Republican strategist on warning signs coming out of Florida election results
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
a few seconds ago
- CNN
Analysis: 4 possible outcomes of a gerrymandering battle royale
The American political system has for years transformed into a more partisan, brutalized and norm-scorning version of itself. The old rules are increasingly out; whatever-it-takes is increasingly in. Few developments epitomize that transformation like the burgeoning gerrymandering arms race. Texas Republicans' recent move to redraw the state's congressional districts in the middle of the decade has little precedent, and for once nobody is pretending this is about anything other than raw politics. Republicans just want to make it harder for Democrats to flip a closely divided US House in 2026. A Texas Republican state representative told CNN the GOP is doing this 'because it's good for our party.' President Donald Trump said this week that the GOP is 'entitled to five more seats' in the state. This has led to promises of reprisals from Democrats. They've pledged to respond in kind by playing dirty in states where they could re-draw the maps, like California. Other states – red and blue – are actively considering jumping into the fray with their own map overhauls. All of it raises the prospect of something pretty scary and undemocratic: a continual race to the bottom in which districts are constantly redrawn whenever it suits one party or another, rather than once a decade. It's an inauspicious prospect, to say the least. Lawmakers could find themselves representing and seeking election in ever-changing districts to which they have little personal connection. Those districts' residents could become pawns in a sophisticated and constant game of divide-and-conquer. Adding to the potential chaos is the possibility that the Supreme Court could strike down a key portion of the Voting Rights Act, which has long required states to ensure minority communities are not barred from electing candidates of their choice. So what's to stop the madness? How could this ultimately shake out? Here are a few scenarios. So what if nobody can — or will — stop what's been set in motion? As many as a dozen states could conceivably be mined for partisan advantage by redrawing their maps either before the 2026 or 2028 elections. CNN has looked at some of them, in both red and blue states. Republicans could add as many as five seats in both Texas and in Florida. They could also go for smaller gains in states like Indiana, Missouri, Ohio and South Carolina. Democrats could conceivably try to add five districts in California, a handful in New York and possibly one more seat in states like Illinois and Maryland. That doesn't mean all of these efforts would succeed — or that the politicians in all these states would even try. Many of these states' maps were already extensively gerrymandered just a few years ago, after the 2020 census. Trying to add new seats could mean stretching a party's advantage in certain districts too thin — i.e. creating very marginal advantages — and having it backfire in a good election for the other side. (There is already some speculation this could happen in Texas.) Democrats also face significant legal hurdles in even attempting to re-draw the maps in states like California and New York. But if the gloves come off and this truly becomes a free-for-all, it's possible Republicans could flip between five and 10 seats, thanks to their superior opportunities. That's not an overwhelming shift, but it matters — the margin of victory for House control has been reliably narrow in recent election cycles. If Democrats won five more seats in 2024, they would currently control the chamber. Still, the real impact is arguably in the precedent it sets for a never-ending gerrymandering war. It's often the case that a such a partisan war appears unavoidable — right up until the moment the two sides avoid it. And there's a case to be made that they each have incentives to prevent this from truly getting ugly. One is the risk of the gerrymanders backfiring because the two sides get too aggressive. Another is that members whose own districts could be impacted start to balk. We're beginning to see this with some California and New York Republicans who could be targeted in retaliatory strikes urging Texas Republicans to back off. Even lawmakers who might not lose their seats often don't like having them diluted or extensively redrawn to facilitate their party's gains elsewhere; no one wants to sign up for a tougher reelection bid. It's conceivable that a handful of states pursue these gerrymanders — maybe Texas follows through, and California tries to retaliate — and then it fizzles because lawmakers decide it's just not worth it for such marginal gains. Maybe they even worry about democracy (a quaint