I can't honestly remember the last time there's been an elected state governor or major-party nominee for governor whose residency qualifications were seriously in doubt. It does happen from time to time in federal elections (largely due to most Members of Congress needing secondary residences in the DC area when Congress is in session).
Also, if Tuberville is ruled to be a Florida resident, wouldn't Tuberville's U.S. Senate seat be declared vacant?
Tbc this complaint is only asserting that Tuberville hasn't been an Alabama resident for the required 7 years to be Governor, not that he isn't an Alabama resident at all. And the federal constitution only requires you be a resident of the state, without any additional stipulations.
There is a difference between owning land in the state (Tuberville) and actually living there. In some situations senators couldn't even do that. Pat Roberts lived in his donor's home in Dodge City, KS, and Josh Hawley lives at I believe his mother's house in Ozark, MO. And for a period of several years Chris Murphy didn't own land in Connecticut (staying at his in-laws house on the coast) as he moved from Cheshire to Hartford.
To add to LePage, he actually didn't fully move back to Maine for his congressional run either. He rents an Augusta apartment from businessman Shawn Moody.
Different offices have different requirements for how long you must be a resident. For some congressional districts, you only have to become a resident after you win and before your term starts in Jan. That's why candidates are know to shop districts - especially after redistricting.
I think Governors have stricter residency requirements in general!
Hell, Walz would probably have steamrolled him. Nominate Lindell and they could be looking at disaster up and down the ballot, including quite possibly losing a congressional seat.
As it is, Klobuchar (and either Flanagan or Craig) are likely to win no matter what, but a more credible GOP nominee might at least cut the coattails.
Walz would be in a much closer race for reasons ranging from the third term issue to the (alleged) welfare fraud controversies, though he might well have pulled it out by literally playing his Trump card.
Flanagan's led almost, if not every other poll up until now, albeit this poll is from a better pollster than most.
Still, I've found that polls tend to underestimate progressives/overestimate centrists in Democratic primaries. In neighboring Illinois, almost every poll save for a handful had the more centrist Krishnamoorthi winning the nomination, just to lose to Juliana Stratton when election day came. Similar story (to a lesser extent) in Texas. I hope Flanagan pulls through - Angie Craig is infuriating
I will add that while I agree with Paleo that Baldacci would have a better chance, Dunlap's win is an additional victory for progressives over established candidates. Of course, he challenged Golden from the left before Golden dropped out and he campaigned with the likes of Graham Platner and Troy Jackson, except the latter didn't win his primary.
What good is an "additional victory for progressives over moderates" if it results in Republicans winning the general election? Though Dunlap isn't an automatic loser any more than Baldacci would be a certain winner.
I don't think the OR-05 2022 comparison is particularly apt as that's a much bluer district. ME-02 would be much harder to retrieve if we drop it, and if we hold it this year it'll likely be due to an overall blue wave.
To be honest, despite my view that Baldacci would have been a better candidate, I don't see *that* much difference between him and Dunlap in terms of chances of winning. I think Baldacci would have been a better fundraiser and have much higher name recognition, but Dunlap is still a statewide official.
Like you said, I don't think his win makes the seat an automatic flip. I think both of them would have had an uphill battle against LePage. I also don't think OR-5 is a good comparison, as McLeod Skinner was not as good of a candidate as Dunlap (for starters, she was a carpetbagger and Dunlap has been in Maine politics for years), and Golden is a better Democratic vote than Kurt Schrader was.
Dunlap isn't a statewide elected official (by most people's understanding of the term). In Maine all statewide executive officials are elected by the state legislature not the people.
I'm not familiar with that race, but in general, increasingly I'm coming to believe that for the vast majority of voters, they pick a candidate far more based on vibes than actual close studies of their positions and resume, and to be honest that goes for politics nerds as much as casual voters.
In 2018 more progressive candidates who won the primary over an establishment candidate lost swing seats in the Syracuse, New York seat, the Omaha seat and the Bucks county Pennsylvania seat as well as the Florida gubernatorial race while mainstream Democrats were winning much tougher races up and down the ballot. This election is certainly no time for more purity tests and no time to nominate flawed candidates who are a drag on the Democratic ticket.
Are you saying that Matt Dunlap is more controversial/flawed than Joe Baldacci? I didn't think he was. Besides, conservative Republicans do the exact same thing in otherwise good years for them (i.e. Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania 2022 Senate races). It's not just dragging down Democrats.
I did read that he (Dunlap) had a thing where he lost his auditor spot because it turned out he didn't have his CPA license, so he had to retake it several times and by the third or so when he finally earned it they rehired him. I don't know how old of news this is, or how relevant it will become, but he's got that at least.
But were those losses because of ideology alone, or were other factors at play? Do you have sources that specifically say them being left wing is why they lost? Brian Fitzpatrick, for one, has long been difficult to unseat (moderate candidates weren’t able to either), and Katie Porter was a different progressive who also won a swing seat.
I really think the problem is that people assume ideology = candidate strength, which isn’t necessarily true. Flawed candidates can exist irrespective of ideology, and I suspect most voters don’t go into a race with a left-right dichotomy in mind. Some candidates are just lousy campaigners, some carpetbagged and have that as an issue, some have scandals, some are a poor fit for the district (and that isn’t ideology specific either), etc. (Not referring to the candidates you mentioned either, just general trends.) Politics isn’t all left, right, and center.
