This Is Sparta(nburg), Con't

If the Public Policy Polling survey of SC voters ahead of Saturday's primary is any indication, America is in for a delicious treat of pecan pralines and racism.

PPP's new South Carolina poll continues to find Donald Trump with a wide lead in the state. He's at 35% to 18% each for Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, 10% for John Kasich, and 7% each for Jeb Bush and Ben Carson. 

What's striking about Trump's support is how consistent it is across different demographic groups- he's at 41% with 'somewhat conservative' voters, 40% with younger voters, 38% with men, 36% with self identified Republicans, 35% with Evangelicals, 35% with middle aged voters, 34% with non-Evangelicals, 31% with women, 30% with self identified independents, 30% with 'very conservative' voters, 30% with seniors, and 29% with moderates. He has a lead of some size within every single one of those groups, similar to what he was able to do in New Hampshire. 

The race is still pretty fluid in South Carolina- 29% of voters say they might change their minds between now and Election Day. Trump benefits from having supporters who are pretty resolute though- 77% of them say they will definitely vote for him, compared to 76% for Cruz and 62% for Rubio. Among voters who say their minds are completely made up, Trump's support goes up to 40% to 20% for Cruz and 16% for Rubio.

Clinton too has a big lead in the state,

On the Democratic side Hillary Clinton leads Bernie Sanders 55/34. South Carolina exemplifies the way in which the Democratic race changes in places where there's a large African American electorate. Clinton and Sanders are tied with white voters at 46%, pretty similar to how the race played out in Iowa. But among African Americans Clinton continues to have a substantial advantage over Sanders at 63/23. Clinton is very popular among black voters with a 71/12 favorability, while feelings about Sanders continue to be pretty mixed with him coming in at 39/33. 

South Carolina's being an open primary works to Sanders' advantage. Clinton is up 31 with actual Democrats, 60/29, but Sanders cuts a lot into her advantage thanks to a 55/27 lead with the independents planning to vote in the Democratic primary. Some of the other customary big demographic splits we've seen in other places present themselves in South Carolina as well- Sanders is up 45/43 with men and 44/42 with younger voters, but that is more than drowned out by Clinton's 64/25 advantage with women and 70/20 one with seniors.

But the real fun is down in the crosstab swamps, and woo boy, is it a hog lagoon and a half down here (PDF) when we get to the GOP primary voters.

Q19 Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion
of George W. Bush?
Favorable........................................................ 64%
Unfavorable .................................................... 25%
Not sure .......................................................... 11% 

Q20 Would you support or oppose banning Muslims
from entering the United States?
Support banning Muslims from entering the
United States ..................................................60%
Oppose banning Muslims from entering the
United States ..................................................23%
Not sure .......................................................... 17%

Nice.  It gets better.

Q22 Would you support or oppose shutting down
mosques in the United States?
Support shutting down mosques in the United
States .............................................................29%
Oppose shutting down mosques in the United
States .............................................................47%
Not sure .......................................................... 24% 

Q23 Would you support or oppose creating a
national database of Muslims in the United
States?
Support a national database of Muslims in
the United States ............................................47%
Oppose a national database of Muslims in
the United States ............................................36%
Not sure .......................................................... 17% 

Q24 Do you think the religion of Islam should be
legal or illegal in the United States?
Islam should be legal in the United States ...... 53%
Islam should be illegal in the United States .... 25%
Not sure .......................................................... 22%

And then it gets amazing.

Q26 Do you support or oppose the Confederate flag
hanging on the capital grounds?
Support the Confederate flag hanging on the
capital grounds ...............................................54%
Oppose the Confederate flag hanging on the
capital grounds ...............................................32%
Not sure .......................................................... 14% 

Q27 Are you glad that the North won the Civil War,
or do you wish that the South had won?
Glad the North won......................................... 36%
Wish the South had won................................. 29%
Not sure .......................................................... 35%

Q28 In general do you think that whites are a
superior race, or not?
Whites are a superior race.............................. 10%
Whites are not a superior race........................ 78%
Not sure .......................................................... 11% 

Q29 Do you prefer mustard, tomato, or vinegar
based barbecue sauce?
Mustard based ................................................ 26%
Tomato based ................................................. 31%
Vinegar based................................................. 26%
Not sure .......................................................... 17%

Racism and barbecue, baby!

