This isn't useful without another option being able to identify as "moderate". But there might be some truth since other polls have reported highest ever self identified "very liberal" or "liberal" voters this year.
Yeah, there are going to be some upset flips this fall. Not sure whether Sullivan will be one of them, but it would be so satisfying if he, Moody, and Husted got the boot.
Maybe fundamentals get markedly better for Republicans, but it's hard to see that happening right now. Voters think the economy is terrible, and we all know that MAGAmuffins don't like to turn out when Trump is off the ballot.
"Ok, folks, let’s not shoot ourselves in the foot. We gotta keep using our ammo against the MAGA-Republican Party, and *not* form a circular firing squad!"
At the very least, he will have enough money to get his message out, but he should be careful not to antagonize people by doing things like texting them from 5 different telephone numbers...
"The upshot here is that I think there is going to be a lot of room for candidate effects in places like Alaska and Ohio — because there are gettable voters who really hate Trump right now, even if they won't vote for a generic Democrat over a generic Republican."
It would be funny if Trump is the person to realize the long discredited 2000s book The Emerging Democratic Majority book by John Judis (still a Bernie bro) and Ruy Teixeira (who's semi MAGA nowadays).
Sounds like he won a lot of low info swing voters based on inflation and the economy. Since things have only gotten worse for them, he is losing their support.
Foushee wrote the same long-winded statement that other elected Democrats spewed out in the wake of the Pretti murder by ICE. Allam, by comparison, wrote a more direct, emotional and blistering message.
If there's potential for a primary upset (apart from the state legislative ones), it's this one.
Your response actually leads me to a question of my own I have.
Given all that's happened with ICE, how likely is it to become an issue in Dem primaries? In the general I suspect it will be a big deal, but I'm curious to see if it will also affect primaries.
I think the 7 votes for the DHS bill might be the easiest targets. Golden is retiring and filing deadlines has passed in NC and TX, but Suozzi Gillen and MGP could be vulnerable. And unlike the other four, their seats aren't that red.
I think it could be a salient issue in deep blue Congressional districts, one that moderate incumbents like Foushee can fumble.
It's not like NC-4 is a purple or lean red district. And we do have a sizeable and diverse immigrant population here in Durham and Orange Counties. If 2026 is the year of the Democratic Tea Party movement, Allam is one such candidate for an upset.
It'll definitely be an issue in Dem primaries with abolition-before-replacement being the default progressive position. In theory, mainstream Dems can triangulate from this position and win the middle, but if the "abolish ICE" wing starts winning primaries, that's a problem in November.
The only group of people that like ICE right now are conservatives that were never going to vote for us anyway. Republican officials are trying to distance themselves from ICE.
I do not think there is any anti-ICE message that is too strong to hurt us this November, especially after the events of this month. If ICE drifts out of relevance by election day, then it won't be talked about to hurt us; if ICE is still relevant, it will be in a way that is good for us electorally.
Ultimately I don't think it's going to be a decisive factor in November in either direction. November is a long way out and the political news cycle is constantly changing. No individual story is likely to dominate the election, it will come down to the general perception of Trump's presidency in the minds of voters.
I'd be shocked if it was a problem for us on election day.
Yeah, well...if there's one consistent metric every two years, it's Democrats being confident that their position on immigration isn't gonna hurt them in the next election.
imo it'll be a good test to see where the base is at. Foushee has been a generally progressive backbencher and she's cut ties with some of her biggest 2022 donors/supporters, which could cut both ways for her. Allam has been running a strong campaign so far w good fundraising numbers. Age & style are probs the biggest differences between the two.
She probably should have voted for the GENIUS act so that Big crypto would support her. But Jeffries put her on the AI panel along with Gottheimer so she may still benefit from outside spending through the new AI super PAC which is currently attacking Alex Bores.
Allam has two things going in her favor: Generational change and the new district is more diverse and has relatively less African Americans. She also has backing from progressive organizations like Justice Dems and Leader We Deserve as well. Nationally, she is mostly known for her advocacy on that forbidden topic.
Justice Dems don’t try to maintain a high K/D ratio. They back many candidates and usually focus their resources on a few with the best chances of success, mostly in urban districts.
