I wonder if perhaps political candidates running in Senate races should get their health checked prior to running.
Fetterman’s deep health problems suggest he wasn’t thinking clearly when he ran for the Senate. Sure, he was a Democratic Senate Candidate back in 2016 but had he been the nominee instead of Katie McGinty, we really don’t know if Fetterman would have been able to be honest about his health problems then or if they had truly changed substantially in six years.
Unless you want to ban people with high blood pressure from running for office you can't preemptively rule out the risk that a candidate has a risk during the election year.
I went to school with Darializa. Her politics won’t be everyone’s cup of tea, but I can say that she is a very hard worker and a serious, methodical organizer, and would take Congressional office seriously (as *some* of Justice Dems’ candidates have not always been accused of doing).
We should be more worried about what the Trump administration is doing right now than what might happen in a primary that still could see candidates drop out.
Would have been more worried about that pre-Trump. These days, I think it's more likely the C-list Republicans sum to like 30% of the primary vote and maybe get shut out themselves than it is to be facing a situation where low Dem primary turnout lets two evenly matched well-funded Republicans both get like 22%.
If we’re talking about the gubernatorial race, it’s highly unlikely the top two primary election will result in two Republicans. The 2021, 2022 and 2025 election results make it much harder for the GOP to gain leverage in the gubernatorial race in this sense.
Back in 2014, in the CA-25 Congressional District then, the GOP did shut out Democratic Candidate Lee Rogers (who in 2012 ran a closer than expected race against incumbent House Republican Buck McKeon) from the general election and it was a two Republican candidate race. Being that redistricting has shifted then, it’s much harder for Democrats to be shut off at the state level than in House races.
Excellent! She’s my pick in that race. I really do not like Craig, her going to a crypto conference where a speaker after her praised the crypto industry for taking out Sherrod Brown was inexcusable.
Calling those opposed to AIPAC "cultists" recently was horrible.
Progressives are sleeping on Minnesota where a DLC/"Majority Democrats PAC" corporate Democrat to the right of Klobuchar might win. I would love to see Murphy and Bernie hold rallies for her.
Flanagan seems to be gaining steam and getting institutional support behind her. The caucuses (the official party endoesements from which still hold significant sway in the state) are in 75 days, February 3rd. My guess is Flanagan gets over 60% and Craig bows out.
How seriously do voters take convention endorsements anyway? The Minneapolis convention chaos this summer can't have helped their credibility, especially as voters decided otherwise in November.
It isn't the be-all end-all it once was, but is still largely respected. Maybe 2-3 races a year have people running against the endorsement, and less than half of those are successful, they just tend to be high profile. (MN-Gov 2010, and Minneapolis Mayor 2021 & 2025 are the most well known). The Minneapolis situation this year was unique given the margins and circumstances surrounding it. Unfortunately the nature of caucuses being run by parties on hand written pieces of paper, and then a series of delegates makes it MUCH less transparent/ cut and dry as an election run by the State.
But yeah, caucuses and endorsements still very much matter, they're just not 100% definitive anymore, only 95% definitive.
I don't see Craig as appreciable different than Tina Smith. Do Flanagan and Craig have different styles? Absolutely. But do I see either of them being a thorn in the side of liberal priorities / party unity? Not a chance. Both would be down the line liberal votes.
On the issue that shall not be named, Tina Smith and Angie Craig are certainly different. Craig voted for the Laken Riley Act and is generally happy to break party lines for GOP messaging bills. That being said, she's never been one to scuttle leadership priorities.
This is false since Craig herself says that she is an independent thinker and will be one "who questions the party". A 100 percent corporate Democrat who has a very centrist voting record. She is different on almost every issue. She will absolutely break the line on antitrust, crypto, healthcare and police union bills.
The DFL endorsement, at the statewide level at least, doesn't have the same effect it used to. The last open gov race where the DFL endorsee won the nomination was Mike Hatch in 2006!
Lets be honest about the governor tidbit. While what you said is technically true, its a sample size of exactly 2: MN-Gov 2018, and MN-Gov 2018, the one noteworthy race I mentioned earlier where the endorsed statewide candidate lost the primary. While its true it matters less than it did, theres literally only two statewide races in living memory where the endorsed DFL candidate lost the primary. I dont see MN-Sen 2026 being #3.
A.k.a. each of the last three contested statewide primaries? It would also be #4 because Matt Pelikan won the DFL endorsement for AG in 2018. What I'm trying to say is the sample of delegates that take part in the statewide convention has become less and less representative of the DFL primary electorate.
That's not to say that Flanagan can't win a primary, but the DFL endorsement is simply less predictive (and impactful, given ballooning outside spending) than it used to be.
Murphy has switched from being a "New Democrat" Clintonite to a Bernie supporter. Some journalists think he's going through a midlife crisis. He's actually quite good and his endorsements are also pretty solid.
Curious to see who Latimer’s challenger could be. Bowman isn’t running again (good), and Latimer will be tough to unseat (bad, I don’t like him) so I wonder who could at least attempt to pull it off.
Indiana is grappling with the question of "What if the governor calls a special session and the Senate doesn't show up?" There is a complicated tangle of state constitutional questions here. It also appears better not to gavel in a session rather than to do so. Get out the popcorn.
Didn't the WI lege do this to Evers? Gavel out quickly when he called a special session? It's very much a "lead a horse to water, but can't make it drink" sort of thing.
