Month: March 2018

No Trump’s not evolving

by digby

Daniel Dale of the Toronto Star helpfully published a chronology of President Trump’s obnoxious speech in Ohio. This way you can quickly peruse his fatuous dishonest braindead blather without having to sit through it as I did and ruin your whole day:

2:09 p.m. — Trump begins with a reference to his election victory: “What a group. Remember, you can’t win unless you win the state of Ohio, right?”

2:13 p.m. — Trump says of Democrats: “They want people to come in from the border, and they want, I guess, want, I can’t imagine they want, but certainly drugs are flowing across borders. We need walls.”

2:14 p.m. — Trump falsely claims that a California project to replace a section of existing border wall — a project proposed in 2009 and entirely separate from his own proposed new wall — is indeed his own wall project. And then he brags about how this wall is a high-quality wall because of his own talents as a builder.

“We started building our wall. I’m so proud of it. We started. We started. We have $1.6 billion. And we’ve already started. You saw the pictures yesterday, and I said what a thing of beauty. And on September 28 we go further. And we’re gettin’ that sucker built. And you think that’s easy? People said, ‘Oh, has he given up on the wall?’ Nah, I never give up. I never … And you saw those beautiful pictures, and the wall looks good. It’s properly designed. That’s what I do is I build. I was always very good at building. It was always my best thing.”

2:16 p.m. — Trump says the U.S. has been treated better on trade by its enemies than its allies: “Frankly our friends did more damage to us than our enemies. Because we didn’t deal with our enemies, we dealt with our friends, and we dealt incompetently.”

2:16 p.m. — “That was a Hillary Clinton special, I hate to say it,” Trump says of the existing free trade agreement with South Korea, which was negotiated by the George W. Bush administration and then revised by the Obama administration.

2:18 p.m. — One day after his administration boasted of the successful completion of a revised trade agreement with South Korea, Trump says, “I may hold it up ’til after a deal is made with North Korea.”

“Does everybody understand that? You know why, right? You know why? Because it’s a very strong card, and I want to make sure everyone is treated fairly and we’re moving along very nicely with North Korea. We’ll see what happens.”

2:19 p.m. — Trump says the media — “the fake news” — would have accused him of “exaggerating” if he had claimed three million jobs would be created between Election Day and today. In fact, slightly more jobs were created over the previous 16-month period, under Obama.

2:21 p.m. — Trump makes his midterm election pitch, telling voters that they cannot afford to jeopardize the strong economy by voting for Democrats. “You know the expression from, I guess it was, Bill Clinton: ‘it’s the economy, stupid?’ Well, it is the economy.”

2:24 p.m. — Trump falsely claims, “We got rid of the bump stocks. The bump stocks now are under very strict control.” His administration’s proposed ban on the firearm device has not been finalized; it will be accepting public comments on the proposal until June 27. Then he falsely claims, “Nobody reported it. It doesn’t get reported.”

2:25 p.m. — Trump says, “I’ve been in construction and building all my life. I love it. I love the smell of a construction site, right? There’s just something about it.”

2:28 p.m. — Trump brings up Clinton again in boasting of his decision to approve the Keystone XL oil pipeline from Alberta: “Hillary wasn’t gonna approve it. Nobody was. It was a dead project. I got in, almost, like, right at the beginning, I approved that.”

2:29 p.m. — Trump falsely says nobody protested his approval of the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines: “Nobody. I approved it, the pickets, they picked up their stuff and they left and it was the end of it.” In fact, the North Dakota protesters were ordered to leave by the governor. About 20 were arrested for refusing to do so.

2:32 p.m. — Trump returns to his prepared text for a moment, saying “nearly 40 per cent of our bridges were built before, think of this, before the first moon landing.” He then laments that another country is currently “building 29 bridges.” He says he will not name this country because it is “friendly to me.”

2:33 p.m. — Trump complains that TransCanada Corp. was not sufficiently grateful for his decision to approve Keystone XL: “And I just say to myself, can you imagine the boss of whatever the hell company it is, who never actually called me to say thank you, but that’s OK. We’ll remember. So this guy’s sitting behind his beautiful chair in a certain place, I know exactly where, nice place, big company, and the consultants march into his office to tell him what a great job they did. They were dead. They had no chance, they failed. I got it approved.”

