Well, the Fords in Canada made their wealth via "pressure-sensitive labels for plastic-wrapped grocery products." Guess when there's a will, there's a way
My teenager is crazy about stickers. Which makes travel souvenirs easy. Then she trades them w friends like we used to trade baseball cards back in the day, or, perhaps, like folks between my daughter and my ages trade Magic cards (?).
Northwest Arkansas is one of the fastest growing metro areas in the state (particularly Benton, Madison and Washington counties) so if blue leaning voters are moving there, he could have a shot of unseating Womack.
Dems actually got even closer to picking up the seat in 1992 when the seat was open and Clinton was actually carrying it at the top of the ticket. That was probably their best chance since the 1974 to take it.
Arkansas is a beautiful state, but it deserves better than the Republicans the voters consistently elect statewide. If there was a bigger research and science university presence like there is here in NC, it would have potential to be competitive.
Jim Tully is a "senior field representative" for MTG out of her district office, is that not a weird title for a congressional staffer? It definitely sounds more like a campaign staffer, I usually expect district staff to be like "constituent advocate"
I don't think it's strange at all; you have staffers that are in DC and staffers in the district, it seems perfectly logical for the latter to be called a field representative.
I don't trust Emerson when they have bad news for Democrats, and I don't trust them when they have good news either. I stand by my prediction of Van Epps winning 57-42. If I end up being too pessimistic, fine, but I refuse to get my hopes up in a Trump+22 district full of right-wing evangelicals.
That Trump -2 approval is based on their likely voter electorate for this special election (hence the recalled vote is Trump +13 rather than Trump +22). What this means is Van Epps is still heavily under performing their expected electorate based on recall and it’s not just turnout causing the swing. FWIW I think Van Epps will win by around 6-8
6-8 seems right. Sadly I think it mgiht fall into the "what if we had picked a better candidate?" margin. Seems like she might be a bit too left for this district
I mean dems in the district chose her. If they’re excited about her, I’m not going to judge. I don’t want outsiders to tell me who “the best candidate” is in my district. I expect the people of TN-07 feel the same.
Not to get pedantic but she won a 4-way primary in which all the candidates were within a few hundred votes of each other at like 23-27%. I wouldn’t say that’s an unqualified endorsement as the best candidate for a general election in a very red district. The other 3 Dems were all varying shades of mod. She may well win, but it’s not because primary voters wisely chose the best candidate in some collaborative fashion; it’ll be purely because of the environment.
Right, but she still got the most votes, even if narrowly. That means she turned out her supporters the best. I take that as a positive sign in a low turnout election.
All Democrats have to do is reach a turnout of, say, 70%+ of their base. Even much less might do the trick – the key thing is to defeat the Sofasitter Party.
I'd guess Van Epps likely wins and it's not super close (more than 2 percent, though quite possibly in single digits), but the swing from 2024 should be enough to sound the alarm for Republicans when extrapolated nationally.
And it wouldn't be an isolated case: note the bulk of both special and regularly scheduled election results since late January.
Thinking way too far ahead here, but it's a shame that this blue wave (if it does indeed happen in '26) will happen too soon for the next redistricting cycle, where a bunch of our 2026 winners will need to win again in what could be a rough Dem midterm in 2030 prior to maps being drawn. This is what screwed us in 2010 (especially in North Carolina, where ~20 years later we remain consistently locked out of lege power with no end in sight).
Anderson Clayton has her eyes locked on flipping the NC state Supreme Court by 2028 or 2030 so that there will be a progressive judicial majority overseeing NC legislative and congressional maps drawn post-2030.
Thanks to her, we stopped the GOP trend of flipping state Supreme Court seats in presidential years -- and that was after a hard-won fight in federal court. It's going to be hard to flip three GOP-held judicial seats in 2028 (esp with Sen Ted Budd running for re-election) but it can be done.
Regarding the DC primaries congressional review deadline, they can just go back and try to override the law through direct legislation, right? They've been moving piecemeal efforts to gut the criminal law overhauls. I guess I'm not sure the odds of success in the Senate, but they could in theory slip it in must-pass legislation like the FSGG or Interior approps bills or NDAA and see if Dems notice/care to fight on stripping it out.
Here is a question perhaps better saved for that Open Thread… Lately there has been plenty of strong criticism of Democrats’ Senate leadership – very justified criticism, imho. So here is my question:
Who would we like to see in the following leadership roles? (current leadership in parentheses)
If I knew what half those positions did, I might be able to answer better. Based on titles, Sanders on Outreach seems right though but maybe he'd be better on Strategic Comms. I'd put Slotkin in policy and move Baldwin and Murphy to something higher. I also think Kelly and Heinrich should play larger roles but maybe that comes in committee chairs.