My understanding from the article is that by not gaveling in, the Indiana legislature avoids fines. 25 senators and the Lt. Gov., who is on board with the redistricting plot, could compel the others to attend, or they would be fined. Not gaveling in at all avoids that problem. Wisconsin likely has different rules.
I wanted to share this impressively positive article. Perhaps this is off-topic, for it has been a long time since there has been a strong focus on the climate crisis. This article highlights how one country, one of the poorest in the world, is showing what can be done: Bhutan.
Small, poorer countries have every reason to quickly deploy cheap cutting edge clean tech rather than slowly build out expensive fossil infra that is no Innovative. This trend will only accelerate
This is so true, and similar to something George Carlin said years ago (look for "the world plus plastic" for the routine): "Earth will survive no matter what we do. The urgency to control global warming, to fight climate change, is for us people now and for our future generations." The Earth can easily survive without people.
I'm curious what would happen to rodents without intelligent life. They've adapted miraculously to our lifestyle, scavenging off of our food waste in particular. How well would rats or mice be able to adapt and thrive in a world without humans?
They would miss us, but there's loads of other stuff for them to eat. And by the way, rats are quite intelligent, though their eyesight and sense of direction seem to suck.
I suspect you're probably correct. But it's not easy to assess how a species so thoroughly adapted to be reliant on us would handle the loss of our presence. Similar with pigeons.
I guess we'll never know: if it does happen we won't be around to know the results, by definition.
I think pigeons would miss us greatly. Their numbers might decline when they no longer have human food to eat or human structures to hang out and build their nests on, but they are intelligent, resourceful birds and great long-distance flyers, and they eat such a variety of things that I have no doubt the species would continue to do well in our absence.
There was a massive agricultural crisis in Sri Lanka. After previously growing enough rice to meet domestic demand, they had to import it now and they took a huge hit to their critical tea exports. It was Lysenkoism crossed with new age crap. One of the advisors on the project (which was completely scrapped after less than a year) believed that if they banned chemical fertilizers and pesticides, they could slowly grow the Sri Lankan life expectancy to well over 100 years old.
Historically, she's a hardcore NIMBY, even opposing affordable housing projects due to their height. But she's also an opportunist, so maybe she's evolved on the issue by now.
I don’t think you understand the San Francisco political scene well.
In SF, YIMBYs like Scott Weiner have good ideas on housing but are otherwise very aloof or not socially conscious enough to concerns over gentrification and neighborhood residents as much as they project. This is why I have preferred Weiner and others efforts in State Government as opposed to when they were Supervisors. State Law on housing nowadays btw makes it easier to have conversations on housing than used to be.
In SF, NIMBYs or anyone else who does not consider themselves either in that category (like me as I am right in the middle on the housing issue) or YIMBY are the way they are because corporate development interest make it hard to have neighborhood conscious dialog. Shutting down housing everywhere is not a good idea but being aloof to resident concerns is even worse. Just go back to the days of when Willie Brown was Mayor starting in the 1990’s and this is why NIMBYs have been emboldened.
I really wish we not get so one sided on the housing issue and instead look at the bigger picture with politicians in SF.
"Shutting down housing everywhere is not a good idea but being aloof to resident concerns is even worse."
No it isn't. If your supposed "middle" is to consider massive homelessness, threat of eviction and unaffordabiliy better than being "aloof" to the concerns of people who don't have to worry about having a roof over their heads, you can count me out!
WTF result do you think shutting down housing anywhere would have? Feel free to act surly toward me for taking his words at face value if it makes you feel more righteous, but it's really damn stupid, as far as I'm concerned. He himself needs to answer for what he says, not you.
Connie Chan serves the Richmond District. It’s not the same district as what contains the SoMa which is more pro development and tech driven. It’s very much middle class, at least from a traditional sense.
If you spend time in the neighborhood, there is a good reason why Chan and her processors have the stances on housing the way they do. I don’t agree with everything they do but some perspective as to why:
Over a decade ago, Petco was planning to open a location on Geary Blvd, right near a neighborhood pet store. Richmond neighborhood activists stopped this because it would have created an unfair advantage to Petco. The location was ended.
This is why SF neighborhoods like the Richmond District are the way they are.
Not great obviously. Compared to the level and type of criminality evident daily in the Trump admin, this seems rather straightforward. Obviously she is entitled to be presumed innocent until guilt is proven, but if this is for real, we need her out immediately.
How reliable is that polling released yesterday that projected a D+15 for generic Democratic candidates in next year's midterms?
And if so, will it grow the worse TACO digs in and the economy further falters? We could definitely use that 10-11 point margin here in North Carolina to eat away at the GOP majority.
I'm seeing the same results from AP News and Reuters. Unless the economy miraculously rebounds by next November, we're getting a 2018 sized midterm walloping. And should things get even worse, potentially 2006 or 2010 in reverse.
In all seriousness, I agree with you on this. I also mentioned things that I knew were possible, though so exceedingly unlikely as to not be worth considering.
I need to see more consistent polling before I buy it. But even a GCB+10 would be a big boost, and it’s unclear what a man as pridefully stubborn and now unmoored from reality as Trump can do to adjust ahead of the midterms
I mean, ICE invading Charlotte, Durham and Raleigh this week ticked off a lot of unaffiliated and Democratic voters with gun permits. Plus the GOP legislature rigging the Congressional map AGAIN quickly, rather than passing a state budget (which they blew off until next year), pissed off the same voters.
And with the POS Phil Berger gaining a strong primary challenger, the ingredients are there for a perfect storm to wash out a lot of GOP legislators next year.
