just weeks left before Election Day, every negative news cycle counts a little bit more. Here’s how this one played out. Continue reading the main story ADVERTISEMENT Trump and Woodward Bob Woodward compiled nine hours of recorded conversations with Mr. Trump for his new book.Jim Lo Scalzo/EPA, via Shutterstock For Mr. Woodward’s first book about the Trump presidency, Mr. Trump did not participate in the project and (are you sitting down?) there was no plan from the White House communications department in 2018 to try to shape the narrative. That left senior officials freelancing, in an effort to preserve their own reputations, and others speaking to Mr. Woodward simply out of fear that they would be the only ones who didn’t. For Mr. Woodward’s second book, Mr. Trump seems to have overcorrected, this time participating in 18 freewheeling on-the-record sessions with the author. “I gave him some time,” Mr. Trump told Sean Hannity, the Fox News host, earlier this week. “But, as usual, with the books he writes, that didn’t work out too well, perhaps.” Why did he do it? Continue reading the main story ADVERTISEMENT Mr. Trump thinks he can charm anyone. His desire to speak at length with Mr. Woodward underscores what has always been the reality of Mr. Trump’s relationship with the news media, despite shouts of “fake news.” Mr. Trump loves talking to journalists — especially famous ones — and is driven, in large part, by his desire to earn positive coverage from the establishment. But he may have been the one charmed, by Mr. Woodward’s status (even if he hasn’t read his books). And he doesn’t seem to care. Unlike other authors who have written unflattering accounts of the Trump White House, Mr. Woodward has yet to receive the book pre-sales bump that typically comes after the president denounces an author and their work on Twitter. Mr. Trump seems resigned to the fact that he got played, perhaps because most of the damaging content appears to come straight from the president’s own mouth. Instead of denouncing Mr. Woodward, Mr. Trump is defending himself. How Biden’s campaign responds to Trump’s scandals Joesph R. Biden Jr. spoke to reporters in Shanksville, Pa., on Sept. 11.Amr Alfiky/The New York Times In recent weeks, Mr. Biden has faced a challenge familiar to Hillary Clinton — how to weaponize Mr. Trump’s scandals. New revelations about the president’s conduct have dominated headlines and cable news chyrons, including his disparaging comments about members of the military reported in The Atlantic, as has the book by Mr. Woodward and another by Michael Cohen, Mr. Trump’s former personal lawyer and confidante. But making those stories last is hard, and breaking through to voters is even harder. Here’s how Mr. Biden is trying: Continue reading the main story ADVERTISEMENT Dispatch surrogates, not the candidate: Following the release of The Atlantic article and highlights from Mr. Woodward’s book, Mr. Biden’s campaign held a media conference call with high-profile surrogates, including Senators Tammy Duckworth of Illinois and Sherrod Brown of Ohio. In doing so, the campaign sought to prolong a news cycle on damaging information to its opponent. Biden advisers also continue a tack they’ve pursued since Mr. Biden became the nominee: While his primary campaign was focused on Mr. Trump and electability, his general election strategy has often left attacking the president to others. Focus on the virus: When Mr. Biden does target Mr. Trump, it has usually been on issues with which he feels most comfortable. He has tried to make this election a referendum on how Mr. Trump has handled the pandemic, and has weaponized new information that bolsters his argument that the administration shirked its responsibility. But the campaign has stayed away from the more gossip-driven elements that animate Mr. Trump’s opponents on social media. Books like the one written by Mr. Trump’s niece, Mary Trump, and Mr. Cohen’s account of his time with the president have rarely found their way into Mr. Biden’s campaign messaging. Presidential contrast: Unlike Mrs. Clinton, who was dealing with the possibility of Mr. Trump becoming president, Mr. Biden is dealing with the reality. And as the scandals have continued into his administration, Democrats believe that voters who were willing to take a chance on Mr. Trump changing in office are now ready for a course correction. This is another element of how the Biden campaign seeks to use Mr. Trump’s words against him, by arguing that Mr. Biden would bring calm and stability to the White House, rather than the stream of norm-busting headlines. Both campaigns agree: The Midwest is best Mr. Biden met local residents during a campaign stop in Detroit.Amr Alfiky/The New York Times With both candidates in Michigan this week, and top surrogates including Donald Trump Jr. and Jill Biden in Minnesota, the travel was a sign of how much attention both campaigns are paying to the Midwest. The intense interest in Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania has dwarfed other regions. There are many ways to get to 270 electoral votes, but here’s why Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden think this campaign will be won in the country’s industrial center. White working-class: Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden are both figures who have staked their appeal on having a specific connection with white working-class voters, a demographic that was not enthusiastic about Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy. Advisers to Mr. Biden believe that’s a population their candidate is better set to succeed with, and states with industrial backgrounds like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are