Andy Kim also won as a progressive in a swing seat in 2018 (Trump actually won his district by quite a lot, then it was gerrymandered in 2022 so he could be more comfortable). The Republican incumbent, Tom MacArthur, was also deeply unpopular.
Probably a significant amount since they campaigned with and endorsed each other. Like I said though, that wasn't able to get Troy Jackson over the finish line.
I think people are overreacting a bit to this. Dunlap is more progressive but he’s not in the squad. And we’re targeting a bunch of other seats in this partisan vicinity.
1) The absolute best-case scenario for the DFL would be Klobuchar vs. Lindell in the gubernatorial general election and Flanagan winning the DFL primary in the U.S. Senate race. If Craig wins the Senate primary, that might hurt turnout among progressive voters to some degree, since you'd only have Ellison in the AG race as a progressive DFL statewide nominee in that scenario.
2) SurveyUSA's polling has been much more favorable towards the less progressive DFL (this is only the second poll I've seen that has Craig ahead in the DFL U.S. Senate primary) and more far-right GOP candidates (this is the only poll I've seen that has Lindell ahead in the GOP gubernatorial primary) than other polling.
3) There appears to be two different polling tracks in the U.S. Senate DFL primary: one that has Flanagan ahead by double digits, and the other that has Craig ahead by mid-single-digits or less. The second track might be factoring in higher than usual DFL primary participation by voters who usually don't participate in partisan primaries or have voted in Republican primaries in past elections.
4) If Craig and Lindell win their respective primaries, 2018 might be the final year of party convention endorsements in Minnesota. Craig didn't even seek the DFL convention endorsement, and Lindell was outside the top two at the GOP convention.
4 doesn't make much sense to me. This would be far from the first time a convention endorsee doesn't win the primary nomination. The point of the convention is to signal the party insiders' preference and give them access to party resources. There's no reason that would stop.
AR-Gov: Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders is touting a major increase in education proficiency since the start of her tenure in Arkansas. Could probably make her win in even bigger a landslide than previously predicted.
Disgusting, even after Podium-gate. Republicans love to defund public schools for handouts to wealthy parents -- and brag about better test scores.
Arkansans deserve better than the pastor's daughter ruling their state the way Kim Reynolds has. Wish the voter electorate in AR was closer to NC/GA/VA than what it is now.
Huh. Arkansas only has 15% of Black residents. For the likely electorate, probably in low teens.
Looking at the 2024 results of 30pt deficit, and many rural counties with less Black voters Harris was still in mid teen to low twenty, rural Arkansas’ White voters still support Democrats at a much higher rate than rural GA/NC/VA. So still room to shift further redder.
The things is, it doesn’t have many sizable and growing metros outside of Northwest AR, which is not a big size anyway.
It would also take a lot for that northwest metro to even get close again. While it was last competitive in 1992 when it was open (future Sen. Tim Hutchinson won it then), Bill Clinton famously made it very close in 1974. You'd think liberal cities like Fayetteville and Eureka Springs would drive Democratic turnout, but I guess not.
This is definitely a problem. There’s room for growth for Democrats in GA as well as Southern red states like AL, MS and SC from the standpoint of black population.
However, AR is a really tough nut to crack for Democrats to expand the base of non-white voters.
In #NY17, the influential religious bloc - which has been very friendly to Mike Lawler and Donald Trump - has endorsed Beth Davidson in the Democratic Primary. Between this and massive Republican spending against Cait Conley, many local Democrats believe that Lawler continues to dissuade NY17 Dems from voting for Conley while encouraging NY17 Dems to vote for Davidson.
In fairness to Effie, she did out-fundraise Beth in the 4/1 - 6/10 fundraising report (Cait out-fundraised both combined). So Effie does have some momentum, just likely not enough considering where she was starting from.
NY Dems have royally fucked up this seat twice. Conley is the favorite and is running a not trump campaign. I work in politics, am super plugged in, and all I know about her is she served in the military and she has tenuous at best ties to the district. I think we’re favored to take the seat but people should underestimate Lawler at their own peril.
First, Sean Patrick Maloney leaped into the district after the gerrymander in 2022 Hochul tried to pass got killed, dislodging then-popular Rep. Mondaire Jones in an attempt to give himself a safe seat and running a horrible campaign (people I’m connected to who canvassed for him said he was in Europe instead of campaigning) and lost a race he most likely just expected to waltz into. As the literal DCCC chair no less. (Republican Marc Molinaro then also won the seat he should have run in.) Then, they recruited Mondaire to run again (passing over their apparent other pick, Gretchen Whitmer’s sister, which would have been a blatant nepotism case itself since her other experience was literally “school board trustee”) and Mondaire proceeded to alienate all his progressive allies, not make new centrist ones (who still thought he was too progressive), and run a similar absentee campaign that he also embarrassingly lost.
I worry about Conley. I went to a debate for this district and half her answers to questions were “I’m in the military”. While the whole opposition research leak from her campaign (which included calling fucking Emily’s List “far left”) was apparently not her actual positions, or so I’ve heard, the lack of clarity on policy is alarming. I’m worried we’re looking at another Gottheimer or Suozzi or MGP who will vote against Dem priorities and block them from going through. Frankly I don’t think this race will end well regardless of candidate. I think Effie can beat Lawler but I’d be lying if I said I’m 100% certain on that (in large part due to a topic that is banned here that I ask not be discussed further), Davidson has no charisma and suspected GOP ties, and Conley has lack of connection to the district and recent Dem party registration questions, combined with policy vagueness. This race is just miserable.
