Category Archives: Elections

Super Tuesday Week

Tuesday is Super Tuesday — the first Tuesday of the primary cycle in which any state can hold a primary contest.  As most states use state-run primaries, there will be a large number of states on Tuesday.

But, before Super Tuesday, several states that are using party-run contests will be holding Republican contests as the “window” for the Republicans opened yesterday.  (The “window” for Democrats opens on Tuesday.)  As discussed last week, one of the contests today is the second half of the Republican’s Michigan two-step with the Republican state convention which will be allocating the “district” level delegates.  In addition to Michigan, today will see events in Missouri and Idaho.

The Missouri Republican rules are somewhat ambiguous.  It looks like they are doing a traditional caucus with a 15% threshold and an unspecified winner-take-all kicker at local option.  But rather than allocating delegates based on today’s vote (which is what the national rules appear to require), they are merely binding the delegates chosen today to vote the same preference at the district conventions (which should effectively have the same result).  Missouri is using a caucus because our current Secretary of State repeatedly lied and claimed that the state-run primary was nonbinding (when the rules of both party made the primary binding) and a repeal of the primary was slipped into an omnibus election bill which passed despite the unanimous opposition of Democratic legislature).  The Democrats will be holding a party-run primary in three weeks with a mail-in option. Continue Reading...

Also posted in House of Representatives, Presidential Candidates, Primary Elections, Senate | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

South Carolina Recap

It’s hard interpreting the Republican results for president this year.  If Donald Trump were the incumbent, the numbers that he is getting would be the sign of substantial opposition within the party.  If this year were a truly open primary (i.e. he was not being treated as the “incumbent candidate” by Republicans), his results would be outstanding.

But the bigger story out of Saturday might be at the Congressional District level and is about the House of Representatives, not the presidency.  Nikki Haley only won one of the seven congressional districts — the First District.  Nancy Mace is the current, two-term, incumbent.  She was one of the “Freedom Caucus Eight” who voted to vacate the chair.  Kevin McCarthy is apparently planning on supporting a primary challenger to Representative Mace.  Does the fact that Nikki Haley got 53% of the vote show that a majority of the Republicans in the First District will support an establishment challenger to a Trumpist candidate.  If so, the Representative Mace’s time in Congress might be coming to a quick end.  Additionally, while the lines were a little different, the last time that the Republicans were this divided and supported the more extreme primary candidate, the Democrats managed to win this district (in 2018).  So, if the Democrats find a credible candidate for the general and Representative Mace wins the primary, perhaps enough real Republicans do not vote in the general or opt to vote for the Democrat to take this seat away from the Freedom Caucus.

Also posted in GOP, House of Representatives, Primary and Caucus Results, Primary Elections | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

2024 Presidential Primaries — South Carolina Republicans and Michigan

As we head into the last week of February, we are also reaching the end of the authorized early primaries.  Under the respective rules of the two parties, there is a preliminary window in which only some states were authorized to hold early primaries/caucuses.  For the Republicans, the “regular” primary window opens on March 1.  For Democrats, the “regular” primary window opens on the first Tuesday in March (March 5).

For this last week, we have three primaries on the book.  First up, today, is the South Carolina Republican primary.  South Carolina law allows the parties to choose the date of their own primary, and the two parties have tended to choose different dates (but usually a Saturday).  And so we had the Democratic primary several weeks back which was won by President Joe Biden.  Now, it’s the Republican primary.  While there are seven candidates on the ballot, two of them are not known nationally, and three of the nationally-known candidates have dropped out.  In other words, while five of the candidates may get some votes, there are only two with any chance of winning delegates — former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley and a candidate who ineligible to be president, Donald Trump.  South Carolina Republicans use a “winner-take-most” system for allocating delegates.  In other words, each congressional district has three delegates and whomever wins that district gets all three delegates.  Likewise, there are twenty-nine at-large delegates, and whomever wins the state gets all twenty-nine delegates.  Especially with only two serious candidates in the races, whomever wins statewide will have won at least one congressional district (and probably will have won more than one).  Thus, the winner of the primary is guaranteed to take at least 32 of the 50 delegates (which is why this type of system is referred to as winner-take-most).  Despite the fact that Nikki Haley used to be the governor of South Carolina, the traditional Republican Party in South Carolina is dead and has been replaced by the Trump Party.  While anybody who did not vote in the Democratic Primary could theoretically vote in the Republican Primary, there probably will not be enough independents and Democrats voting to save the Republican Party from itself.  Polls show Donald Trump leading by a wide enough margin that he should win all fifty delegates, and the only question is whether Nikki Haley can make it close enough to steal a district or two.