If the blue wave is strong enough to flip one state House and lead to a 50-50 split in the other, I will laugh.
I think they're scared about the margin scaring their members. Even though there is a path to Behn winning and people should donate/volunteer to help her win, her actually winning is an uphill battle.
He is a relatively young (mid-40s) lawyer who is Kentucky's only Congressional Democrat, representing essentially Louisville. I believe he's in his second term now. He reminds me a bit of Andy Beshear.
I’ll miss Nydia, she was always an underrated representative.
Her successor may be even more progressive than her- this is probably the most left-wing district in the country. If the NYC DSA consolidates behind one candidate they’ll probably take it easily.
It's worth noting that Zohran Mamdani's assembly district partially overlaps with the 7th. So there is a proven record of DSA types winning downballot in the area.
Salazar, Senator Kristin Gonzalez, Assemblymembers Steve Raga, Claire Valdez, Emily Gallagher, Councilmembers Guttierez and Nurse are all possible. This could get interesting and you may even see some people district hop a bit to run here. The musical chairs this may set off is crazy
Abdelhamid is currently trying for Mamdani's State Assembly seat. Given that there will be a special election for that, and the local Dems will almost certainly pick a centrist for that seat given their feud with the DSA (in NY the state party picks the candidates in special elections), I could see Abdelhamid challenging whoever they appoint.
Personally, if I'm Reynoso, I take a pass here. I have 4 more years of being Brooklyn BP, and little kids to take care of, I don't want to be a freshman in congress--especially when I could be Mayor in 4 or 8 years. But I definitely think if he runs, others stay out to run for BP.
Lincoln...maybe. Most of his district isn't here (I believe he lives in BK Heights now, but he may live in Williamsburg).
I'm shocked to see a Dem retire at such a young age...only 72! /s
In all seriousness, it's a loss for Congress, but I'm glad she's retiring in a timely manner and in a cycle where somebody very progressive can hopefully win.
Those 2 top GOP candidates for CA gov are currently in positions 1 and 3 in the jungle race, while Democrats are up to about 10 candidates and counting. Are they trying to hand this to a Republican?
I would say this argument would be true if Eleni Kounalakis and Toni Atkins were still in the race. However, since Kounalakis moved to running for State Treasurer and Atkins dropped out due to poor polling and traction, it has been Katie Porter who alone has taken the steam out of the race. That alone says a lot no matter how many candidates are running.
Remember, it was Kamala Harris who was hyped to have been a probable choice for being governor and it was the CA State Democratic Party at large that was for months overshadowed by the potential of Harris considering a run. Even CA Attorney General Rob Bonta couldn't keep his mouth shut over this and said Harris would be "field clearing" if she ran.
Since Harris is out, Porter has all of a sudden in the last few months gotten more freedom in the polling and is overshadowing every other candidate in the race. Eric Swalwell running will only mean Democrats will have a clearer choice of options for higher profile candidates as opposed to having to stick with Porter, who because of concerns over temperament might not be the best choice to replacing Gavin Newsom.
None of the following Democratic Candidates are really gaining in their campaigns compared to Porter, Becerra and Swalwell:
Antonio Villaraigosa
Betty Yee
Ian Calderon
Steven Cloobeck
Tony Thurmond
Villaraigosa and Yee could get more traction as we get closer to the June primary but it's hard to say at this point. All the other Democratic candidates running that I have not mentioned (Tom Steyer not included) are some dude types who will probably get a few hundred to a few thousand votes but nothing to really make anything matter in the actual primary.
This is not the 2020 Democratic Presidential Primary Race where we had significantly high profile candidates from Bernie Sanders to Joe Biden to Bill DeBlasio (and even Eric Swalwell) running. What we have in the CA gubernatorial race is nothing compared to 2020.
It seems a little odd to blame the frontrunner for taking the steam out of a race, though you have a point inasmuch as she's been attacked on how she treats her staff.
I do not have any understanding of what Katie Porter is specifically doing in her campaign. All I know is that her presence in the race and the fact that she’s polling well above in wide double digit margins compared to the rest of the gubernatorial candidates is what is what is currently dominating the race. Polling could tighten as we get closer to the primary but it remains to be seen.
Perhaps “taking the steam out” was a stretch but Porter is getting most of the attention right now. Eric Swalwell’s entry in the gubernatorial race could change this.
As for Porter’s temperament, I am not going to give my own personal opinion on it except to say that primary voters are likely going to weigh this compared to how other candidates like Swalwell present themselves.
The last numbers I saw had Hilton in first (barely), followed by Porter, with Bianco, another Republican, in third a few points behind, then lots of stragglers. There doesn't have to be overwhelming competition with Dem votes diluted by egos and no-chancers, allowing candidates with small percentages to rise. As a party, it's poor - or non-existent - strategy for winning.
I hear what you are saying but I am just not seeing this race to shape up to be that big of a problem right now.
We have however 6+ months until the primary and I suspect what could happen is that candidates like Betty Yee, Tony Thurmond, etc. could very well drop out. Otherwise, I am not sure any candidates margins besides Porter, Swalwell and Becerra will be enough that they would make Bianco and Hilton advance to the general election.
It’s more likely either Bianco or Hilton will be a general election candidate than it being say a Porter vs Swalwell race after the primary.
NY 21: Assemblyman Robert Smullen (R-Schoharie) is in, Anthony Constantino will enter Monday, and Joe Pinion (Newsmax host and 2022 nominee against Sen. Schumer) is expected to enter shortly thereafter
Blake Gendebien has been running for most of this year and is an excellent fit for the district. He has been getting the message out effectively. Well worth supporting.