Cait is easily the strongest candidate against Lawler. If she wasn't, the GOP wouldn't be masquerading as a phony progressive pack and spending a whopping $1.5M to stop her. Throw in the fact that Cait is the strongest fundraiser (she out-raised all of her Dem opponents combined) and the average 5-6 point bump that all Democratic veteran candidates tend to get, and the evidence just continues to pile up. She codes really well for the district and her military service gives her an 'in' with a lot of moderate voters that never like Trump in the first place and have likely soured on Lawler. It's just undeniable to me.
On paper you would think that this is a toss-up seat at worst. But I would argue that this is not a standard House seat. I think it's less shiftable than a typical House seat. This is not a seat that will ever be listed as Lean D, regardless of the worsening environment for the GOP. Lots of law enforcement in this district. Then there is also the religious bloc vote community. A lot of pro-Israel voters. I personally think a candidate like Effie would get destroyed in a NY17 general election. Davidson would have a better chance, but I think her purported strength in Rockland County is vastly overstated, and Lawler seems to be rooting for her to win. Cait Conley codes very well for this district with her military/service background. Attempts to label her as 'far left' or 'weak on XYZ security' won't hold up. Cait is the type of candidate who can get those Kamala-Lawler voters - voters who could not stomach Trump but felt that Lawler was moderate enough - to give her a second look. From a purely strategic standpoint, I can't imagine why any Democratic voter would select anyone other than Cait. And if you don't believe me, just look at the $1.5M that the GOP is spending to try and stop her.
What I worry about is, given her lack of clarity on policy (at least in the debate I was at), will she vote for Dem priorities, or block them like the Unbreakable Nine? The GOP always gets their base together for big votes. Surely we can do the same.
No one can see the future, but I think that assumptions that she will be like an MGP is just speculation without facts. I've seen numerous Cait detractors ponder whether she is another Fetterman, which I find absurd and without any evidence. I look no further than that many groups that have endorsed her, from End Citizens United, to LGBTQ+ groups to pro-choice groups to gun safety groups to union groups and on and on. Besides, even if you look at it from a purely cynical view, odds are that she is going to be more to the left than the right because if NY redraws the maps, NY17 is going to wind up much more D-friendly than R-friendly. But for the sake of argument, let's say that she took the moderate lane. Since I think she is the only Democrat who can beat Mike Lawler, I'd still take a Democrat in a tough seat who is with me 50% of the time over a Republican who is against me 95% of the time. The Goldens and MGPs can be a huge pain, but it's either them or a Republican, and I'll take them any day of the week.
My speculative two cents: If Lawler had his druthers, the order in which he'd like to face the Dem primary candidates is 1. Effie, 2. Beth, 3. Cait. If Effie was polling higher, Lawler might have taken a different tact. But with Cait seemingly in the lead (look at that phony progressive PAC's $1.5M spending), Lawler likely sees Beth as the most realistic non-Cait option to help get over the finish line, and thus give him the best chance of winning reelection. I do believe that Lawler fears Cait the most and won't know how to effectively run against her. On the other hand, he knows Beth very well and is already signaling his anti-law enforcement message against her (something that he would not be able to sell against veteran Conley).
For a normal person? No, not that I'm aware of. But there are a lot of police officers in this district, and Lawler has already previewed his attacks on her after she sponsored a bill in Rockland about preventing ICE from working with local law enforcement. Which is undoubtedly a good thing, but Lawler is ready to run with it. If Cait is the nominee, the avenue of 'weak on crime' or 'weak on security' is a much tougher sell given her background.
Another DFP poll. Melat Kiros ahead of Diana DeGette 41-36. A previous poll by DFP had DeGette ahead 40-7. Apparently there’s been lots of spending in this race recently - this could be a reason.
Kiros has done a phenomenal job establishing name recognition, and she's been helped by a couple of controversies involving DeGette, the most notable one involved DeGette allies barring Kiros from holding rallies at some Denver venues (Kiros held an outdoor rally outside the state capitol because of this)
Since it was conducted on behalf of the justice dems, it is probably a bit too favorable to Kiros. But this is still a signal of a competitive race, which is not something I expected at all.
Ex-attorney turned barista. I’d say why she was fired, but the reason overlaps with a banned topic so I’ll just say you can look it up if you want to know.
DeGette is fine in my book, and I'd really like to limit the size of the bomb-throwing caucus, because we don't need a blue version of the Freedom Caucus that slows legislation down and may push for some unpopular policies.
OH-9: I don't know why this is making the rounds again as something new (one source I linked is new, the other is from January 2023), but it's resurfaced that Democratic Rep. Marcy Kaptur considered being bipartisan by voting for former Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) as Speaker.
I suppose working across the aisle would help her in a conservative district, but she also has some progressive bonafides.
Trump shouting at and threatening members of Congress over the phone reminds me of the reports of Biden's reaction to Hunter's scandals. Incoherent, expletive-laden in-the-moment garbage. I know too many people who have mood swings like that.
Biden's made more sense on a pathos-level because it was about his son. Trump is just a brat who wants his way and thinks he can get everything he wants with a tantrum.
Yet in Maine there were at least three major candidates for governor or Congress with famous family names, and of them only Pingree proved successful.
Speaking of nepotism and family connections, it was amusing to hear Jack Schlossberg denouncing his opponents for being funded by billionaires, considering that nobody would be likely giving him the time of day politically if not for his grandfather, whose own political career was at least initially heavily subsidized by his father who would be a multi-billionaire today.
