Monthly Archives: January 2020

Mr. Sanders and Ms. Warren have accused one another of lying about a private conversation in 2018 over whether a woman could become president; Mr. Sanders and Mr. Biden have attacked each other over Social Security and corruption; and Hillary Clinton, the 2016 Democratic nominee, has come off the sidelines to stoke her rivalry with Mr. Sanders, declaring that nobody likes him.

The lack of consensus among Democratic voters, 10 days before the presidential nominating primary begins with the Iowa caucuses, has led some party leaders to make unusually fervent and early pleas for unity. On Monday alone, a pair of influential Democratic congressmen issued strikingly similar warnings to very different audiences in very different states.

We get down to November, theres only going to be one nominee, Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, the third-ranking House Democrat, said at a ceremony for Martin Luther Kings Birthday at the State House in Columbia. Nobody can afford to get so angry because your first choice did not win. If you stay home in November, you are going to get Trump back.

No matter who our nominee is, we cant make the mistake that we made in 16, Representative Dave Loebsack of Iowa said that night in Cedar Rapids as he introduced his preferred 2020 candidate, former Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind., at a town hall meeting. We all got to get behind that person so we can get Donald Trump out of office, Mr. Loebsack added.

In interviews, Democratic leaders say they believe the partys fights over such politically fraught issues as treasured entitlement programs, personal integrity, and gender and electability could hand Mr. Trump and foreign actors ammunition with which to depress turnout for their standard-bearer.

I am concerned about facing another disinformation campaign from the other side, said Representative Brendan Boyle of Pennsylvania, a Biden supporter who was uneasy enough that he recently sought out high-profile congressional backers of some of the other contenders to discuss an eventual dtente. For those of us who are elected officials, we need to exercise real leadership to make sure all of the camps are immediately united after all this is over.

More:

A Major Fear for Democrats: Will the Party Come Together by November? - The New York Times

Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg faced sharp questioning at a Fox News town hall from an anti-abortion Democrat about his position on the issue and whether he thinks those who oppose abortion have a home in the Democratic Party.

"I'm a proud pro-life Democrat. So, do you want the support of pro-life Democrats?" town hall audience member Kristen Day, president of the Washington, D.C., organization Democrats for Life, asked the former South Bend, Indiana, mayor. "And if so, would you support more moderate platform language in the Democratic Party to ensure the party of diversity and inclusion really does include everybody?"

"I'm not going to try to earn your vote by tricking you. I am pro-choice, and I believe that a woman ought to be able to make that decision," Buttigieg, 38, responded. "But I know that the difference of opinion that you and I have is one that we have come by honestly. And the best that I can offer and it may win your vote, and if not, I understand. The best that I can offer is that, if we can't agree on where to draw the line, the next best thing we can do is agree on who should draw the line. And in my view, it's the woman who is faced with that decision in her own life."

Town hall moderator Chris Wallace noted that President Trump on Friday became the first president to speak at the annual anti-abortion March for Life demonstration in Washington, D.C. Wallace turned back to Day and asked if she was satisfied with the way Buttigieg answered her question.

"I was not because he didn't answer the second part of my question," Day said. "The Democratic platform contains language that basically says that we don't belong, we have no part in the party because it says abortion should be legal up to nine months; the government should pay for it. And there's nothing that says that people that have a diversity of views on this issue should be included in the party."

She noted that in 1996 and other years, there was language in the Democratic Party platform that welcomed those with different views on abortion.

"I support the position of my party that this kind of medical care needs to be available to everyone," Buttigieg said. "And I support the Roe v. Wade framework that holds that early in pregnancy, there are very few restrictions and later in pregnancy, there are very few exceptions. And again, the best I can offer is that we may disagree on that very important issue, and hopefully we'll be able to partner on other issues."

The woman then said something inaudible not captured by the microphone, and Wallace asked Buttigieg whether anti-abortion Democrats should be asked to look at the party platform as a whole or look for another party.