When you're still angry or at least indifferent about the outcome of the damn Civil War and support the Confederate Flag O' Traitors on your state's capitol, you really do need to reassess your life in the year 2016.  Also, screw vinegar based barbecue sauce.  The Carolinas are famous for it and it's *awful*.

Never change, Palmetto State.  Never change.

StupidiNews!

• China has deployed anti-aircraft missiles on the disputed Paracel Islands in the South China Sea according to Taiwan, the deployment has been confirmed by US satellite imagery.
• A federal advisory panel has concluded that there's not enough evidence to recommend screening all US toddlers for autism, saying more research is needed.
• Turkey's Deputy PM says Ankara wants a 10 kilometer strip of land along the Syrian side of the border to be secured by Turkish forces.
• Former UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali has died at the age of 93, the Egyptian diplomat remains the only UN chief to have a second term blocked by the US.
• A federal judge has ordered Apple to help the FBI unlock the iPhone of one of the two San Bernardino shooters, but the company is resisting doing so.

Last Call For Brokened Convention

Team WIN THE MORNING's Ben Schreckinger is high on his own supply again if he thinks this is going to come to pass.

Mysterious outside groups are asking state parties for personal data on potential delegates, Republican campaigns are drawing up plans to send loyal representatives to obscure local conventions, and party officials are dusting off rule books to brush up on a process that hasn’t mattered for decades.

As Donald Trump and Ted Cruz divide up the first primaries and center-right Republicans tear one another apart in a race to be the mainstream alternative, Republicans are waging a shadow primary for control of delegates in anticipation of what one senior party official called “the white whale of politics”: a contested national convention.

The endgame for the most sophisticated campaigns is an inconclusive first ballot leading to a free-for-all power struggle on the floor in Cleveland.

“This is going to be a convention like I’ve never seen in my lifetime,” said veteran operative Barry Bennett, who managed Ben Carson’s campaign until December and is now advising Trump. “It’s going to be contentious from Day One.”

The primaries and caucuses that dot the nominating calendar and whose results drive headlines will decide whom most delegates are bound to vote for on the first ballot at the Republican National Convention. Should the first ballot fail to produce a nominee, the outcome of the convention will depend on results of the parallel primary now underway for the hearts and minds of delegates.

Each state party has its own rules governing delegate selection, a process so steeped in nuance and legal ambiguity that there are multiple blogs dedicated to wading through it all.

Man, Politico really, really, really wants a brokered convention fight.  Like, more than I want bacon want.  Look, I understand the plan, if everyone with delegates stays in the fight long enough, then they can keep Trump from getting a majority of primary delegates and force a fight.  But the reality is if Trump keeps winning primaries -- and there's no reason to think he won't keep on winning them -- then GOP primary voters who voted for the guy aren't going to just say "Oh, well I mean he won but sure let's nominate Rubio!"

We're talking a rising column of flames here, guys.  Hot in Cleveland.

But here's Politico trying to sell this notion anyway.  It's enlightened self-interest, the GOP party apparatchiks want a brokered convention to get rid of Trump, and Politico wants arguably the biggest Republican fight in decades to cover.

But be careful what you wish for, guys...

Flipping The Script On SCOTUS

President Obama is working on his selection for a Supreme Court nominee to replace the late Antonin Scalia, and everyone is wondering who it will be.

President Barack Obama has held preliminary discussions with his team about whom to nominate to the Supreme Court, the White House said on Monday, while accusing Senate Republicans of "bluster" for saying they would not confirm his pick.

White House spokesman Eric Schultz told reporters administration officials had started talking with Senate offices about the process, which is shaping up to be an epic fight between Republicans and Democrats in a presidential election year.

Republicans, who control the Senate, say Obama should put off naming a replacement for conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, who died over the weekend, and leave it to the next president to decide. Democrats say it is the president's responsibility and right to make the choice.

Americans will choose a new president in the Nov. 8 elections. Obama leaves office in January 2017.

Scalia's death leaves the court evenly divided between liberal and conservative justices just as it is set to decide major cases on abortion, voting rights and immigration.

A growing number of Republican senators have already said they will not support an Obama nominee, including a dozen who are up for reelection in November. On Monday, Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania and Rob Portman of Ohio each announced their opposition. Both are up for reelection this year.

“This is not the first time that Republicans have come out with a lot of bluster, only to have reality ultimately sink in,” Schultz said, citing recent spats over raising the U.S. debt limit and approving a nuclear deal with Iran.