That's pretty major in particular. Has he endorsed against any other congressional incumbents this cycle? Not sure the last time he has, for Newman against Lipinski in 2018/2020? Not sure if he endorsed Bush against Clay in 2018.
He endorsed Lander, who’s challenging Dan Goldman, and Nida Allam, who challenged Valerie Foushee. He’s probably endorsed more too that I can’t name off the top of my head. Ballotpedia has a page of some of his endorsements so far:
Ah, I forgot about Lander especially, that feels almost fait accompli lol. DeGette is much much more senior and powerful than Goldman, Foushee and Bell, so I still think a pretty big deal.
Edit: Interesting, Ballotpedia shows him endorsing against David Scott (GA-14), Dina Titus (NV-01) and I forgot the big endorsement against Henry Cuellar (TX-35) in 2022. And Shontel Brown (OH-11), but that was following the special and before Nina Turner truly fell off the deep end. He'd also endorsed Audrey Denney (CA-01) in 2020, but interesting that he didn't this time with it as a gerrymandered seat. That cycle, he also endorsed against Eliot Engel (NY-16), which was a big deal but I think safer politics, and Josh Gottheimer (NJ-05, lol). And I'd remembered right that he was against Clay in 2020 and Lipinski in both 2020 and 2018.
Kiros and Senate candidate Julie Gonzales were on Breaking Points today (I'm not sure what we think of them here, but sometimes they're pretty good. Still part of the media ecosystem that continues to divide us.)
Was that Krystal Ball’s show? I do not like Krystal Ball one bit. I remember her pushing against impeachment during Trump I. I’m quite suspicious of her.
I think Ball and Enjeti are idiots, and Grim can be insightful but also twist his brain around into saying really stupid things too. Griffin Davis seems fine from the few bits I've seen, but think he's sort of more an everyman role for the panel. I'm overall not a fan of the show lol
I have one of Grim’s books, We’ve Got People. It’s actually a really interesting look at the background of the progressive movement - goes back to Jesse Jackson in the 80s, mentions some of the progressive Senators like George McGovern and Mike Gravel who lost their seats in the Reagan Revolution, etc.
I do still think he’s an idiot though, particularly recently.
Sometimes I have it on as background noise as I'm doing something else and out of nowhere, I hear a really terrible take by Ball or Enjeti and have to turn it off.
TX-Sen: Rep. Jasmine Crockett is skipping the Texas Democratic convention, and says Black voters will not unite behind James Talarico as the nominee. Additionally, she says that because there is no Black nominee statewide, Black turnout will decrease.
I don't understand the reasoning behind some of these Crockett voters, saying that Talarico has "to earn their vote" and saying he's not doing it -- like, what? TX voters voted no on Colin Allred in 2024, and they didn't want JC to be the nominee this year.
Talarico would not be pulling this if the reverse happened. He would be hitting every county to get people to vote for Jasmine.
It's so lame and short-sighted. Why do some TX Dems want the cartoonishly corrupt Paxton to replace Cornyn? Talarico would vote for 95-98% of the same policies and federal judges that JC would.
I think the perception on the ground is that she got a lot less grace in ways that rubbed people the wrong way. We heard similar in 2008 with Clinton. Folks will come around. I think also there is probably a bit of misinformation around Talarico's back story - I had family from Dallas telling me they thought he used to be a Republican, which was wild as hell to me.
What a dumbass! She’s literally openly trying to sabotage us! Now I really don’t want her running for another office in the future. (I wonder if this will end in a party switch to independent or whatever.)
Crockett’s impact may be limited as Talarico has worked a lot post-primary to reach out to black leaders, including several prominent Crockett supporters. He’s likely to get more support from the black vote than what Crockett is implying.
Her comments about the high school track meet stabbing show she has zero political acumen and lives in an online bubble. All the red flags people worried about in the primary have manifested themselves.
I'm really curious if Talarico reached out and tried to smooth over the emotions of the primary. He should have brought people from her circle of friends and advisors into his campaign. If he tried, seriously, and she is pouting, then shame on her. If he has not tried, or just went through the motions, shame on him. I think Harris, Warnock, Abrams and others in her circle, and whom she respects, need to get involved NOW.
He literally invited her to give the keynote at the TX Dem Convention and she ignored him. He’s done what he can and went out of his way to compliment her throughout the primary and after. There seems to be no winning with her.
Obituaries: The Rev. Robert Abrams, a shipyard worker and the father of popular Georgia politician Stacey, is dead at 77.
As a teenager, the elder Abrams was a civil rights activist, registering Black voters in Mississippi. He was a campaign surrogate when Stacey ran for governor, twice.
Tuberville should've been disqualified on his residency alone. And yet AL will likely elevate the carpetbagger from FL to the governor's mansion.
You can't make this shit up.
I can't honestly remember the last time there's been an elected state governor or major-party nominee for governor whose residency qualifications were seriously in doubt. It does happen from time to time in federal elections (largely due to most Members of Congress needing secondary residences in the DC area when Congress is in session).
Also, if Tuberville is ruled to be a Florida resident, wouldn't Tuberville's U.S. Senate seat be declared vacant?
Paul LePage 2022. Also a Florida man.
Zach Lahn, now. Kansas.
All three of them have been recent Republican gubernatorial nominees, which I find interesting.