In fact, TransCanada chief executive Russ Girling thanked Trump twice, in person, in the Oval Office, with cameras rolling.

2:34 — Trump complains that the U.S. spends money “building up foreign countries” while allowing its own infrastructure to fall into disrepair. He specifically complains about U.S. support for South Korea.

“Look at Korea. We have a border at Korea. We have a wall of soldiers. We don’t get paid very much for this, do we? We have, you look at that, nobody comes through. But our own border, we don’t take care of it. Think of it. We spend billions of dollars in other countries maintaining their borders and we can’t maintain our borders in our own country. Is there something a little bit wrong with that? Think of it. We spend billions and billions of dollars. Look: North and SouthKorea. Thirty-two thousand soldiers. The finest equipment. Barbed wire all over the place. We protect that whole thing, nobody comes through. But our country, we don’t do it. Things are changing, folks.”

2:34 p.m. — Trump falsely claims that he was opposed to the Iraq War “from the beginning.” He haltingly supported the war when radio host Howard Stern asked him in 2002, saying, “Yeah, I guess so. I wish the first time it was done correctly.”

2:35 p.m. — Trump appears to ad-lib a major foreign policy declaration that is at odds with his administration’s stated policy — claiming, with no details, that he will withdraw the U.S. military from Syria “very soon.”

“And by the way we’re knockin’ the hell out of ISIS. We’ll be coming out of Syria like very soon. Let the other people take care of it now. Very soon. Very soon. We’re coming out. We’re going to have 100 per cent of the caliphate, as they call it, sometimes referred to as land, we’ve taken it all back quickly, quickly. But we’re gonna be coming out of there real soon, we’re gonna get back to our country, where we belong, where we wanna be.”

2:36 p.m. — Trump falsely claims, for the ninth time in office, that the U.S. has spent $7 trillion on Middle East wars. (One Brown University estimate put the current total at $4.3 trillion, and the total including estimated future costs at $5.6 trillion.) Trump then says, “Nobody ever heard of the word trillion until 10 years ago.”

2:38 p.m. — Trump advocates a war crime, saying the U.S. should have seized Iraqi oil for itself: “And you know what we have for it (the war)? Nothing. Remember I used to say keep the oil? … We never kept the oil. If we kept the oil we would’ve been OK. If we kept the oil we wouldn’t have ISIS … They kept the oil, we didn’t keep the oil. Stupid! Stupid!”

2:39 p.m. — Trump expresses confusion about all of the judicial vacancies that greeted him upon entering office: “I don’t know why Obama left that. It was like a big beautiful present to all of us. Why the hell did he leave it? Maybe he got complacent ….What happened? How did he do that?” What happened was Senate Republicans refused to approve Obama’s judicial nominees.

2:39 p.m. — Trump explains what judges are: “We were left judges! They’re the ones that judge all your disputes! They judge on what’s fair on the environment and what’s not fair!”

2:41 p.m. — Trump complains of an international program in which wealthy countries help developing countries cover the cost of transitioning to cleaner energy. “As far as I’m concerned, we’re developing. Pay us some money. Right? Pay us. We’re developing.”

2:43 p.m. — Trump says of the Department of Veterans Affairs before his presidency: “They had sadists that treated our vets horribly. Horribly. Worse than a movie.”

2:45 p.m. — Trump says he does not know what a community college is. He says community colleges should be called vocational schools, though those are entirely different.

“When I was growing up we had what was called vocational schools. They weren’t called community colleges. ‘Cause I don’t know what that means, a community college. To me, it means a 2-year college. I don’t know what it means. But I know what vocational. And I tell people, call it vocational from now on. It’s a great word. It’s a great word. Call it vocational, and technical, perhaps. But use vocational, because that’s what it’s all about. People know what that means. We don’t know what a community college means.”

2:46 p.m. — Trump gives a rare shout-out to his daughter Tiffany, standing behind her better-known sister Ivanka.

2:49 p.m. — Trump complains about an unnamed road in an unnamed state, which he says has been made too curvy. “Not good if you’re not feeling so good behind the wheel.”

2:51 p.m. — Trump says, “America built the Empire State Building in one year. Think of it, one year. It’s actually like nine months, can you believe that?” It was 13 months.

2:54 p.m. — Trump says America’s infrastructure is “like, in many cases, a Third World country.”