On Tuesday, we will primaries for both parties in Michigan.  President Joe Biden should win the state easily.  Neither Representative Dean Phillips nor Marianne Williamson is a serious contender to reach the fifteen percent to win delegates.  The real contender to take delegates away from President Biden is “uncommitted.”  Representative Rashida Tlaib has been encouraging voters to vote for uncommitted in protest of President Biden’s middle of the road stance on Israel’s response to Hamas’s invasion of Israel.  While the pro-Palestinian progressive wing of the Democratic Party has a problem with Israel trying to remove Hamas from the Gaza Strip, if President Biden were to do what they want him to do, it would guarantee Donald Trump’s victory in November.  If uncommitted stays below 15% (state-wide or in any individual district), President Biden will win all of the delegates (state-wide or in that district).  The largest districts have seven delegates; so it is unlikely that uncommitted will get more than one delegate in any individual district.  The one exception to that might be Representative Tlaib’s district.  And the issue in that district will be whether uncommitted can get to the 21% necessary to win a second delegate.  If uncommitted does not win any delegates in that district, we could see a primary challenge to Representative Tlaib emerge.  State-wide, there are twenty-five at-large delegates and fifteen party-leader delegates.  As such, if uncommitted were to get to fifteen percent state-wide, uncommitted would get, at least, four at-large and two party-leader delegates.   But the expectation is that President Biden will win almost all of the 117 delegates at stake on Tuesday. Continue Reading...

Also posted in Donald Trump, Primary Elections | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Trump Ballot Case and the Precedents of Nat Turner and John Brown

On Friday, the United Staes Supreme Court decided to grant President Trump’s Petition for Certiorari in Trump vs. Anderson.  However, it took no action on the companion Petition for Certiorari filed by the Colorado Republican Party in Colorado State Republican Central Committee v. Anderson.  Before turning to the issues raised in this case, there are two things to note about the Supreme Court order granting review and the petitions filed.

First, in granting Trump’s petition, the Supreme Court implicitly recognized the necessity to resolve this issue quickly.  The briefs of Trump and his enablers in the Republican Party (and related organizations) are due on January 18, less than two weeks after the order granting review (as opposed to the usual 45 days).  The briefs of Trump’s challengers and the Colorado election official who are in the middle of this case are due thirteen days later on January 31 (along with any outside brief from individuals who want to support Democracy) with any reply briefs due five days later on February 5.  This contrast to the normal deadlines of 45 days for petitioner’s brief with respondent’s brief due 30 days later and the reply brief an additional 35 days later. Additionally, the case will be argued on February 8 which is a special setting in the middle of what would otherwise have been the Supreme Court’s winter break.

Second, the Supreme Court did not rewrite Trump’s question presented.  Typically, the question prsented in a petition for certiorari is narrowly focused on one legal issue.  For example, did the lower court err in finding that the potential for the metabolizing of blood alcohol content is an automatic exigent circumstance permitting law enforcement officers to conduct a warrantless blood draw?  If there are multiple issues in a case, the petition will present multiple questions on which the Supreme Court can pick and choose which issues will be considered at the time that the petition is granted.  For example, the Colorado Republican Party presented three issues:  1) does Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment apply to the President; 2) is Section 3 self-executing; and 3) does disqualifying a candidate violate the First Amendment rights of political parties.  By contrast, the Trump Petition, after noting the ruling (that his actions and the office of President fell within the restrictions of Section) simply asks whether the Colorado Supreme Court erred by excluding him from the ballot.  In other words, unlike the usual question which identifies a specific legal error in the ruling, the Supreme Court appears to be allowing the consideration of any potential theory on why the Colorado Supreme Court erred. Continue Reading...

Also posted in 2024 Convention, Donald Trump, GOP, Judicial, Republicans, RNC | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Trump Ballot Case and the Precedents of Nat Turner and John Brown

Special Elections 2024

Things are about to get very interesting in the House of Representatives.  While there have been a large number of representatives who are not running for re-election.  The irony of Republicans explaining their reason for leaving as the unpleasant environment in Congress is hard to miss.  But the focus of this post is not on those leaving in January 2025.  It is those who have left (involuntarily) or are about to be leaving mid-term.