"I've never encountered a politician or frankly another person that I agreed with 100% of the time, even on very important things," Buttigieg said. "I cannot imagine that a decision that a woman confronts is going to ever be better medically or morally because it's being dictated by any government official. And that's just where I am on the issue."

Earlier in the town hall, Buttigieg similarly said that while he was trying to woo anti-Trump Republicans into supporting him, he was not trying to "trick" anyone.

At a Fox News town hall in May 2019, Buttigieg indicated that he did not support any restrictions on access to abortion in the third trimester of pregnancy. When Wallace noted that about 6,000 women per year get abortions in the third trimester of pregnancy, Buttigieg responded that represents less than 1% of cases.

"If its that late in your pregnancy, then its almost by definition, youve been expecting to carry it to term," Buttigieg said in May. "And the bottom line is, as horrible as that choice is, that woman, that family may seek spiritual guidance, they may seek medical guidance, but that decision is not going to be made any better, medically or morally, because the government is dictating how that decision should be made."

Just a handful of Democrats in Congress side with the anti-abortion platform, and abortion rights advocates have called for loosening all restrictions on abortion. In 2016 the Democratic platform on the issue shifted from calling for abortions to be "safe, legal, and rare" to just "safe and legal."

The Fox News town hall comes just a week before the first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses. The RealClearPolitics average of Iowa polls finds Buttigieg behind former Vice President Joe Biden and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders with 19.3% support.

The rest is here:

'Didn't answer the second part of my question': Buttigieg grilled by anti-abortion Democrat - Washington Examiner

A Mix of Candor and Evasion on the Obama Years

[See their responses on the Obama years.]

None of the Democratic candidates has shown any appetite for criticizing President Barack Obama. So, we wondered what they would say if we asked whether Barack Obama made any mistakes at all. Some of them responded by dodging the core of the question: Mr. Buttigieg and Ms. Warren, for instance, declined to name anything in particular they thought Mr. Obama did wrong.

But while all of them swathed their answers in lavish praise for the Obama record, several offered revealing hints of criticism. Mr. Bloomberg said the former president should have moved faster to fill vacant judgeships, while Ms. Klobuchar called the failure to take on prescription drug pricing a significant missed opportunity. Mr. Steyer faulted the former president for having spent too much time trying to work with Republican adversaries whom Mr. Steyer said would never compromise.

He trusted the Republicans too much, too long, Mr. Steyer said.

Most interesting of all may have been Mr. Yang, who delivered a big-picture critique of the Obama economic record: When we had a fundamental choice to either recapitalize the banks or keep Americans in their homes, we chose the banks, we bailed out Wall Street, Mr. Yang said. That is a view several other candidates in the race surely share, even if they did not say it out loud.

[See their responses about bad habits, books and celebrity crushes.]

While the interviews were mostly serious, eat-your-vegetables questions, we couldnt resist adding a bit of dessert. And so we asked all of the candidates to name their bad habits, the last book they read and their celebrity crushes.

The bad habits were almost endearingly normal.

I like Cheez-Its, Mr. Bloomberg said, which are probably not good for you.

I bite my nails, said Mr. Buttigieg.

Ms. Klobuchar had perhaps our favorite bad habit: The New York Times crossword puzzle, she said. So, my problem is that I do it at night.

Some candidates were willing to name a celebrity crush, but most were not. Without hesitation, Ms. Warren named The Rock. Just look at that man! she said. Hes eye candy!

See the rest here:

5 Things We Learned Interviewing 2020 Democrats (Again) - The New York Times

Democrats are pushing back at GOP backlash over a controversial line in House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam SchiffAdam Bennett SchiffSunday shows preview: Lawmakers prepare for week two of impeachment trial Trump defense team signals focus on Schiff Schiff pushes back: Defense team knows Trump is guilty MOREs (D-Calif.) closing statement in Friday night's impeachment trial arguments.

