The sheriff from Riverside County is the worst possible choice for CA governor. Dems need to cull the field so just two candidates overwhelm Bianco's poll numbers. He could easily transition to run ICE with his ethics and philosophy and we sure don't need that in CA. I know the primary offers the culling process, but by then he may be pulling millions from his fellow bigots. Be very aware, CA voters.
Poll numbers don't by default translate into votes, especially this early in the process where there's a signifcant number of undecided voters.
Agreed that the field of Democrats should shrink but if Eric Swalwell and Katie Porter are going to take up too much of the steam, it's unlikely voters will even look at candidates like Betty Yee, Tony Thurmond, etc. to the degree where the percentages in the primary they get will be of any significance.
If Chad Bianco were the general election nominee against a Democratic candidate, he has no shot at winning it. Besides the 2021 CA Gubernatorial Recall Election failing by double digits, Newsom winning re-election by a similar amount in 2022 and Prop 50 being passed by 30%+ points, Bianco and the Huntington Beach City Council recently lost their attempt to challenge CA State's sanctuary law. Bianco has also been faced with a lawsuit on campaigning for governor in his uniform as sheriff.
I think it's likely that the Dem field will consolidate and prevent a lockout, though the fact that it's plausible at all shows the problems with the top 2 primary.
I think this has shifted over time. Calvert has been trying to moderate his image ever since his district became more competitive after 2020 redistricting. I also think Kim is revealing herself to be a more conservative as she becomes entrenched.
Yeah, I think Kim is a lot of talk over being a moderate and not a lot of results or a voting record to really back it up, she just does a good job coding herself by being a member of the Tuesday Group/Governance Group, Problem Solvers and Main Street caucuses. Calvert has made shifts as his district became more competitive, and for the most part has kept a lot of poison pill social issues out of Defense approps as the Repub cardinal. Obviously both could pull a Stefanik switch and go full MAGA in a redder seat, and I'd also just rather cut off her career sooner.
I think we should consider the fact that Asians as demographics are varying, at least if we’re talking about family origins (and race as well).
I can’t comment on knowing specific Asians in Young Kim’s district as voter registration demographics really don’t break this down much into subcategories. That said, I wouldn’t be surprised a substantial portion of Asians in Kim’s district are Chinese, Japanese and Korean.
Marriage equality as an issue is pretty low bar but that is not the best example of what I consider to be cultivating a moderate image. Plenty of conservatives have already come out in favor of marriage equality but it has been an evolving issue for them since the 2000's. Hell, even former Senator Rob Portman came out for gay marriage before he left office even while the backdrop was that he had a gay son.
How a Republican becomes moderate is the ability to compromise and work with Democrats on issues where ideology does not overtake the member of Congress in doing his/her job. In today's environment, this has been the case with Young Kim as working with Abigail Spanberger on police reform when she was still in the House.
Here's an excerpt from Kim's campaign website (whose domain URL I cannot reference as that could give SEO to her site). This does not sound like something a MAGA Republican would say in response to the Defunding the Police agenda:
.
.
.
Law enforcement must first make sure any officers who abuse their power are held accountable for their actions. Increasing transparency to ensure that officers who are fired for gross misconduct are not unwittingly hired by a different department and put back on the streets should also be a priority.”
…
“Law enforcement should also reevaluate their use of force regulations as well as increase training to prevent instances of police brutality and decrease unnecessary use of force. Congress can assist by providing funds for training and prioritize de-escalation practices. Federally, we can also ensure law enforcement grants prioritize those departments that are practicing responsible policing techniques, employing body cameras, and are working to build bonds of trust with their communities.
Let us use this tragedy to move forward and make progress together as a country. That starts with treating each other with respect regardless of our race or occupation and having honest conversations without accusations or judgement. Let us turn our outrage to constructive action that will build up our community and work with our local law enforcement to increase trust and understanding. Change starts with each one of us taking personal responsibility. We can all do our part to be better for our fellow citizens and work together to ensure that the promise of America is available for all.”
With this said, I do not believe Kim is a true moderate. Her view on marriage equality is really out of step with most Californians and she's conservative on quite a number of issues.
Yeah but didn’t that not go anywhere? I thought it was just a nice press release. Was legislation actually introduced? Esp since Spanberger left. Calvert has been a longtime appropriator and demonstrated compromising there.
Re: West Windsor, NJ having a Republican mayor despite voting more than 70% for Sherrill. This is exactly why Democrats need to change all municipal elections to show candidates' partisan affiliations on the ballot. Allowing Republicans to control heavily Democratic towns like West Windsor (and many cities in California, which are the same way) is seriously holding back local government from its progressive potential. Not only that, it's unnecessarily adding to Republicans' farm team and giving them strong candidates to run in any swing districts that may include these deep-blue towns. Republicans shouldn't have any say at all in the governance of deep-blue towns like West Windsor, and Democrats should do whatever is necessary to ensure they don't.
Adding partisan affiliation to municipal elections may work in NJ for Democratic benefit, but partisan affiliation for state judicial races is not -- ie the North Carolina state Supreme Court. The then D-controlled legislature added partisan affiliation, then made it nonpartisan, then Rs made it partisan again after flipping the legislature.