I don't have super strong feelings on the specifics, but do any of those leadership positions beyond the top 4 matter at all? As I recall a lot of those lower positions were created by Schumer to try and spread the influence around so everyone felt like they had a seat at the table.
Murphy might be my top choice for leader, but I suspect we're more likely to see Schatz or CCM. CCM would be a continuation of Schumer's flaws so I wouldn't be happy about that. Murphy, Schatz, Klobuchar, and Booker all in the top four (not in that order) is my first-thought preference while taking into account the people who could plausibly get there in the first place.
Posting this again with updates since the last thread two days ago, which had already gone dead:
Trying to exert undue influence over the primaries in Maine, Minnesota, and Michigan by coordinating endorsements, labor unions, and donors is blatantly anti-democratic. I’ve been calling this out for months, and it seems several Senators have now come to the same conclusion. Mills, Stevens, and Craig are essentially his mirror images. Someone should challenge his right-hand ally Gillibrand in 2030 as well. We need to move past Schumer and his neoliberal business-friendly approach ASAP.
“Chuck Schumer Faces Pushback From a ‘Fight Club’ of Senate Democrats
A group of liberal senators is quietly challenging the minority leader over his approach to the midterms and President Trump, in a sign of the party’s deep frustration.”
The group includes Sanders, Warren, Markey, Merkley, Murphy, Smith, Heinrich, Van Hollen, and others. A dozen in total. They are focused the most on Michigan, Maine, and Minnesota, as well as Texas and Iowa.
It’s laughable that Schumer and DSCC strategists are trying to paint this group as underperforming radicals who have never won competitive races. Sanders is one of the most popular politicians in America according to multiple polls (Pew, Gallup, DFP, Emerson). He has consistently overperformed, except in 2024 when an “Independent Democrat” took 2.5% of the vote, causing him to fall short by only a fraction. Tina Smith lost about 6% to a left-leaning weed-legalization candidate. Heinrich, Murphy, and Van Hollen have all historically overperformed. Murphy and Van Hollen have each defeated multiple leftists throughout their career, and Murphy represented swing territory in the state legislature and then in the U.S. House, flipping two seats. Warren is the only real underperformer in the group. What unites this otherwise motley group is their shared anti-establishment, anti-corporate politics —but not progressive (M4A, free college, GND) — and their aggressive stance toward Trump.
There’s no justification for tilting the scales in favor of neoliberal Craig over Flanagan, especially since Minnesota isn’t going to be competitive anytime soon. The only real explanation is Schumer’s ideological hostility toward progressives.
" “We have a lot of good candidates out there, and the DSCC has seemed to put their foot on the scale in favor of the more establishment candidates as opposed to some of these, you know, other candidates,” Van Hollen told “CNN News Central” Tuesday.
“It’s fine to support a Sherrod Brown [of Ohio] who was recruited into a race, but there are many active and open Senate Democratic primaries,” he added. “It’s our view that for the most part these should play out without interference from the Senate Democratic leadership.”
“The DSCC is focused on winning Senate seats and flipping the majority in 2026, and our strategy is guided by the best way to do that,” DSCC spokesperson Maeve Coyle told the New York Times.
“I think it needs a rebrand, because it’s more like ‘Never Won a Real Fight Club,’ because these are a bunch of people who have never been engaged or never themselves been in a really competitive race,” a Democratic strategist who’s been involved with Senate campaigns vented to The Post. "
In fact, Gillibrand has never faced a truly competitive election in her career after a blue wave election in 2006. She was elevated out of relative obscurity by the governor at the time because she was a Schumer protégé and the scion of a elite family, and she was on track to lose her Blue Dog–leaning House seat in 2010. Schumer then lobbied the Obama White House to offer her potential challengers—Steve Israel, Andrew Cuomo, Caroline Kennedy, Scott Stringer, a prominent gun-control congresswoman, and others—alternative positions or races in order to clear the field for her. Obama obliged, personally calling each of them. Schumer, Gillibrand, and their circle seem to operate as if the truth is irrelevant. When was the last time Schumer ran in a competitive race? 1990s?
NYT notes that such a revolt is unprecedented in Democratic party history.
I largely agree with this, phrased this way (I'm not so sure I don't think Mills is the best option who's running in ME-Senate, though), but I think most of us saw this post previously and just had no more to say about it.
From yesterday's update: "Fishback used his kickoff announcement to charge that Rep. Byron Donalds, who is favored to become the state’s first Black governor, is “a slave to his donors.”"