Schiffsparked an audible reaction from Republicans when he referenced a CBS News report that cited an anonymous Trump confidant saying GOP senators' headswould be on a pike if they opposed President TrumpDonald John TrumpKaine: Obama called Trump a 'fascist' during 2016 campaign Kaine: GOP senators should 'at least' treat Trump trial with seriousness of traffic court Louise Linton, wife of Mnuchin, deletes Instagram post in support of Greta Thunberg MORE on impeachment.

Republicans including Sens. LisaMurkowski(Alaska) and Susan CollinsSusan Margaret CollinsKaine: GOP senators should 'at least' treat Trump trial with seriousness of traffic court Romney: 'It's very likely I'll be in favor of witnesses' in Trump impeachment trial Schumer: Trump's team made case for new witnesses 'even stronger' MORE (Maine) quickly distanced themselves, with Collins overheard repeatedly saying "thats not true" and Murkowski saying Schiff "overreached."

But Senate Democrats are rallying behindSchiff, accusing Republicans offauxoutrage or overreacting to a few sentences in an hourlong closing statement for the House managers.

"The most dangerous place in America, maybe in Washington, is to stand by the exit door at the White House because when you fall out of favor with this president, he lops off your head, throws your body in the snow and buries you in vicious tweets," said Sen. DickDurbin(D-Ill.), the No. 2 Democrat, when asked about the GOP reaction to the line.

"So the notion that he may be following this and have some feelings about how people vote is not preposterous,"Durbinadded.

Asked about the outrage from Republicans, Sen. Jon TesterJonathan (Jon) TesterDemocrats cry foul over Schiff backlash Democrats feel political momentum swinging to them on impeachment Nadler gets under GOP's skin MORE (D-Mont.), who won reelection in 2018 in a red state, saidSchiff'scomment wasn't a mistake and that "in some cases people are just looking for excuses."

Sen. Chris MurphyChristopher (Chris) Scott MurphyDemocrats cry foul over Schiff backlash Tensions between McConnell and Schumer run high as trial gains momentum Nadler gets under GOP's skin MORE (D-Conn.)added in a tweetthat Republicans were jumping on the line as a distraction to avoid the substance of the allegations against President Trump.

Schiffreferenced the report as he was in the final stretch of his closing argument on the Senate floor Friday night.

"CBS News reported last night that a Trump confidant said that key senators were warned, 'Vote against the president and your head will be on a pike.' I don't know if that's true," Schiff said.

Go here to read the rest:

Democrats cry foul over Schiff backlash | TheHill - The Hill

Republican senators and Democratic House impeachment managers doubled down Sunday on their positions on calling witnesses in the Senate impeachment trial of President TrumpDonald John TrumpKaine: Obama called Trump a 'fascist' during 2016 campaign Kaine: GOP senators should 'at least' treat Trump trial with seriousness of traffic court Louise Linton, wife of Mnuchin, deletes Instagram post in support of Greta Thunberg MORE, with Republicans dismissing it as a stalling tacticand Democrats insisting the Senate and the public are entitled to additional information.

Sen. Tom CottonThomas (Tom) Bryant CottonSunday shows preview: Lawmakers prepare for week two of impeachment trial Schiff closes Dems' impeachment arguments with emotional appeal to remove Trump Commerce Department withdraws Huawei rule after Pentagon pushback: reports MORE (R-Ark.) said he was unsure of whether the Senate would vote to call witnesses but dismissed the idea on CBSs Face the Nation.

"Im not going to vote to approve witnesses because the House Democrats have had lots of witnesses. ... We listened to [House Intelligence Committee Chairman] Adam SchiffAdam Bennett SchiffSunday shows preview: Lawmakers prepare for week two of impeachment trial Trump defense team signals focus on Schiff Schiff pushes back: Defense team knows Trump is guilty MORE [D-Calif.] drone on for three days, and the president's lawyers in just two hours demolished the case they had made," he said.

"Theyre not upset that they havent had witnesses. Theyre upset that their witnesses havent said what they want them to say," he added.