Democrat Nicholas Kristof was ultimately ruled ineligible to run for governor of Oregon because he did not satisfy the residency requirement.
Tbc this complaint is only asserting that Tuberville hasn't been an Alabama resident for the required 7 years to be Governor, not that he isn't an Alabama resident at all. And the federal constitution only requires you be a resident of the state, without any additional stipulations.
There is a difference between owning land in the state (Tuberville) and actually living there. In some situations senators couldn't even do that. Pat Roberts lived in his donor's home in Dodge City, KS, and Josh Hawley lives at I believe his mother's house in Ozark, MO. And for a period of several years Chris Murphy didn't own land in Connecticut (staying at his in-laws house on the coast) as he moved from Cheshire to Hartford.
Yes but I'm describing the world as it is, not how we may want it to be. The residency bar is very low for federal representatives.
https://www.pressherald.com/2026/03/26/paul-lepage-is-using-an-augusta-apartment-for-his-political-comeback/
To add to LePage, he actually didn't fully move back to Maine for his congressional run either. He rents an Augusta apartment from businessman Shawn Moody.
Different offices have different requirements for how long you must be a resident. For some congressional districts, you only have to become a resident after you win and before your term starts in Jan. That's why candidates are know to shop districts - especially after redistricting.
I think Governors have stricter residency requirements in general!
Mike Lindell as the R for MN gov would be a gift. Hope that poll is correct.
Klobuchar will steamroll this guy.
Hell, Walz would probably have steamrolled him. Nominate Lindell and they could be looking at disaster up and down the ballot, including quite possibly losing a congressional seat.
I agree but it would've much closer.
As it is, Klobuchar (and either Flanagan or Craig) are likely to win no matter what, but a more credible GOP nominee might at least cut the coattails.
Walz would be in a much closer race for reasons ranging from the third term issue to the (alleged) welfare fraud controversies, though he might well have pulled it out by literally playing his Trump card.
I was dismayed to see that one poll with Craig in the lead, I had thought Flanagan was doing much better.
looks like a lot of "undecided" in that one from the numbers tho
Flanagan's led almost, if not every other poll up until now, albeit this poll is from a better pollster than most.
Still, I've found that polls tend to underestimate progressives/overestimate centrists in Democratic primaries. In neighboring Illinois, almost every poll save for a handful had the more centrist Krishnamoorthi winning the nomination, just to lose to Juliana Stratton when election day came. Similar story (to a lesser extent) in Texas. I hope Flanagan pulls through - Angie Craig is infuriating
Fine with me!
And, more so, that matchup could help us significantly in downballot races
hilarious
So now that Dunlap won ME-2, can he still win, or was Baldacci the only person who could?
He could win but Baldacci would have had a better chance.
Another 2022 OR-5 primary.
If Golden had lost. Baldacci is not as conservative as those 2.
The only difference is Golden backed out before the primary. The root cause is 100% the same, as are the results.
The democrats there should have gone with Baldacci.
I will add that while I agree with Paleo that Baldacci would have a better chance, Dunlap's win is an additional victory for progressives over established candidates. Of course, he challenged Golden from the left before Golden dropped out and he campaigned with the likes of Graham Platner and Troy Jackson, except the latter didn't win his primary.
What good is an "additional victory for progressives over moderates" if it results in Republicans winning the general election? Though Dunlap isn't an automatic loser any more than Baldacci would be a certain winner.
I don't think the OR-05 2022 comparison is particularly apt as that's a much bluer district. ME-02 would be much harder to retrieve if we drop it, and if we hold it this year it'll likely be due to an overall blue wave.
To be honest, despite my view that Baldacci would have been a better candidate, I don't see *that* much difference between him and Dunlap in terms of chances of winning. I think Baldacci would have been a better fundraiser and have much higher name recognition, but Dunlap is still a statewide official.
Like you said, I don't think his win makes the seat an automatic flip. I think both of them would have had an uphill battle against LePage. I also don't think OR-5 is a good comparison, as McLeod Skinner was not as good of a candidate as Dunlap (for starters, she was a carpetbagger and Dunlap has been in Maine politics for years), and Golden is a better Democratic vote than Kurt Schrader was.
Dunlap isn't a statewide elected official (by most people's understanding of the term). In Maine all statewide executive officials are elected by the state legislature not the people.
Good catch. Edited.
I'm not familiar with that race, but in general, increasingly I'm coming to believe that for the vast majority of voters, they pick a candidate far more based on vibes than actual close studies of their positions and resume, and to be honest that goes for politics nerds as much as casual voters.
It wasn’t a progressive versus a moderate. But I do think Dunlap earned points for being willing to take on Golden.
I’d put it as lean R. With Baldacci I would have had it as a toss up. At least.
The UNH poll from a little while back had it at LePage 47, Dunlap 46. So definitely doable.
LePage was also Trump before Trump, right? Even if that district is heavily R, I wonder if that bloom will still be on the rose by November.
Charles Pierce has referred to LePage, in the past, as a human bowling jacket. Regardless of the accuracy, it’s a funny insult
In 2018 more progressive candidates who won the primary over an establishment candidate lost swing seats in the Syracuse, New York seat, the Omaha seat and the Bucks county Pennsylvania seat as well as the Florida gubernatorial race while mainstream Democrats were winning much tougher races up and down the ballot. This election is certainly no time for more purity tests and no time to nominate flawed candidates who are a drag on the Democratic ticket.