“At each pass, they took a hard line. They tried to play politics. But ultimately, they were not able to back up their threats," Schultz said.

So we've reached an interesting situation: unlike the GOP's ultimately doomed debt ceiling and shutdown games, a liberal majority of Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan, Sotomayor, and another Obama selection would absolutely change the direction of the Supreme Court for decades, especially if Justice Ginsburg can retire and be replaced by an Obama successor in the future.  That would cement a liberal bent to the high court for years, and Republicans would be insane to allow that.  They'd be obliterated by their base and replaced in the Senate with people even crazier.

It's a battle that neither side can afford to lose.  So who does President Obama nominate, knowing that his pick has no chance whatsoever of even getting a vote, knwing there's the possibility that there will still be a GOP Senate and a Democratic President 11 months from now.  What then?

Does he go for broke with a boldly liberal jurist? Does he put forward a consensus choice who is eminently qualified but would ultimately have no chance, giving up their opportunity for the high court?  Does he put forward a moderate, Kennedy-style justice who would potentially be a wild card?

I honestly don't know.  I do trust the President's choice though, becuase he's beaten the GOP time and time again  Can he win in a way that finally motivates the Democratic base to turn out and flip the Senate and SCOTUS?

I sincerely hope so.

Indiana Pence And The Temple Of Boom

Remember Elkhart, Indiana?  Back in 2009, the city had an unemployment rate of over 15%. President Obama visited the town as a prime example of what his stimulus package was going to fix.

Fast forward to 2016.  How is Elkhart doing now?

Pretty damn well.

Elkhart's unemployment rate now is 3.5%.  

But Indiana is considered red state America and they'd never vote for a Democrat, right?

Maybe Gov. Mike Pence has a race on his hands after all in November.  

Closer to home, the Indiana gubernatorial contest in November is perhaps generating the most anticipation among Elkhart County observers, outside the local races. Gov. Mike Pence, a Republican, is going after his second term but faces a challenge from Democrat John Gregg, who unsuccessfully ran against him in 2012 as well.

Pence, a social conservative, has come under fire from some who blast his handling of the debate over including civil rights protections for the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community in state law. He worries moves to protect the LGBT community could trample on religious freedoms and took a hands-off approach to the debate over the issue in the current legislation session, which fizzled after the key proposal up for debate, Senate Bill 344, stalled.

“Pence is locked into his old ideals,” said Democrat Fish. “The reality he lives in is completely wrong for Indiana. He’s way out of touch.”

Republican Dickerson defended Pence, alluding to his efforts to keep Indiana fiscally sound and creation of the HIP 2.0 program, essentially an expansion of Medicaid health program to more people. Wesco pointed to the decline in unemployment under Pence and what he said is the business-friendly ambiance here.

Still, Pence’s victory isn’t a foregone conclusion. “I think it’s definitely going to be a race that the governor’s going to have to work on,” Wesco said.

We'll see what John Gregg can do.

StupidiNews!

• Turkey is blaming Russia for the aerial bombing of two Syrian hospitals, killing 22 and leaving dozens wounded, in what Amnesty International is calling "war crimes".
• The Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs has reopened, three months after a shooting rampage at the abortion provider left three dead and nine wounded.
• Both Saudi Arabia and Russia will freeze oil output at current levels, dependent on the Iranians, who may or may not follow suit.
• Former President George W. Bush is taking to the campaign trail for his brother Jeb this week in South Carolina in an effort to boost the younger Bush's presidential primary prospects.
• Mattel is getting into the 3D printer business for kids as it plans to sell the $300 ThingMaker with software design kit allowing kids to print their own toys.

Last Call For Like A Kansas Tornado, Con't

What better way for the worst senator in the GOP to show he's all for deep austerity cuts than with the endorsement of the most despised governor in America?

Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback has become the first sitting governor to endorse Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida for president. 

The Rubio campaign announced the endorsement Monday. “Just like Governor Brownback, Marco has consistently defended life, small government and free enterprise throughout his career in public service,” Rubio midwest spokesman Jeremy Adler said in a statement. 

Kansas Republicans will caucus Mar. 5. 

Brownback, a Republican who once ran for president, endorsed then-Texas Gov. Rick Perry in 2011. Perry was a candidate for the 2016 GOP nomination but withdrew. 

“Marco Rubio has a proven track record of protecting life, defending religious liberty, and undoing Obamacare,” Brownback’s statement said. “He will be a wonderful president, and I am proud to offer him my full support.” 