Sen. James LankfordJames Paul LankfordSchiff sparks blowback with head on a 'pike' line Schiff closes Dems' impeachment arguments with emotional appeal to remove Trump Senate Republicans confident they'll win fight on witnesses MORE (R-Okla.), meanwhile, decried the call for witnesses as an attempt to prolong the trial as the chambers GOP majority seeks a speedy resolution.

They wanted to move as fast as possible, and now they want to slow down the trial as much as possible in the Senate, Lankford said on ABCs This Week. Thats just a very odd political strategy for them more than a fact-finding strategy.

The vote on whether to call witnesses, which will likely take place this week, has become a central question in the impeachment trial. Democrats tried to include a requirement to vote on individual witnesses and documents in the organizing resolution that set the rules for the trial, but Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellSchumer: Trump's team made case for new witnesses 'even stronger' Trump, Democrats risk unintended consequences with impeachment arguments CNN's Axelrod says impeachment didn't come up until 80 minutes into focus group MORE (R-Ky.) had the votes to shoot down the amendments and punt the question of witnessesuntil after both sides deliver opening statements.

Democrats want to hear from former national security adviser John BoltonJohn BoltonRomney: 'It's very likely I'll be in favor of witnesses' in Trump impeachment trial George Conway: Witness missing from impeachment trial is Trump Democrats see Mulvaney as smoking gun witness at Trump trial MORE and acting White House chief of staff Mick MulvaneyJohn (Mick) Michael MulvaneyDemocrats see Mulvaney as smoking gun witness at Trump trial Trump legal team offers brisk opening defense of president Trump legal team launches impeachment defense MORE. Last week, they dismissed an idea floated by Republicans of "witness reciprocity,"which would allowRepublicans to call a witness they want to hear from, such as former Vice President Joe BidenJoe BidenDes Moines Register endorses Elizabeth Warren as Democratic presidential nominee Sanders faces lingering questions about appeal to women voters George Conway: Witness missing from impeachment trial is Trump MORE's son Hunter Biden, in exchange for each Democratic witness called.

Sen. Amy KlobucharAmy Jean KlobucharDes Moines Register endorses Elizabeth Warren as Democratic presidential nominee Sunday shows preview: Lawmakers prepare for week two of impeachment trial Moore defends Sanders's reputation: 'We don't want the fake, and the phony and the fraudulent' MORE (D-Minn.) quoted the musical Hamilton in explaining her request for witnesses, saying, I want to hear from the men to quote the Founding Fathers musical to hear from the men in the room where it happened. ... That is people like Mr. Bolton and Mick Mulvaney.

Democrats say Bolton and Mulvaney have firsthand knowledge of Trump's dealings with Ukrainebut that Hunter Biden's testimony is irrelevant because he doesn't. Trump's allies contend that information from Hunter Biden could unravel the beginnings of the investigation.

The Houses impeachment managers also defended how the trialhas been conducted thus far, with Rep. Zoe LofgrenZoe Ellen LofgrenSunday shows preview: Lawmakers prepare for week two of impeachment trial GOP warns of 'drawn out' executive privilege battle over Bolton testimony Female impeachment managers say American public know a 'rigged' trial when they see one MORE (D-Calif.) calling on Trump to get a grip after a Sunday morning tweet in whichhe saidSchiff has not paid the price, yet, for what he has done to our Country.

"The president has a tendency to say things that seem threatening to people," Lofgren said on CNN's "State of the Union."

Lofgren also called on senators to vote for witnesses as a favor to the country, saying, "I think the country wants a complete picture. The senators have an opportunity to do it. ... I think they would be doing themselves a favor as well as the country a favor."

Schiff also responded to Trumps tweet, saying it was intended as a threat.

"It is going to be very difficult for some of these senators to stand up to this president. It really is. There's just no question about it," Schiff said on NBCs Meet the Press. "I want to acknowledge that, and I don't want to acknowledge it in a way that is offensive to them, but I do want to speak candidly about it."