Allam lost by only 8 points in a more demographically unfavorable district, with a third candidate splitting the vote, in a bad year for progressives with low anti-establishment energy (2022).
Foushee shouldn’t have repudiated crypto and AIPAC interests—that was a huge mistake.
Since it neither prevented Allam from launching a primary nor does she have their financial muscle now. She was very weak at fundraising unlike Allam in the 2022 primary and was bailed out by them. This was one of the very rare single digit races where I'd wager that PACs had a huge impact.
Do note that the Justice Dems in 2018 were quite different than now — they backed a lot more candidates at first and only later were more targeted. I think that an analysis of their success rate should consider that.
Florida gubernatorial candidate David Jolly's speech on the murders in Minnesota went viral across social media platforms. Meanwhile, Jerry Demings has been a dud, has a non-existent social media game and doesn't even have a launch video. Both of them are neck to neck in polls.
I actually believe his ideological change since he has moved to the left gradually over the course of 10 years and is endorsed by Gwen Graham. He was a moderate Republican appalled by Trump and his rhetoric on Muslims at first.
Meanwhile, Georgia's Geoff Duncan called himself a conservative Reagan Republican as late as the 2024 presidential election and was talking about retaking the control of his party.
I don't know, there's a tradeoff there. How much someone who wants to be governor value the democratic nomination for governor of states like Wyoming or Idaho? Sure, their only chance of winning is to have a nomination, but at a certain point the benefit is low enough to not be worth it.
Florida is at least ostensibly winnable, even if I think it's a harder hill to climb than many others think. I think the republican advantage in Florida is high enough that I would not consider a democratic party switch to have an easier chance of a nomination to be a strong consideration for a serious politician.
When it was first reported that David Jolly was running in the gubernatorial race, I had thought he would be another Charlie Crist who like Jolly became a Democrat after originally being a long-time Republican (Crist for a brief time was an Independent).
He might be able to be a much different candidate than we'd expect. Remains to be seen.
I will give David Jolly credit for one thing when he served in the House - He actually tried to reform campaign finance laws as a result of being outraged in what he saw in members of Congress spending a lot of time every day on the phone raising money for donors. As a result of Jolly's efforts, almost no Democrat or Republican in the House signed on.
Jolly would have worked well with Russ Feingold and John McCain if they were both still in the Senate at the time.
As far as the gubernatorial race, I am being cautious about the direction it could go in this early but clearly it seems Jolly has fire in his belly.
Since someone asked about the NC race, I wanted to ask about the CA-11 race too, the district currently held by Pelosi.
I'm curious about the Chakrabarti vs. Chan vs. Wiener primary. I haven't seen much reporting on it here, but there seems to be significant social media and betting hype (note: I don't support betting), especially given that the district sits at the heart of Silicon Valley.
My concern is the possibilty of Chakrabarti and Chan splitting the left vote and allowing Wiener (the relative moderate) to win.
That being said, San Francisco has swung right in recent years (the DA recall, the school board recall, Gordon Mar and Dean Preston losing their primaries, Joel Engardio's recall for supporting a park being constructed on a highway, Daniel Lurie being a bit of a centrist, etc.) so Wiener was probably favored anyway. (Although Connie Chan survived re-election and Jackie Fielder and Chyanne Chen won their races so I don't know.)
I have no doubt that you knew that, I was just pointing it out to any potential uninitiated readers who might get the impression that Wiener was a centrist.
Should be noted that Jackie Fielder is in favor of the new Marina housing development above Safeway, which Mayor Daniel Lurie and District 2 Supervisor Stephen Sherrell (who was appointed to the seat by former Mayor London Breed before she left office).
It's so very interesting that in District 2, the most ritzy part of San Francisco, there's more sensitivity to new housing above Safeway just because the "views are being blocked" as opposed to real legitimate concerns such as adverse gentrification and local businesses seeing the ripple effects of their rent being jacked up substantially so they end up leaving.
Dean Preston I'm not a fan of (and I've been a supporter of Aaron Peskin when he was District 3 Supervisor but mainly for reasons not because of housing) but Joel Engardio's recall is not necessary because of SF moving to the right.