Two things:
1. Am I surprised this is coming out of a political campaign, especially from the Republicans and in Florida? No
2. It's still reprehensible, no matter what you think of Donalds.
Damn right! I believe Biden’s deterioration has been greatly exaggerated. That said, even President Vegetable would have a competent team that would keep our country running. In marked contrast to the ingrates, grifters, DUI hires, Fascists and outright traitors of the Trump Regime!
PS. Biden’s debate performance was catastrophic – but so was Trump’s, although the pundits and the news media hardly focused on that. And after Biden with drew, Kamala Harris trounced Trump in their debate. By any reasonable measure, Trump’s pathetic performance should have ended his campaign and his political career!
After that debate, the Harris Campaign (especially her fundraisers!) and Kamala herself made a fundamental mistake: They kept portraying her as "the Underdog" rather than as a Winner. By implication they made Trump the Head Dog. I think this bled energy from Kamala’s GOTV efforts and actually cost her the Presidency. Americans like to vote for the Winner.
Minnesota Special Election filing has closed. HD 47A will stay DFL (Minnesota's version of the Democratic Party), since no Republicans filed. The primary on 12/16 will be the election, since the winner will be unopposed in the general. The DFL party for the district will try to endorse a candidate on 12/3.
In HD 64A, 6 DFLers and 1 Republican has filed. The district's DFL Party will try to endorse a candidate on 12/7. The winner of the primary will be a huge favorite in the general.
I just wanted to add on to and extend thanks to the team here for all the work they do. This has been an extremely rough year personally and obviously for the nation and you've built a wonderful website and community here to help give us the tools to see what we are up against and what we can do to contribute to the struggle. Thank you.
I'd echo that. I get most of my political news here and on a couple of YouTube channels, and I find that discussion here is usually sober and somewhat of an antidote to all the craziness. Happy Thanksgiving to all who are celebrating, and if any of you are instead mourning the theft of land and oppression of the Native Americans, my sympathies. I do celebrate, but I always like to remember the amazing gifts of Native Americans to the world. Contemplate cuisine without tomatoes, corn, many kinds of squash, potatoes, chilis, wild rice, chocolate...
Didn't see this posted anywhere today or yesterday:
Wisconsin's Supreme Court has appointed separate three-judge panels to hear two lawsuits seeking new congressional boundaries in time for the 2026 election.
"Dems are likely getting 1-2 House seats in the WI redistricting case
Both of the 3-judge panels are all Dems, I don’t see how it doesn’t rule it a gerrymander
If so, the WI leg is required to have the first go at it. If unable to pass with Evers, the court will make the map."
Only thing I don't understand is why TWO panels are necessary.
Also it sounds like Dems are at a geographical disadvantage is Wisconsin where the opposite of Utah may be needed to give Dems more seats (splitting of counties and cities such as Kenosha area etc)
Has anyone done an attempt at drawing neutral districts for Wisconsin lately? I'd agree that we're likely at a geographic disadvantage, but the 1st and 3rd are only lightly red. The 1st is close to Milwaukee. The 3rd isn't that close to Madison but it should be plausible to link it up with the urban area. Doing both of those would likely entail redrawing every seat in total to make population totals work of course, but I think on paper getting +2 seats out of a neutral map isn't that unrealistic.
If a court really wanted equity they could go for 3R-3D-2 competitive seats.
From yesterday with a link to a local paper on it; the two panels are to address that the suits are challenging with totally separate arguments of unconstitutionality. I'd expect them to wait for both panels to rule and sift thru which of the claims are unlikely to succeed, and then consolidate them with a more refined scope of the legal questions. I think it's too unwieldy to have one panel go through so many different arguments even if it was one suit, and giving both petitioners their own panel allows more time for each suit to air their claims.
Polls with potential candidates can be helpful as hypotheticals (for example, Rep. Jasmine Crockett says her decision to run for Senate can hinge on a potential Democratic primary poll)
I get that but it would be nice to have a separate question about only candidates who are currently declared, as well as not including candidates who were never running, like Godlewski.
Good. Democrats need to expand back into rural territory if they want to expand their margins (Not through conservatism on social issues like some believe, though).
only a matter of time before what happened in DC today would happen...2 National Guardsmen dead...the soonest this can impact elections will be Tuesday and I bet it will.
Question: what, if any, are the long-term effects here? Will this blow over like Kirk’s killing more or less did or will voters be thinking about this in November of next year?
No, not likely they'd vote on that next year. But we have to watch out for the reaction in terms of force and oppression of the people. And condolences to the survivors of the guardsmen.
already plenty of hateful reactions on the dark web...these were not some nazi hacks...National Guard is U. S. military and trump and his minions will have plenty to say about it
And? They’d still be alive and living in West Virginia without Trump. They died for a political stunt. Besides, I thought there are no murders in Washington anymore.