thought, sure). Of course, it will be hard to reach such a détente, especially if Trump is intent on extracting whatever advantage he can. The president has demonstrated little regard for such norms or the prerogatives of even his fellow Republicans. And given the GOP clearly has more to gain here, the party has little incentive to back away. Perhaps the most efficient way to avoid this war is for Texas Democrats' walkout to actually, somehow, work. Texas is the canary in the coal mine here, and Democrats appear dug-in to do what they can to stop it. Dozens of lawmakers have left the state to prevent the legislature from getting the quorum it needs to do business. Republicans have issued a series of threats aimed at getting them to return. Those include talking about arrests, fines and a proposal from a Texas Republican facing a primary — Sen. John Cornyn — to enlist the FBI to help in some way. But those threats might not be as serious as Republicans would like to pretend they are. It's not at all clear what role the FBI could even play, for example, in the absence of laws being broken. The name of the game for Democrats is getting to early December. That's when time runs out for Texas Republicans to be able to re-draw the maps in time for the 2026 primaries. Walkouts often don't work, but sometimes they lead to some concessions. Perhaps Republicans begin to worry about the spotlight being cast on their power grab. Perhaps Democrats cut a deal to return that means smaller GOP gains, and the temperature drops. It might be the cleanest resolution. This is probably the most far-fetched resolution in this political day and age. But what if this whole mess leads lawmakers to actually, you know, decide to do something to rein in gerrymandering? (Another quaint thought, we know.) One of those lawmakers who could be targeted by Democratic reprisals, GOP Rep. Kevin Kiley of California, is talking about a bill banning mid-decade redistricting. Another, Rep. Mike Lawler of New York, wants to ban gerrymandering — though it's not at all clear what such a ban would entail, since they would have to define what actually constitutes gerrymanding, or how it would ever get consensus. It's virtually impossible to see either of these proposals becoming law. But perhaps Democrats could band together with blue-state Republicans to threaten a discharge petition to at least force the issue a little bit. It almost surely would never pass, but they could bring some pressure to bear.
CNN
a minute ago
- CNN
Analysis: 4 possible outcomes of a gerrymandering battle royale
FacebookTweetLink The American political system has for years transformed into a more partisan, brutalized and norm-scorning version of itself. The old rules are increasingly out; whatever-it-takes is increasingly in. Few developments epitomize that transformation like the burgeoning gerrymandering arms race. Texas Republicans' recent move to redraw the state's congressional districts in the middle of the decade has little precedent, and for once nobody is pretending this is about anything other than raw politics. Republicans just want to make it harder for Democrats to flip a closely divided US House in 2026. A Texas Republican state representative told CNN the GOP is doing this 'because it's good for our party.' President Donald Trump said this week that the GOP is 'entitled to five more seats' in the state. This has led to promises of reprisals from Democrats. They've pledged to respond in kind by playing dirty in states where they could re-draw the maps, like California. Other states – red and blue – are actively considering jumping into the fray with their own map overhauls. All of it raises the prospect of something pretty scary and undemocratic: a continual race to the bottom in which districts are constantly redrawn whenever it suits one party or another, rather than once a decade. It's an inauspicious prospect, to say the least. Lawmakers could find themselves representing and seeking election in ever-changing districts to which they have little personal connection. Those districts' residents could become pawns in a sophisticated and constant game of divide-and-conquer. Adding to the potential chaos is the possibility that the Supreme Court could strike down a key portion of the Voting Rights Act, which has long required states to ensure minority communities are not barred from electing candidates of their choice. So what's to stop the madness? How could this ultimately shake out? Here are a few scenarios. So what if nobody can — or will — stop what's been set in motion? As many as a dozen states could conceivably be mined for partisan advantage by redrawing their maps either before the 2026 or 2028 elections. CNN has looked at some of them, in both red and blue states. Republicans could add as many as five seats in both Texas and in Florida. They