I think it's gonna be Chakrabarti vs. Wiener since the latter has the institutional lane to himself and the former has so much money that he could flood the left lane with cash
I'm heard about Chakrabarti for his climate policy advocacy and his role in helping launch the modern progressive movement, and about Wiener for his leadership on California’s permitting reforms and broader housing agenda. But I know far less about Chan. Most of what I’ve encountered portrays her as a NIMBY figure who has had a long-running and often contentious relationship with Wiener and other YIMBYs.
Connie Chan is not a NIMBY. She's more in between but neither a NIMBY or even YIMBY.
Last year she announced an affordable housing development where the owners of the Alexandria Theater, a long-dormant theater in the Richmond district, planned to convert the theater space into 76 units of housing. For housing of this kind at this location, this is a BFD.
A good reason why I am not a YIMBY is that I get really nauseated when politicians like Weiner and the YIMBY groups start throwing purity at those who have differences of opinion when they want to deemphasize market rate housing and focus more on real, true affordable housing.
If you want to argue that politicians are being NIMBY because they are stopping housing developments anywhere and everywhere they can, fine. But you can't argue this is the case when someone like Chan actually is getting housing development done even if it may not be on par with what YIMBYs want.
Honestly, Chan fits the view of most of her constituents when it comes to development. Whether appealing to the get off my lawn tendencies of voters out in the Sunset or Richmond will power her to victory (especially since there's far more voters east of Van Ness than west of it) is a separate question, but Joel Engardio shows there's limits there's a big get off my lawn sentiment in that part of San Francisco.
Steve Watkins was a very controversial congressman and he still won what was then a competitive district in a very unfavorable year for Republicans. Marshall responded 2 years later by defying polling and winning his first Senate race in a landslide. Kansas is really just that red.
I thought that too but maybe she wants to raise her name ID in case Trump gets the votes and she is gerrymandered out of the House in the next session.
If she over performed statewide as much as she did in her district she would still lose by 9. So maybe she makes it a single digit race. Johnson county dems love her.
I think she is great and was very pleased to hear her join The Downballot podcast last week. While I would love to have her to join the senate, I cannot really see her winning statewide and losing her house seat is not worth it. I suspect that her tour is to broadcast to the R's that if they re-draw her district, her running would be the result. I suspect Marshall wold prefer an easier run.
I don’t think dems would lose her house seat if Davids ran for senate. The district was D+4 in 2024. Another dem may not get the margins Davids does, but I don’t think the seat would flip. Unless it’s gerrymandered of course.
Yes please. Roger Marshall fits the profile of a Republican who could be felled in a wave. The odds are less than 50-50 for Davids but I can't see her being content to be a House lifer anyway so I don't see an upside to a prevent-defense strategy here.
LA-5: State Rep. Dixon McMakin is in, which probably means former Rep. Garret Graves won't run, considering McMakin's announcement hinged on his decision.
Landry has a candidate in this race named Misti Cordell, who he appointed to the Board of Regents. Not sure who the anti-Landry candidate will be. Maybe this guy.
This isn't California. If Democrats are given the green light by the Supreme Court, and they go for a 9-1 map, it's not beyond the realm of possibility that they'd lose the referendum.
If the redistricting referendum becomes a referendum on Trump then it's hard to see how it would lose in Virginia. NoVa would turn out in droves to give Trump the political black eye like they did in November.
I'd be pretty shocked if it didn't pass, regardless of what map legislators draw. Same reason I thought we should have gone for the jugular (even more) in CA.
This race probably fell off the table when Hogan announced he wouldn't run. And even he probably wouldn't have been favoured against a decently popular Moore in a year with a highly unpopular GOP administration, despite Hogan's disassociation with it.
In Massachusetts, where Maura Healey is also strongly favored to win a second term, Michael Minogue and Mike Kennealy have poured millions of their own dollars into their campaigns.
Didn't Healey do something that pissed people off? I feel like I remember there was some discontent against her, but for the life of me I cannot remember why.
She nominated her ex-girlfriend for a judgeship, which drew ire from state Republicans, and also had a staffer charged for cocaine and illegal gun trafficking.
Oh no I was under no delusion that the GOP stood a sliver of a chance in MA, I was just trying to figure out why they're fundraising better than Moore's opponents.