Steve Kornacki on NBC News has made valid observations on what could be the expected shift in turnout in the TN-07 special election. This is based on observing the NJ-GOV and VA-GOV election results compared to the 2020 and 2024 presidential election results, where Trump was on the ballot and GOP turnout was greater in 2020 and 2024 compared to this year.
Remains to be seen what happens in turnout although due to redistricting, when Mark Green was running for re-election in 2022 and 2024 Democrats got a 10% increase in margins compared to 2020. Could be change in demographics. I believe if I'm not mistaken TN-07 contains Nashville suburbs.
This article notes some of the candidates running for the seat, but I bring it up because one of them is apparently 2016 US Senate nominee Misty Snow. Snow ran as a progressive then, so she'd likely be one again now.
I do worry that she, Nate Blouin, and Caroline Gleich would split the left vote and allow Ben McAdams to win.
We really are entering uncharted territory as this is the first real blue Congressional District Utah has had that I can recall.
Should be noted that Ben McAdams was Mayor of Salt Lake County for years before he first ran for Congress in UT-04 back in 2018 where he unseated the late Mia Love. He does have strong roots although it should be clarified that McAdams was not Mayor of Salt Lake City. SLC the city is more liberal than Salt Lake County, which complicated McAdams’ bid for Congress providing he has to appeal to the more liberal/progressive voters.
It all boils down to which Democratic candidate is going to get the most attraction. Frankly, I do not think McAdams is going to be able to get enough traction simply because he is not running for UT-04. A blue district with multiple candidates makes it harder for McAdams to stand out, especially considering standards on where he is on the issues are much higher.
If he admits his health was that much of a problem, then he should resign and let Shapiro appoint a replacement.
Him and Shapiro dont get along, that won't happen.
Then Shapiro should appoint someone better than him. Doesn't matter if they don't get along - Shapiro has to fill the vacancy.
I'm saying Fetterman won't resign because he doesn't get along with Shapiro, he won't let him get over on him like that.
Extremely immature and irresponsible.
I wonder if perhaps political candidates running in Senate races should get their health checked prior to running.
Fetterman’s deep health problems suggest he wasn’t thinking clearly when he ran for the Senate. Sure, he was a Democratic Senate Candidate back in 2016 but had he been the nominee instead of Katie McGinty, we really don’t know if Fetterman would have been able to be honest about his health problems then or if they had truly changed substantially in six years.
Unless you want to ban people with high blood pressure from running for office you can't preemptively rule out the risk that a candidate has a risk during the election year.
Fetterman lost a large amount of weight (~150 pounds) in the late '10s. At that point, it seemed reasonable to assume he was getting healthier.
Espaillat should know better. He got his seat by challenging a geriatric like he is now in the 1st place.
Okay... 71 isn't a mummy.
I'm referencing his health issues. Apparently there was some along the way.
What issues?
I can't seem to find a specific source, but along the way I heard of heart problems, which is common in both men his age and younger.
That's true. Those are common.
I went to school with Darializa. Her politics won’t be everyone’s cup of tea, but I can say that she is a very hard worker and a serious, methodical organizer, and would take Congressional office seriously (as *some* of Justice Dems’ candidates have not always been accused of doing).
How worried should I be that California is in danger of having only the two Republicans come out of the "top two" primary 🤔?
We should be more worried about what the Trump administration is doing right now than what might happen in a primary that still could see candidates drop out.
That said, yes, it is possible.
Would have been more worried about that pre-Trump. These days, I think it's more likely the C-list Republicans sum to like 30% of the primary vote and maybe get shut out themselves than it is to be facing a situation where low Dem primary turnout lets two evenly matched well-funded Republicans both get like 22%.
If we’re talking about the gubernatorial race, it’s highly unlikely the top two primary election will result in two Republicans. The 2021, 2022 and 2025 election results make it much harder for the GOP to gain leverage in the gubernatorial race in this sense.
Back in 2014, in the CA-25 Congressional District then, the GOP did shut out Democratic Candidate Lee Rogers (who in 2012 ran a closer than expected race against incumbent House Republican Buck McKeon) from the general election and it was a two Republican candidate race. Being that redistricting has shifted then, it’s much harder for Democrats to be shut off at the state level than in House races.
Peggy Flanagan picked up endorsements from Chris Murphy, Jeff Merkley, Martin Heinrich, and Chris Van Hollen.
Excellent! She’s my pick in that race. I really do not like Craig, her going to a crypto conference where a speaker after her praised the crypto industry for taking out Sherrod Brown was inexcusable.
Calling those opposed to AIPAC "cultists" recently was horrible.
Progressives are sleeping on Minnesota where a DLC/"Majority Democrats PAC" corporate Democrat to the right of Klobuchar might win. I would love to see Murphy and Bernie hold rallies for her.
You figure Craig is to the right of Klobuchar? On what issues?
labor, crypto regulation, crime, and the topic we aren't allowed to discuss
Healthcare and immigration too
Flanagan seems to be gaining steam and getting institutional support behind her. The caucuses (the official party endoesements from which still hold significant sway in the state) are in 75 days, February 3rd. My guess is Flanagan gets over 60% and Craig bows out.
How seriously do voters take convention endorsements anyway? The Minneapolis convention chaos this summer can't have helped their credibility, especially as voters decided otherwise in November.