could also go for smaller gains in states like Indiana, Missouri, Ohio and South Carolina. Democrats could conceivably try to add five districts in California, a handful in New York and possibly one more seat in states like Illinois and Maryland. That doesn't mean all of these efforts would succeed — or that the politicians in all these states would even try. Many of these states' maps were already extensively gerrymandered just a few years ago, after the 2020 census. Trying to add new seats could mean stretching a party's advantage in certain districts too thin — i.e. creating very marginal advantages — and having it backfire in a good election for the other side. (There is already some speculation this could happen in Texas.) Democrats also face significant legal hurdles in even attempting to re-draw the maps in states like California and New York. But if the gloves come off and this truly becomes a free-for-all, it's possible Republicans could flip between five and 10 seats, thanks to their superior opportunities. That's not an overwhelming shift, but it matters — the margin of victory for House control has been reliably narrow in recent election cycles. If Democrats won five more seats in 2024, they would currently control the chamber. Still, the real impact is arguably in the precedent it sets for a never-ending gerrymandering war. It's often the case that a such a partisan war appears unavoidable — right up until the moment the two sides avoid it. And there's a case to be made that they each have incentives to prevent this from truly getting ugly. One is the risk of the gerrymanders backfiring because the two sides get too aggressive. Another is that members whose own districts could be impacted start to balk. We're beginning to see this with some California and New York Republicans who could be targeted in retaliatory strikes urging Texas Republicans to back off. Even lawmakers who might not lose their seats often don't like having them diluted or extensively redrawn to facilitate their party's gains elsewhere; no one wants to sign up for a tougher reelection bid. It's conceivable that a handful of states pursue these gerrymanders — maybe Texas follows through, and California tries to retaliate — and then it fizzles because lawmakers decide it's just not worth it for such marginal gains. Maybe they even worry about democracy (a quaint thought, sure). Of course, it will be hard to reach such a détente, especially if Trump is intent on extracting whatever advantage he can. The president has demonstrated little regard for such norms or the prerogatives of even his fellow Republicans. And given the GOP clearly has more to gain here, the party has little incentive to back away. Perhaps the most efficient way to avoid this war is for Texas Democrats' walkout to actually, somehow, work. Texas is the canary in the coal mine here, and Democrats appear dug-in to do what they can to stop it. Dozens of lawmakers have left the state to prevent the legislature from getting the quorum it needs to do business. Republicans have issued a series of threats aimed at getting them to return. Those include talking about arrests, fines and a proposal from a Texas Republican facing a primary — Sen. John Cornyn — to enlist the FBI to help in some way. But those threats might not be as serious as Republicans would like to pretend they are. It's not at all clear what role the FBI could even play, for example, in the absence of laws being broken. The name of the game for Democrats is getting to early December. That's when time runs out for Texas Republicans to be able to re-draw the maps in time for the 2026 primaries. Walkouts often don't work, but sometimes they lead to some concessions. Perhaps Republicans begin to worry about the spotlight being cast on their power grab. Perhaps Democrats cut a deal to return that means smaller GOP gains, and the temperature drops. It might be the cleanest resolution. This is probably the most far-fetched resolution in this political day and age. But what if this whole mess leads lawmakers to actually, you know, decide to do something to rein in gerrymandering? (Another quaint thought, we know.) One of those lawmakers who could be targeted by Democratic reprisals, GOP Rep. Kevin Kiley of California, is talking about a bill banning mid-decade redistricting. Another, Rep. Mike Lawler of New York, wants to ban gerrymandering — though it's not at all clear what such a ban would entail, since they would have to define what actually constitutes gerrymanding, or how it would ever get consensus. It's virtually impossible to see either of these proposals becoming law. But perhaps Democrats could band together with blue-state Republicans to threaten a discharge petition to at least force the issue a little bit. It almost surely would never pass, but they could bring some pressure to bear.