I hope that applies to next year's state Supreme Court race here in NC! Our fantastic incumbent Democratic justice Anita Earls is up for re-election against Sarah Stevens, a horrible state legislator who voted for the 12-week abortion ban, helped suppress voting (eliminating the 3-day grace period for VBM ballots) and voted for our rigged maps. (She also voted in lockstep to take control of our state Board of Elections and give it to the GOP auditor, who promptly fired Karen Brinson Bell and hired partisan GOP aides -- including the infamous Bob Rucho -- to serve on the board.)
If Justice Earls prevails, there's going to be energy to flip 2 or all 3 seats up in 2028. NC voters are PISSED.
I guess I would phrase it as that Republicans are more likely to be in favor of services and raising money to pay for them at the local level, even if they rail against "big government" at the State and Federal level.
Where I live in SC conservation-minded candidates that support smart growth/development would win local elections overwhelmingly if the local elections were non-partisan. But they aren't, so Republicans win, or people who run as Republicans win.
As a former West Windsor resident (I've lived right next door in East Windsor for the last three years), I can say that the electoral success of the town's Republican mayor stems from him being seen as a relative moderate, and also from the fact that West Windsor is not particulary liberal (yes, it's very Democratic, but many residents would say that they're moderate, especially on fiscal issues).
We actually tried to switch the town to partisan elections last year, but that measure failed. I think the better way for us to defeat the Republican mayor is to run a Democrat who fits the town's unique electoral profile. So, not a progressive, but rather, a Democrat known for being moderate when it comes to spending/taxing.
I live in CA-20. However, I am CA-22 adjacent. Randy Villegas is trying to increase his name recognition. He had a float in the Bakersfield xmas parade that got him a good 30 seconds of Bakersfield TV time, plus all the probably 10,000 people at the parade that saw the float.
Also, I'm seeing Tom Steyer for Governor ads on my TV already.
They absolutely work - Bloomberg almost won the nomination in 2020 because of wall-to-wall TV and digital spend, even though he had no actual base within the electorate.
slogging through candidate interviews in the FOUR different deep blue Chicago-area Congressional seats, and all I can say is: if you're a campaign professional in Chicago and you haven't already paid off your Maui timeshare on this mess, you need to reconsider your life choices.
Do you have a target date to release endorsements? IL-7 and IL-8 are the most volatile to me, so I don't have clear favorites (I do have clear dislikes lol).
IL-7's candidates seem to be mostly establishment to center left, while IL-8 is a mixture: Bean and Bankole are part of the establishment wing, while Ahmed is progressive.
In IL-7, Boykin is a conservadem DINO, Conyears-Ervin is corrupt/could end up in a federal indictment and Collins is most a disorganized advocate that's had diminishing respect among the progressive circles I know. Ford seems... fine. I don't know much about him even if he's probably the most likely winner. I know even less about Driver, but he has progressive establishment and labor cred.
In IL-8, Bean is the worst option as an bygone Blue Dog, Ahmed is ofc the most left as the DSA choice (but this is the worst open district in IL for that, both in likelihood to win and long term) and Bankole/Morrison/Dunung seem to be pretty much in the same mainstream Dem lane.
Edit: I know Morrison's name from just being aware of the county board, but I've often said that I don't think they really do anything beyond the president (who's elected at-large and is the only one with a real budget and staff), so I don't know his record at all. I have the sense he's vaguely progressive, but it's interesting that he's not been endorsed by Preckwinkle, who would know his bona fides there best as county board pres and county party chair.
finished IL-09, where there are several rock stars. Working my way thru IL-08 where I wouldn't characterize any of them as A grade on climate, but maybe B to B+ grade. Haven't started IL-07 or IL-02 yet. And my group doesn't endorse without also a survey to our grassroots members in the district to hear what they think. I don't think we'll be putting out any endorsements til early January but it will definitely be EARLY January if at all.
Very interesting, I was looking at your group's endorsement processes and really like that they also involve people on the ground to get their impressions of the candidates.
Better Netflix does this with their own cash than the looming alternative. Larry Ellison and his precious little boy David at Paramount were lobbying WB and Trump hard to get this deal with some help with some Arabian noble family investment. They also wanted to fold in all of WB while Netflix's terms were to leave WB's TV stations running as they have been. Comcast could have been better, but it seems like their offer was less than the other two.
Also, Dems are probably going to be more pragmatic at targeting mergers going forward. Last administration going hard on it only ended in many legal losses and Bezos and Zuckerberg donning the black shirt.
The 2nd Least Worst Option is still a bad option. Netflix is so anti-theater that this could be the death knell for theatrical distribution.
It ended in many legal losses because of the Conservative capture of the courts. There are so many issues I'm not certain how we even go about fixing them if we don't push for more than marginal incremental change.
Lina Kahn tried more than marginal with her novel arguments to apply anti-trust laws more broadly and all she got was her hands tied by the courts. She couldn't even stop Microsoft from buying Activision. The administration got no credit from activists for doing all they could to up anti-trust enforcement.
What are you talking about? Netflix is planning to with the Warner Bros brand release films in theaters. It is not going strictly streaming here.
The acquisition in no way shape or form is going to lead to the downfall of movie theatre exhibition. In fact, there’s been a resurgence as of recently. San Francisco for starters is getting this, especially with Apple Cinemas opening a new theater in the city.
I am not happy with this acquisition but Larry Ellison’s son is a dufus (and also is a college dropout like his father) and Paramount Skydance acquiring WB was a dumb idea to begin with. This is truly the lesser of two evils.