As far as the reaction goes, what do you think they’ll do? How far might they go? Is the Insurrection Act at risk of being invoked, or are we not at that point yet?
So far the reaction seems to be unorganized. My very own Governor Morrisey put out conflicting statements on their conditions, first saying they were deceased, then saying they were alive in critical condition, and then finally confirming their deaths. He deployed them along with ~300 other West Virginians 3 months ago, and their stay has been extended.
The older establishment politicians such as Sen. Capito expressed sorrow, while our younger politicians like AG McCuskey and state Republican Party chair Holstein expressed rage - it seems those that are younger will have more violent reactions.
It's normal for a violent event like this to cause physical illness and okay to feel strongly about it. I also think it's reasonable to speculate on the aftermath of these events, but not too much.
I understand the reaction but we shouldn’t keep presuming every act of violence in this country will provoke a MAGA Order 66…most people are working on getting ready for Thanksgiving right now and I doubt this is even registering among the vast majority of the populace.
Kirk was gruesomely shot on camera, his carotid opened. That made it more impactful, even if they milked it to excess (and who the heck puts on pyrotechnics for a funeral?).
NY-21: Fascinated how someone becomes a "wealthy sticker magnate".
Well, the Fords in Canada made their wealth via "pressure-sensitive labels for plastic-wrapped grocery products." Guess when there's a will, there's a way
I’ve been wondering how Rob Ford could afford all that crack cocaine!
I'm sure lots of 80s kids would like to know as well.
My teenager is crazy about stickers. Which makes travel souvenirs easy. Then she trades them w friends like we used to trade baseball cards back in the day, or, perhaps, like folks between my daughter and my ages trade Magic cards (?).
https://www.the-downballot.com/p/morning-digest-democrats-deploy-1/comment/181378363?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=e543n
Northwest Arkansas is one of the fastest growing metro areas in the state (particularly Benton, Madison and Washington counties) so if blue leaning voters are moving there, he could have a shot of unseating Womack.
If Clinton couldn't do it in 1974, I don't know if someone can now
Dems actually got even closer to picking up the seat in 1992 when the seat was open and Clinton was actually carrying it at the top of the ticket. That was probably their best chance since the 1974 to take it.
How is 1974's electoral performance relevant at all today? Coalitions have flipped 180° since the end of the Solid South.
Sadly, educated conservatives and Arkansans born in other parts of the state move there.
Arkansas is a beautiful state, but it deserves better than the Republicans the voters consistently elect statewide. If there was a bigger research and science university presence like there is here in NC, it would have potential to be competitive.
Isn’t “educated conservative” an oxymoron?
-George W. Bush got a BA at Yale (as did his father) and an MBA at Harvard
-John Thune got an MBA at the University of South Dakota
-Mike Johnson got a JD at Louisiana State University
"Educated conservative" isn't *necessarily* an oxymoron but many rural conservative voters don't have education experience
Jim Tully is a "senior field representative" for MTG out of her district office, is that not a weird title for a congressional staffer? It definitely sounds more like a campaign staffer, I usually expect district staff to be like "constituent advocate"
https://www.legistorm.com/person/James_E_Tully/506928.html
I don't think it's strange at all; you have staffers that are in DC and staffers in the district, it seems perfectly logical for the latter to be called a field representative.
Hard to see how his association with MTG helps him right now.
I'm not as familiar with DOs, so fair enough. It doesn't seem to be the most common title compared to constituent services/caseworker titles.
TN 7 Special: Van Epps (R) 48%; Behn (D) 46%. Emerson Poll (Nov 22-24). https://emersoncollegepolling.com/tennessee-7th-district-2025-special-election-poll/
I don't trust Emerson when they have bad news for Democrats, and I don't trust them when they have good news either. I stand by my prediction of Van Epps winning 57-42. If I end up being too pessimistic, fine, but I refuse to get my hopes up in a Trump+22 district full of right-wing evangelicals.
54-45 is my best guess
The poll also has trump at -2 approval which feels a little low in a district like this.
That Trump -2 approval is based on their likely voter electorate for this special election (hence the recalled vote is Trump +13 rather than Trump +22). What this means is Van Epps is still heavily under performing their expected electorate based on recall and it’s not just turnout causing the swing. FWIW I think Van Epps will win by around 6-8
6-8 seems right. Sadly I think it mgiht fall into the "what if we had picked a better candidate?" margin. Seems like she might be a bit too left for this district
Exactly. Which is why I'd be shocked if she won.