At the present time, we have a vacancy in New York’s Third District due to the expulsion of fraudster who called himself George Santos.  (And the fact that the majority of House Republicans did not want to expel him despite overwhelming evidence of fraud while wanting to open an impeachment of President Biden with no evidence says something about the shell of a serious political party that the Republicans have become).  But we have also had announcements of the intent to resign in three other districts (so far) —   California’s Twentieth District (former Speaker Kevin McCarthy who will be leaving sometime later this month or in early January),  New York’s  Twenty-Sixth District (Democrat Brian Higgins who will be leaving in February), and Ohio’s  Sixth District (Republican Bill Johnson who will be leaving in March).

These departures in the House will alter the size of the Republican majority in the House.  The rules for vacancies in the House are different than the rules for vacancies in the Senate.  Under the Seventeenth Amendment, the governor of each state can temporarily fill a vacancy in the Senate until an election can be held to fill the balance of the term.  By contrast, there is no equivalent provision for the House.  Thus a House seat remains vacant until there is a special election.  For both the House and the Senate, the timing of the special election is left to the state.  Especially for the Senate, there is a wide range of rules with some states leaving the appointee in office until the next regularly scheduled election (which can create the weirdness of having two elections for the same office — one for the last three to four weeks of the current term and one for the next term — at the same time) and others requiring a prompt special election.  But the states also have different rules for the scheduling of House elections (and who chooses the candidates). Continue Reading...

Also posted in House of Representatives | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Special Elections 2024

A Manchin-less Senate

This week, Senator Joe Manchin (I/D — WVa) announced that he would not be running for re-election.  If Senator Manchin does not end up on the “Let’s split the anti-Trump vote” “No Labels” ticket, this decision is both positive and negative for what Democrats might be able to do in the 2025-26 Congress.

To paraphrase a saying attributed to Karl Rove, progressive want to nominate the most progressive candidate that can win a general election.  In West Virginia, Joe Manchin might just have been the most progressive candidate that Democrats could nominate and still have a chance at winning.  His name recognition and reputation allowed him to win a state in which the average Democrat has hoping to receive 40-45% of the vote in the general election.

Is it possible that, one day in the future, Democrats could be competitive in West Virginia again?  Yes.  But, in one crucial way, West Virginia resembles the pre-Civil War South.  In today’s West Virginia, coal mining is a key industry.  While only 2% of the state directly works in coal (like only a tiny percentage of Southerners owned slaves), coal is the second largest industry (beyond the health sector) based on GDP generated.  In many parts of the state, if coal mining stopped tomorrow, there would be significant job losses in many areas of the state which would also cause retail and service industries to decline in those areas.  And the number who see their livelihood as tied to coal is a large enough percent to make the pro-coal vote a significant block in West Virginia elections.  This puts Democrats in a bind.  It is essential for the nation and the world for the U.S. to reduce its reliance on coal.  But recognizing and acting on this necessity hurts Democrats in West Virginia.   As such, the reality is that without Joe Manchin running, it is almost certain that Democrats will lose the Senate race in West Virginia.   And given how close the Senate is currently divided, the loss of this seat will make it harder for Democrats to have a majority in the Senate after the 2024 election. Continue Reading...

Also posted in Senate | Tagged , , | Comments Off on A Manchin-less Senate

November 2023 Elections

In the U.S., in something that would be a surprise to the Franers, the presidential election has become the “main” election.  Turnout is always highest for the presidential election.  But that is not the only only election, and other elections can be even more important.  To save money, most states have their statewide elections coincide with federal elections (either the presidential election or the mid-term election).  But a handful of states have taken a different approach and hold their elections in odd-numbered years.  In addition, many states (while holding the elections for state offices at the same time as federal election in even-numbered years) hold local elections in the odd-numbered years.  And most states, even if November in odd-numbered years is not a “regular” election date keep it available as a potential election date for special elections and propositions.   This year, the November election will feature several big races.

At the state-wide office level, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Kentucky hold their elections for governor in the year immediately proceeding the presidential election.  Louisiana is a little different because it holds a “jungle primary” which is actually an open general election (i.e. no party primaries) with a runoff if nobody gets 50%.  This “primary” election was several weeks ago, and the Republicans picked up the governor’s office in Louisiana.  Given that Louisiana is a deep red state, this pickup was not too surprising as it takes the right Democrat to have a chance at winning and the incumbent Democrat was term limited.  The new governor is a right wing extremist, and we will probably be hearing a lot of nonsense out of the Pelican State for the next eight years.