That was the absolute worst option. Comcast was probably the best of all the worst options, but there is a reason why people are extremely concerned about this acquisition when it comes to movie theaters. Netflix is incredibly hostile toward the theatrical experience and have already said that they want to shorten the release window. https://variety.com/2025/film/news/netflix-warner-bros-movies-theaters-buying-studio-1236601073/
This is bad. It's better than an Ellison owned WB but it's still not great, Bob. (Insert Mad Men gif here)
Why are you saying it’s better than a Paramount Skydance acquisition but arguing this was the worst option? Am I reading this correctly?
A Paramount Skydance acquisition would have turned WB into another Disney-like situation where Disney owns 20th Century Fox. Really idiotic idea but this would essentially mean an already increasingly media driven giant Disney would compete with Amazon and Paramount Skydance. Not exactly fair for those preservationist types like myself who want to see film studios be just film studios.
I re-read the article but there is a real disconnect here:
The old business model of simply exhibiting films in theaters doesn’t work like it used to. Celluloid film is increasingly higher in cost due to inflation and more productions are made using digital film instead to conserve costs. Even legendary documentarian Frederick Wiseman has gone to digital for his films, such as his recent documentary covering UC Berkeley. Film studios use streaming as a way of profiting as as additional revenue source to lower costs. I am not a fan of streaming but until the market is regulated better, film exhibition companies (even Alamo Drafthouse) have to be creative to work through profiting.
That said, I am not a fan of shorter theatrical runs for films. I am not sure what Netflix intends to do with shortening theatrical runs other than what has already been done. Amazon has its Amazon Prime streaming option even while it owns MGM Studios. The market may just saturate even more.
I will give this more thought. The main reason why I thought the Netflix deal was the lesser of two evils is because it is not a media giant. If Comcast was a better option, how?
I myself would rather all these media companies be broken up and film studios go back to where they used to be.
"THAT (Skydance-Paramount) was the absolute worst option". I'm saying that Netflix is the 2nd Least Worst Option and the least worst option of the three choices was Comcast.
The issue isn't like, a film projectionist has canisters of film that they switch out, and we're viewing it on actual film. That is, admittedly, a very niche market/experience that people want. Digital Film is fine and pretty much every major theater uses digital copies to exhibit film, maintaining the theatrical experience. The way you're describing "streaming" isn't exactly how it works. What people are railing against is the Netflix model of dropping select films in theaters for a week (Roma, Knives Out, Frankenstein) in NYC or LA just so that they can be eligible for the Oscars and then dump it onto their platform. No physical media releases either which is another passion of mine.
Comcast/Universal Studios are the best studio around for people who love film. It's why Christopher Nolan made Oppenheimer with them. They are, in my experience, friendliest to the creator/auteur. Netflix on the other hand has created the conditions that have utterly destroyed the Entertainment Industry as a way to make a living. Not even just talking about theatrical distribution but TV especially where they drop everything all at once, not allowing buzz to build that helps keep shows on the air and find their footing and their audience. I worked on a show called The Residence and if that would have been released on a weekly schedule. I believe it would have been a HUGE hit. But because it dropped every episode all at once. It didn't break through and the mystery of a who-dunnit was solved that same day. I'm not even talking about how they created the model of 2-3 years between seasons and below the line crew members instead of working on 1 show with a short hiatus every year have to cobble together 3-4 jobs in a year and have to wait years to work on the same show. Netflix may not be a media giant but they are a huge problem in this industry.
Based on the national media catching up to the massive fraud scandal in Minnesota, can people see now why I predicted the national Democratic wave will be, at best, subdued in Minnesota? I'm skeptical at this point Walz will even follow through on running for a third term.
It wasn't very blue in 2018, either. Walz and Smith were elected statewide by underwhelming margins and the House delegation remained the same with 2 easy flips on both sides.
Walz won by 11 and Smith won by 10 in 2018. I thought that was pretty darn good. I'm highly doubtful you'll see any Democratic margins that lopsided in Minnesota in 2026 or any other time in the near future for that matter.
Didn’t Klobuchar literally just win by 15 points last year? Even if the fraud thing affects votes, you really think it the Pillow creep and with the pedo stache is going to take advantage of it?
I think it's far more likely that Lisa Demuth will be the Republican nominee than Lindell. Definitely non-zero for Lindell, but even if he was the nominee I bet it would be a 5-point race with as wounded as Walz is....with downballot consequences.
Honestly, I don't get this argument at all in the current political environment. Barring a massive shift between now and next Fall, I have a hard time seeing us not winning MN-Gov by double digits.
Guy is apparently down to living on 1k a week. Well join the club pal. Where is he going to get the funds to campaign? I feel like this isnt a serious attempt to get the seat, but more of a "fill my coffers up" money grab through creative accounting, gofundme slush, and the like.
Headline story in the NY Times last weekend and feature story all over national newscasts this week: massive fraud scandal with pandemic funds. Over a $1 billion in stolen money that the GOP is fingering Walz for. It's the reason Trump came out this week calling Minnesota's Somali community "garbage".
Walz isn't guilty of anything directly. The GOP accusations are that he was asleep at the switch and thus a bad manager. It's a little fuzzy how right they are about that but as the Governor there's some truth to the buck stopping with him. Republicans' ability to say Walz was looking the other way because most of the perpetrators were Somalians is another feather in their cap electorally.
You seem to give gop talking points far more credibility and credence than they deserve. Do nyt stories really move voters in Duluth? They are going to attack no matter what - not sure blaming a liked immigrant community is going to help them much.