Politico
a minute ago
- Politico
Playbook PM: It's Russia decision time for Trump
Presented by THE CATCH-UP BREAKING: 'Trump administration seeking $1 billion settlement from UCLA,' by CNN's Betsy Klein: 'Officials from UCLA have returned to the negotiating table … and have made clear they would like to reach a deal to restore [$584 million in] funding. The Trump administration, in turn, is laying its marker for a high-dollar settlement. … [It] would mark the biggest settlement it's received from a higher education institution — [and] requires a resolution monitor to oversee the school, as well as a new senior administrator who will be focused on compliance with anti-discrimination laws.' TO RUSSIA, WITH LOVE: President Donald Trump set today as the deadline for Russia to stop its war on Ukraine or face major economic reprisals. But as Washington and Moscow circle a potential summit next week, it's unclear if Trump will indeed spring for more secondary sanctions — or instead strike a deal that would give Russian President Vladimir Putin control of Ukrainian territory. The latest talks: The U.S. and Russia are discussing an agreement for a pause in the war, under which Russia would stop attacking but retain most or all of the land its military has occupied, Bloomberg's Donato Paolo Mancini and colleagues report. Talks for a lasting peace deal would follow. Putin wants Ukraine to agree to give up all of the Donbas — including parts Russia hasn't yet seized — and Crimea. That would be 'a major win for Putin,' and it remains to be seen whether Ukraine or Europe would agree to it, as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy 'risks being presented with a take-it-or-leave-it deal to accept the loss of Ukrainian territory.' Recent polling has shown the Ukrainian public increasingly inclined toward negotiations rather than continued fighting, but there's also broad opposition to accepting Russia's terms. Russia killed at least three more people in strikes overnight. The summit: Though Trump has become fed up with Putin's intransigence, he also strongly wants to broker a deal for a ceasefire in Ukraine. Nothing is final for if and when a Trump-Putin summit may come together, CNN's Kevin Liptak reports. Zelenskyy may take part too. CBS' Jennifer Jacobs reports that the United Arab Emirates, Rome and Hungary are all possible locations. The punishments: So far, Trump has announced secondary sanctions for buying Russian oil only on India, to take effect toward the end of August. There's no word yet on penalties for other leading importers like China and Turkey. But as NYT's Anatoly Kurmanaev notes, Russia's war effort may be able to withstand the choking off of oil revenue even despite an economic slowdown. Bridge Colby strikes again: 'New Pentagon policy could divert weapons built for Ukraine back into US stockpiles,' by CNN's Natasha Bertrand and Zachary Cohen: 'A memo written by the Pentagon's policy chief last month gives the Defense Department the option to divert certain weapons and equipment intended for Ukraine back into US stockpiles … a dramatic shift that could see billions of dollars previously earmarked for the war-torn country go toward replenishing dwindling American supplies.' How we got here: From Minsk, Time's Simon Shuster has an illuminating interview with Belarusian dictator Alexander Lukashenko about his role as a quiet back channel between the U.S. and Russia all year. While Putin blustered publicly, Lukashenko repeatedly reassured sometimes-skeptical U.S. officials that Putin actually wanted peace and would negotiate. 'Even if you can't make sense of Putin, treat him like a human being,' Lukashenko says, encouraging Trump to show Putin some respect or deference. 'Everything now is in Donald's hands … And he can screw it all up because of that character of his,' Lukashenko says, dismissing Trump's deadline for Putin and sanctions threats as 'foolish' and 'all pure emotions.' Shuster writes: 'The story of the backchannel through Belarus, in other words, could become the preamble to Ukraine's capitulation.' What Trump is focused on: The leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia will be at the White House shortly this afternoon to sign what the U.S. has billed as a peace agreement. The two countries, just south of Russia, have fought on and off for decades over the Nagorno-Karabakh territory. Happy Friday afternoon. Thanks for reading Playbook PM. Drop me a line at eokun@ 7 THINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW 1. WEAPONIZATION WATCH: 'DOJ opens investigation into New York AG's