Let me suggest something, in love.

Earlier, you said and I agreed with you, that the Trump side should be looking to poke holes in their case. It would only make it stronger. I wanted you to be a part of the hearings here.

Now, I think you need to do the same.

1) FL absentees, early voting:

*Dems as expected ("souls to the polls Sunday") had a good day and FINALLY take the early walk-in vote lead by 6,100 votes.

Rs total: 1,151,593
Ds total: 1,092,547

Rs +59,046 combined lead. This is very good for this point in the campaign.

2) At this point in 2016, Rs only led by 40,000. I could be mistaken but I think yesterday was the last day polls were open on Sunday, so the final "souls to the polls" Sunday.

3) As of yesterday, four red counties were yet to report. That would likely boost the lead back to 70k

4) I don't think the FL Rs in their wildest dreams expected to lead this late in the campaign.

5) Likewise in NV:
Clark (with its union "encouragement" for members turned out big yesterday and added net 6,000 voters.

However---big however---neither Washoe nor the rurals . . .

(5) contd. . . were open yesterday. My guesstimate is that would slice that number in half.

While this helped, the NV Ds are still looking at a significant--to potentially massive--shortfall from their 2016 numbers coming out of early voting.

6) Gotta make sure you compare days to days. Calendars and voting days differ.

1) https://t.co/ejQmeU5YIu

First the Hill/Cook, now this. Folks, they are aware they are losing or have already lost the House. The last big vote suppression push is on.

Yesterday, two NC polls basically put all the "at risk" NC seats out of reach.
Before that, TX and OH's vulnerable seats were pretty much off the board (Sessions is ahead but close).

NY now down to two vulnerable seats with the R leading in one. Both are red.

3) UNLIKE THE LIBS, I will tell you . . .

I.
Can.
Be.
Wrong.

But I'm not seeing a DemoKKKrat takeover of the House. At most I have them with 19 flips---but that is really stretching it and that's them running the table.

4) Meanwhile, we had news of a D-R potential flip in AZ1, where Wendy Rogers has gotten out to a surprising lead.

This goes along with the expected two flips from MN. There are at least two others out there, possibly three.

5) Meanwhile, in the world of real voting, in blue Montgomery Co., OH we have the following in absentee balloting: R=11,041, D=7,087, I/U=12,609

Well, you say, all those indies may vote D.

They didn't in 2016. Based on 2016 votes and voting history of EVERY SINGLE HOUSE . . .

1) Last night I said we have 12 data points (AZ statewide, FL statewide +4 specific counties, IA + 2 counties, OH 2 counties, and NC).

Every single one was showing GOP turnout higher than midterm levels of 2014 and all but one (a county) showing turnout above 2016.

2) If I recall all the data correctly, D turnout/performance was below that of 2016 and, in the case of IA, below that of 2014.

3) Now we have two more data points to add: news out of WY that a net of 10k switched from D/other to R in last six months & turnout #s in Knox Co. TN

3) Out of 12 MEASURABLE data points--not polls which are opinions of what people "might" do in the future---every single one is favors the Rs.

4) I'll admit, I got a tad depressed for a minute yesterday when the latest Siena/NYT polls came out . . . before I was reminded . . .

4) . . they were making 60,000 calls to reach a mere 300 respondents.

SIXTY THOUSAND!

5) Who do you think is NOT responding?

Conservatives, Republicans, people with families & jobs.

6) That means these NYT polls are utterly worthless with a margin of error of 20% or more

7) So once again, we have real world data about what has ALREADY HAPPENED, stuff we can count . . .

and unreliable polls of the opinions of people who won't even vote about what they might do if it doesn't rain or if they don't have a hangnail that day.

1) Voting in Cuyahoga County (OH's Manhattan for its blueishness) has dramatically increased.

2) Bad news right?

3) Er, no. "And increases are coming from Republicans and unaffiliated voters."

4) Now, we have to watch unaffiliated voters, but my OH guys--"The Accountant" and "Ohio Wan" developed a statistical model in 2016 that appears to be holding for assessing how Us will vote.

5) It's not bad for us at all.

6) So, here are the raw numbers:

Eighteen days out in 2018:
D 68,760 (44 %)
R 39,080 (25%)
Us 48,206 (30 %)
Total 156,251

2014:
D 75,675 (55 %)
Rs 33,964 (25 %)
•Us 26,854 (19 5)
Total 137,053

"Republicans appear energized" due to the Kavanaugh

(THREAD) Pre-election Russia collusion may take down Trump. It's equally possible the Trumps' pre- and post-election collusion with Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Israel will do it—a course of collusion also connected to the Kremlin. I explain here. I hope you'll read on and retweet.

1/ I must stress how unbelievably complex the "Grand Bargain" theory of the Trump-Russia case is—a different thing from saying it's not substantiated. It's substantiated in *almost every single particular*—it just *also* happens to be very confusing. Not byzantine—just confusing.