I swear some of you guys make an artform out of whistling past graveyards. You spent 3 1/2 years telling me I was full of shit about the border before finally realizing that bottomless asylum was gonna cost the Democratic Party everything and that all of your policy wishes were lost for at least a generation as a direct consequences of the tone-deafness of bottomless asylum.
With that in mind, one would think my instinct would have earned enough trust to take me seriously when I tell you that this is a catastrophic problem for Walz. It's the lead story in every conversation about Minnesota politics....and now the headlines have gone national, meaning that Walz is gonna find it even harder to escape this story. It WILL move votes! Take it to the bank!
Yeah, it's probably not going to be an overwhelming dem wave in Minnesota because of local issues. It's interesting, here in Kansas the opposite is happening, Laura Kelly is still pretty popular and I wouldn't be surprised if the combination of good will toward her and the national environment help dems keep the governorship next year. We'll see though, I feel like neither of the top dem candidates are as strong as Kelly.
She needs to pull a Mills (though that has yet to be determined if it’s a successful strategy). Say you’re only running for 1 term in a campaign to “stop the insanity and bring common sense back to Washington” or however she wants to phrase it.
Voters there may be open to giving a fairly moderate, fairly popular governor 1 term in the Senate as a Democrat. I suspect she’d still lose given the dynamics between federal and state government, but she’d probably outperform anyone else we could run.
I remember he was going back and forth for months on even running which tells me his heart isn’t really in it. I’m not sure why he wants to run again, he seems to have established a decent legacy with many accomplishments and there is a deep DFL bench waiting in the wings.
TX-37: Doggett reiterated his plan to retire and Casar reiterated his plan to run here after the SCOTUS decision, bringing the retirement total up to 40 in the House. This many retirements is not uncommon, but it's worth noting this time in the 2024 cycle there wasn't 40 yet.
Just looking at retirement and resignation totals for the most recent cycles since Trump to compare (not including primary and general losses). I imagine more will come thru the New Year.
-2024: 48+1 midterm resignation (and 2 deaths)
-2022: 50+2 resignations (and 1 death) – decennial redistricting year
I don't know why CBC PAC hasn't been posting their endorsements as press releases or built out a page for them all yet... But their socials have started trickling out their first endorsements of the cycle. Linking to my last post surveying the major party caucus PAC endorsements:
He’s one of the wealthiest members of Congress. I lived in his current district. The democratic candidate was leading in the polls at three weeks from the election. Issa started spending his money and flooded all media with attack adds and ended up getting elected. This was a very red district that was starting to turn purple.
The sheriff from Riverside County is the worst possible choice for CA governor. Dems need to cull the field so just two candidates overwhelm Bianco's poll numbers. He could easily transition to run ICE with his ethics and philosophy and we sure don't need that in CA. I know the primary offers the culling process, but by then he may be pulling millions from his fellow bigots. Be very aware, CA voters.
Poll numbers don't by default translate into votes, especially this early in the process where there's a signifcant number of undecided voters.
Agreed that the field of Democrats should shrink but if Eric Swalwell and Katie Porter are going to take up too much of the steam, it's unlikely voters will even look at candidates like Betty Yee, Tony Thurmond, etc. to the degree where the percentages in the primary they get will be of any significance.
If Chad Bianco were the general election nominee against a Democratic candidate, he has no shot at winning it. Besides the 2021 CA Gubernatorial Recall Election failing by double digits, Newsom winning re-election by a similar amount in 2022 and Prop 50 being passed by 30%+ points, Bianco and the Huntington Beach City Council recently lost their attempt to challenge CA State's sanctuary law. Bianco has also been faced with a lawsuit on campaigning for governor in his uniform as sheriff.
https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article311991026.html
https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/republican-governor-candidate-sanctuary-city-fight-21221593.php
I think it's likely that the Dem field will consolidate and prevent a lockout, though the fact that it's plausible at all shows the problems with the top 2 primary.
Almost like we should do Ranked Choice Voting here to prevent that.
Yep Alaska's top 4 is a much better system.
Issa has a lot of nerve lying about Prop 50 being a power grab, while ignoring power grabs by the GOP in NC and TX.
He's just mad that Democrats are starting to play by the GOP's rules now.
Even blue state Republicans view Republicans as the natural ruling party
Issa did file a lawsuit challenging Prop 50 before the election. His argument was that it was supposed to take away his influence.
Well guys, let’s take Issa’s influence next year by defeating him for re-election.
I'd rather Calvert stay in Congress than Kim lol. He's more moderate than her and a stronger dealmaker.
That's the first I've heard. I've seen Young Kim to be more moderate than Ken Calvert, especially with her ability to address police reform.
Calvert is your typical conservative Republican.
I think this has shifted over time. Calvert has been trying to moderate his image ever since his district became more competitive after 2020 redistricting. I also think Kim is revealing herself to be a more conservative as she becomes entrenched.
A good example is the vote around protecting marriage equality, which Calvert supported and Kim opposed: https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2022373
Yeah, I think Kim is a lot of talk over being a moderate and not a lot of results or a voting record to really back it up, she just does a good job coding herself by being a member of the Tuesday Group/Governance Group, Problem Solvers and Main Street caucuses. Calvert has made shifts as his district became more competitive, and for the most part has kept a lot of poison pill social issues out of Defense approps as the Repub cardinal. Obviously both could pull a Stefanik switch and go full MAGA in a redder seat, and I'd also just rather cut off her career sooner.
