I honestly don't think it will be much of a primary. Foushee has been a solid progressive and hasn't done anything to upset Democrats. I suspect she wins easily.
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.
LOL at Justice Dems. I remember reading an analysis done on the success rate of interest groups' endorsements in Democratic primaries, and Justice Dems had literally the lowest success rate of any interest group in their endorsements.
So that just makes me believe even more that Allam will lose. The Democrats who beat incumbents in primaries will be ones who bring together a broad ideological coalition in support of them (which is what Ayanna Pressley did in 2018), or where the incumbent is out of step with the racial demographics of the district (which AOC benefited from in 2018). The latter doesn't apply here, and Allam isn't currently attempting to do the former.
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.
I think it’s pertinent to remind people that the CA referendum at the start of the campaign wasn’t exactly guaranteed to pass either, let alone pass with that big of a margin.
Throw in some “stand up to Trump” air waves blanketed tv/online/media ads with him being -20 in state approval and these support numbers probably grow pretty fast while Republicans are entirely too broke to fight back. Go for 10-1, it’ll pass with room to spare.
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.
Ed Hale appears to get the most press coverage. Moore shouldn't have any problem. I think the majority of Maryland Republicans were hoping for a Larry Hogan comeback.
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.
I watched a long clip of Ilhan Omar's event last night and what struck me most was how much of a regular old politician she sounded like, as opposed to her reputation as some kind of fire breathing banshee. After the attack, she just plowed on with her relatively boring town hall meeting. For someone who has known her by reputation only, it was pretty notable.
That is a recent development by Omar, and a necessary one. She realized screaming controversial things into every megaphone within arms reach was going to eventually cost her a primary, and it nearly did a couple times already. The reason she did markedly better in her 2024 primary than previous ones was because she changed her speaking style.
Precisely the evolution that AOC went through. Not coincidentally, my opinion of her has elevated dramatically. Here's hoping Omar can make the same transition.
Lakshya Jain and Matt Yglesias have pointed out that she is the only Squad member to always outperform the fundamentals so maybe there's nothing she has to change.
From what I understand Tlaib has quite the effective constituency service operation, so she's probably secure in her district even if she isn't always a great spokesperson for progressive causes nationally.
Political coalitions always change, sometimes quickly, in unexpected ways.
Is it time for people to revive talks of an Obama coalition resurrection? There’s definitely been rumblings in special elections and in polling, but very few are talking about that possibility instead of the conventional wisdom focus on youth/latino reversion from 2024 in polls.
Would really shake up the election results in the midterms. South Florida Republicans would be in serious danger if that happened. Lots of midwestern/plains Republicans would be sweating too, thinking old Iron Range MN, MT, NE-01 etc.
"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.
Once Letlow runs ads stating that she is endorsed by Trump and Cassidy voted for Trump's impeachment she should pull ahead. Cassidy is in real trouble here.
Trump impeachment whistleblower Vindman raises $1.7M in first day of Florida Senate campaign
The figure, shared first with POLITICO, is the highest amount reported in a day raised by any other Senate candidate in Florida history, the campaign said, adding that it received more than 36,000 contributions total — with 99 percent of online donations totaling $100 or less.
Moody’s latest fundraising total won’t be posted on the Federal Election Commission website until Jan. 31, but records through the first three quarters of 2025 show she raised nearly $1.9 million and transferred $2.1 million from other authorized committees.
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...
You have every reason to be annoyed, it’s valid and justified. At the same time doing that is exactly why he almost outraised Moody’s campaign fundraising haul for all of last year in just 24 hours.
It sucks, it’s also a necessity for Democrats to compete against the corporate/crypto billionaires in Trump/GOP’s pocket (of which there are many).
1 crypto pac alone has stockpiled $200m cash on hand to attack us and support Republicans in 2026 elections. People power is all we got to fight back.
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!"
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
I honestly don't think it will be much of a primary. Foushee has been a solid progressive and hasn't done anything to upset Democrats. I suspect she wins easily.
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.
LOL at Justice Dems. I remember reading an analysis done on the success rate of interest groups' endorsements in Democratic primaries, and Justice Dems had literally the lowest success rate of any interest group in their endorsements.
So that just makes me believe even more that Allam will lose. The Democrats who beat incumbents in primaries will be ones who bring together a broad ideological coalition in support of them (which is what Ayanna Pressley did in 2018), or where the incumbent is out of step with the racial demographics of the district (which AOC benefited from in 2018). The latter doesn't apply here, and Allam isn't currently attempting to do the former.
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.
If Chan is a NIMBY, then we really shouldn't be calling her a progressive. IMO being a progressive and being a NIMBY are mutually exclusive.
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.
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
I think it’s pertinent to remind people that the CA referendum at the start of the campaign wasn’t exactly guaranteed to pass either, let alone pass with that big of a margin.
Throw in some “stand up to Trump” air waves blanketed tv/online/media ads with him being -20 in state approval and these support numbers probably grow pretty fast while Republicans are entirely too broke to fight back. Go for 10-1, it’ll pass with room to spare.
“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.)