a good way to test that appeal. Black voters: There are more Latino voters in the general election, but Democrats and Republicans have probably spent more time focusing on Black voters in this election than any other minority group. Mr. Biden has leaned on his personal connection with former President Barack Obama, and Republicans have pitched Democrats as irresponsible stewards of Black urban communities. More than other battleground states like Florida or out West, the industrial states have cities with Black turnout that could determine the statewide totals. These include places like Milwaukee, Philadelphia and Cleveland. Mr. Biden’s campaign is not expanding the map: Early in the race, some Democratic operatives pleaded with the Biden campaign to expand the traditional battleground map and invest in states like Texas and Georgia that have had demographic shifts beneficial to Democrats. However, if the candidate’s travel schedule is any indication, the campaign is focusing efforts on the traditional battlegrounds — for now. Mr. Biden’s campaign just announced another Midwest trip, to Minnesota, in the coming week. It shows a willingness to defend states Mrs. Clinton won in 2016 over expanding the map to new states that have long proved fool’s gold for the party. What you might have missed A week after Mr. Trump suggested that voters in North Carolina should cast two ballots — one by mail and another at the polls — the authorities in Georgia are threatening criminal action against 1,000 Georgia voters who did just that. Intentionally voting twice in a federal election could result in a $10,000 fine and up to five years in prison. In the past, few people have done it, or have had to pay the full fine. The Trump campaign has spent over $800 million of their $1.1 billion budget since July 2019. Some say the money was blown on small costs, like buying $110,000 worth of magnetic pouches that are used to store cellphones during fund-raisers so that donors could not secretly record Mr. Trump. Continue reading the main story Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance. You received this email because you signed up for On Politics With Lisa Lerer from The New York Times. To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences. Subscribe to The TimesGet The New York Times app Connect with us on: Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

On Politics Poll Watch: The Voters Biden Needs

An authoritative new study on 2018 midterm voters sheds light on the Democratic nominee's position.

View in browser|nytimes.com Continue reading the main story September 11, 2020 By Giovanni Russonello Welcome to Poll Watch, our weekly look at polling data and survey research on the candidates, voters and issues that will shape the 2020 election. Two years ago, a flood of anti-Trump sentiment helped flip the House of Representatives blue, with Democratic candidates winning more votes than Republicans by nearly 10 percentage points nationwide — a record margin for a party that had been in the minority. Continue reading the main story ADVERTISEMENT Because the 2018 election was largely seen as a referendum on President Trump, Democratic strategists are looking to carry those gains forward. Indeed, national and swing-state polls continue to show Joseph R. Biden Jr. with a steady lead — particularly in the suburban areas where Democrats made some of their biggest gains in the midterms. But Mr. Biden may not be able to count on the same level of support that Democratic candidates received in 2018. Some of the groups that swung hardest in Democrats’ direction in 2016 have been slow to warm to Mr. Biden. Compared with an authoritative study of the 2018 midterm electorate released this week by the Pew Research Center, recent polls show the party’s presidential nominee lagging behind the rates at which certain key demographics broke for the Democrats two years ago. To conduct the study, Pew used its American Trends Panel, which tracks a nationally representative sample of Americans and allows researchers to re-contact the same voters over time. Because of its large sample size and because it used a method called voter validation — checking panelists’ responses against publicly available voter files to confirm that they participated when they said they did — Pew’s study is considered more reliable than the national exit polls, which are conducted quickly on the day of the election and undergo minimal adjustments afterward. Midterm elections after a new president has taken office always tend to be tough for the president’s party. Yet midterm voters also tend to skew slightly more affluent and conservative than general-election voters. So the surge in Democratic votes across the board, particularly among key groups, appears to tee up Mr. Biden for a strong showing. Continue reading the main story ADVERTISEMENT Latinos, white suburbanites and young voters swung especially hard in Democrats’ favor in 2018, as the Pew study reflected, sometimes even more starkly than the exit polls. Here’s a look at what the Pew study tells us about those groups, and at where things stand now. Young voters Youth enthusiasm and participation ran low in the 2016 general election, but voters under 30 grew heavily involved in 2018 — doubling their participation rate from the previous midterms, according to an analysis by the United States Elections Project at the University of Florida. No other age group jumped by as much. In 2016, most young voters saw neither candidate in a positive light, and 14 percent of them expressed their displeasure by voting third party, a far higher number than for older voters. But as they surged to the polls in 2018, those under 30 picked Democratic House