2:56 p.m. — Trump suggests he deserves some credit for the SpaceX rocket launch and landing in February. He also suggests he doesn’t think the government should fund such rocket programs — and, incongruously, takes credit for reviving the government’s space agency, NASA.

“We must recapture the excitement of creation, the spirit of innovation, and the spark of invention. We’re starting. You saw the rocket the other day, you see what’s going on with cars, you see what’s going on with so much, NASA, space agency, all of a sudden it’s back, you notice? It was dormant for many, many years. Now it’s back. And we’re trying to have the private sector invest the money. Why the hell should we do it, right? Let them invest. If they want to send rocket ships up, they’re rich, let ‘em do it.”

2:58 p.m. — Trump tells workers: “You’re restoring pride in this country again. Our country had very little pride. Look back. See what was happening. Our country had very little pride.”

2:59 p.m. — Trump is building up to his big conclusion. But he gets distracted by a thought in his head — about the revival of the sitcom Roseanne, starring Roseanne Barr as a Trump supporter.

“Even look at Roseanne! I called her yesterday! Look at her ratings! Look at her ratings! I got a call from Mark Burnett, he did The Apprentice, he’s a great guy. He said, ‘Donald, I called just to say hello and to tell you, did you see Roseanne’s ratings?’ I said, ‘Mark, how big were they?’ They were unbelievable! Over 18 million people! And it was about us! They haven’t figured it out! The fake news hasn’t quite figured it out yet! They have not figured it out! So that was great. And they haven’t figured it out. But they will. And when they do, they’ll become much less fake. May take a while, but it’s happening.”

3:00 p.m. — Trump hastily pivots to his conclusion.

“But you’re the ones who are truly making America great again. We’re going to work together, we’re going to work with the state of Ohio, we’re going to work with everybody, and we’re going to bring our country to a level of success and prominence and pride like it has never, ever seen before. Thank you, and God bless America.”

He is, as you can see, entirely unchanged from the campaign. After 14 months he has not learned even one thing and is just as mendacious and unserious as he was before.

In case you were wondering … it’s not getting any better.

.

Let’s fight the last war shall we? That’s always a winning strategy.

by digby

These people aren’t taking to the streets to support Trumpism

So it turns out that the exit polls were wrong and there were a lot more white working class people who voted than college educated whites. According to Thomas Edsall this means that the Democrats need to change radically and do it fast. Here’s the recommendation:

Let’s go back to Galston, writing on the Brookings website, presciently, in June 2016. I will quote him at some length, because in my opinion no one captures the situation better than he does:

Most working-class whites have incomes below $50,000; most whites with BAs or more have incomes above $50,000. Most working-class whites rate their financial circumstances as only fair or poor; most college educated whites rate their financial circumstances as good or excellent. Fifty-four percent of working-class whites think of themselves as working class or lower class, compared to only 18 percent of better-educated whites ….

In many respects, these two groups of white voters see the world very differently. For example, 54 percent of college-educated whites think that America’s culture and way of life have improved since the 1950s; 62 percent of white working-class Americans think that it has changed for the worse. Sixty-eight percent of working-class whites, but only 47 percent of college-educated whites, believe that the American way of life needs to be protected against foreign influences. Sixty-six percent of working-class whites, but only 43 percent of college-educated whites, say that discrimination against whites has become as big a problem as discrimination against blacks and other minorities. In a similar vein, 62 percent of working-class whites believe that discrimination against Christians has become as big a problem as discrimination against other groups, a proposition only 38 percent of college educated whites endorse.

This brings us to the issue of immigration. By a margin of 52 to 35 percent, college-educated whites affirm that today’s immigrants strengthen our country through their talent and hard work. Conversely, 61 percent of white working-class voters say that immigrants weaken us by taking jobs, housing, and health care. Seventy-one percent of working-class whites think that immigrants mostly hurt the economy by driving down wages, a belief endorsed by only 44 percent of college-educated whites. Fifty-nine percent of working-class whites believe that we should make a serious effort to deport all illegal immigrants back to their home countries; only 33 percent of college-educated whites agree. Fifty-five percent of working-class whites think we should build a wall along our border with Mexico, while 61 percent of whites with BAs or more think we should not. Majorities of working-class whites believe that we should make the entry of Syrian refugees into the United States illegal and temporarily ban the entrance of non-American Muslims into our country; about two-thirds of college-educated whites oppose each of these proposals.