Biggest reason why republicans feel comfortable throwing money into MA has nothing to do with Healey. It's that between 1990 and 2026, there have been two democratic governors and five republican governors: republicans won 6 elections while democrats won 3. They are going to have expectations of being potentially competitive due to the state's electoral history.
Right now I feel like Trump has basically tanked that going forward. Maybe if we have another 2010/2014 level midterm with an open seat republicans might be competitive for the gov office in MA, but that's it. Even then, they barely won the open 2014 gubernatorial election with one of the weakest dem candidates possible. I'm not sure they can count on being competitive for that office going forward, but they will want to try.
Holy shit. Granted none of these guys are representative of the GOP base, but still.
This isn't useful without another option being able to identify as "moderate". But there might be some truth since other polls have reported highest ever self identified "very liberal" or "liberal" voters this year.
Yeah, there are going to be some upset flips this fall. Not sure whether Sullivan will be one of them, but it would be so satisfying if he, Moody, and Husted got the boot.
Just the numbers:
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) raised $1.4 million in Q4.
Mary Peltola raised $1.5 million in her first 24 hours.
I’ll take it, but nine months is a long time
Maybe fundamentals get markedly better for Republicans, but it's hard to see that happening right now. Voters think the economy is terrible, and we all know that MAGAmuffins don't like to turn out when Trump is off the ballot.
Democratic Party, note to self:
"Ok, folks, let’s not shoot ourselves in the foot. We gotta keep using our ammo against the MAGA-Republican Party, and *not* form a circular firing squad!"
I wish him well. It's going to be tough to unseat Moody given how red the state is. But maybe the blue tsunami could wash her out too.
If you think you can compete in Texas, Ohio and Alaska, then there is no reason to leave Florida off the table.
At the very least, he will have enough money to get his message out, but he should be careful not to antagonize people by doing things like texting them from 5 different telephone numbers...
I doubt that sending texts from 5 numbers in a row after getting replies of "Stop" is why he raised so much money.
Note: Never give campaigns your cell phone number!
No majority is ever “permanent” no matter what politicians like to claim
What the current coalition has that Obama didn’t was highly educated and/or suburban white voters. The old coalition plus that would be unstoppable.
Who does that even leave the GOP? Evangelicals and edgelords?
Plus Tech Lords (some), Russian investors (all), and Crypto Kings.
"The upshot here is that I think there is going to be a lot of room for candidate effects in places like Alaska and Ohio — because there are gettable voters who really hate Trump right now, even if they won't vote for a generic Democrat over a generic Republican."
https://x.com/lxeagle17/status/2016540984407200126
It would be funny if Trump is the person to realize the long discredited 2000s book The Emerging Democratic Majority book by John Judis (still a Bernie bro) and Ruy Teixeira (who's semi MAGA nowadays).
Sounds like he won a lot of low info swing voters based on inflation and the economy. Since things have only gotten worse for them, he is losing their support.
Yep.
Low info = stupid, ignorant. All of the horror that's happened for the last year was completely unnecessary.
Barry Bot?
Absolutely knock this off, both of you.
Reported and flagged for idiocy and trolling.
Yeah, because standing up to Trump and incurring his wrath is so slimy.....please.
Oof. Nancy Mace doesn't seem to be doing too well.
Did something happen? Or just in general
The poll in the digest
:facepalm: I don't know how I missed that lol
Also in general, lol
Alan Wilson sucks but he’d be doing us a favor if he takes out Mace AND Norman in one primary
Isn't he the "You lie!" guy?
That’s Joe Wilson - his dad
I don't know. Alan Wilson is pretty awful. Evette would probably be the best.
Can you write about NC 4? Curious about the allam vs foushee primary
Foushee wrote the same long-winded statement that other elected Democrats spewed out in the wake of the Pretti murder by ICE. Allam, by comparison, wrote a more direct, emotional and blistering message.
If there's potential for a primary upset (apart from the state legislative ones), it's this one.
Your response actually leads me to a question of my own I have.
Given all that's happened with ICE, how likely is it to become an issue in Dem primaries? In the general I suspect it will be a big deal, but I'm curious to see if it will also affect primaries.
It will, but I don't think Foushee is seen as one of the more ICE-friendly Democrats.
I meant more in a general sense, but thanks.