My question is how many asians are in this district, it'll probably be the difference here.
How many Koreans is the bigger question. (Oops, crossed wires with the Kim v Tran notion instead of Kim v Calvert.)
I think we should consider the fact that Asians as demographics are varying, at least if we’re talking about family origins (and race as well).
I can’t comment on knowing specific Asians in Young Kim’s district as voter registration demographics really don’t break this down much into subcategories. That said, I wouldn’t be surprised a substantial portion of Asians in Kim’s district are Chinese, Japanese and Korean.
Well, he had to with Palm Springs in his new district — that was no noble gesture.
Marriage equality as an issue is pretty low bar but that is not the best example of what I consider to be cultivating a moderate image. Plenty of conservatives have already come out in favor of marriage equality but it has been an evolving issue for them since the 2000's. Hell, even former Senator Rob Portman came out for gay marriage before he left office even while the backdrop was that he had a gay son.
How a Republican becomes moderate is the ability to compromise and work with Democrats on issues where ideology does not overtake the member of Congress in doing his/her job. In today's environment, this has been the case with Young Kim as working with Abigail Spanberger on police reform when she was still in the House.
Here's an excerpt from Kim's campaign website (whose domain URL I cannot reference as that could give SEO to her site). This does not sound like something a MAGA Republican would say in response to the Defunding the Police agenda:
.
.
.
Law enforcement must first make sure any officers who abuse their power are held accountable for their actions. Increasing transparency to ensure that officers who are fired for gross misconduct are not unwittingly hired by a different department and put back on the streets should also be a priority.”
…
“Law enforcement should also reevaluate their use of force regulations as well as increase training to prevent instances of police brutality and decrease unnecessary use of force. Congress can assist by providing funds for training and prioritize de-escalation practices. Federally, we can also ensure law enforcement grants prioritize those departments that are practicing responsible policing techniques, employing body cameras, and are working to build bonds of trust with their communities.
Let us use this tragedy to move forward and make progress together as a country. That starts with treating each other with respect regardless of our race or occupation and having honest conversations without accusations or judgement. Let us turn our outrage to constructive action that will build up our community and work with our local law enforcement to increase trust and understanding. Change starts with each one of us taking personal responsibility. We can all do our part to be better for our fellow citizens and work together to ensure that the promise of America is available for all.”
With this said, I do not believe Kim is a true moderate. Her view on marriage equality is really out of step with most Californians and she's conservative on quite a number of issues.
Yeah but didn’t that not go anywhere? I thought it was just a nice press release. Was legislation actually introduced? Esp since Spanberger left. Calvert has been a longtime appropriator and demonstrated compromising there.
Yes, legislation was introduced with Kim and Spanberger as sponsors. It's not the first time Spanberger has worked with Kim.
Calvert also supported the overturning of Roe vs Wade although Kim has the same position as well.
It's really a question of where Calvert and Kim stand on the issues relative to where the GOP is.
https://problemsolverscaucus.house.gov/media/press-releases/problem-solvers-caucus-backs-bipartisan-bill-support-uyghurs-against-peoples#:~:text=Abigail%20Spanberger%20(VA%2D07).,these%20atrocities%2C%E2%80%9D%20said%20Rep.
https://calvert.house.gov/media/press-releases/rep-calvert-statement-dobbs-v-jackson-women-s-health-organization-ruling
Re: West Windsor, NJ having a Republican mayor despite voting more than 70% for Sherrill. This is exactly why Democrats need to change all municipal elections to show candidates' partisan affiliations on the ballot. Allowing Republicans to control heavily Democratic towns like West Windsor (and many cities in California, which are the same way) is seriously holding back local government from its progressive potential. Not only that, it's unnecessarily adding to Republicans' farm team and giving them strong candidates to run in any swing districts that may include these deep-blue towns. Republicans shouldn't have any say at all in the governance of deep-blue towns like West Windsor, and Democrats should do whatever is necessary to ensure they don't.
Adding partisan affiliation to municipal elections may work in NJ for Democratic benefit, but partisan affiliation for state judicial races is not -- ie the North Carolina state Supreme Court. The then D-controlled legislature added partisan affiliation, then made it nonpartisan, then Rs made it partisan again after flipping the legislature.
Sure, but partisan affiliation in state judicial races certainly helped Dems in Pennsylvania this year, since we won them all.
I hope that applies to next year's state Supreme Court race here in NC! Our fantastic incumbent Democratic justice Anita Earls is up for re-election against Sarah Stevens, a horrible state legislator who voted for the 12-week abortion ban, helped suppress voting (eliminating the 3-day grace period for VBM ballots) and voted for our rigged maps. (She also voted in lockstep to take control of our state Board of Elections and give it to the GOP auditor, who promptly fired Karen Brinson Bell and hired partisan GOP aides -- including the infamous Bob Rucho -- to serve on the board.)
If Justice Earls prevails, there's going to be energy to flip 2 or all 3 seats up in 2028. NC voters are PISSED.
It cuts both ways though, helping Dems get a foothold in conservative turf.
Having partisan local elections introduces all the issues with low turnout primaries. Plus a lot of local government is less ideological.
Except there are far fewer Dems winning elections in conservative areas due to nonpartisan elections than vice versa.
Frankly, Republicans are better at hiding their true beliefs in these sorts of races than Democrats are.