Opinions on trade follow a similar pattern. By a narrow margin of 48 to 46 percent, college-educated whites endorse the view that trade agreements are mostly helpful to the United States because they open up overseas markets while 62 percent of working-class whites believe that they are harmful because they send jobs overseas and drive down wages.

It is understandable that working-class whites are more worried that they or their families will become victims of violent crime than are whites with more education. After all, they are more likely to live in neighborhoods with higher levels of social disorder and criminal behavior. It is harder to explain why they are also much more likely to believe that their families will fall victim to terrorism. To be sure, homegrown terrorist massacres of recent years have driven home the message that it can happen to anyone, anywhere. We still need to explain why working-class whites have interpreted this message in more personal terms.

The most plausible interpretation is that working-class whites are experiencing a pervasive sense of vulnerability. On every front — economic, cultural, personal security — they feel threatened and beleaguered. They seek protection against all the forces they perceive as hostile to their cherished way of life — foreign people, foreign goods, foreign ideas, aided and abetted by a government they no longer believe cares about them. Perhaps this is why fully 60 percent of them are willing to endorse a proposition that in previous periods would be viewed as extreme: the country has gotten so far off track that we need a leader who is prepared to break some rules if that is what it takes to set things right.

Ok. But Clinton won the popular vote by three million votes and lost the presidency by 70,000 in the antiquated electoral college spread across three states in a fluky election from outer space. But sure, let’s throw out the baby with the bathwater and cater to the fears of this demographic because … well, just because.

It sounds as though he’s saying that Democrats need to get on the Trump train. Maybe they could be a little less crude but that above is a recipe for a kinder and gentler anti-Muslim, law and order, nativist, white nationalist approach.  And I guess if the young people and women and Hispanics and African Americans and college educated whites who currently make up the vast majority of the Democratic Party don’t like it well, too bad. Apparently, every election will always feature that 70,000 vote spread that simply cannot be overcome unless we trash our values and betray the future.

By the way — if you really want to cater to the fears and resentments of whites who voted for Trump, you’d better add guns, gays and abortion to this mix. They believe those issues are destroying their way of life just as much as the Mexicans and the Muslims along with all this “political correctness” that requires decent society to stop using the “N” word and treat women with respect. Better tell the Parkland kids to STFU, get straight and learn CPR and abstinence.

Maybe someone, somewhere could address the fact that these people are being brainwashed by rightwing propaganda day in and day out which might have something to do with the fact that they are all so goddamned afraid of everything. Until that is challenged and dealt with no amount of appeasement to their paranoia will change anything other than demoralize the existing Democratic base and turn young people apathetic. There is always something for these wingnut demagogues to turn into “the other.”

I’m sorry these white people feel so afraid of people who don’t look like them. I have a cure. Turn off Fox and Rush Limbaugh. They’ll feel safer and more secure almost immediately.

*Standard disclaimer: of course Democrats should offer policies that do benefit these people and their families. But catering to their prejudices won’t put food on their tables or give their kids a future. That’s why rich selfish Republicans do it.

.

His Majesty elevates his “gentleman of the stool”

Dear Michelle Goldberg

by tristero

Dear Michelle Goldberg,

You write that in the age of Trump, it’s difficult to know what conservative voices are serious enough to  engage. Maybe so, but let’s get one thing straight.

If the Atlantic was truly serious about providing genuine conservative voices, they would have hired a genuine conservative instead of a right wing, racist, homophobic, misogynist blowhard like Kevin Williamson. So what if Williamson can turn a phrase? He doesn’t have opinions. He merely has prejudices.

You want a real conservative voice to engage with? I’d suggest Colin Powell, someone I strongly disagree with on many issues, someone who made a spectacular error in judgment in making a case at the UN for Saddam’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction, but also someone who has both the intelligence and experience to deserve to be listened to.

Love,

trustier

Their most vulnerable spot
by Tom Sullivan

Rick: And remember, this gun is pointed right at your heart.

Captain Renault: That is my *least* vulnerable spot.

Aim instead for the pocketbook and score another for The Spocko Method. It drew an apology out of Laura Ingraham. That had to sting.