I think the 7 votes for the DHS bill might be the easiest targets. Golden is retiring and filing deadlines has passed in NC and TX, but Suozzi Gillen and MGP could be vulnerable. And unlike the other four, their seats aren't that red.
I think it could be a salient issue in deep blue Congressional districts, one that moderate incumbents like Foushee can fumble.
It's not like NC-4 is a purple or lean red district. And we do have a sizeable and diverse immigrant population here in Durham and Orange Counties. If 2026 is the year of the Democratic Tea Party movement, Allam is one such candidate for an upset.
It'll definitely be an issue in Dem primaries with abolition-before-replacement being the default progressive position. In theory, mainstream Dems can triangulate from this position and win the middle, but if the "abolish ICE" wing starts winning primaries, that's a problem in November.
The only group of people that like ICE right now are conservatives that were never going to vote for us anyway. Republican officials are trying to distance themselves from ICE.
I do not think there is any anti-ICE message that is too strong to hurt us this November, especially after the events of this month. If ICE drifts out of relevance by election day, then it won't be talked about to hurt us; if ICE is still relevant, it will be in a way that is good for us electorally.
Ultimately I don't think it's going to be a decisive factor in November in either direction. November is a long way out and the political news cycle is constantly changing. No individual story is likely to dominate the election, it will come down to the general perception of Trump's presidency in the minds of voters.
I'd be shocked if it was a problem for us on election day.
Yeah, well...if there's one consistent metric every two years, it's Democrats being confident that their position on immigration isn't gonna hurt them in the next election.
imo it'll be a good test to see where the base is at. Foushee has been a generally progressive backbencher and she's cut ties with some of her biggest 2022 donors/supporters, which could cut both ways for her. Allam has been running a strong campaign so far w good fundraising numbers. Age & style are probs the biggest differences between the two.
She probably should have voted for the GENIUS act so that Big crypto would support her. But Jeffries put her on the AI panel along with Gottheimer so she may still benefit from outside spending through the new AI super PAC which is currently attacking Alex Bores.
Allam has two things going in her favor: Generational change and the new district is more diverse and has relatively less African Americans. She also has backing from progressive organizations like Justice Dems and Leader We Deserve as well. Nationally, she is mostly known for her advocacy on that forbidden topic.
Justice Dems don’t try to maintain a high K/D ratio. They back many candidates and usually focus their resources on a few with the best chances of success, mostly in urban districts.
Allam lost by only 8 points in a more demographically unfavorable district, with a third candidate splitting the vote, in a bad year for progressives with low anti-establishment energy (2022).
Foushee shouldn’t have repudiated crypto and AIPAC interests—that was a huge mistake.
Why would that have been a huge mistake?
Since it neither prevented Allam from launching a primary nor does she have their financial muscle now. She was very weak at fundraising unlike Allam in the 2022 primary and was bailed out by them. This was one of the very rare single digit races where I'd wager that PACs had a huge impact.
But if she is sincere, shouldn't we respect her decision to repudiate them?
Do note that the Justice Dems in 2018 were quite different than now — they backed a lot more candidates at first and only later were more targeted. I think that an analysis of their success rate should consider that.
It also seems like they're being even more selective this cycle, with most of their candidates having a background in elected office.
We wrote about it last month when Allam announced, and it will definitely come up again! https://www.the-downballot.com/i/181381292/nc-04
https://x.com/davidjollyfl/status/2015617494724096157?s=20
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/florida-playbook/2026/01/27/minnesota-matters-shooting-enters-florida-governors-race-00748781
Florida gubernatorial candidate David Jolly's speech on the murders in Minnesota went viral across social media platforms. Meanwhile, Jerry Demings has been a dud, has a non-existent social media game and doesn't even have a launch video. Both of them are neck to neck in polls.
Maybe this party switch gambit is actually genuine.
I actually believe his ideological change since he has moved to the left gradually over the course of 10 years and is endorsed by Gwen Graham. He was a moderate Republican appalled by Trump and his rhetoric on Muslims at first.
Meanwhile, Georgia's Geoff Duncan called himself a conservative Reagan Republican as late as the 2024 presidential election and was talking about retaking the control of his party.
Why would it be anything else? It's not like an opportunist would change from Republican to Democratic in -Florida-.
Easier to get a nomination?
But way easier to lose in the general as well.