I mean dems in the district chose her. If they’re excited about her, I’m not going to judge. I don’t want outsiders to tell me who “the best candidate” is in my district. I expect the people of TN-07 feel the same.
Not to get pedantic but she won a 4-way primary in which all the candidates were within a few hundred votes of each other at like 23-27%. I wouldn’t say that’s an unqualified endorsement as the best candidate for a general election in a very red district. The other 3 Dems were all varying shades of mod. She may well win, but it’s not because primary voters wisely chose the best candidate in some collaborative fashion; it’ll be purely because of the environment.
Right, but she still got the most votes, even if narrowly. That means she turned out her supporters the best. I take that as a positive sign in a low turnout election.
The poll shows those who already voted going for Behn 55.5-42.5.
All Democrats have to do is reach a turnout of, say, 70%+ of their base. Even much less might do the trick – the key thing is to defeat the Sofasitter Party.
Also, if anyone wants to volunteer this weekend to help Aftyn win, you can sign up for a fully remote phone bank here: https://www.mobilize.us/aftynforcongress/event/826070/
My prior is that Van Epps will win by about 6, in line with those Florida specials earlier this year.
I'd guess Van Epps likely wins and it's not super close (more than 2 percent, though quite possibly in single digits), but the swing from 2024 should be enough to sound the alarm for Republicans when extrapolated nationally.
And it wouldn't be an isolated case: note the bulk of both special and regularly scheduled election results since late January.
A single digit win for Van Epps is a massive fire alarm for the GOP. Imagine that kind of margin extending to the state legislative races next year.
Thinking way too far ahead here, but it's a shame that this blue wave (if it does indeed happen in '26) will happen too soon for the next redistricting cycle, where a bunch of our 2026 winners will need to win again in what could be a rough Dem midterm in 2030 prior to maps being drawn. This is what screwed us in 2010 (especially in North Carolina, where ~20 years later we remain consistently locked out of lege power with no end in sight).
Anderson Clayton has her eyes locked on flipping the NC state Supreme Court by 2028 or 2030 so that there will be a progressive judicial majority overseeing NC legislative and congressional maps drawn post-2030.
Thanks to her, we stopped the GOP trend of flipping state Supreme Court seats in presidential years -- and that was after a hard-won fight in federal court. It's going to be hard to flip three GOP-held judicial seats in 2028 (esp with Sen Ted Budd running for re-election) but it can be done.
Anderson Clayton is amazing! Imagine if other states had equally energetic and capable state party chairs. I am looking at e.g. New York here!
I generally agree with you but the fact is that redistricting no longer seems to be constrained to every ten years...
Pollsters have struggled with Tennessee for a generation. I'd be shocked if Behn got within single digits.
Regarding the DC primaries congressional review deadline, they can just go back and try to override the law through direct legislation, right? They've been moving piecemeal efforts to gut the criminal law overhauls. I guess I'm not sure the odds of success in the Senate, but they could in theory slip it in must-pass legislation like the FSGG or Interior approps bills or NDAA and see if Dems notice/care to fight on stripping it out.
https://rollcall.com/2025/09/16/house-passes-youth-offender-bills-in-latest-effort-to-overrule-dc/
My best wishes for a Happy Thanksgiving to the DownBallot team!
Question: Will there be a Weekend Open Thread? A humble request...
Here is a question perhaps better saved for that Open Thread… Lately there has been plenty of strong criticism of Democrats’ Senate leadership – very justified criticism, imho. So here is my question:
Who would we like to see in the following leadership roles? (current leadership in parentheses)
– Senate Democratic Minority (or Majority) Leader – (Schumer)
– Democratic Senate Whip – (Durbin)
– Chair of the Policy & Steering Committee – (Klobuchar)
– Chair of Strategic Communications – (Booker)
– Democratic Conference Secretary – (Baldwin)
– Conference Vice Chair I – (Warren)
– Conference Vice Chair II – (Warner)
– Chair of Outreach – (Sanders)
– Vice Chair of Outreach – (Cortez Masto)
– Deputy Democratic Conference Chair I – (Schatz)
– Deputy Democratic Conference Chair II – (Murphy)
If I knew what half those positions did, I might be able to answer better. Based on titles, Sanders on Outreach seems right though but maybe he'd be better on Strategic Comms. I'd put Slotkin in policy and move Baldwin and Murphy to something higher. I also think Kelly and Heinrich should play larger roles but maybe that comes in committee chairs.
I don't have super strong feelings on the specifics, but do any of those leadership positions beyond the top 4 matter at all? As I recall a lot of those lower positions were created by Schumer to try and spread the influence around so everyone felt like they had a seat at the table.