On Wednesday, Fox News’ Laura Ingraham tweeted about 17-year-old high school senior, David Hogg, who since surviving the Parkland massacre has become a gun-control activist:

David Hogg Rejected By Four Colleges To Which He Applied and whines about it. (Dinged by UCLA with a 4.1 GPA…totally predictable given acceptance rates.) https://t.co/wflA4hWHXY— Laura Ingraham (@IngrahamAngle) March 28, 2018

But David Hogg knows pundits like Ingraham are only fueled by insults and armored against them. He knows where they are most vulnerable. Hogg worked up a quick list for his 650k+ Twitter followers:

Pick a number 1-12 contact the company next to that #

Top Laura Ingraham Advertisers
1. @sleepnumber
2. @ATT
3. Nutrish
4. @Allstate & @esurance
5. @Bayer
6. @RocketMortgage Mortgage
7. @LibertyMutual
8. @Arbys
9. @TripAdvisor
10. @Nestle
11. @hulu
12. @Wayfair— David Hogg (@davidhogg111) March 29, 2018

The Washington Post takes up the story there:

Within 24 hours, several companies responded — among them the pet food brand Nutrish and the home goods retailer Wayfair — announcing over Twitter and in media interviews that they would pull their ads from Ingraham’s show.

By Thursday afternoon, Ingraham apologized. “On reflection, in the spirit of Holy Week, I apologize for any upset or hurt my tweet caused him or any of the brave victims of Parkland,” she tweeted.

Ingraham didn’t apologize for targeting Hogg, mind you. Only for hurting his widdle feelings. Only because his followers hit a softer target than hers.

One wonders whether @davidhogg111 knows he’s using The Spocko Method. Nevertheless, the strategy pioneered over a decade ago by our resident Vulcan has proven itself once again.

Vox adds:

“As a company, we support open dialogue and debate on issues,” Jane Carpenter, Wayfair’s head of public relations, told CNBC. “However, the decision of an adult to personally criticize a high school student who has lost his classmates in an unspeakable tragedy is not consistent with our values.”

A corporation’s brand is one of its most vulnerable spots. Pointing out that who they sponsor can devalue the brand in which they’ve invested so much makes corporate PR people twitchy, as Spocko pointed out here:

3) This is about ALL of their stated values
What does their mission statement say? What do their HR guidelines say? If they are a public company, do they have corporate governance documents?Regulation that they are legally required to follow? Vendor ethics agreements? Core brand value statements? They can then answer the question: “Are we true to our values? Is this what we want people to associate our brand with?” Then, if what they are sponsoring doesn’t line up with their own stated values, they can decide to make a change.

It’s a shame Spocko doesn’t get “a piece of the action” commensurate with his contribution, but it must be gratifying that people have taken up the Method from the Vulcan Stanislavski without even knowing its origins.

* * * * * * * *

For The Win 2018 is ready for download. Request a copy of my county-level election mechanics primer at tom.bluecentury at gmail. (If you are already on my email list, check your in-box.)

Trouble in Conway paradise?

by digby

What in the hell is this about?

Kellyanne Conway’s husband has begun deleting a series of tweets he posted in the last month that are critical of President Donald Trump.

George Conway, a conservative lawyer Trump once considered nominating as solicitor general, deleted several tweets that called attention to Trump’s legal woes, his difficulty in finding his next communications director and the White House’s later debunked denials of staff shakeups.

Most notably, Conway deleted a tweet that called Trump’s denials of reports that later turned out to be true “absurd” and sarcastically noted that “people are banging on the doors to be his communications director.”

His wife, counselor to the President Kellyanne Conway, is among those who may take over as White House communications director — at least on an interim basis — following Hope Hicks’ departure.

“I have nothing to add,” George Conway said when reached by phone Thursday. 

Pressed as to why he deleted the tweets, he simply said, “no reason.”

Conway also nixed a retweet of a clip of CBS’ “60 Minutes” piece on Stormy Daniels in which a former Federal Election Commission chairman Trevor Potter says the $130,000 payment to silence Daniels may have been an illegal campaign contribution. 

He also undid a retweet in which a former associate counsel in President Barack Obama’s White House blasted Trump’s move to make White House officials sign nondisclosure agreements.