I guess I would phrase it as that Republicans are more likely to be in favor of services and raising money to pay for them at the local level, even if they rail against "big government" at the State and Federal level.
Where I live in SC conservation-minded candidates that support smart growth/development would win local elections overwhelmingly if the local elections were non-partisan. But they aren't, so Republicans win, or people who run as Republicans win.
As a former West Windsor resident (I've lived right next door in East Windsor for the last three years), I can say that the electoral success of the town's Republican mayor stems from him being seen as a relative moderate, and also from the fact that West Windsor is not particulary liberal (yes, it's very Democratic, but many residents would say that they're moderate, especially on fiscal issues).
We actually tried to switch the town to partisan elections last year, but that measure failed. I think the better way for us to defeat the Republican mayor is to run a Democrat who fits the town's unique electoral profile. So, not a progressive, but rather, a Democrat known for being moderate when it comes to spending/taxing.
Thank you for explaining the situation in West Windsor. I always appreciate local color like this.
I live in CA-20. However, I am CA-22 adjacent. Randy Villegas is trying to increase his name recognition. He had a float in the Bakersfield xmas parade that got him a good 30 seconds of Bakersfield TV time, plus all the probably 10,000 people at the parade that saw the float.
Also, I'm seeing Tom Steyer for Governor ads on my TV already.
Bombarding people on tv used to work but in todays age it's just not as effective.
in fact, it is very ineffective...I have heard a number of people already call in a pain in the ass.
That doesn't prove it's ineffective. People always pan negative ads, too, yet they often work.
They absolutely work - Bloomberg almost won the nomination in 2020 because of wall-to-wall TV and digital spend, even though he had no actual base within the electorate.
You're talking about the presidential nomination? If so, I'd have to disagree with you. He came nowhere close to winning it!
Warren knocked him out at the debate, but his polling surge was not a mirage, and he was regularly ranked as the second choice if Biden faded.
South Dakota senate
Rep Rounds: 52%*
Dem Beaudoin: 30%
Rep Rounds: 44%*
Indy Bengs: 31%
Informed Senate Ballot:
Bengs: 42%
Rounds: 39%*
PPP / Nov 14, 2025
(Bengs Internal)
Who the hell is Bengs? Lol.
Former Dem Senate Candidate running as an Indy. https://www.sdpb.org/politics/2025-05-01/bengs-announces-another-bid-for-u-s-senate
It seems a number of red state Dems saw how well Osborn did and said "I can do that!". I doubt any of them will win.
He didn't, either.
slogging through candidate interviews in the FOUR different deep blue Chicago-area Congressional seats, and all I can say is: if you're a campaign professional in Chicago and you haven't already paid off your Maui timeshare on this mess, you need to reconsider your life choices.
Do you have a target date to release endorsements? IL-7 and IL-8 are the most volatile to me, so I don't have clear favorites (I do have clear dislikes lol).
IL-7's candidates seem to be mostly establishment to center left, while IL-8 is a mixture: Bean and Bankole are part of the establishment wing, while Ahmed is progressive.
Looked again at the clusterfucks for a sense.
In IL-7, Boykin is a conservadem DINO, Conyears-Ervin is corrupt/could end up in a federal indictment and Collins is most a disorganized advocate that's had diminishing respect among the progressive circles I know. Ford seems... fine. I don't know much about him even if he's probably the most likely winner. I know even less about Driver, but he has progressive establishment and labor cred.
In IL-8, Bean is the worst option as an bygone Blue Dog, Ahmed is ofc the most left as the DSA choice (but this is the worst open district in IL for that, both in likelihood to win and long term) and Bankole/Morrison/Dunung seem to be pretty much in the same mainstream Dem lane.
Edit: I know Morrison's name from just being aware of the county board, but I've often said that I don't think they really do anything beyond the president (who's elected at-large and is the only one with a real budget and staff), so I don't know his record at all. I have the sense he's vaguely progressive, but it's interesting that he's not been endorsed by Preckwinkle, who would know his bona fides there best as county board pres and county party chair.
finished IL-09, where there are several rock stars. Working my way thru IL-08 where I wouldn't characterize any of them as A grade on climate, but maybe B to B+ grade. Haven't started IL-07 or IL-02 yet. And my group doesn't endorse without also a survey to our grassroots members in the district to hear what they think. I don't think we'll be putting out any endorsements til early January but it will definitely be EARLY January if at all.
Very interesting, I was looking at your group's endorsement processes and really like that they also involve people on the ground to get their impressions of the candidates.
I wonder how you found Biss and Abughazaleh to be in IL-9
The Indiana house has passed the new congressional map
Is the state Senate still holding firm against it?
Manifesting the next PresiDem as the biggest Trust Buster we've seen since Teddy Roosevelt so we can save my industry from these Tech Bro Ghouls.
https://apnews.com/article/netflix-warner-acquisition-studio-hbo-streaming-f4884402cadfd07a99af0c8e4353bd83
Ironic considering the theme of one of HBO's best shows - Succession.
Better Netflix does this with their own cash than the looming alternative. Larry Ellison and his precious little boy David at Paramount were lobbying WB and Trump hard to get this deal with some help with some Arabian noble family investment. They also wanted to fold in all of WB while Netflix's terms were to leave WB's TV stations running as they have been. Comcast could have been better, but it seems like their offer was less than the other two.
Also, Dems are probably going to be more pragmatic at targeting mergers going forward. Last administration going hard on it only ended in many legal losses and Bezos and Zuckerberg donning the black shirt.