Murphy might be my top choice for leader, but I suspect we're more likely to see Schatz or CCM. CCM would be a continuation of Schumer's flaws so I wouldn't be happy about that. Murphy, Schatz, Klobuchar, and Booker all in the top four (not in that order) is my first-thought preference while taking into account the people who could plausibly get there in the first place.
There certainly will be! Happy Thanksgiving!
Posting this again with updates since the last thread two days ago, which had already gone dead:
Trying to exert undue influence over the primaries in Maine, Minnesota, and Michigan by coordinating endorsements, labor unions, and donors is blatantly anti-democratic. I’ve been calling this out for months, and it seems several Senators have now come to the same conclusion. Mills, Stevens, and Craig are essentially his mirror images. Someone should challenge his right-hand ally Gillibrand in 2030 as well. We need to move past Schumer and his neoliberal business-friendly approach ASAP.
“Chuck Schumer Faces Pushback From a ‘Fight Club’ of Senate Democrats
A group of liberal senators is quietly challenging the minority leader over his approach to the midterms and President Trump, in a sign of the party’s deep frustration.”
Sources:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/24/us/politics/schumer-democrats-senate-fight-club.html
https://archive.ph/Xbra2
The group includes Sanders, Warren, Markey, Merkley, Murphy, Smith, Heinrich, Van Hollen, and others. A dozen in total. They are focused the most on Michigan, Maine, and Minnesota, as well as Texas and Iowa.
It’s laughable that Schumer and DSCC strategists are trying to paint this group as underperforming radicals who have never won competitive races. Sanders is one of the most popular politicians in America according to multiple polls (Pew, Gallup, DFP, Emerson). He has consistently overperformed, except in 2024 when an “Independent Democrat” took 2.5% of the vote, causing him to fall short by only a fraction. Tina Smith lost about 6% to a left-leaning weed-legalization candidate. Heinrich, Murphy, and Van Hollen have all historically overperformed. Murphy and Van Hollen have each defeated multiple leftists throughout their career, and Murphy represented swing territory in the state legislature and then in the U.S. House, flipping two seats. Warren is the only real underperformer in the group. What unites this otherwise motley group is their shared anti-establishment, anti-corporate politics —but not progressive (M4A, free college, GND) — and their aggressive stance toward Trump.
There’s no justification for tilting the scales in favor of neoliberal Craig over Flanagan, especially since Minnesota isn’t going to be competitive anytime soon. The only real explanation is Schumer’s ideological hostility toward progressives.
" “We have a lot of good candidates out there, and the DSCC has seemed to put their foot on the scale in favor of the more establishment candidates as opposed to some of these, you know, other candidates,” Van Hollen told “CNN News Central” Tuesday.
“It’s fine to support a Sherrod Brown [of Ohio] who was recruited into a race, but there are many active and open Senate Democratic primaries,” he added. “It’s our view that for the most part these should play out without interference from the Senate Democratic leadership.”
“The DSCC is focused on winning Senate seats and flipping the majority in 2026, and our strategy is guided by the best way to do that,” DSCC spokesperson Maeve Coyle told the New York Times.
“I think it needs a rebrand, because it’s more like ‘Never Won a Real Fight Club,’ because these are a bunch of people who have never been engaged or never themselves been in a really competitive race,” a Democratic strategist who’s been involved with Senate campaigns vented to The Post. "
Source: https://nypost.com/2025/11/25/us-news/senate-dem-fight-club-challenges-schumer-over-2026-primaries-but-critic-warns-of-one-big-giant-mess/
In fact, Gillibrand has never faced a truly competitive election in her career after a blue wave election in 2006. She was elevated out of relative obscurity by the governor at the time because she was a Schumer protégé and the scion of a elite family, and she was on track to lose her Blue Dog–leaning House seat in 2010. Schumer then lobbied the Obama White House to offer her potential challengers—Steve Israel, Andrew Cuomo, Caroline Kennedy, Scott Stringer, a prominent gun-control congresswoman, and others—alternative positions or races in order to clear the field for her. Obama obliged, personally calling each of them. Schumer, Gillibrand, and their circle seem to operate as if the truth is irrelevant. When was the last time Schumer ran in a competitive race? 1990s?
NYT notes that such a revolt is unprecedented in Democratic party history.
I largely agree with this, phrased this way (I'm not so sure I don't think Mills is the best option who's running in ME-Senate, though), but I think most of us saw this post previously and just had no more to say about it.
I think the next morning digest had already been posted after that in an hour.
From yesterday's update: "Fishback used his kickoff announcement to charge that Rep. Byron Donalds, who is favored to become the state’s first Black governor, is “a slave to his donors.”"