Are you saying that Matt Dunlap is more controversial/flawed than Joe Baldacci? I didn't think he was. Besides, conservative Republicans do the exact same thing in otherwise good years for them (i.e. Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania 2022 Senate races). It's not just dragging down Democrats.
I did read that he (Dunlap) had a thing where he lost his auditor spot because it turned out he didn't have his CPA license, so he had to retake it several times and by the third or so when he finally earned it they rehired him. I don't know how old of news this is, or how relevant it will become, but he's got that at least.
But were those losses because of ideology alone, or were other factors at play? Do you have sources that specifically say them being left wing is why they lost? Brian Fitzpatrick, for one, has long been difficult to unseat (moderate candidates weren’t able to either), and Katie Porter was a different progressive who also won a swing seat.
I really think the problem is that people assume ideology = candidate strength, which isn’t necessarily true. Flawed candidates can exist irrespective of ideology, and I suspect most voters don’t go into a race with a left-right dichotomy in mind. Some candidates are just lousy campaigners, some carpetbagged and have that as an issue, some have scandals, some are a poor fit for the district (and that isn’t ideology specific either), etc. (Not referring to the candidates you mentioned either, just general trends.) Politics isn’t all left, right, and center.
Andy Kim also won as a progressive in a swing seat in 2018 (Trump actually won his district by quite a lot, then it was gerrymandered in 2022 so he could be more comfortable). The Republican incumbent, Tom MacArthur, was also deeply unpopular.
It will be interesting to see the overlap in Platner voters for Dunlap.
That's a good point. We'll see how he affects turnout.
Oh I mean for the primary already. Wonder if many Platner voters broke for Dunlap.
Probably a significant amount since they campaigned with and endorsed each other. Like I said though, that wasn't able to get Troy Jackson over the finish line.
I think people are overreacting a bit to this. Dunlap is more progressive but he’s not in the squad. And we’re targeting a bunch of other seats in this partisan vicinity.
Some Minnesota notes:
1) The absolute best-case scenario for the DFL would be Klobuchar vs. Lindell in the gubernatorial general election and Flanagan winning the DFL primary in the U.S. Senate race. If Craig wins the Senate primary, that might hurt turnout among progressive voters to some degree, since you'd only have Ellison in the AG race as a progressive DFL statewide nominee in that scenario.
2) SurveyUSA's polling has been much more favorable towards the less progressive DFL (this is only the second poll I've seen that has Craig ahead in the DFL U.S. Senate primary) and more far-right GOP candidates (this is the only poll I've seen that has Lindell ahead in the GOP gubernatorial primary) than other polling.
3) There appears to be two different polling tracks in the U.S. Senate DFL primary: one that has Flanagan ahead by double digits, and the other that has Craig ahead by mid-single-digits or less. The second track might be factoring in higher than usual DFL primary participation by voters who usually don't participate in partisan primaries or have voted in Republican primaries in past elections.
4) If Craig and Lindell win their respective primaries, 2018 might be the final year of party convention endorsements in Minnesota. Craig didn't even seek the DFL convention endorsement, and Lindell was outside the top two at the GOP convention.
4 doesn't make much sense to me. This would be far from the first time a convention endorsee doesn't win the primary nomination. The point of the convention is to signal the party insiders' preference and give them access to party resources. There's no reason that would stop.
https://arkansasadvocate.com/2026/06/18/arkansas-students-see-boost-in-annual-test-scores/
AR-Gov: Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders is touting a major increase in education proficiency since the start of her tenure in Arkansas. Could probably make her win in even bigger a landslide than previously predicted.
Disgusting, even after Podium-gate. Republicans love to defund public schools for handouts to wealthy parents -- and brag about better test scores.
Arkansans deserve better than the pastor's daughter ruling their state the way Kim Reynolds has. Wish the voter electorate in AR was closer to NC/GA/VA than what it is now.
Huh. Arkansas only has 15% of Black residents. For the likely electorate, probably in low teens.
Looking at the 2024 results of 30pt deficit, and many rural counties with less Black voters Harris was still in mid teen to low twenty, rural Arkansas’ White voters still support Democrats at a much higher rate than rural GA/NC/VA. So still room to shift further redder.
The things is, it doesn’t have many sizable and growing metros outside of Northwest AR, which is not a big size anyway.
It would also take a lot for that northwest metro to even get close again. While it was last competitive in 1992 when it was open (future Sen. Tim Hutchinson won it then), Bill Clinton famously made it very close in 1974. You'd think liberal cities like Fayetteville and Eureka Springs would drive Democratic turnout, but I guess not.
Eureka Springs is only like 2,000 people total.
This is definitely a problem. There’s room for growth for Democrats in GA as well as Southern red states like AL, MS and SC from the standpoint of black population.
However, AR is a really tough nut to crack for Democrats to expand the base of non-white voters.
blech.
still have a vision of that photo of her signing the child labor bill into law, while strategically positioned waifs stood in witness.
they were not, iirc, smiling.
In #NY17, the influential religious bloc - which has been very friendly to Mike Lawler and Donald Trump - has endorsed Beth Davidson in the Democratic Primary. Between this and massive Republican spending against Cait Conley, many local Democrats believe that Lawler continues to dissuade NY17 Dems from voting for Conley while encouraging NY17 Dems to vote for Davidson.
https://www.rocklanddaily.com/news/skver-backs-beth-davidson-tom-dinapoli-ahead-of-tuesday-s-democratic-primary
Do they think Davidson is a worse candidate? (Interestingly, no one is talking about Effie, who I’m voting for.)