But the races for Governor in Kentucky and Mississippi will be on Tuesday.  (At least the initial vote will be on Tuesday as Mississippi has a runoff provision if nobody gets to 50%.)  The governor in Kentucky is a Democrat and the governor in Mississippi is a Republican.  Both are favored to be reelected but the challengers in both states have chances at pulling an upset.  In Kentucky, the challengers big advantage is that he is a Republican.  But the Republican candidate has been a controversial figure as Attorney General, and the Democratic incumbent is popular which might be just enough to hold onto the office.  In Mississippi, the Governor has gotten entangled in some scandals and the challenger happens to be a member of a famous family even if that fame was over 50 years ago.  But Mississippi is still a deep red state.  In short, the most likely outcome is that there will be no changes, but it is also possible that either or both states could flip. Continue Reading...

Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on November 2023 Elections

Candidate Trump — Felon Ballot Access Restrictions and the Fourteenth Amendment

We are heading into uncharted waters.  A major political party has become a cult in thrall to a person who may not be eligible to run for president (or at least barred from the ballot in several states) who insists that he should be the nominee in 2024.  Add to that a martyr complex by the true believers who have taken over many state parties, and we are heading into potential chaos for the Fall of 2024.

Of course, one of the complexities is that the national election for president is when the electoral college meets and votes and sends those votes to Congress to be counted.  Up until that Wednesday in December, we have fifty-one elections for presidential electors and more elections for delegates to the nominating convention.  Each of the jurisdictions (states and territories) involved in these elections have different rules and procedures.

Having said that, there are several general things that are consistent from state to state.  First, for the general elections, the parties certify the name of their presidential and vice-presidential candidate in late August or early September.   Second, there is a state election authority which receives and processes the candidate paperwork for state and federal candidates.  For the most part, these officials rarely refuse candidate filings, but they are tasked with determining whether the filing to be on the ballot is complete and shows that the candidate is eligible to run under state law.  Third, decisions on whether a candidate qualifies to be on the ballot is subject to some form of judicial review.  But, assuming that the election authority finds that a candidate is eligible to run, the different states have different rules on who can challenge that determination.  In all, or almost every state, the opposing candidates have the right to bring such a case, but the rules as to who else has that right differs from state to state.  Fourth, if, for some reason, a party’s nominee has to be replaced on the ballot, it generally falls on the state party to name a replacement.  Fifth, for the presidential election, there is actually a ticket composed of the candidates for president, the vice-president, and the presidential electors.  It is the last two or three where the potential for chaos emerges. Continue Reading...

Also posted in Donald Trump, Electoral College, Judicial, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Candidate Trump — Felon Ballot Access Restrictions and the Fourteenth Amendment

The Independent State Legislature Theory, Election Law, and the Trump Crimes

Recently, a federal grand jury in the District of Columbia returned an indictment charging the Orange Menance with crimes related to his attempted coup after the 2020 election.  It is expected that within a week or two a state grand jury in Fulton County, Georgia will add state charges related to the efforts of dictator-wannabe Donald Trump to convince Georgia election authorities to alter the results of the election in that state.

Much of the crimes committed by Donald Trump and his band of incompetent coconspirators were based on a flawed version of the independent state legislature theory and a misunderstanding of election mechanics.

First, the independent state legislature theory.  The independent state legislature theory is based on two clauses in the U.S. Constitution.  One of the clauses is found in Article I and applies to the election of members of Congress.  The other clauses is found in Article II and deals with the selection of presidential electors. Continue Reading...

Also posted in 2020 General Election, Donald Trump, Electoral College | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The Independent State Legislature Theory, Election Law, and the Trump Crimes

Direct Democracy in Ohio

This Tuesday, voters in Ohio will decide the future of direct democracy in Ohio.  For the most part, the U.S., like many other democracies is a republic.  In other words, the usual way that laws get made is through the legislative process with elected representatives debating, amending, and voting on proposals.  In theory, the will of the majority is expressed through their representatives.  A little over a century ago, reformers during the Progressive Era argued that there were flaws in the representative system that sometimes allowed a minority to block useful and popular legislation.  The remedy was the initiative and referendum process which allowed ordinary voters to get proposals on the ballot were they could be directly determined by the voters.

Now, not every state has authorized the initiative and referendum process.  Even in those that do, the rules differ as to how many signatures are required.  However, for the most part, states that allow for direct democracy (whether through proposals initiated by voters or by proposals referred to the voters by the government) only require a simple majority for the proposal to pass.

Even from the beginning, there has been resistance to the initiative and referendum process.  After all, special interests that are able to get what they want from elected officials do not like the voters having the ability to override those efforts. Continue Reading...

Also posted in GOP, Politics | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Direct Democracy in Ohio