Two things:
1. Am I surprised this is coming out of a political campaign, especially from the Republicans and in Florida? No
2. It's still reprehensible, no matter what you think of Donalds.
Fishback is a loony guy. His social media posts are insane.
The younger Republicans are typically more insane and incel-like. That makes sense.
LOL Donalds can't say anything about it or else he's woke. The republican party is just a punch of clowns.
New Republican slogan:
"Better catatonic than woke!"
That reminds me of what I was saying last summer after Biden's debate performance and before he dropped out.
"I'd rather vote for a vegetable than a dictator!"
And guess what? After a year of Trump, I still would.
And he never was a vegetable, though he debated like absolute crap.
Damn right! I believe Biden’s deterioration has been greatly exaggerated. That said, even President Vegetable would have a competent team that would keep our country running. In marked contrast to the ingrates, grifters, DUI hires, Fascists and outright traitors of the Trump Regime!
PS. Biden’s debate performance was catastrophic – but so was Trump’s, although the pundits and the news media hardly focused on that. And after Biden with drew, Kamala Harris trounced Trump in their debate. By any reasonable measure, Trump’s pathetic performance should have ended his campaign and his political career!
After that debate, the Harris Campaign (especially her fundraisers!) and Kamala herself made a fundamental mistake: They kept portraying her as "the Underdog" rather than as a Winner. By implication they made Trump the Head Dog. I think this bled energy from Kamala’s GOTV efforts and actually cost her the Presidency. Americans like to vote for the Winner.
Anyone else got flashbacks of the monkey comments from Ron DeSantis about Andrew Gillium?
Yeah, nah - fuck Byron - he cast his lot in with these scumbags - he can get all the karma coming his way.
I hope you have a Happy Thanksgiving
"Democratic Socialism can WIN BIG in Manhattan! But only with a huge upset.
What is the “Reverse-Goldman” method, and how can we use it to win?
Donate & Support below- my opponents to the right are LOADED.
http://kaskyforcongress.com"
https://x.com/camkasky/status/1993459664554803253
LOL
Minnesota Special Election filing has closed. HD 47A will stay DFL (Minnesota's version of the Democratic Party), since no Republicans filed. The primary on 12/16 will be the election, since the winner will be unopposed in the general. The DFL party for the district will try to endorse a candidate on 12/3.
In HD 64A, 6 DFLers and 1 Republican has filed. The district's DFL Party will try to endorse a candidate on 12/7. The winner of the primary will be a huge favorite in the general.
NY-12:
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/new-york-playbook/2025/11/26/black-friday-cyber-monday-super-pac-summer-00669416
Liam Elkind is out.
I just wanted to add on to and extend thanks to the team here for all the work they do. This has been an extremely rough year personally and obviously for the nation and you've built a wonderful website and community here to help give us the tools to see what we are up against and what we can do to contribute to the struggle. Thank you.
I'd echo that. I get most of my political news here and on a couple of YouTube channels, and I find that discussion here is usually sober and somewhat of an antidote to all the craziness. Happy Thanksgiving to all who are celebrating, and if any of you are instead mourning the theft of land and oppression of the Native Americans, my sympathies. I do celebrate, but I always like to remember the amazing gifts of Native Americans to the world. Contemplate cuisine without tomatoes, corn, many kinds of squash, potatoes, chilis, wild rice, chocolate...
Didn't see this posted anywhere today or yesterday:
Wisconsin's Supreme Court has appointed separate three-judge panels to hear two lawsuits seeking new congressional boundaries in time for the 2026 election.
"Dems are likely getting 1-2 House seats in the WI redistricting case
Both of the 3-judge panels are all Dems, I don’t see how it doesn’t rule it a gerrymander
If so, the WI leg is required to have the first go at it. If unable to pass with Evers, the court will make the map."
Only thing I don't understand is why TWO panels are necessary.
Also it sounds like Dems are at a geographical disadvantage is Wisconsin where the opposite of Utah may be needed to give Dems more seats (splitting of counties and cities such as Kenosha area etc)
Has anyone done an attempt at drawing neutral districts for Wisconsin lately? I'd agree that we're likely at a geographic disadvantage, but the 1st and 3rd are only lightly red. The 1st is close to Milwaukee. The 3rd isn't that close to Madison but it should be plausible to link it up with the urban area. Doing both of those would likely entail redrawing every seat in total to make population totals work of course, but I think on paper getting +2 seats out of a neutral map isn't that unrealistic.
If a court really wanted equity they could go for 3R-3D-2 competitive seats.
I was just gonna ask this, too.