2/ The basics: Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the UAE all view Iran as their chief regional enemy. Iran is propped up by Russia. Therefore the Saudis, Israelis, and Emiratis all need a US government willing to find a way to get the Kremlin to *stop* supporting Iran in the Middle East.

3/ The best way to get Russia to stop supporting Iran—or reduce support—was/is to drop all sanctions on Russia over its 2014 annexation of Crimea, as that'd be worth *trillions* to the Kremlin over the next decade. Everyone knew that Clinton wouldn't do this—and that Trump would.

4/ Per the NYT, on August 3, 2016, Donald Trump Jr. met secretly at Trump Tower with a Saudi and Emirati emissary, George Nader, as well as an Israeli intelligence expert, Joel Zamel, with *significant* ties to both Israeli intelligence *and* Russian oligarchs allied with Putin.

1. Short thread - on the various claims we're seeing from Republican politicians over the last few days that the Democratic push for accountability is "divisive." Damn right it's divisive - that is what it has to be.

2. It is intended to enforce a clear division between those who accept and are committed to democracy and those who are willing to turn to violence when the vote doesn't turn out the way that they want it to.

3. One of the basic implications of Adam Przeworski's theoretic work is that democracy is made out of mutually reinforcing expectations, and those expectations are fragile. If some actors think they would be better off defecting from the democratic bargain, they will.

4. In other words: democracy and armed factionalism are far closer than we think, or we would like them to be. This means that it is incredibly important to police the boundaries between them. Allowing some to turn to violence can lead to expectation collapse and cascading ruin.

5. When we allow the divisions to become blurred, that means that we are running the perpetual risk of things getting fucked up. If a major faction turns to violence, and no-one responds, things can get really fucked up really, really fast.

1) FL absentees, early voting:

*Dems as expected ("souls to the polls Sunday") had a good day and FINALLY take the early walk-in vote lead by 6,100 votes.

Rs total: 1,151,593
Ds total: 1,092,547

Rs +59,046 combined lead. This is very good for this point in the campaign.

2) At this point in 2016, Rs only led by 40,000. I could be mistaken but I think yesterday was the last day polls were open on Sunday, so the final "souls to the polls" Sunday.

3) As of yesterday, four red counties were yet to report. That would likely boost the lead back to 70k

4) I don't think the FL Rs in their wildest dreams expected to lead this late in the campaign.

5) Likewise in NV:
Clark (with its union "encouragement" for members turned out big yesterday and added net 6,000 voters.

However---big however---neither Washoe nor the rurals . . .

(5) contd. . . were open yesterday. My guesstimate is that would slice that number in half.

While this helped, the NV Ds are still looking at a significant--to potentially massive--shortfall from their 2016 numbers coming out of early voting.

6) Gotta make sure you compare days to days. Calendars and voting days differ.

HUF / H!ndu Undivided Family - A thread

HUF or H!ndu undivided family is a special provision under the income tax act which allows H!ndu families to enjoy lesser payable income tax as compared to any other individual.

1/n

It also encompasses Buddhist, Ja!n & Sikh families.

HUF Essentially allows a Joint or any family 4 that matter 2 be treated as an individual & the family’s income 4m inherited property, wills and gifts 2 be taxed separately rather than being clubbed with individual’s income.
+

Essentially they can divide their income in two parts.

What does that mean? In essence, It means that it allows the individuals to reduce the payable income tax, as they do not have to consider income from HUF when calculating “their own” taxable income.

3/n

The income from inherited property,wills, gifts is accounted under HUF (with a separate PAN card) and since it is not summed with individual’s income, it warrants a lower payable tax.

4/n

What’s interesting is that, HUF is based on H!ndu law, which does not govern other families allowed to avail benefits of HUF, i.e Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains.

5/n

The initiatives of Congress are to come in two areas. One within the party and the other with other parties.
First Congress has to Improve its communication with people, cadres, leaders and supporters.
Rahul is mainly shouldering this responsibility. But why not other leaders.
/1

It may be argued that some leaders are doing it within their areas. What about other areas, other leaders?
There will be many contenders for posts, maybe even for President’s if given a chance.
Why not leaders volunteer to propagate views, counter the Modi regime on the field?
/2

Some leaders give out statements in media, write their views on social media. Are they enough? Are they doing justice to their potential?
Even during elections, they limit themselves to their constituencies/ state.
Why should they not extend it beyond & even between elections?
/3

The statements of Congress leaders with few exceptions are bland, insipid, prosaic, not interesting and attracting enough to percolate to the people.
How many of their messages reached the people?
Can they not make it more attractive or find other ways to reach the masses?
/4

Some may say there are limitations of age, barriers of territory, egos, invitations, interference.
Most of them are artificial, self-imposed and can be sorted out.
These leaders do not devote themselves to the masses.
If Rahul does it, expected to do it why not others?
/5