It isn't the be-all end-all it once was, but is still largely respected. Maybe 2-3 races a year have people running against the endorsement, and less than half of those are successful, they just tend to be high profile. (MN-Gov 2010, and Minneapolis Mayor 2021 & 2025 are the most well known). The Minneapolis situation this year was unique given the margins and circumstances surrounding it. Unfortunately the nature of caucuses being run by parties on hand written pieces of paper, and then a series of delegates makes it MUCH less transparent/ cut and dry as an election run by the State.
But yeah, caucuses and endorsements still very much matter, they're just not 100% definitive anymore, only 95% definitive.
I am much less polarized on this race. I prefer Flanagan, but Craig would be a fine senator.
I think Craig and Flanagan as Senators would be as different from each other as Jeanne Shaheen and Elizabeth Warren are.
I don't see Craig as appreciable different than Tina Smith. Do Flanagan and Craig have different styles? Absolutely. But do I see either of them being a thorn in the side of liberal priorities / party unity? Not a chance. Both would be down the line liberal votes.
On the issue that shall not be named, Tina Smith and Angie Craig are certainly different. Craig voted for the Laken Riley Act and is generally happy to break party lines for GOP messaging bills. That being said, she's never been one to scuttle leadership priorities.
This is false since Craig herself says that she is an independent thinker and will be one "who questions the party". A 100 percent corporate Democrat who has a very centrist voting record. She is different on almost every issue. She will absolutely break the line on antitrust, crypto, healthcare and police union bills.
The reopening betrayal vote showed a big, BIG difference between Warren and Shaheen.
i originally thought that was the original comment's point but i clearly missed it
Craig is going to the primary no matter what happens at the convention and has said as much.
https://www.minnpost.com/national/washington/2025/08/angie-craig-and-peggy-flanagan-flex-their-political-muscles-in-race-for-u-s-senate-seat/
The DFL endorsement, at the statewide level at least, doesn't have the same effect it used to. The last open gov race where the DFL endorsee won the nomination was Mike Hatch in 2006!
Lets be honest about the governor tidbit. While what you said is technically true, its a sample size of exactly 2: MN-Gov 2018, and MN-Gov 2018, the one noteworthy race I mentioned earlier where the endorsed statewide candidate lost the primary. While its true it matters less than it did, theres literally only two statewide races in living memory where the endorsed DFL candidate lost the primary. I dont see MN-Sen 2026 being #3.
A.k.a. each of the last three contested statewide primaries? It would also be #4 because Matt Pelikan won the DFL endorsement for AG in 2018. What I'm trying to say is the sample of delegates that take part in the statewide convention has become less and less representative of the DFL primary electorate.
That's not to say that Flanagan can't win a primary, but the DFL endorsement is simply less predictive (and impactful, given ballooning outside spending) than it used to be.
Murphy has switched from being a "New Democrat" Clintonite to a Bernie supporter. Some journalists think he's going through a midlife crisis. He's actually quite good and his endorsements are also pretty solid.
I think he’s just savvy enough to follow where the energy on our side is right now a little quicker than his sloth-like peers
"NEW: More NY House Dem primaries coming
- Espaillat challenge "likely," per consultant
- Latimer expects a DSA challenger
- Nadler on a Lander-Goldman matchup: "Brad Lander will win." (He then walked it back)
- Justice Dems: "Expect more news"
@axios"
https://x.com/AndrewSolender/status/1991314504601543093
https://www.axios.com/2025/11/20/mamdani-jeffries-osse-democrat-primary-congress
Dan Goldman is toast if the DSA isn't stupid enough to run their own candidate. Even AIPAC and DMFI can't save him.
Curious to see who Latimer’s challenger could be. Bowman isn’t running again (good), and Latimer will be tough to unseat (bad, I don’t like him) so I wonder who could at least attempt to pull it off.
Gonna be a busy primary season in NYC, Velazquez retiring - https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/20/nyregion/nydia-velazquez-retire.html
Indiana is grappling with the question of "What if the governor calls a special session and the Senate doesn't show up?" There is a complicated tangle of state constitutional questions here. It also appears better not to gavel in a session rather than to do so. Get out the popcorn.
https://indianacapitalchronicle.com/2025/11/20/can-indiana-lawmakers-ignore-a-governors-special-session-call/?emci=7bb80472-76c5-f011-8196-6045bdfe8e9c&emdi=9264e6a2-0cc6-f011-8196-6045bdfe8e9c&ceid=630426
Didn't the WI lege do this to Evers? Gavel out quickly when he called a special session? It's very much a "lead a horse to water, but can't make it drink" sort of thing.
My understanding from the article is that by not gaveling in, the Indiana legislature avoids fines. 25 senators and the Lt. Gov., who is on board with the redistricting plot, could compel the others to attend, or they would be fined. Not gaveling in at all avoids that problem. Wisconsin likely has different rules.
I wanted to share this impressively positive article. Perhaps this is off-topic, for it has been a long time since there has been a strong focus on the climate crisis. This article highlights how one country, one of the poorest in the world, is showing what can be done: Bhutan.
Enjoy!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/nov/18/bhutan-pm-tshering-tobgay-first-carbon-negative-nation-climate-wellbeing
Small, poorer countries have every reason to quickly deploy cheap cutting edge clean tech rather than slowly build out expensive fossil infra that is no Innovative. This trend will only accelerate
Solar panels are becoming huge in Pakistan.
Yep. It solves enormous issues by creating microgrids in countries where grid reliability has traditionally been poor if not nonexistent
This is so true, and similar to something George Carlin said years ago (look for "the world plus plastic" for the routine): "Earth will survive no matter what we do. The urgency to control global warming, to fight climate change, is for us people now and for our future generations." The Earth can easily survive without people.