From yesterday with a link to a local paper on it; the two panels are to address that the suits are challenging with totally separate arguments of unconstitutionality. I'd expect them to wait for both panels to rule and sift thru which of the claims are unlikely to succeed, and then consolidate them with a more refined scope of the legal questions. I think it's too unwieldy to have one panel go through so many different arguments even if it was one suit, and giving both petitioners their own panel allows more time for each suit to air their claims.
https://www.the-downballot.com/p/morning-digest-alabamas-doug-jones/comment/181236906
TIPP/League of American Workers poll | 11/17-11/21 RV
Wisconsin Governor primaries
🟦Democratic
Mandela Barnes 21%
Josh Kaul 8%
Sara Rodriguez 6%
David Crowley 6%
Sarah Godlewski 3%
Missy Hughes 2%
Kelda Roys 1%
Other 1%
Not sure 52%
—
🟥Republican
Eric Hovde 25%
Tom Tiffany 17%
Tim Michels 12%
Josh Schoemann 5%
Kevin Nicholson 2%
Other 0%
Not sure 37%
President Trump approval
Disapprove 52%
Approve 41%
—
Governor Tony Evers approval
Approve 49%
Disapprove 37%
Not sure 14%
—
Senator Ron Johnson approval
Disapprove 42%
Approve 34%
Not sure 24%
—
Senator Tammy Baldwin approval
Approve 43%
Disapprove 40%
Not sure 17%
Why are Godlewski and Kaul there and where is Hong?
Also Barnes and Hovde are not officially running, so not especially helpful.
Polls with potential candidates can be helpful as hypotheticals (for example, Rep. Jasmine Crockett says her decision to run for Senate can hinge on a potential Democratic primary poll)
I get that but it would be nice to have a separate question about only candidates who are currently declared, as well as not including candidates who were never running, like Godlewski.
Just basically a name ID poll at this point
Politico: https://archive.ph/agiJD
Democrats spending big to expand coalition in midterms
A new DCCC program will pour eight figures into engaging some demographic groups that swung to the right in 2024.
Gee, I wonder if the groups will be white voters from suburbia...
It's predictable that that will be one of them, along with Hispanics, Asians and young men.
According to the article, rural voters are on the list.
Good. Democrats need to expand back into rural territory if they want to expand their margins (Not through conservatism on social issues like some believe, though).
Latino and rural voters but your sarcasm is duly noted.
Why would that have to be sarcasm?
Since white voters from suburbia hardly moved to the right in 2024 compared to other groups.
OK, but they did at least in some areas.
only a matter of time before what happened in DC today would happen...2 National Guardsmen dead...the soonest this can impact elections will be Tuesday and I bet it will.
Question: what, if any, are the long-term effects here? Will this blow over like Kirk’s killing more or less did or will voters be thinking about this in November of next year?
No, not likely they'd vote on that next year. But we have to watch out for the reaction in terms of force and oppression of the people. And condolences to the survivors of the guardsmen.
already plenty of hateful reactions on the dark web...these were not some nazi hacks...National Guard is U. S. military and trump and his minions will have plenty to say about it
They absolutely will, as will others outside of his orbit.
And? They’d still be alive and living in West Virginia without Trump. They died for a political stunt. Besides, I thought there are no murders in Washington anymore.
To be fair, most of the wars the U.S. has fought were political stunts, but that hasn't prevented us from mourning the American troops killed in them.
As far as the reaction goes, what do you think they’ll do? How far might they go? Is the Insurrection Act at risk of being invoked, or are we not at that point yet?
How could I reliably predict what Trump will do?
So far the reaction seems to be unorganized. My very own Governor Morrisey put out conflicting statements on their conditions, first saying they were deceased, then saying they were alive in critical condition, and then finally confirming their deaths. He deployed them along with ~300 other West Virginians 3 months ago, and their stay has been extended.
The older establishment politicians such as Sen. Capito expressed sorrow, while our younger politicians like AG McCuskey and state Republican Party chair Holstein expressed rage - it seems those that are younger will have more violent reactions.
Yeah that seems reasonable. Forgive my panicked reaction, I'm feeling physically ill right now and probably shouldn't be posting.
It's normal for a violent event like this to cause physical illness and okay to feel strongly about it. I also think it's reasonable to speculate on the aftermath of these events, but not too much.
I understand the reaction but we shouldn’t keep presuming every act of violence in this country will provoke a MAGA Order 66…most people are working on getting ready for Thanksgiving right now and I doubt this is even registering among the vast majority of the populace.
I wish you a speedy recovery!
Kirk was gruesomely shot on camera, his carotid opened. That made it more impactful, even if they milked it to excess (and who the heck puts on pyrotechnics for a funeral?).
I doubt there'll be any effect to be honest
I see this having zero impact on any elections.