Brownback’s decision is a mild surprise. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas is a favorite of many religious conservatives like Brownback. Jeff Roe is the campaign manager for Cruz, and he has had some influence in Kansas. Kansas is a caucus state, like Iowa, where Cruz prevailed. 

He might have also endorsed fellow Gov. John Kasich of Ohio, or former Gov. Jeb Bush. Bush has appeared in Kansas with Brownback. 

It’s possible Brownback may consider Rubio the most electable Republican in the GOP field. Brownback will be looking for work after the 2018 election, and may have an interest in a position with the federal government. A Republican in the White House would be a prerequisite for a federal job.

Quite the job resume there, especially the part where Brownback drove Kansas into a hole. And Marco Rubio thinks that's going to help him in Kansas next month?

Sure thing, Marco.  Keep telling yourself that.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/the-buzz/article60470866.html#storylink=cpy

The Mask Slips Again

...and again Republicans reveal their cards, accidentally telling the truth.  Today's contestant: Sen. Marco Rubio, who gets into an argument with the Sunday shows and gives the game away over Scalia's replacement on SCOTUS.

On Meet the Press, Rubio again insisted that there should be no nominations from a “president nearing the last few months of his administration.” 

“Do presidential terms end after three years?” NBC host Chuck Todd shot back at the candidate. 

“There comes a point in the last year of the president, especially in their second term, where you stop nominating,” Rubio said. “You basically say, at this point, with a few months left in your term, no accountability from the ballot box on the appointment you’re going to make — on a lifetime appointment.” 

“Eleven months!” Todd interrupted. 

Fox News host Chris Wallace asked Rubio if he believed no president should be able to make second term Supreme Court appointments. 

“I’m not saying it’s illegal,” Rubio replied. “I think we should wait until after November before we move forward on confirming any justice to the Supreme Court.” 

Wallace reminded Rubio that President Ronald Reagan appointed Anthony Kennedy to the Supreme Court in his final year in office. 

“It doesn’t really matter what Reagan did back in ’87,” Rubio opined. “I think the president should allow the next president to appoint the justice to the Supreme Court, and if it’s me — and I anticipate that it will be — I’m going to look for someone in the mold of Justice Scalia, who while irreplaceable, I think is a model jurist and one of the great jurists in American history.”

Of course Marco Rubio is going to insist he gets the opportunity to nominate another Scalia in 2017. He working the refs here to make sure that this happens. Unfortunately, he and Ted Cruz are in position to make sure no confirmation vote happens, and there's little that Obama can do about it.

There is a lot, however, that voters can do about it in November.  The question is will they finally decided to punish the GOP?

I wouldn't hold your breath on that.

You Won't Have Ol' Gil To Kick Around Anymore

The Guardian's Ben Jacobs comes not to praise the Jim Gilmore GOP presidential campaign which ended last week in a cloud of pathos, but to rightfully bury it as a sloppy, embarrassing mess.

The one-term governor of Virginia ran a narcissistic, quasi-delusional campaign, under the premise that a virtual unknown last elected to state office in 1997 could somehow be elevated to the presidency.

Being a quasi-delusional narcissist is not a necessarily a flaw in American politics. No entirely normal person can devote years of their lives to the proposition that they are the most qualified person in more than 300 million to lead the free world. The odds are always long.

After all, what could have seemed more narcissistic than Rick Santorum running for the White House in 2012 after a blowout defeat for re-election to the US Senate? Or, this cycle, what could have appeared more delusional in early 2015 than Bernie Sanders’ belief that a septuagenarian socialist who had never been a Democrat could seriously challenge Hillary Clinton for that party’s nomination.

Gilmore’s sin was not an excess of ego. It was a total lack of a work ethic. He barely campaigned, he did not raise money and he had no political organization. As the Washington Post noted in September, for more than a month after declaring his candidacy he did not hold a single campaign event.

In state after state after state, his campaign missed ballot deadlines. The most press coverage he generated outside of debate appearances was when bored political reporters spearheaded a drive to get him verified on Twitter.

And yet the former governor could not be accused of being a political neophyte. He had also been Virginia attorney general and chair of the Republican National Committee. He had already mounted a presidential campaign, in 2008, a year in which Mark Warner dealt him a crushing defeat for the US Senate. He knew what he was getting himself into.

What he wasn’t doing was running for president.