Damn right. And no matter what we do, rodents, cockroaches and jellyfish are here to stay.
I'm curious what would happen to rodents without intelligent life. They've adapted miraculously to our lifestyle, scavenging off of our food waste in particular. How well would rats or mice be able to adapt and thrive in a world without humans?
They would miss us, but there's loads of other stuff for them to eat. And by the way, rats are quite intelligent, though their eyesight and sense of direction seem to suck.
I suspect you're probably correct. But it's not easy to assess how a species so thoroughly adapted to be reliant on us would handle the loss of our presence. Similar with pigeons.
I guess we'll never know: if it does happen we won't be around to know the results, by definition.
I think pigeons would miss us greatly. Their numbers might decline when they no longer have human food to eat or human structures to hang out and build their nests on, but they are intelligent, resourceful birds and great long-distance flyers, and they eat such a variety of things that I have no doubt the species would continue to do well in our absence.
I hope this doesn't backfire on them like when Sri Lanka mandated organic-only farming.
What happened as a result?
There was a massive agricultural crisis in Sri Lanka. After previously growing enough rice to meet domestic demand, they had to import it now and they took a huge hit to their critical tea exports. It was Lysenkoism crossed with new age crap. One of the advisors on the project (which was completely scrapped after less than a year) believed that if they banned chemical fertilizers and pesticides, they could slowly grow the Sri Lankan life expectancy to well over 100 years old.
This is basically a more extreme version of the Luddite anti-GMO stance so many (usually affluent white) people inexplicably have
CA-11:
https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/sf-supervisor-connie-chan-seeks-congressional-seat-held-by-nancy-pelosi/amp/
SF Supervisor and progressive Connie Chan is in.
Also a NIMBY.
Unfortunately yes.
What’s Jane Kim like on housing? I was hoping she’d run.
Historically, she's a hardcore NIMBY, even opposing affordable housing projects due to their height. But she's also an opportunist, so maybe she's evolved on the issue by now.
Granted that describes like 98% of SF politicos
But not Scott Wiener, who definitely would be far better on this issue than she is.
But also an issue that would rarely come up federally
One way to get left-NIMBY's out of local government is by electing them to Congress. Can do less damage there lol.
I don’t think you understand the San Francisco political scene well.
In SF, YIMBYs like Scott Weiner have good ideas on housing but are otherwise very aloof or not socially conscious enough to concerns over gentrification and neighborhood residents as much as they project. This is why I have preferred Weiner and others efforts in State Government as opposed to when they were Supervisors. State Law on housing nowadays btw makes it easier to have conversations on housing than used to be.
In SF, NIMBYs or anyone else who does not consider themselves either in that category (like me as I am right in the middle on the housing issue) or YIMBY are the way they are because corporate development interest make it hard to have neighborhood conscious dialog. Shutting down housing everywhere is not a good idea but being aloof to resident concerns is even worse. Just go back to the days of when Willie Brown was Mayor starting in the 1990’s and this is why NIMBYs have been emboldened.
I really wish we not get so one sided on the housing issue and instead look at the bigger picture with politicians in SF.
"Shutting down housing everywhere is not a good idea but being aloof to resident concerns is even worse."
No it isn't. If your supposed "middle" is to consider massive homelessness, threat of eviction and unaffordabiliy better than being "aloof" to the concerns of people who don't have to worry about having a roof over their heads, you can count me out!
Yeah, I'm sure Zero Cool is a supporter of "massive homelessness, threat of eviction and unaffordability".
WTF result do you think shutting down housing anywhere would have? Feel free to act surly toward me for taking his words at face value if it makes you feel more righteous, but it's really damn stupid, as far as I'm concerned. He himself needs to answer for what he says, not you.
Connie Chan serves the Richmond District. It’s not the same district as what contains the SoMa which is more pro development and tech driven. It’s very much middle class, at least from a traditional sense.
If you spend time in the neighborhood, there is a good reason why Chan and her processors have the stances on housing the way they do. I don’t agree with everything they do but some perspective as to why:
Over a decade ago, Petco was planning to open a location on Geary Blvd, right near a neighborhood pet store. Richmond neighborhood activists stopped this because it would have created an unfair advantage to Petco. The location was ended.
This is why SF neighborhoods like the Richmond District are the way they are.
That doesn't sound like a reason for opposition to new -housing-.
Democratic Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick has been indicted for a multimillion dollar theft of disaster relief funds.
https://apnews.com/article/cherfilus-mccormick-fema-theft-campaign-funds-35b99f987380c9509735c45dd36db1c8
Not great obviously. Compared to the level and type of criminality evident daily in the Trump admin, this seems rather straightforward. Obviously she is entitled to be presumed innocent until guilt is proven, but if this is for real, we need her out immediately.
Between her and Cory Mills on the GOP side, WTF is going on in Florida?
Florida gonna Florida
So they should resign or retire as a package deal so no shenanigans with special elections
How reliable is that polling released yesterday that projected a D+15 for generic Democratic candidates in next year's midterms?
And if so, will it grow the worse TACO digs in and the economy further falters? We could definitely use that 10-11 point margin here in North Carolina to eat away at the GOP majority.