The 2nd Least Worst Option is still a bad option. Netflix is so anti-theater that this could be the death knell for theatrical distribution.
It ended in many legal losses because of the Conservative capture of the courts. There are so many issues I'm not certain how we even go about fixing them if we don't push for more than marginal incremental change.
Lina Kahn tried more than marginal with her novel arguments to apply anti-trust laws more broadly and all she got was her hands tied by the courts. She couldn't even stop Microsoft from buying Activision. The administration got no credit from activists for doing all they could to up anti-trust enforcement.
The courts - especially the Supreme Court - need to have different personnel, and maybe some laws need to be changed.
We are beyond regulatory capture, and are beginning to move onto wholesale governmental and state capture
What are you talking about? Netflix is planning to with the Warner Bros brand release films in theaters. It is not going strictly streaming here.
The acquisition in no way shape or form is going to lead to the downfall of movie theatre exhibition. In fact, there’s been a resurgence as of recently. San Francisco for starters is getting this, especially with Apple Cinemas opening a new theater in the city.
I am not happy with this acquisition but Larry Ellison’s son is a dufus (and also is a college dropout like his father) and Paramount Skydance acquiring WB was a dumb idea to begin with. This is truly the lesser of two evils.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/05/business/warner-brothers-discovery-netflix.html
That was the absolute worst option. Comcast was probably the best of all the worst options, but there is a reason why people are extremely concerned about this acquisition when it comes to movie theaters. Netflix is incredibly hostile toward the theatrical experience and have already said that they want to shorten the release window. https://variety.com/2025/film/news/netflix-warner-bros-movies-theaters-buying-studio-1236601073/
This is bad. It's better than an Ellison owned WB but it's still not great, Bob. (Insert Mad Men gif here)
I’m sorry but I am confused.
Why are you saying it’s better than a Paramount Skydance acquisition but arguing this was the worst option? Am I reading this correctly?
A Paramount Skydance acquisition would have turned WB into another Disney-like situation where Disney owns 20th Century Fox. Really idiotic idea but this would essentially mean an already increasingly media driven giant Disney would compete with Amazon and Paramount Skydance. Not exactly fair for those preservationist types like myself who want to see film studios be just film studios.
I re-read the article but there is a real disconnect here:
The old business model of simply exhibiting films in theaters doesn’t work like it used to. Celluloid film is increasingly higher in cost due to inflation and more productions are made using digital film instead to conserve costs. Even legendary documentarian Frederick Wiseman has gone to digital for his films, such as his recent documentary covering UC Berkeley. Film studios use streaming as a way of profiting as as additional revenue source to lower costs. I am not a fan of streaming but until the market is regulated better, film exhibition companies (even Alamo Drafthouse) have to be creative to work through profiting.
That said, I am not a fan of shorter theatrical runs for films. I am not sure what Netflix intends to do with shortening theatrical runs other than what has already been done. Amazon has its Amazon Prime streaming option even while it owns MGM Studios. The market may just saturate even more.
I will give this more thought. The main reason why I thought the Netflix deal was the lesser of two evils is because it is not a media giant. If Comcast was a better option, how?
I myself would rather all these media companies be broken up and film studios go back to where they used to be.
"THAT (Skydance-Paramount) was the absolute worst option". I'm saying that Netflix is the 2nd Least Worst Option and the least worst option of the three choices was Comcast.
The issue isn't like, a film projectionist has canisters of film that they switch out, and we're viewing it on actual film. That is, admittedly, a very niche market/experience that people want. Digital Film is fine and pretty much every major theater uses digital copies to exhibit film, maintaining the theatrical experience. The way you're describing "streaming" isn't exactly how it works. What people are railing against is the Netflix model of dropping select films in theaters for a week (Roma, Knives Out, Frankenstein) in NYC or LA just so that they can be eligible for the Oscars and then dump it onto their platform. No physical media releases either which is another passion of mine.
Comcast/Universal Studios are the best studio around for people who love film. It's why Christopher Nolan made Oppenheimer with them. They are, in my experience, friendliest to the creator/auteur. Netflix on the other hand has created the conditions that have utterly destroyed the Entertainment Industry as a way to make a living. Not even just talking about theatrical distribution but TV especially where they drop everything all at once, not allowing buzz to build that helps keep shows on the air and find their footing and their audience. I worked on a show called The Residence and if that would have been released on a weekly schedule. I believe it would have been a HUGE hit. But because it dropped every episode all at once. It didn't break through and the mystery of a who-dunnit was solved that same day. I'm not even talking about how they created the model of 2-3 years between seasons and below the line crew members instead of working on 1 show with a short hiatus every year have to cobble together 3-4 jobs in a year and have to wait years to work on the same show. Netflix may not be a media giant but they are a huge problem in this industry.
Based on the national media catching up to the massive fraud scandal in Minnesota, can people see now why I predicted the national Democratic wave will be, at best, subdued in Minnesota? I'm skeptical at this point Walz will even follow through on running for a third term.
It wasn't very blue in 2018, either. Walz and Smith were elected statewide by underwhelming margins and the House delegation remained the same with 2 easy flips on both sides.
Walz won by 11 and Smith won by 10 in 2018. I thought that was pretty darn good. I'm highly doubtful you'll see any Democratic margins that lopsided in Minnesota in 2026 or any other time in the near future for that matter.