candidates by an enormous 49-point margin. (That’s way more than the 35-point advantage that national exit polls from 2018 had indicated.) Scott Keeter, a senior survey adviser at Pew who helped assemble the report, noted that people under 30 accounted for more than one-third of 2018 voters who had not cast ballots in 2016. “That’s a fairly striking figure,” he said. “And they were already a good group for Hillary Clinton, but they became even more Democratic in 2018.” Continue reading the main story ADVERTISEMENT Yet Mr. Biden is not particularly popular among young people: His favorability rating is five points in the negative among likely voters under 35, according to the latest Quinnipiac University poll. Still, young voters appear to be even less fond of Mr. Trump — and uninterested in sitting out another presidential election. Mr. Biden leads Mr. Trump by 63 to 27 percent among voters under 35, according to Quinnipiac; that’s better than Mrs. Clinton’s 58-28 margin among the youngest voters in 2016, according to Pew, and it suggests that those who didn’t vote or who cast third-party ballots in 2016 may be wary of doing so again. Hispanic voters Hispanic turnout two years ago jumped by 74 percent from the 2014 midterms — more than for any other major racial or ethnic group — according to voting data compiled by the Elections Project. (The growth rate for Black and white voters was about half that.) These voters favored Democrats by a whopping 47 points in 2018, with just a quarter of Hispanic voters casting ballots for Republicans, the Pew study shows. That was a nine-point gain on Mrs. Clinton’s margin in 2016. Mr. Biden is up on Mr. Trump by anywhere from 20 to 32 points among Hispanic voters nationwide, according to recent polls. That is considerably weaker than Mrs. Clinton’s advantage, and far below the Democrats’ wider lead in 2018. Partly because the Hispanic population is so diverse — with regard to nation of origin, racial identity and political thought, among much else — and because phone surveys rarely have a Hispanic sample of much more than 100 people, this group can be hard to accurately poll. Pollsters have long considered exit polling of Hispanic voters to be notably problematic. That is part of what is so valuable about the Pew report, which affirms, using validated voters, how Hispanic voters actually cast ballots — though it doesn’t break down the Hispanic population into more specific demographic categories. “There’s all sorts of signals coming from the polling world,” Mr. Keeter said, “that make it hard to know how enthusiastic the Latino vote is for Biden and ultimately how much they’re going to turn out for him.” Suburban voters Suburban voters were crucial to Democratic victories in many House districts that flipped from red to blue in 2018, and Pew’s results reflected that trend nationwide. While the suburbs over all broke just barely for Mr. Trump in 2016, these increasingly diverse areas of the country swung Democratic by seven points in 2018, Pew found. Among white suburbanites in particular there was still a slight Republican tilt in the midterms, but these voters chose Democratic candidates 47 percent of the time, according to Pew. That was up from the 38 percent who voted for Mrs. Clinton. This is one area in which Mr. Biden is well positioned to carry the gains of 2018 forward — and even exceed them. An NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist College poll last month showed Mr. Biden winning in the suburbs by a whopping 25 points. A separate Marist poll this week of Pennsylvania found Mr. Biden leading in the suburbs by 19 points Who got more involved in 2018 In a sign of just how heavily the anti-Trump winds were blowing in the midterms, when you look specifically at new voters and 2016 abstainers (those who didn’t vote for either Mr. Trump or Mrs. Clinton), Democrats won even in rural areas, a Trump stronghold, by 19 points, according to Pew. Over all, those who sat on the sidelines in 2016 but went to vote in 2018 tended to be liberal or moderate, and they were more likely to be Black or Hispanic than those who had voted for a major candidate in 2016. That reflects the lack of enthusiasm felt both on the left and among voters of color in the last presidential election. The bounce-back of nonwhite voter participation in 2018 also serves as a reminder to Democratic strategists that Barack Obama’s absence from the ballot in 2016 was not the only factor driving down participation from Black and other nonwhite voters. The challenge confronting Mr. Biden will be to convince many of those who sat out in 2016, but two years later felt compelled to provide a check to Mr. Trump, that the former vice president is worth voting Democratic again for, even amid a pandemic. RECOMMENDED READING Photo illustration by Najeebah Al-Ghadban. Source photographs (Reagan, fishing, sky): Getty Images; screen grabs from YouTube.   Screenland Montana’s Greatest Cultural Export: Inane Campaign Ads The state perfected intensely folksy political advertising, a signifiers-over-substance approach that has pervaded the nation. By Dan Brooks Were you forwarded this newsletter? Sign up here to get it delivered to your inbox. Is there anything you think we’re missing? Anything you want to see more of? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com. Continue reading the main story Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance. You received this email because you signed up for On Politics With Lisa Lerer from The New York Times. To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences. Subscribe to The TimesGet The New York Times app Connect with us on: Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018