I'm seeing the same results from AP News and Reuters. Unless the economy miraculously rebounds by next November, we're getting a 2018 sized midterm walloping. And should things get even worse, potentially 2006 or 2010 in reverse.
https://apnews.com/projects/polling-tracker/
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-approval-falls-lowest-his-term-over-prices-epstein-files-reutersipsos-poll-2025-11-18/
Some of those things are so unlikely we might consider a nuclear strike and a massive eruption of Yellowstone, too...
In all seriousness, I agree with you on this. I also mentioned things that I knew were possible, though so exceedingly unlikely as to not be worth considering.
I hope we do better than 2018 when we lost two Senate seats!
"Trump knows if his party loses control of either chamber, his presidency is over"
I think that's an exaggeration; the wide majority of this Presidency's actions have been done unilaterally with support via Senate confirmations.
I need to see more consistent polling before I buy it. But even a GCB+10 would be a big boost, and it’s unclear what a man as pridefully stubborn and now unmoored from reality as Trump can do to adjust ahead of the midterms
I mean, ICE invading Charlotte, Durham and Raleigh this week ticked off a lot of unaffiliated and Democratic voters with gun permits. Plus the GOP legislature rigging the Congressional map AGAIN quickly, rather than passing a state budget (which they blew off until next year), pissed off the same voters.
And with the POS Phil Berger gaining a strong primary challenger, the ingredients are there for a perfect storm to wash out a lot of GOP legislators next year.
If the blue wave is strong enough to flip one state House and lead to a 50-50 split in the other, I will laugh.
seems to have riled up this crowd, 30000 strong: https://www.reddit.com/r/CzechCoconutCommunity/comments/1p1qy7l/30000_students_in_charlotte_north_carolina/
Even consistent polling can be wildly wrong, as shown by the recent New Jersey governor results.
Who the hell knows? Polling seems like anything but a hard science at this point.
Are repubs really running scared in TN-07? What will that tell us if that race turns out to be R+5 or less? Didn't trump carry that district by 20+?
I think they're scared about the margin scaring their members. Even though there is a path to Behn winning and people should donate/volunteer to help her win, her actually winning is an uphill battle.
NY-7:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/20/nyregion/nydia-velazquez-retire.html
Nydia Velazquez is retiring.
I don't know Who McGarvey is, but I guess I'll be hearing more about him.
He is a relatively young (mid-40s) lawyer who is Kentucky's only Congressional Democrat, representing essentially Louisville. I believe he's in his second term now. He reminds me a bit of Andy Beshear.
Time flies. Seems like she just got there.
I’ll miss Nydia, she was always an underrated representative.
Her successor may be even more progressive than her- this is probably the most left-wing district in the country. If the NYC DSA consolidates behind one candidate they’ll probably take it easily.
This is like DSA central, they’ll have their pick
It's worth noting that Zohran Mamdani's assembly district partially overlaps with the 7th. So there is a proven record of DSA types winning downballot in the area.
On Bluesky Nick Tagliaferro (former Primary School author) is joking we may end up with Rep. Julia Salazar.
He might not be wrong!
She might possibly be the best contender for the seat. Was the first person I thought of when I saw the news
Salazar, Senator Kristin Gonzalez, Assemblymembers Steve Raga, Claire Valdez, Emily Gallagher, Councilmembers Guttierez and Nurse are all possible. This could get interesting and you may even see some people district hop a bit to run here. The musical chairs this may set off is crazy
Abdelhamid is currently trying for Mamdani's State Assembly seat. Given that there will be a special election for that, and the local Dems will almost certainly pick a centrist for that seat given their feud with the DSA (in NY the state party picks the candidates in special elections), I could see Abdelhamid challenging whoever they appoint.
Personally, if I'm Reynoso, I take a pass here. I have 4 more years of being Brooklyn BP, and little kids to take care of, I don't want to be a freshman in congress--especially when I could be Mayor in 4 or 8 years. But I definitely think if he runs, others stay out to run for BP.
Lincoln...maybe. Most of his district isn't here (I believe he lives in BK Heights now, but he may live in Williamsburg).
Yeah, very good. Well done! I didn't realize, she's 72.
I'm shocked to see a Dem retire at such a young age...only 72! /s
In all seriousness, it's a loss for Congress, but I'm glad she's retiring in a timely manner and in a cycle where somebody very progressive can hopefully win.
Points taken, but I don’t think you have to worry about ideology in that district.
Those 2 top GOP candidates for CA gov are currently in positions 1 and 3 in the jungle race, while Democrats are up to about 10 candidates and counting. Are they trying to hand this to a Republican?
With Swalwell's announcement tonight, it will get worse.
Exactly, diluting the Dem pool, no matter how good or bad the contenders, weakens the chance of a Dem coming out on top.
the worst thing about politicians is their ego!
They need some serious reflection on the stakes here. CA is absolutely critical to hold any blue line.
Although you probably have to have one to do what they do and risk your life doing it.
agree but c'mon...way too many "some dudes" to make sense...hopefully, all but 2 or 3 will drop out or be totally insignificant by next spring.
I didn't say all of them should be running.
The solution is clearly ranked choice voting but for whatever reason we don't want to put it on the ballot. It would solve these problems.
Still, if you field 20 candidates, it complicates the process unnecessarily.
I would say this argument would be true if Eleni Kounalakis and Toni Atkins were still in the race. However, since Kounalakis moved to running for State Treasurer and Atkins dropped out due to poor polling and traction, it has been Katie Porter who alone has taken the steam out of the race. That alone says a lot no matter how many candidates are running.