Didn’t Klobuchar literally just win by 15 points last year? Even if the fraud thing affects votes, you really think it the Pillow creep and with the pedo stache is going to take advantage of it?
I think it's far more likely that Lisa Demuth will be the Republican nominee than Lindell. Definitely non-zero for Lindell, but even if he was the nominee I bet it would be a 5-point race with as wounded as Walz is....with downballot consequences.
Honestly, I don't get this argument at all in the current political environment. Barring a massive shift between now and next Fall, I have a hard time seeing us not winning MN-Gov by double digits.
Yeah - I just don’t see it either. Maybe the “scandal” ticks a few points off the margin but doubt it puts much into play.
https://www.newsweek.com/mike-lindell-living-off-1000-week-smartmatic-court-mypillow-2060927
Guy is apparently down to living on 1k a week. Well join the club pal. Where is he going to get the funds to campaign? I feel like this isnt a serious attempt to get the seat, but more of a "fill my coffers up" money grab through creative accounting, gofundme slush, and the like.
What's happening in Minnesota?
Headline story in the NY Times last weekend and feature story all over national newscasts this week: massive fraud scandal with pandemic funds. Over a $1 billion in stolen money that the GOP is fingering Walz for. It's the reason Trump came out this week calling Minnesota's Somali community "garbage".
Mike Lindell filed, so....
I'm more glad Fateh lost Minneapolis Mayor now in any event as for all we know, he could have been complicit.
Is the state DOJ going to get to work to claw back as much as it can or what?
I never put it past the Minnesota GOP to eschew Demuth in favor of Lindell.
The last I saw, they figured they'd be lucky to claw back a third of the stolen money.
Nice. But is there any evidence Walz could be guilty? Who is suspected?
Walz isn't guilty of anything directly. The GOP accusations are that he was asleep at the switch and thus a bad manager. It's a little fuzzy how right they are about that but as the Governor there's some truth to the buck stopping with him. Republicans' ability to say Walz was looking the other way because most of the perpetrators were Somalians is another feather in their cap electorally.
You seem to give gop talking points far more credibility and credence than they deserve. Do nyt stories really move voters in Duluth? They are going to attack no matter what - not sure blaming a liked immigrant community is going to help them much.
I swear some of you guys make an artform out of whistling past graveyards. You spent 3 1/2 years telling me I was full of shit about the border before finally realizing that bottomless asylum was gonna cost the Democratic Party everything and that all of your policy wishes were lost for at least a generation as a direct consequences of the tone-deafness of bottomless asylum.
With that in mind, one would think my instinct would have earned enough trust to take me seriously when I tell you that this is a catastrophic problem for Walz. It's the lead story in every conversation about Minnesota politics....and now the headlines have gone national, meaning that Walz is gonna find it even harder to escape this story. It WILL move votes! Take it to the bank!
Yeah, it's probably not going to be an overwhelming dem wave in Minnesota because of local issues. It's interesting, here in Kansas the opposite is happening, Laura Kelly is still pretty popular and I wouldn't be surprised if the combination of good will toward her and the national environment help dems keep the governorship next year. We'll see though, I feel like neither of the top dem candidates are as strong as Kelly.
But no hope of Kelly running for Senate? That would be ideal if they could get her.
I don't think so. She's 75 and seems done with politics.
Thankfully we have until June 1 to get her to change her mind.
She needs to pull a Mills (though that has yet to be determined if it’s a successful strategy). Say you’re only running for 1 term in a campaign to “stop the insanity and bring common sense back to Washington” or however she wants to phrase it.
Voters there may be open to giving a fairly moderate, fairly popular governor 1 term in the Senate as a Democrat. I suspect she’d still lose given the dynamics between federal and state government, but she’d probably outperform anyone else we could run.
I remember he was going back and forth for months on even running which tells me his heart isn’t really in it. I’m not sure why he wants to run again, he seems to have established a decent legacy with many accomplishments and there is a deep DFL bench waiting in the wings.
TX-37: Doggett reiterated his plan to retire and Casar reiterated his plan to run here after the SCOTUS decision, bringing the retirement total up to 40 in the House. This many retirements is not uncommon, but it's worth noting this time in the 2024 cycle there wasn't 40 yet.
Just looking at retirement and resignation totals for the most recent cycles since Trump to compare (not including primary and general losses). I imagine more will come thru the New Year.
-2024: 48+1 midterm resignation (and 2 deaths)
-2022: 50+2 resignations (and 1 death) – decennial redistricting year
-2020: 36+4 resignations
-2018: 55+3 resignations
-2016: 43+3 resignations (and 1 death)
I don't know why CBC PAC hasn't been posting their endorsements as press releases or built out a page for them all yet... But their socials have started trickling out their first endorsements of the cycle. Linking to my last post surveying the major party caucus PAC endorsements:
-Mike Simmons (IL-09), Lauren Babb Tomlinson (CA-06), Tahesha Way (NJ-11 ***special***)
https://www.the-downballot.com/p/morning-digest-alabamas-doug-jones/comment/181251100?utm_source=activity_item
Issa's personal wealth can be an issue.
An issue how?
He’s one of the wealthiest members of Congress. I lived in his current district. The democratic candidate was leading in the polls at three weeks from the election. Issa started spending his money and flooded all media with attack adds and ended up getting elected. This was a very red district that was starting to turn purple.
I understand, but I don’t think spending will overcome a Democratic tilt in a district plus a likely Democratic wave.