Schiff also called on Chief Justice John Roberts to rule on the relevance of testimony from Hunter Biden if he is called to testify.

We have a very capable justice sitting right behind me who can make decisions about the materiality of witnesses, he said. We trust the Supreme Court chief justice to make those decisions.

See original here:

Democrats, Republicans tussle over witnesses as vote approaches | TheHill - The Hill

Driving the news: Democratic contenders responded with visceral dislike to mentions of Facebook during The New York Times' recent on-camera endorsement process.

Between the lines: Tech issues have driven more campaign debate during this Democratic primary season than in previous cycles.

Be smart: Criticism of Big Tech is coming from both parties. But Republicans and conservatives have historically opposed regulating industry and breaking up monopolies, while for Democrats, it's home base.

The big picture: Facebook has leaned on its conservative connections under the Trump administration, while its relationship with Democrats has become more hostile.

Yes, but: Facebook's Silicon Valley-based workforce almost certainly leans liberal, and its chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg, is a vocal Democrat.

Our thought bubble: Past presidents have shied away from criticizing or targeting specific U.S. firms, but Trump has erased that norm.

The bottom line: Big companies of a sufficient size generally avoid becoming associated with a political party because they want to attract customers across the political spectrum and they want to profit under presidents of either party.

Go deeper:

Go here to read the rest:

Facebook is worried about Democrats winning the presidential election - Axios

Mark Kelly speaks at New York's City Hall with his wife, former congresswoman Gabby Giffords, in 2016. Kelly is a strong Democratic candidate for an Arizona Senate seat this year. (Photo by Spencer Platt / Getty Images)

Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!

The impeachment trial in the US Senate is clearly a constitutional and moral moment of truth. It is also an excellent opportunity to advance the nitty-gritty work that will defeat vulnerable incumbent Republican senators and allow Democrats to recapture control of that critical chamber when voters head to the polls this November. It is easy for progressives to get excited about compelling candidatespeople with impressive life stories and hard-hitting adsand then shower resources on those candidates. And, yes, charisma and well-crafted ads are nice. But as Virginia Democrats success last fall demonstrates, robust, statewide voter mobilization operations are better.Ad Policy

Republicans currently hold 53 of the Senates 100 seats; Democrats will need a minimum net gain of three seats and a new, Democratic vice president to flip partisan control of the body. Of the 23 Republican-controlled Senate seats up for election this year, there are currently 13 seats in 12 states that offer plausible prospects for Democrats to defeat their Republican opponent.

Factoring in four key criteriapast electoral results, demographic developments, existing civic engagement infrastructure, and incumbent favorability ratingsI have given all 12 states with a Republican incumbent (and one state, Alabama, with a vulnerable Democrat) a score that illustrates their respective winnability.

(Read a complete description of the methodology and underlying data incorporated in the ratings here.)

The states where Democrats are most likely to flip a Senate seat are those where theyve fared well in recent statewide elections, and where there is a large pool of potential Democratic voters who could be brought into the electorate to improve the overall odds of victory.

Kyrsten Sinema won the Arizona US Senate race in 2018the first Democrat to win an open seat in that state since 1976. Conventional wisdom attributes Sinemas success to popularity with moderate voters, generally code for white swing voters; but she actually lost the white vote to her opponent. While her white vote share was admittedly higher than many Democrats receive, it was her 70 percent of the Latino vote that propelled her to victory, by just 56,000 votes. And there could be a whole lot more where that came from: More than 600,000 eligible Latinos did not vote in 2018.

Burgeoning Latino civic engagement infrastructure is the progressive secret weapon in Arizona. Ever since the states government passed the 2010 anti-immigrant legislation often referred to as the show me your papers law, a strong, sustained and effective cohort of organizations and leaders have worked together to build political power and darken the complexion of the Arizona electorate. Republican Martha McSally is the incumbent up for reelection this fall; progressive solidarity, combined with the strong fundraising of likely Democratic nominee Mark Kellyformer astronaut, current gun control activist, and husband of former representative Gabby Giffordsmakes this one of the most winnable Senate seats in the country.Current Issue

Subscribe today and Save up to $129.