Remember, it was Kamala Harris who was hyped to have been a probable choice for being governor and it was the CA State Democratic Party at large that was for months overshadowed by the potential of Harris considering a run. Even CA Attorney General Rob Bonta couldn't keep his mouth shut over this and said Harris would be "field clearing" if she ran.
Since Harris is out, Porter has all of a sudden in the last few months gotten more freedom in the polling and is overshadowing every other candidate in the race. Eric Swalwell running will only mean Democrats will have a clearer choice of options for higher profile candidates as opposed to having to stick with Porter, who because of concerns over temperament might not be the best choice to replacing Gavin Newsom.
None of the following Democratic Candidates are really gaining in their campaigns compared to Porter, Becerra and Swalwell:
Antonio Villaraigosa
Betty Yee
Ian Calderon
Steven Cloobeck
Tony Thurmond
Villaraigosa and Yee could get more traction as we get closer to the June primary but it's hard to say at this point. All the other Democratic candidates running that I have not mentioned (Tom Steyer not included) are some dude types who will probably get a few hundred to a few thousand votes but nothing to really make anything matter in the actual primary.
This is not the 2020 Democratic Presidential Primary Race where we had significantly high profile candidates from Bernie Sanders to Joe Biden to Bill DeBlasio (and even Eric Swalwell) running. What we have in the CA gubernatorial race is nothing compared to 2020.
It seems a little odd to blame the frontrunner for taking the steam out of a race, though you have a point inasmuch as she's been attacked on how she treats her staff.
To clarify:
I do not have any understanding of what Katie Porter is specifically doing in her campaign. All I know is that her presence in the race and the fact that she’s polling well above in wide double digit margins compared to the rest of the gubernatorial candidates is what is what is currently dominating the race. Polling could tighten as we get closer to the primary but it remains to be seen.
Perhaps “taking the steam out” was a stretch but Porter is getting most of the attention right now. Eric Swalwell’s entry in the gubernatorial race could change this.
As for Porter’s temperament, I am not going to give my own personal opinion on it except to say that primary voters are likely going to weigh this compared to how other candidates like Swalwell present themselves.
Why do you think Swalwell will get so much attention and support?
The last numbers I saw had Hilton in first (barely), followed by Porter, with Bianco, another Republican, in third a few points behind, then lots of stragglers. There doesn't have to be overwhelming competition with Dem votes diluted by egos and no-chancers, allowing candidates with small percentages to rise. As a party, it's poor - or non-existent - strategy for winning.
I hear what you are saying but I am just not seeing this race to shape up to be that big of a problem right now.
We have however 6+ months until the primary and I suspect what could happen is that candidates like Betty Yee, Tony Thurmond, etc. could very well drop out. Otherwise, I am not sure any candidates margins besides Porter, Swalwell and Becerra will be enough that they would make Bianco and Hilton advance to the general election.
It’s more likely either Bianco or Hilton will be a general election candidate than it being say a Porter vs Swalwell race after the primary.
I suspect that's correct, but in times such as these, all efforts to minimize risk should be employed.
NY 21: Assemblyman Robert Smullen (R-Schoharie) is in, Anthony Constantino will enter Monday, and Joe Pinion (Newsmax host and 2022 nominee against Sen. Schumer) is expected to enter shortly thereafter
Blake Gendebien has been running for most of this year and is an excellent fit for the district. He has been getting the message out effectively. Well worth supporting.
I'd rather support Dylan Hewitt. Gendebein did not say who he voted for last year...could he have been a Trump supporter?
TN-07 Special Election:
Steve Kornacki on NBC News has made valid observations on what could be the expected shift in turnout in the TN-07 special election. This is based on observing the NJ-GOV and VA-GOV election results compared to the 2020 and 2024 presidential election results, where Trump was on the ballot and GOP turnout was greater in 2020 and 2024 compared to this year.
Remains to be seen what happens in turnout although due to redistricting, when Mark Green was running for re-election in 2022 and 2024 Democrats got a 10% increase in margins compared to 2020. Could be change in demographics. I believe if I'm not mistaken TN-07 contains Nashville suburbs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13ERPdxzzd4
If you feel so inclined, you could summarize what additional shifts he is projecting.
I decided to repost the thread in the Weekly Open Thread so everyone would be able to see as opposed to yesterday where it was closer in the evening.
Here's the thread. I mentioned more about Kornacki's analysis here:
https://www.the-downballot.com/p/weekly-open-thread-9ab/comment/179873664
UT-1:
https://www.fox13now.com/news/politics/with-a-new-competitive-congressional-map-democrats-dive-in
This article notes some of the candidates running for the seat, but I bring it up because one of them is apparently 2016 US Senate nominee Misty Snow. Snow ran as a progressive then, so she'd likely be one again now.
I do worry that she, Nate Blouin, and Caroline Gleich would split the left vote and allow Ben McAdams to win.
We really are entering uncharted territory as this is the first real blue Congressional District Utah has had that I can recall.
Should be noted that Ben McAdams was Mayor of Salt Lake County for years before he first ran for Congress in UT-04 back in 2018 where he unseated the late Mia Love. He does have strong roots although it should be clarified that McAdams was not Mayor of Salt Lake City. SLC the city is more liberal than Salt Lake County, which complicated McAdams’ bid for Congress providing he has to appeal to the more liberal/progressive voters.
It all boils down to which Democratic candidate is going to get the most attraction. Frankly, I do not think McAdams is going to be able to get enough traction simply because he is not running for UT-04. A blue district with multiple candidates makes it harder for McAdams to stand out, especially considering standards on where he is on the issues are much higher.