Yeah, but you have to be in it to win it.
I don't know, there's a tradeoff there. How much someone who wants to be governor value the democratic nomination for governor of states like Wyoming or Idaho? Sure, their only chance of winning is to have a nomination, but at a certain point the benefit is low enough to not be worth it.
Florida is at least ostensibly winnable, even if I think it's a harder hill to climb than many others think. I think the republican advantage in Florida is high enough that I would not consider a democratic party switch to have an easier chance of a nomination to be a strong consideration for a serious politician.
That seems like a booby prize in Florida.
It's not like switching to the Ds to run in Wyoming, but it's a good point.
To quote Kurt Vonnegut, "you are who you pretend to be, so we must be careful about who we pretend to be."
When it was first reported that David Jolly was running in the gubernatorial race, I had thought he would be another Charlie Crist who like Jolly became a Democrat after originally being a long-time Republican (Crist for a brief time was an Independent).
He might be able to be a much different candidate than we'd expect. Remains to be seen.
That's if he wins the primary, let alone the general.
I will give David Jolly credit for one thing when he served in the House - He actually tried to reform campaign finance laws as a result of being outraged in what he saw in members of Congress spending a lot of time every day on the phone raising money for donors. As a result of Jolly's efforts, almost no Democrat or Republican in the House signed on.
Jolly would have worked well with Russ Feingold and John McCain if they were both still in the Senate at the time.
As far as the gubernatorial race, I am being cautious about the direction it could go in this early but clearly it seems Jolly has fire in his belly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnyalqKNRwc
Jolly’s a good guy- he was my law school moot court partner
Since someone asked about the NC race, I wanted to ask about the CA-11 race too, the district currently held by Pelosi.
I'm curious about the Chakrabarti vs. Chan vs. Wiener primary. I haven't seen much reporting on it here, but there seems to be significant social media and betting hype (note: I don't support betting), especially given that the district sits at the heart of Silicon Valley.
My concern is the possibilty of Chakrabarti and Chan splitting the left vote and allowing Wiener (the relative moderate) to win.
That being said, San Francisco has swung right in recent years (the DA recall, the school board recall, Gordon Mar and Dean Preston losing their primaries, Joel Engardio's recall for supporting a park being constructed on a highway, Daniel Lurie being a bit of a centrist, etc.) so Wiener was probably favored anyway. (Although Connie Chan survived re-election and Jackie Fielder and Chyanne Chen won their races so I don't know.)
California has top two primaries. Saikat backed the challenge against Preston. Preston supporting left-NIMBYs will likely gravitate towards Chan.
Oh right. Forgot about that.
the "relative" in "relative moderate" is doing a lot of work there because Wiener would be firmly on the left side of caucus.
100% true but then again, it's SF.
Yeah, I’m aware that a SF moderate is usually an anywhere else progressive, hence why I said relative.
I have no doubt that you knew that, I was just pointing it out to any potential uninitiated readers who might get the impression that Wiener was a centrist.
Should be noted that Jackie Fielder is in favor of the new Marina housing development above Safeway, which Mayor Daniel Lurie and District 2 Supervisor Stephen Sherrell (who was appointed to the seat by former Mayor London Breed before she left office).
It's so very interesting that in District 2, the most ritzy part of San Francisco, there's more sensitivity to new housing above Safeway just because the "views are being blocked" as opposed to real legitimate concerns such as adverse gentrification and local businesses seeing the ripple effects of their rent being jacked up substantially so they end up leaving.
Dean Preston I'm not a fan of (and I've been a supporter of Aaron Peskin when he was District 3 Supervisor but mainly for reasons not because of housing) but Joel Engardio's recall is not necessary because of SF moving to the right.
https://missionlocal.org/2025/12/sf-marina-safeway-government-poll/#sup-d9
.
.
.
1. Do you support the current housing proposal for the Marina Safeway?
Yes, though wish it was more affordable.
Those are some of the best views in the world, though!
I think it's gonna be Chakrabarti vs. Wiener since the latter has the institutional lane to himself and the former has so much money that he could flood the left lane with cash
I'm heard about Chakrabarti for his climate policy advocacy and his role in helping launch the modern progressive movement, and about Wiener for his leadership on California’s permitting reforms and broader housing agenda. But I know far less about Chan. Most of what I’ve encountered portrays her as a NIMBY figure who has had a long-running and often contentious relationship with Wiener and other YIMBYs.