After two decades of sustained investment in a strong progressive infrastructure of organizations and leaders in Coloradoa period during which the states population has also become increasingly diverseDemocrats have won all four statewide elections since 2016. Cory Gardner, the current incumbent Republican senator, won this seat in 2014 by the narrow margin of 40,000 votes. (He was helped along by the fact that 300,000 fewer Democratic voters turned out than had voted in 2008s presidential election.) Two Democrats, former governor John Hickenlooper and former speaker of the state House Andrew Romanoff, will face off in Colorados June primary; whoever prevails should be the favorite to win the seat in a high-turnout presidential election year.

The silver lining of Georgias bitterly disappointing gubernatorial election in 2018? Stacey Abramss historic bid helped to build an electoral infrastructure that resulted in record Democratic voter turnout. That operation gives a massive head start to Democrats looking to win the state in 2020, at both the Senate and presidential levels. (A few months ago, Abrams even created a document in which she shares her prescription for victory.) Georgia has two Senate seats on the ballot in November. The field of potential Senate candidates is still unsettled: It includes Jon Ossoff, who previously ran for US Congress; Sarah Riggs Amico, a former candidate for Georgia lieutenant governor; and Teresa Tomlinson, who was the first female mayor of Columbus, Georgia. All are competing for the seat currently held by David Perdue. (Theres a special election planned for the second seat as well, but theres been little clarity yet about that race.) Regardless of who the ultimate candidates are, Georgia should be all-hands-on-deck for progressives nationallyespecially because the state is also within reach of any Democratic presidential nominee, even more so if Abrams were on the ticket to be vice president. If the Democrats can mobilize the Abrams coalition, it will lift all boats.

Texas, once seen as a solidly red state, now has the greatest progressive electoral potential of any state in the country. Its enormous number of eligible, non-voting people of color absolutely dwarfs the shrinking margin of difference in statewide elections. In 2018, Beto ORourke lost his US Senate bid by just 215,000 votes, despite the fact that 5.5 million people of color didnt cast ballots.

Similar to what weve seen in Virginia, groups such as the Texas Organizing Project have helped make the difference in mayoral elections in Houston and San Antonio in recent years, with a steady course of methodical civic engagement work. Texass very competitive Democratic primary is fast approaching, on March 3, or Super Tuesday; that contest is among the first of the battleground Senate races. While the Democratic senatorial Campaign Committee has sought to tip the scales in favor of M.J. Hegarwhose military background, its assumed, will help attract white votersthere are multiple candidates of color in the race. The person with the clearest and most logical path to defeating Republican John Cornyn is Cristina Tzintzn Ramirez. She comes from an organizing background, has deep ties to Latino communities across the state, and is the kind of inspiring and progressive candidate who can capture the imagination of the largeand still essentially untappedelectorate that holds the key to flipping Texas. (Full disclosure: I have contributed to Tzintzn Ramirezs campaign, and she is a guest on the latest episode of my podcast, Democracy in Color.)Related Article

There are actually just a handful of states where large numbers of voters regularly switch their partisan preferences. Such states are harder and more expensive to win; at worst, they can be bottomless money pits, where political ads may or may not be wasted. (Bringing to mind the old adage: Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is I dont know which half.) But with a president as divisive, unqualified, and destructive as the one we have now, the prospect of Democrats prevailing in swing states could be higher than usual.