It's nearly impossible to view it as anything else other than a small man with grand dreams and no real chance.  At least Ben Carson has a book to sell. Gilmore didn't even have that. I'm not sure how much money he wasted, but I feel sorry for anyone who donated to the guy.

Having said that, it's the other Republicans still in the race who represent a real threat to the country.

StupidiNews!

• Saudi Arabia and troops from 20 Arab and Muslim countries are conducting military exercises dubbed Operation North Thunder as Russian forces close in on the Syrian town of Aleppo.
• The Mexican border wall that Donald Trump proposes to build if elected President would cost the US nearly a half a billion yearly in lost wildlife tourism.
• The foreclosure crisis in Nevada has had a direct effect on the 2016 primary races, as keeping track of voters through the mess has led to out of date voter information for the campaigns.
• The US is signaling increasing concern with China using non-naval ships to stake its claims to the disputed waters of the South China Sea.
• A new app aims to crowdsource using smartphones as a network of earthquake detection devices that could detect quakes in real time and notify first responders.

Last Call For Syria's Business Indeed

If the Russians and Iranians "liberate" Aleppo, Bashar al-Assad gets Syria back, and the alternative is Turkey stepping in along with the Saudis and Gulf States and essentially precipitating a shooting war between NATO and Russia.

Which outcome is worse?

This week, the Syrian army, backed by Russian air strikes and Iranian-supported militias including Hezbollah, launched a major offensive to encircle rebel strongholds in the northern city of Aleppo, choking off one of the last two secure routes connecting the city to Turkey and closing in on the second. This would cut supplies not only to a core of the rebellion against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, but also to the city’s 300,000 remaining civilians, who may soon find themselves besieged like hundreds of thousands of others in the country. In response, 50,000 civilians have fled Aleppo for the Turkish border, where the border crossing is currently closed. An unnamed U.S. defense official told The Daily Beast’s Nancy Youssef that “the war is essentially over” if Assad manages to seize and hold Aleppo.

The city, formerly Syria’s largest and its commercial and industrial hub, hasproven pivotal to the civil war in the past. As Andrew Tabler of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy explained to me, the rebels’ push to take Aleppo in 2012—following a year in which the city had seen relatively little of the protests and violence that had been escalating elsewhere in the country—“was one of the first real major offensives of the armed opposition in Syria.” The hope was to set up an alternative capital there to rival Damascus, and from that base to gradually expand opposition control. The city has been roughly divided between the regime and the rebels ever since, with Assad’s forces mainly in the west and opposition forces mainly in the east, and “with some parts of the city changing hands on a daily basis,” according to the BBC.

Critically, the rebels have controlled major roads to Turkey, which has allowed them to transport supplies into their half of the city and to their other strongholds in northern Syria. Government forces in western Aleppo, meanwhile, have been cut off from those ground routes and forced to rely on airplanes and helicopters to get supplies. As Aleppo became the site of a bloody urban war of attrition—in late 2013, Assad’s forces barrel-bombed the city for a month straight, and they have repeatedly tried to encircle it—the rebels have held on.

Russia’s military intervention in Syria, which began last fall, may change that. Unlike the U.S. coalition’s air strikes in the country, which have targeted ISIS-controlled areas in eastern Syria, Russia’s are targeting rebel groups, some of them backed by the United States, in the country’s west, including near Aleppo. “[T]he bombing over the last four months has significantly softened up the opposition, and decimated them in many areas,” Tabler said. Against that backdrop, and barring an unlikely breakthrough at international peace talks scheduled to resume this week (after they were called off following the Syrian army’s advance on Aleppo), the regime offensive to recapture the city may ultimately succeed, even if it takes starving its inhabitants into submission.

The frank analysis of author Kathy Gilsinan and Andrew Tabler is stark:

Gilsinan: And then what happens to the regional balance of power within that war?

Tabler: It would be a tremendous loss for the U.S. and its traditional allies: Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Jordan. It’s already been extremely costly for most of those allies, but it would be a defeat [in the face of] the Russian-Iranian intervention in Syria. This would also be a huge loss for the United States vis-à-vis Russia in its Middle East policy, certainly. And because of the flow of refugees as a result of this, if they go northward to Europe, then you would see a migrant crisis in Europe that could lead to far-right governments coming to power which are much more friendly to Russia than they are to the United States. I think that is likely to happen.

Gilsinan: So it changes the entire orientation, not just of the Middle East, but of Europe as well.