Connie Chan is not a NIMBY. She's more in between but neither a NIMBY or even YIMBY.
Last year she announced an affordable housing development where the owners of the Alexandria Theater, a long-dormant theater in the Richmond district, planned to convert the theater space into 76 units of housing. For housing of this kind at this location, this is a BFD.
A good reason why I am not a YIMBY is that I get really nauseated when politicians like Weiner and the YIMBY groups start throwing purity at those who have differences of opinion when they want to deemphasize market rate housing and focus more on real, true affordable housing.
If you want to argue that politicians are being NIMBY because they are stopping housing developments anywhere and everywhere they can, fine. But you can't argue this is the case when someone like Chan actually is getting housing development done even if it may not be on par with what YIMBYs want.
https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/urban-development/sf-supe-connie-chan-unveils-new-inner-richmond-housing-plan/article_afcd438c-572f-11ee-bad5-93d0d09140bb.html
https://sfbos.org/sites/default/files/CHAN-Letter_to_Mayor_Lurie-Housing_Element_Capacity_FZP_Amendments.pdf
Honestly, Chan fits the view of most of her constituents when it comes to development. Whether appealing to the get off my lawn tendencies of voters out in the Sunset or Richmond will power her to victory (especially since there's far more voters east of Van Ness than west of it) is a separate question, but Joel Engardio shows there's limits there's a big get off my lawn sentiment in that part of San Francisco.
Flanagan up 13 points in new internal poll. Her lead over Craig increases to 29 after negative messaging against both is applied.
https://x.com/lisakashinsky/status/2016514509188346043?s=46
Some (not here) have questioned why Flanagan has released all her internals if she is confident.
I ask why hasn't Craig if she is in the lead?
The precinct caucuses are Tuesday. Flanagan is asserting herself as the favorite in people's minds a few days before caucus night.
"Inbox: Rep. Sharice Davids (D-KS 03) kicked off a statewide tour as she considers a possible challenge to Sen. Roger Marshall (R)."
https://x.com/kirk_bado/status/2016552286198124719
Thoughts?
No.
Last time Democrats elected a senator in Kansas Herbert Hoover was president. And Marshall is not unpopular or that controversial.
Marshall has actually had some pretty bad comments and stances over the years. I question his level of popularity.
Steve Watkins was a very controversial congressman and he still won what was then a competitive district in a very unfavorable year for Republicans. Marshall responded 2 years later by defying polling and winning his first Senate race in a landslide. Kansas is really just that red.
Watkins barely won a pretty red district, actually.
Doesn't matter - he will cruise in the GE. Davids needs to stay where she is and hold down her blue-ish (but by no means deep blue) seat.
I think she'd be better off in the House, especially in her current seat, she doesn't stand much of a chance statewide - even this year.
She wouldn’t give up her house seat if she didn’t have some interesting data coming in.
I thought that too but maybe she wants to raise her name ID in case Trump gets the votes and she is gerrymandered out of the House in the next session.
I think that's what she's doing and it's a good idea. If she gets drawn out, no reason for her not to run for Senate (or Governor, I suppose)....
If she over performed statewide as much as she did in her district she would still lose by 9. So maybe she makes it a single digit race. Johnson county dems love her.
I wouldn't be surprised if 2026 is 9 points bluer than 2024 (would be about D+7, same as 2018)
I guess this means they couldn't convince Laura Kelly. Ah well.
Kelly is up there age wise and also she's smart enough to know she has no chance in a federal race, might as well enjoy retirement.
I think she is great and was very pleased to hear her join The Downballot podcast last week. While I would love to have her to join the senate, I cannot really see her winning statewide and losing her house seat is not worth it. I suspect that her tour is to broadcast to the R's that if they re-draw her district, her running would be the result. I suspect Marshall wold prefer an easier run.
I don’t think dems would lose her house seat if Davids ran for senate. The district was D+4 in 2024. Another dem may not get the margins Davids does, but I don’t think the seat would flip. Unless it’s gerrymandered of course.
You led me to look up the Cook PVI: D+2. You are right and any risk would be minimal next year.