Progressives like us like Effie, but the national donors don't care because she's polling single digits and lags in fundraising.
In fairness to Effie, she did out-fundraise Beth in the 4/1 - 6/10 fundraising report (Cait out-fundraised both combined). So Effie does have some momentum, just likely not enough considering where she was starting from.
Voted for Effie as well. I don't think she'll win the primary and it'll be between Conley and Davidson.
I'd prefer Davidson to Conley, but I'm doubtful either beat Lawler, honestly.
Frankly I don’t think Effie will win either. That’s part of why I’m voting for her.
I’m prepared to support the Dem in the general obviously. If needed I’ll canvass, place signs, etc. too like I did for Pete Harckham in 2018.
Really? You don't think we're at worst a toss-up in a seat like this in this political environment?
NY Dems have royally fucked up this seat twice. Conley is the favorite and is running a not trump campaign. I work in politics, am super plugged in, and all I know about her is she served in the military and she has tenuous at best ties to the district. I think we’re favored to take the seat but people should underestimate Lawler at their own peril.
How have we fucked it up? Who do you think would be the strongest candidate against Lawler?
First, Sean Patrick Maloney leaped into the district after the gerrymander in 2022 Hochul tried to pass got killed, dislodging then-popular Rep. Mondaire Jones in an attempt to give himself a safe seat and running a horrible campaign (people I’m connected to who canvassed for him said he was in Europe instead of campaigning) and lost a race he most likely just expected to waltz into. As the literal DCCC chair no less. (Republican Marc Molinaro then also won the seat he should have run in.) Then, they recruited Mondaire to run again (passing over their apparent other pick, Gretchen Whitmer’s sister, which would have been a blatant nepotism case itself since her other experience was literally “school board trustee”) and Mondaire proceeded to alienate all his progressive allies, not make new centrist ones (who still thought he was too progressive), and run a similar absentee campaign that he also embarrassingly lost.
I worry about Conley. I went to a debate for this district and half her answers to questions were “I’m in the military”. While the whole opposition research leak from her campaign (which included calling fucking Emily’s List “far left”) was apparently not her actual positions, or so I’ve heard, the lack of clarity on policy is alarming. I’m worried we’re looking at another Gottheimer or Suozzi or MGP who will vote against Dem priorities and block them from going through. Frankly I don’t think this race will end well regardless of candidate. I think Effie can beat Lawler but I’d be lying if I said I’m 100% certain on that (in large part due to a topic that is banned here that I ask not be discussed further), Davidson has no charisma and suspected GOP ties, and Conley has lack of connection to the district and recent Dem party registration questions, combined with policy vagueness. This race is just miserable.
Cait is easily the strongest candidate against Lawler. If she wasn't, the GOP wouldn't be masquerading as a phony progressive pack and spending a whopping $1.5M to stop her. Throw in the fact that Cait is the strongest fundraiser (she out-raised all of her Dem opponents combined) and the average 5-6 point bump that all Democratic veteran candidates tend to get, and the evidence just continues to pile up. She codes really well for the district and her military service gives her an 'in' with a lot of moderate voters that never like Trump in the first place and have likely soured on Lawler. It's just undeniable to me.
On paper you would think that this is a toss-up seat at worst. But I would argue that this is not a standard House seat. I think it's less shiftable than a typical House seat. This is not a seat that will ever be listed as Lean D, regardless of the worsening environment for the GOP. Lots of law enforcement in this district. Then there is also the religious bloc vote community. A lot of pro-Israel voters. I personally think a candidate like Effie would get destroyed in a NY17 general election. Davidson would have a better chance, but I think her purported strength in Rockland County is vastly overstated, and Lawler seems to be rooting for her to win. Cait Conley codes very well for this district with her military/service background. Attempts to label her as 'far left' or 'weak on XYZ security' won't hold up. Cait is the type of candidate who can get those Kamala-Lawler voters - voters who could not stomach Trump but felt that Lawler was moderate enough - to give her a second look. From a purely strategic standpoint, I can't imagine why any Democratic voter would select anyone other than Cait. And if you don't believe me, just look at the $1.5M that the GOP is spending to try and stop her.
What I worry about is, given her lack of clarity on policy (at least in the debate I was at), will she vote for Dem priorities, or block them like the Unbreakable Nine? The GOP always gets their base together for big votes. Surely we can do the same.
No one can see the future, but I think that assumptions that she will be like an MGP is just speculation without facts. I've seen numerous Cait detractors ponder whether she is another Fetterman, which I find absurd and without any evidence. I look no further than that many groups that have endorsed her, from End Citizens United, to LGBTQ+ groups to pro-choice groups to gun safety groups to union groups and on and on. Besides, even if you look at it from a purely cynical view, odds are that she is going to be more to the left than the right because if NY redraws the maps, NY17 is going to wind up much more D-friendly than R-friendly. But for the sake of argument, let's say that she took the moderate lane. Since I think she is the only Democrat who can beat Mike Lawler, I'd still take a Democrat in a tough seat who is with me 50% of the time over a Republican who is against me 95% of the time. The Goldens and MGPs can be a huge pain, but it's either them or a Republican, and I'll take them any day of the week.