Tabler: It will soften up American power in Europe, yeah. And put into jeopardy a lot of the advances in the NATO-accession countries, which are adjacent to Russia, as well.

Gilsinan: That’s a staggeringly significant outcome for relatively cheap [expenditures] on Russia’s part.

Tabler: It is, isn’t it? I don’t think most people get how much of a blowout this really is. I don’t think most people understand: This defeat of the United States by Russia in Syria, it’s not just about Syria. It’s about our presence in Europe.

And if Aleppo falls, that's basically the ball game for NATO.  Putin got the better of us here, and he knows it. If we had intervened 3 years ago, maybe things would have been different, but Republicans (and Democrats) said no.

This is the result.

The Clown Car Crashes

The wheels came off the clown car last night in the GOP debate in South Carolina, and it happened at this point here.

During the second hour of the GOP debate in South Carolina on Saturday, the conversation went beyond anything ever seen in a Republican debate.

After the six men hurled insults back and forth, the debate took a steep dive into chaos around when Cruz hit Trump for previously supporting liberal policies.

“The next president is going appoint one, two, three, four Supreme Court Justices,” Cruz said. “If Donald Trump is president, he will appoint liberals. If Donald Trump is president… your Second Amendment will go away. You know how I know that?”

CBS moderator John Dickerson cut him off.

“Hold on gentlemen. I’m going to turn this car around,” Dickerson said.

When Trump continued talking and questioning Cruz’s conservative credentials, Dickerson again attempted to control the stage.

“All right, gentlemen… We’re in danger of driving this into the dirt.”

I mean, at some point voters have to realize that these guys are absolutely bonkers, right?

Right?

Sunday Long Read: The Long Climb Out

Recently, Charlotte, North Carolina was named the most difficult large city in the US for people to break the cycle of poverty in. I grew up in North Carolina and left for a reason, and as the state has become increasingly controlled by Republicans, I'm increasingly glad I did. Especially when I read stories like this about people working three jobs and still being poor.

WHEN SHE COMES home from work tonight, Toreasera “Kisha” Dawkins knows two things will happen: Her three daughters will be waiting for her, and her husband will call from prison.

She knows this as she finishes her nine-hour shift behind the cash register at the Mighty Midget Mart gas station on Albermarle Road. She knows this as she walks outside, wearing jeans and a red Shell T-shirt, her long, dark hair streaked with blond and pulled into a side ponytail. She knows this as she pops the hood of her faded green 2003 Dodge Grand Caravan.

It’s rush hour on a hot day in early July, and her radiator’s shot. Kisha, 37, pours in cold water to keep the engine from overheating. She can’t afford her rent, much less a new car, so for now, this will have to do.

She drives east past strip malls, Walmart, Goodwill—landmarks of life at the bottom rung of Charlotte’s economic ladder. As she pulls into her driveway, her daughters crowd around the front steps. “Hi, Mommy!” they shout, all bright eyes and round cheeks. But she is already on the phone, talking to their father.

Travis Dawkins is serving four to six years in a Gaston County prison for breaking and entering, and this is month eight. For several years, until he was arrested, he stayed home to raise the girls while their mom was at work. Now he’s a disembodied voice on the other end of the line, calling to make sure they remember him.

His daughters push open the screen door into their run-down ranch house, where a blanket-turned-curtain covers the front window. They race around the playroom, jumping on bare mattresses on the floor. Kisha holds out the phone and puts it on speaker so they can talk to their father. “Hey, Daddy, I love you, Daddy,” sings Ja’Mya, the four-year-old.

Kisha asks the girls to clean up their toys. Ja’Mya obeys, but her two-year-old sister, Zyauna, doesn’t, so her father tries to discipline her by speakerphone. “ZaZa, Daddy need you to put your listening ears on,” he says.

“OK, Daddy!” ZaZa shouts back.

She and Ja’Mya and their one-year-old sister, Tyasia, scramble around, putting away dolls and games. “Daddy say he love you,” their mother announces. “Tell Daddy bye.”

All three shout back in unison: “We love you, Daddy. Bye!”

This is Kisha’s family. It’s not the one she planned, and it’s not the one many social scientists would choose for her—a black woman raising three young children below the poverty line while her husband is in prison. Her family embodies many of the reasons it’s so difficult to escape poverty in Charlotte: segregated housing, unstable families, the growing distance between her paycheck and the one-fifth of Mecklenburg County households that earn more than $115,000 annually. Kisha works an average of 45 to 50 hours a week and earns $12,000 to $15,000 a year. Some would blame her choices, others her lot in life. As she sees it, her only option is to move forward, to keep working and juggling bills and treating ear infections and praying, until by some miracle, by some mysterious force she cannot understand, she can give her daughters a life better than her own.