Many people forget that Barack Obama managed to win North Carolina in 2008, if only by a tiny margin. And although Trump won the state in 2016, Democrat Roy Cooper prevailed in the gubernatorial contest that year. In a state with a meaningful number of college-educated whites, particularly around the so-called Research Triangle of Chapel Hill, Durham, and Raleigh, likely Democratic nominee Cal Cunningham may have appeal, but hell need to work hard to inspire the African Americans who make up 22 percent of the states population. Much of the burden of increasing African American voter turnouta group that overwhelmingly votes Democraticwill fall to progressive groups and the Democratic presidential ticket (further accentuating the importance of a ticket that can inspire voters of color).

Maine Republican Susan Collins and her pseudo-moderate rhetoric have enraged progressives for yearsmost notably during the fight over Brett Kavanaughs Supreme Court confirmation, where she provided critical cover for the Republicans patriarchal power play. She could be vulnerable this year. Maine is more Democratic than many people realize; the state voted Democratic in the last seven presidential elections. Collins now faces a formidable Democratic opponent in Sara Gideon, the well-funded speaker of the Maine House of Representatives and daughter of an Indian immigrant. Furthermore, Collinss favorability numbers are underwater, as 10 percent more Maine residents view her unfavorably than favorably.

Iowa, of course, is among the swingiest swing states in the country, having flipped from backing Obama by substantial margins in 2008 to a Trump blowout in 2016. (Pat Rynard, who runs the political news site Iowa Starting Line discussed this phenomenon on my podcast in October, observing that candidates who have run on a change-type message have done well in the state.) In that lightand taking note of incumbent Republican Joni Ernsts unfavorable polling numbersit is realistic to try to flip this seat. A three-way Democratic primary in June will determine the partys nominee. Many party leaders have high hopes for Theresa Greenfield, who is backed by Emilys List and other progressive groups.

There is another cohort of states where seats are up for election this yearones that would normally be out of reach, just by virtue of their paucity of Democratic voters. But in a high-turnout year when many white voters are alarmed by the Republican standard-bearer, things could conceivably break just right for Democrats. Think of the perfect storm that swept through Alabama in 2017, when Republicans nominated accused child-molester Roy Moore for the Senate, and Democrat Doug Jones rode a robust black voter turnout operation to victory.

Jones is up for reelection this year, and he faces daunting odds in a state that Trump won by nearly 28 points. (Joness own 2017 win came in a contest with much lower voter turnout.) But in addition to the possibility of Joness being reelected, the other states where an Alabama Miracle could conceivably occur are Mississippi, South Carolina, and Kentucky. Mississippi and South Carolina are similar to Alabama, in that they have large African American populations; Kentucky is worth considering, too, since Democrat Andy Beshear squeaked to victory in the governor race last year, and incumbent Mitch McConnells steadfast support for Trumps divisive agenda has made him one of the least popular senators in the country.

Montana is a true iconoclast, where there is frequent ticket splitting of perplexing proportions. In 2016, Trump won Montana by 20 points, even while Democrat Steve Bullock prevailed in the gubernatorial contest. The popular Bullockwho briefly entered the Democratic presidential primary last year, before pulling out in Decemberhas thus far resisted entreaties to run for Senate. But should he do so, he would be a strong favorite to flip that seat.

The Senate impeachment trial will force all incumbent senators to openly condemn or condone Trumps behavior. This could draw a clear connection between the actions of this president and the responsibility of his congressional enablers. If Democrats can make sure that voters in the most winnable states understand the role that their incumbent GOP senators have played in this havoc, it could accelerate their efforts to take back control of the Senate and this country.

Taking control of the Senate will require success on two fronts: increasing turnout of voters of color, and cementing support among those suburban white voters who gave Trump a chance in 2016, but shifted their support to Democrats in the 2018 midterms. Most people of color understand clearly the danger and destruction presented by this administration, but the Senate trial offers an excellent opportunity to affirm the increasing alarm felt by those suburban white voters too. Once the evidence is presented, every senator will have to go on the record about whether they support Trumps unconstitutional corruption. Come November, there are at least 12 incumbent Republicans who can, and should, pay the political price for their complicity in endangering and undermining our democracy.

More here:

12 States Where Democrats Could Flip the Senate - The Nation