office that brought fraud case against Trump,' by NBC's Ryan Reilly and colleagues: 'Federal prosecutors are in the early stages of an investigation into the office of New York Attorney General Letitia James … The probe is focused on whether or not the New York attorney general's office caused a deprivation of legal rights under the color of law through its civil suits against Trump and his businesses as well as the National Rifle Association … It is being run out of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of New York.' James lawyer Abbe Lowell responds, via the NYT: 'the most blatant and desperate example of this administration carrying out the president's political retribution campaign.' The retaliation campaign rolls on: AG Pam Bondi has now tapped Ed Martin as a special prosecutor to undertake mortgage fraud investigations into James and Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Fox News' Peter Doocy scooped. 2. REDISTRICTING ROUNDUP: Texas Gov. Greg Abbott keeps escalating his fight against Democrats in the GOP drive to gerrymander the state further. In an interview with NBC's Ryan Chandler and Bridget Bowman, Abbott pledged that he'll call 'special session after special session after special session' to prevent Dems who left the state from running out the clock. They'd have to remain out of state 'until like 2027 or 2028' to avoid giving Republicans a quorum in Austin, he vowed. And on the 'Ruthless' podcast, Abbott said that if Democrats don't return, he may expand from snatching five congressional seats to six, seven or eight. The big picture: Republicans' unprecedented, Trump-fueled power grab across the country could ultimately flip a dozen or more seats to the party — across Texas, Florida, Ohio, Missouri and Indiana — before voters even have a say, Punchbowl's Jake Sherman and colleagues tally up. Democrats can try to make up some of that ground, seizing as many as eight seats if California Dems succeed. Dems are setting aside their longtime reform goals to fight fire with fire and avoid being gerrymandered out of power for good, POLITICO's Nick Wu and Andrew Howard report. But but but: Democrats' path is much more difficult, since Democratic-led states have disproportionately opted for good-government changes to remove partisanship from redistricting. And in California, the prospect of a snap election to push through a gerrymander in response to Texas has local election officials concerned about the complicated logistics, AP's Michael Blood reports. 3. CONTEMPT CONTRETEMPS: In a 2-1 ruling, Trump appointees on a D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel today vacated Judge James Boasberg's contempt finding over Trump administration officials flouting his Alien Enemies Act ruling, POLITICO's Kyle Cheney and Josh Gerstein report. Boasberg's move 'raises troubling questions about judicial control over core executive functions,' they wrote. A scathing dissent warned that '[o]ur system of courts cannot long endure if disappointed litigants defy court orders with impunity.' 4. THE CARTEL CRACKDOWN: In a significant escalation of his fight against Latin American drug cartels, Trump has now quietly instructed the military to start going after them, NYT's Helene Cooper and colleagues report. This could lay the groundwork for the U.S. military to take action in foreign countries against cartels the U.S. has labeled terrorist groups — which could raise legal, constitutional and diplomatic concerns. Another avenue: The FBI wants to start adding people linked to those cartels to the terrorist watch list, Reuters' Sarah Lynch and colleagues scooped. Local law enforcement agencies were asked by the bureau earlier this year to start providing names of such people and their family members or associates. This has the potential to expand the watch list significantly, including with many more Americans. 5. WE HARDLY KNEW YA: California Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, one of the top Democratic gubernatorial contenders, is dropping out of the crowded field and switching to run for state treasurer, POLITICO's Dustin Gardiner reports. With Kounalakis and Kamala Harris out of the race, the remaining candidates could now compete for a significant San Francisco donor base. A new Emerson poll finds Katie Porter and Republican Steve Hilton in the early lead, but with many voters undecided. … In Michigan, Democratic state Rep. Joe Tate announced he'll exit the Senate race, as he struggled to keep up with Rep. Haley Stevens, state Sen. Mallory McMorrow and Abdul El-Sayed, AP's Isabella Volmert reports from Lansing. Primary colors: 'Team of Rivals? Inside the Weird Super PAC Pitch in the Kentucky GOP's Senate Race,' by NOTUS' Reese Gorman: 'Some allies of Daniel Cameron have pitched Rep. Andy Barr's team on a super PAC to take down Nate Morris.' For your radar: Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) is considering a campaign for Texas AG, The Hill's Mychael Schnell scooped. 