| Get Jonathan Bernstein's newsletter every morning in your inbox. Click here to subscribe. Catch of the Day to G. Elliott Morris for his reaction to a story about former Vice President Joe Biden falling behind President Donald Trump in campaign cash-on-hand: I don't think this sort of fundraising horse-race journalism is in any way meaningful. There's no evidence these comparisons are predictive of what will happen in Nov. It obscures the role of grassroots orgs key to turnout and a Dem win. And it's horribly off the news right now. I disagree on that last point; campaign reporting is always OK by me. But the rest? Yup. I'll start with the money. Here's the deal: Even given the current economic situation and the pandemic, I strongly suspect both major-party candidates will have far more money than they need, and will start seeing seriously diminishing returns. Money simply isn't that important in presidential general elections. Between saturation media coverage and the effects of partisanship, campaigns really aren't left with much to do. Sure, they help with the mechanics of turnout. And if one side spent a billion dollars and the other spent a few hundred thousand, that might have an effect. But given the current rules and conditions regulating campaign finance, it just isn't that hard to raise enormous sums, and it doesn't much matter whether one enormous sum is a bit larger. The same dynamic is true for much of the upcoming election. That's why I agree with Dan Drezner that the Trump campaign's tactical gambits — including its much-hyped plan to attack Biden for being soft on China — aren't likely to succeed. Where I differ somewhat is that I don't think we can have much confidence in traditional election models. Jay Ulfelder said it well: "I find it odd that U.S. election forecasters continue to discuss the 2020 cycle as if all the usual assumptions will hold. Maybe they will, but between the pandemic and the GOP's cutthroat approach to retaining power, I think there's much more uncertainty than usual." Exactly. Normally, the electorate punishes the in-party for bad economic news, and particularly a sitting president seeking re-election. If that's the case this year, Biden will most likely win in a blowout. But I have no idea how voters will react to the current situation. Yes, people have punished presidents for turns of the economic cycle that they did nothing to cause and might even have handled reasonably well. Yet there's no precedent for in effect deliberately inducing a recession to save lives. And that seems different enough to me that I'm going to be very careful about making predictions. Which isn't to say that I think Trump, with his persistently low approval ratings, is in good shape. I don't think he entered 2020 as the strong favorite and perhaps not as the favorite at all. So I don't think it would take very much to make him a significant underdog. I'm just really reluctant to guess how the pandemic and its economic consequences will play out — other than to say that I very much doubt that blaming Biden for being weak on China will make any difference at all. 1. Brian Arbour on Biden and the youth vote. 2. Meredith Conroy on misinformation and the pandemic. 3. Michael Tesler at the Monkey Cage on marijuana and the 2020 election. 4. Julia Azari on democratic norms and the coronavirus. 5. And Eric McGhee on mail-in ballots. Get Early Returns every morning in your inbox. Click here to subscribe. Also subscribe to Bloomberg All Access and get much, much more. You'll receive our unmatched global news coverage and two in-depth daily newsletters, the Bloomberg Open and the Bloomberg Close. | 
Sitaram Panchal died of cancer at 54 New Delhi: After Inder Kumar’s sudden death, Bollywood industry got another shock this mornin...
Post a Comment