And NC Republicans will shake their heads and tell you, while defunding Planned Parenthood, wanting to get rid of Obamacare, cutting school funding, refusing to raise the state's minimum wage, and making abortion all but impossible to access, is that Kisha Dawkins should never have had children she couldn't afford, and that the state of North Carolina can't afford to help her either.

The $12,000 a year she makes is too much money for Medicaid.  Republicans saw to that. She has to depend on church help and non-profit organizations just to put food on the table. She is working hard for her family and is sacrificing everything she has just to stay above water.

And Republicans do not give a good god damn about her and her three kids and never, ever will.

Remember that.

Eight Is Apparently Enough

I agree with WaPo's Amber Phillips that there's no reason, given the behavior of the GOP over the last seven years, to believe that Mitch McConnell will even allow a vote on confirming his Supreme Court nominee to replace Scalia. 

Come January 2017, Republicans have a chance at controlling the House of Representatives, the Senate and the White House.

So it stands to reason that Republicans have very little incentive to even consider President Obama's suggestion for who should replace Justice Antonin Scalia, who died Saturday.

There's some historical precedent for them to do just that. A hazy rule dating back decades that congressional experts say is really more of a tradition suggests senators of the opposition party of the White House can oppose some judicial nominations in the months before a presidential election.

It's known as the "Thurmond Rule," for reasons we'll get into, but there is widespread disagreement on what it even means and when it can be invoked.

"It's not a rule," said Russell Wheeler, a judicial expert with the Brookings Institution. "It's just sort of a pie-in-the-sky flexibility that both parties try to disown when it's convenient for them and try to say it means something when it's not."

Whether rule or tradition, it pops up throughout history in times like these, when a high-stakes judicial nomination collides with a presidential election.

But Wheeler and other congressional experts think the rule is less in-play now than in the past. Republicans have control of the Senate and can simply sit on the nomination if they want -- no matter how much the other side cries foul.

If the very real prospect of someone like Donald Trump appointing a Supreme Court Justice doesn't scare the crap out of the "Not a dime's worth of difference between the parties" voters turned off by Hillary or Bernie, then we deserve what we get.

But considering voters haven't bothered to punish the GOP Congress at all and in fact have rewarded them at every turn, there's no reason to believe that a President Sanders or Clinton would be able to get anyone confirmed either.

Don't expect this vacancy to be filled.  Hell, I half expect calls from the GOP and the Broderites to either appoint a right-wing nut like Scalia or for Justice Ginsberg to retire to make a seven-justice SCOTUS "fair".

This is the entire ball game for the GOP if Scalia is replace by a liberal justice, and they damn well know it.  They will resist by any and every means necessary.  You thought they hated Obama before?

You have no idea.

BREAKING: Justice Antonin Scalia Dead At 79

America just got real interesting.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, a leading conservative voice on the high court, has died at the age of 79, a government source and a family friend told CNN on Saturday.

Scalia died in his sleep during a visit to Texas.

A government official said Scalia went to bed Friday night and told friends he wasn't feeling well. Saturday morning, he didn't get up for breakfast. And the group he was with for a hunting trip left without him.

Someone at the ranch went in to check on him and found him unresponsive.

First of all, as wrong and as awful as Scalia's politics were as a jurist, he was a human being who had a family, a wife and nine children who lost a husband and father. "Great and terrible things, but great nonetheless" as they say.

Second of all, having said that, there is no way Republicans are going to let Obama nominate anyone to replace him. GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell's statement today:

"Today our country lost an unwavering champion of a timeless document that unites each of us as Americans. Justice Scalia's fidelity to the Constitution was rivaled only by the love of his family: his wife Maureen his nine children, and his many grandchildren. Through the sheer force of his intellect and his legendary wit, this giant of American jurisprudence almost singlehandedly revived an approach to constitutional interpretation that prioritized the text and original meaning of the Constitution. Elaine and I send our deepest condolences to the entire Scalia family.

“The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.”

No matter what you believe about Scalia, or Obama, think about the last time a Senate leader said that a sitting President had no right to name a replacement justice to the Supreme Court.

You're up, Mr. President.