“Occasionally an official would ask us in the Obama White House Counsel’s Office if they could make their staff sign NDAs. We’d tell them no,” Bassin’s tweet reads. “WH staff work for the public.”

Conway also deleted a tweet in which he compared Trump’s later disproven denials of staff shakeup reports to former President Bill Clinton’s grand jury testimony amid his impeachment scandal. 

“depends on what the meaning of the word ‘are’ is,” Conway tweeted. The tweet was gone from his Twitter page on Thursday.

As of this report, Conway has not deleted the most recent tweet that drew attention to his Twitter feed, in which Conway referred to a report that Trump’s lawyer John Dowd discussed pardons with attorneys to Trump’s former aides.

“This is flabbergasting,” Conway tweeted on Wednesday.

Is Conway on the outs with his wife? Does it have something to do with Trump?

Is he drinking?

I don’t know but it’s mighty weird. Conway is a hardcore wingnut, even moreso than his wife. It can’t be political. It’s got to be personal …

via GIPHY

Oh my God. 2020 is only two years away.

by digby

It’s early so take this whole article with a grain of salt. But it is a good snapshot of where the electorate is this minute:

Fifty-four percent of Americans say they expect Trump to lose his campaign for re-election, the same number who said Obama would lose the 2012 election at this point in his first term. Only 40% of Americans think Trump will win in 2020, similar to the 44% who said the same for Obama.

Republicans overwhelmingly say they expect Trump to win re-election to the White House in 2020 (79% feel that way), while Democrats nearly unanimously say they expect him to lose (87% say so). A majority of independents also expect him to lose. Republicans now are more optimistic about Trump’s re-election prospects than Democrats were about Obama (just 69% of Democrats said they expected Obama to win at this point in 2010).

Former President Bill Clinton faced even worse expectations in 1995, when only a quarter of Americans expected him to win his second term following deep losses for his party in the 1994 midterm elections. Trump filed re-election paperwork with federal election officials on Inauguration Day in 2017. He formally announced his re-election bid in February.

Trump holds strong support among his own party’s potential voters in a 2020 primary race. Three-quarters of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, 75%, say they think the GOP should re-nominate Trump in 2020. Only one in five, 20%, say the GOP should nominate a different candidate. These numbers are virtually identical to Obama’s support among Democrats at this point in his term.

But when those who want to see someone else take the party’s nomination are asked to name an alternative to Trump, no potential candidate has a clear edge. None of the potential nominees raised by respondents earn more than 1% support; that list includes Vice President Mike Pence, former GOP nominee Mitt Romney, House Speaker Paul Ryan, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, television personality Oprah Winfrey and retiring South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy.
Speculation about a Republican primary challenge has swirled around some anti-Trump GOP voices like Ohio Gov. John Kasich, outgoing Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake and Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse, who have refused to rule out a run for the White House.

Former Vice President Joe Biden holds the most widespread support when potential Democratic primary voters are asked to rate the chances they would support six possible candidates for the party’s 2020 nomination.

A broad 84% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents say they are likely to support a Biden bid for the Democratic nomination, two-thirds of whom say they are “very likely” to back his candidacy.

Large majorities of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents also say they are likely to support Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (75%) and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren (68%). Still, this support is slightly less intense than Biden’s: Six in 10 likely Sanders backers say they are “very likely” to support him and less than half of Warren’s likely supporters say they are “very likely” to support her.

Both Biden, 75, and Sanders, 76, have not ruled out bids for the White House in 2020. Warren has said she isn’t running.

About half of potential Democratic primary voters say they are likely to back California Sen. Kamala Harris, New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker and New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand. Roughly one in five say they aren’t sure if they’d support those latter three, lesser-known possible candidates. Only two in 10 potential Democratic voters overall say they are “very likely” to back Harris and Booker; only one in 10 are “very likely” to support Gillibrand.
Sanders still has the strongest grip on young voters in the Democratic party: 60% of potential Democratic primary voters under 35 say they are very likely to back Sanders vs. 52% for Biden, 29% for Warren, 18% for Harris, 16% for Booker and 12% for Gillibrand.

Among potential Democratic primary voters, racial divisions also play a role. Six in 10 nonwhites, 61%, say they are very likely to back Biden’s candidacy vs. 52% of whites who say the same. On the flip side, 39% of whites are very likely to back Warren’s bid vs. only 25% of nonwhites.