6. WITH ALLIES LIKE THESE: Trump's trade wars — and even tentative deals — continue to strain relationships with a number of key U.S. allies in Asia, with India foremost among them. After Trump imposed steep tariffs, New Delhi has now frozen a plan to buy American missiles, combat vehicles and aircraft, and scrapped a trip to D.C. by its defense minister, Reuters' Shivam Patel and Aftab Ahmed scooped. India denied this reporting as false. How we got here: The U.S.-India relationship remains tense, a pivot that Bloomberg's Sudhi Ranjan Sen and colleagues report began after a difficult June phone call, in which PM Narendra Modi pushed back on Trump taking credit for an India-Pakistan ceasefire. Though a trade deal looked close earlier this summer, Trump's frustration grew over India's reluctance to lower its high trade barriers as much as other countries, POLITICO's Daniel Desrochers and Megan Messerly report. Big in Japan: After talks with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Japan's top trade negotiator said the U.S. had agreed to fix an 'extremely regrettable' mistake in stacking 15 percent tariffs on top of others, per the FT. With Japanese PM Shigeru Ishiba under political fire at home for questions about the trade agreement's specifics, he explained to lawmakers this week that 'the other party [Trump] is not a normal person,' WaPo's Michelle Ye Hee Lee and Chie Tanaka report. Trouble in Taiwan: Lacking a deal and now facing steep U.S. tariffs, Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te is increasingly struggling with domestic political opposition, NYT's Meaghan Tobin and colleagues report. 7. CLIMATE FILES: A major EPA database that allows companies to see their carbon footprint and emissions will no longer be updated, after the researcher in charge of it was suspended for criticizing the administration's scientific research cuts, NYT's Harry Stevens reports. At the same time, the Justice Department has significantly slowed down civil enforcement against polluting companies that violate environmental laws, NYT's Maxine Joselow and Stevens report. The pushback: After the Trump administration tapped a handful of dissenting researchers to put out a report that undermined the widely accepted scientific consensus on climate change, dozens of top scientists are coordinating an organized effort to respond, CNN's Ella Nilsen and Andrew Freedman report. TALK OF THE TOWN JD Vance and David Lammy went carp fishing, though only Vance's kids were successful, in the U.K. TRANSITIONS — The Institute for Global Affairs at the Eurasia Group is adding Rudina Hajdari and Elizabeth Shackelford as acting program directors to run the International Democracy Fellowship and the Summer Geopolitics Academy, respectively. Hajdari is a former Albanian member of Parliament and Eliot Engel alum. Shackelford is a former U.S. diplomat who previously was at the Dickey Center at Dartmouth. SUNDAY SO FAR … Fox News 'Sunday Morning Futures': VP JD Vance … Rep James Comer (R-Ky.) … Miranda Devine. FOX 'Fox News Sunday': New York Gov. Kathy Hochul … Texas Gov. Greg Abbott … Rep. Rick Crawford (R-Ark.) … Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.). Panel: Francesca Chambers, Horace Cooper, Matt Gorman and Marie Harf. NBC 'Meet the Press': Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker … Eric Holder … Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). Panel: Lanhee Chen, Neera Tanden, Carol Lee and Tony Plohetski. MSNBC 'The Weekend: Primetime': Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.) … Rep. Sarah McBride (D-Del.). CBS 'Face the Nation': Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) … Ukrainian Ambassador Oksana Markarova. CNN 'State of the Union': Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Panel: Kristen Soltis Anderson, Ashley Allison, Scott Walker and Mo Elleithee. NewsNation 'The Hill Sunday': Rep. Dave Min (D-Calif.). Panel: Tyler Pager, Margaret Talev, Charles Lane and Sabrina Siddiqui. Send Playbookers tips to playbook@ or text us on Signal here. Playbook couldn't happen without our editor Zack Stanton, deputy editor Garrett Ross and Playbook Podcast producer Callan Tansill-Suddath.