Yes please. Roger Marshall fits the profile of a Republican who could be felled in a wave. The odds are less than 50-50 for Davids but I can't see her being content to be a House lifer anyway so I don't see an upside to a prevent-defense strategy here.
https://www.nola.com/news/politics/baton-rouge-republican-joins-race-for-julia-letlow-us-house-seat-congress/article_dda6d34a-3db0-44bc-947f-fbad0e78121e.html
LA-5: State Rep. Dixon McMakin is in, which probably means former Rep. Garret Graves won't run, considering McMakin's announcement hinged on his decision.
That is… one hell of a name.
I’d prefer Graves exact his revenge up Jeff “Klandry,” personally
Landry has a candidate in this race named Misti Cordell, who he appointed to the Board of Regents. Not sure who the anti-Landry candidate will be. Maybe this guy.
Oh, I meant in 2027 for Governor, not LA-5 necessarily
Dixon McMakin. What a name.
Poll shows support for Virginia redistricting ballot initiative up 51-43.
https://x.com/polltracker2024/status/2016539979988500698?s=46
This isn't California. If Democrats are given the green light by the Supreme Court, and they go for a 9-1 map, it's not beyond the realm of possibility that they'd lose the referendum.
“I guarantee if Jesus came down and was the vote counter, I would win California."
– Trump, interviewed by Dr. Phil
(Trump, totally forgetting that he deported Jésus to Guatemala.)
You mean a 9-2 or 10-1 map.
Sure it's not Cali but it doesn't have to be, after last November i feel good about an 8 point lead in Virginia.
If the redistricting referendum becomes a referendum on Trump then it's hard to see how it would lose in Virginia. NoVa would turn out in droves to give Trump the political black eye like they did in November.
I'd be pretty shocked if it didn't pass, regardless of what map legislators draw. Same reason I thought we should have gone for the jugular (even more) in CA.
Also I think the Dem side will far outspend the GOP side
Jay Jones won lol.
They can't make a map that looks ridiculous. A 9-2 map with reasonable lines has a much better chance to get passed by the voters.
Does the map itself have to go before the voters?
No.
Then they don't need to present it till after the motion is voted on.
MD-Gov: Though Wes Moore is strongly favored to win a second term, Republicans can barely raise any money against him:
-State delegate Chris Bouchat has raised $8,000
-Wealthy businessman and owner of the Baltimore Blast Ed Hale has raised only $15,000
-Businessman John Myrick has raised $17,000
-The best-funded Republican, little-known farmer Kurt Wedekind, has raised about $60,000
https://campaignfinance.maryland.gov/
This race probably fell off the table when Hogan announced he wouldn't run. And even he probably wouldn't have been favoured against a decently popular Moore in a year with a highly unpopular GOP administration, despite Hogan's disassociation with it.
The fact that Moore is strongly favored is probably the reason no one can raise money against him.
In Massachusetts, where Maura Healey is also strongly favored to win a second term, Michael Minogue and Mike Kennealy have poured millions of their own dollars into their campaigns.
Didn't Healey do something that pissed people off? I feel like I remember there was some discontent against her, but for the life of me I cannot remember why.
She nominated her ex-girlfriend for a judgeship, which drew ire from state Republicans, and also had a staffer charged for cocaine and illegal gun trafficking.
There you go, thanks. Haven't heard of many Wes Moore scandals so that might play a role too.
After the daily crap Trump pulls that they applaud, they don't really have a leg to stand on in Mass, Healy by 30.
Oh no I was under no delusion that the GOP stood a sliver of a chance in MA, I was just trying to figure out why they're fundraising better than Moore's opponents.
Biggest reason why republicans feel comfortable throwing money into MA has nothing to do with Healey. It's that between 1990 and 2026, there have been two democratic governors and five republican governors: republicans won 6 elections while democrats won 3. They are going to have expectations of being potentially competitive due to the state's electoral history.
Right now I feel like Trump has basically tanked that going forward. Maybe if we have another 2010/2014 level midterm with an open seat republicans might be competitive for the gov office in MA, but that's it. Even then, they barely won the open 2014 gubernatorial election with one of the weakest dem candidates possible. I'm not sure they can count on being competitive for that office going forward, but they will want to try.