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/
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.
Ed Hale appears to get the most press coverage. Moore shouldn't have any problem. I think the majority of Maryland Republicans were hoping for a Larry Hogan comeback.
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 Texas Tribune has a nice piece out today on the Democratic candidates for AG, including funds raised and spent, top contributors, and answers to multiple questions on how they would serve as AG. https://www.texastribune.org/2026/01/28/texas-attorney-general-democrats-2026-primary-qa-voter-guide/?utm_source=thetexastribune.beehiiv.com&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=top-story-q-a-with-the-democrats-running-for-texas-attorney-general&_bhlid=7a9d818dcaa2e6f006122c13c16bb679d760e2a0
Rare piece on a downballot AG race. Seems like Johnson is the only one raising serious money.
Hopefully, once the primary is over, the Dem nominee will has money pour in. AG is the most important race in TX other than the senate.
It's Lt Gov who sets the legislative agenda unlike other states.
I watched a long clip of Ilhan Omar's event last night and what struck me most was how much of a regular old politician she sounded like, as opposed to her reputation as some kind of fire breathing banshee. After the attack, she just plowed on with her relatively boring town hall meeting. For someone who has known her by reputation only, it was pretty notable.
Omar constituent here:
That is a recent development by Omar, and a necessary one. She realized screaming controversial things into every megaphone within arms reach was going to eventually cost her a primary, and it nearly did a couple times already. The reason she did markedly better in her 2024 primary than previous ones was because she changed her speaking style.
Sounds like she's evolved from an activist into a veteran congresswoman.
Precisely the evolution that AOC went through. Not coincidentally, my opinion of her has elevated dramatically. Here's hoping Omar can make the same transition.
Rashida Tlaib needs to learn a thing or two from Omar and AOC.
It doesn't seem like she needs to change anything to keep winning reelection.
Lakshya Jain and Matt Yglesias have pointed out that she is the only Squad member to always outperform the fundamentals so maybe there's nothing she has to change.
From what I understand Tlaib has quite the effective constituency service operation, so she's probably secure in her district even if she isn't always a great spokesperson for progressive causes nationally.
Ditto.
Political coalitions always change, sometimes quickly, in unexpected ways.
Is it time for people to revive talks of an Obama coalition resurrection? There’s definitely been rumblings in special elections and in polling, but very few are talking about that possibility instead of the conventional wisdom focus on youth/latino reversion from 2024 in polls.
https://www.theargumentmag.com/p/trump-is-losing-the-working-class
https://x.com/lxeagle17/status/2016540621788598771
Trump's underrated political weakness is poor people.
In our polling, whites making <$25K backed Trump by 26 (!) in 2024. His approval with them now is breakeven.
That's *insane*.
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.
My dream scenario for 2026 that someone else already posted on Musk’s hellsite:
Obama Black/WWC + Hillary Hispanic/Latino + Biden suburbs/Asians + Harris LGBTQ
Would really shake up the election results in the midterms. South Florida Republicans would be in serious danger if that happened. Lots of midwestern/plains Republicans would be sweating too, thinking old Iron Range MN, MT, NE-01 etc.
"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.
LA-Sen: A poll taken on behalf of Bill Cassidy Jan 20-22 has him leading Julia Letlow 32%-21%. https://www.billcassidy.com/state-of-race-memo
Once Letlow runs ads stating that she is endorsed by Trump and Cassidy voted for Trump's impeachment she should pull ahead. Cassidy is in real trouble here.
FL-Sen: Big bucks.
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/28/trump-impeachment-whistleblower-vindman-raises-1-7m-in-first-day-of-florida-senate-campaign-00753157
Trump impeachment whistleblower Vindman raises $1.7M in first day of Florida Senate campaign
The figure, shared first with POLITICO, is the highest amount reported in a day raised by any other Senate candidate in Florida history, the campaign said, adding that it received more than 36,000 contributions total — with 99 percent of online donations totaling $100 or less.
Moody’s latest fundraising total won’t be posted on the Federal Election Commission website until Jan. 31, but records through the first three quarters of 2025 show she raised nearly $1.9 million and transferred $2.1 million from other authorized committees.
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.
Honestly, if all he does is make the GOP/NRSC spend just $10m here in 2026, it’s a win for us.
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...
You have every reason to be annoyed, it’s valid and justified. At the same time doing that is exactly why he almost outraised Moody’s campaign fundraising haul for all of last year in just 24 hours.
It sucks, it’s also a necessity for Democrats to compete against the corporate/crypto billionaires in Trump/GOP’s pocket (of which there are many).
1 crypto pac alone has stockpiled $200m cash on hand to attack us and support Republicans in 2026 elections. People power is all we got to fight back.
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!
👀
https://x.com/IAPolls2022/status/2016617393884213744
📊 2026 Generic Congressional Ballot
🟦 Democrats: 51% [+2]
🟥 Republicans: 42% [-2]
D+9 — the widest Democratic lead by Clarity Campaign this cycle (was D+5 in Dec)
——
@claritycampaign
| 1/15-22 | 1,147 LV
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!"