My speculative two cents: If Lawler had his druthers, the order in which he'd like to face the Dem primary candidates is 1. Effie, 2. Beth, 3. Cait. If Effie was polling higher, Lawler might have taken a different tact. But with Cait seemingly in the lead (look at that phony progressive PAC's $1.5M spending), Lawler likely sees Beth as the most realistic non-Cait option to help get over the finish line, and thus give him the best chance of winning reelection. I do believe that Lawler fears Cait the most and won't know how to effectively run against her. On the other hand, he knows Beth very well and is already signaling his anti-law enforcement message against her (something that he would not be able to sell against veteran Conley).
Is Davidson bad on law enforcement in some way?
For a normal person? No, not that I'm aware of. But there are a lot of police officers in this district, and Lawler has already previewed his attacks on her after she sponsored a bill in Rockland about preventing ICE from working with local law enforcement. Which is undoubtedly a good thing, but Lawler is ready to run with it. If Cait is the nominee, the avenue of 'weak on crime' or 'weak on security' is a much tougher sell given her background.
Maybe partly that, but more likely she's made some agreement with them to give them what they want.
Well, that makes the decision for me. I don't particularly like and defiently don't trust Conely but I'll now be voting for her.
CO-01:
https://zeteo.com/p/melat-kiros-diana-degette-colorado-congress-poll
Another DFP poll. Melat Kiros ahead of Diana DeGette 41-36. A previous poll by DFP had DeGette ahead 40-7. Apparently there’s been lots of spending in this race recently - this could be a reason.
Kiros has done a phenomenal job establishing name recognition, and she's been helped by a couple of controversies involving DeGette, the most notable one involved DeGette allies barring Kiros from holding rallies at some Denver venues (Kiros held an outdoor rally outside the state capitol because of this)
Since it was conducted on behalf of the justice dems, it is probably a bit too favorable to Kiros. But this is still a signal of a competitive race, which is not something I expected at all.
What is Kiros' story?
Ex-attorney turned barista. I’d say why she was fired, but the reason overlaps with a banned topic so I’ll just say you can look it up if you want to know.
God I hope not
Is there a problem with Kiros?
DeGette is fine in my book, and I'd really like to limit the size of the bomb-throwing caucus, because we don't need a blue version of the Freedom Caucus that slows legislation down and may push for some unpopular policies.
Well the left is a part of the coalition whether you want them to be or not. Our votes are still needed if the Dems want to win.
The campaign to put two equal rights amendments on the ballot in Ohio has been postponed from this year to 2027.
https://thebuckeyeflame.com/2026/06/17/organizers-postpone-ohio-equal-rights-ballot-initiatives-to-2027/
They need 442,958 verified signatures apiece to put the issue on the ballot.
https://www.conservativenewsdaily.net/breaking-news/kaptur-weighed-voting-for-mccarthy-as-speaker-book/
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/democrat-floats-backing-mccarthy-to-overcome-speakership-impasse/
OH-9: I don't know why this is making the rounds again as something new (one source I linked is new, the other is from January 2023), but it's resurfaced that Democratic Rep. Marcy Kaptur considered being bipartisan by voting for former Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) as Speaker.
I suppose working across the aisle would help her in a conservative district, but she also has some progressive bonafides.
God no. If you can’t even bother voting for a Dem speaker, why even bother electing you as a Dem there at all?
The first source says it, a McCarthy aide has a new book coming out about his career up to being unseated as Speaker.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/18/us/politics/mccarthy-trump-speaker-book.html?eafs_enabled=false
Trump shouting at and threatening members of Congress over the phone reminds me of the reports of Biden's reaction to Hunter's scandals. Incoherent, expletive-laden in-the-moment garbage. I know too many people who have mood swings like that.
Biden's made more sense on a pathos-level because it was about his son. Trump is just a brat who wants his way and thinks he can get everything he wants with a tantrum.
I don’t mind Pingree, but this is yet another indication that voters don’t hate nepotism as much as they say they do.
Yet in Maine there were at least three major candidates for governor or Congress with famous family names, and of them only Pingree proved successful.
Speaking of nepotism and family connections, it was amusing to hear Jack Schlossberg denouncing his opponents for being funded by billionaires, considering that nobody would be likely giving him the time of day politically if not for his grandfather, whose own political career was at least initially heavily subsidized by his father who would be a multi-billionaire today.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5806153-jfk-grandson-schlossberg-says-billionaires-massive-ai-companies-spending-millions-in-new-york-house-race/
CO-01 again:
https://x.com/MelatKirosCO/status/2068027210506678519
Bernie Sanders has endorsed Melat Kiros.
That's pretty major in particular. Has he endorsed against any other congressional incumbents this cycle? Not sure the last time he has, for Newman against Lipinski in 2018/2020? Not sure if he endorsed Bush against Clay in 2018.
He endorsed Lander, who’s challenging Dan Goldman, and Nida Allam, who challenged Valerie Foushee. He’s probably endorsed more too that I can’t name off the top of my head. Ballotpedia has a page of some of his endorsements so far:
https://ballotpedia.org/Endorsements_by_Bernie_Sanders
Ah, I forgot about Lander especially, that feels almost fait accompli lol. DeGette is much much more senior and powerful than Goldman, Foushee and Bell, so I still think a pretty big deal.
Edit: Interesting, Ballotpedia shows him endorsing against David Scott (GA-14), Dina Titus (NV-01) and I forgot the big endorsement against Henry Cuellar (TX-35) in 2022. And Shontel Brown (OH-11), but that was following the special and before Nina Turner truly fell off the deep end. He'd also endorsed Audrey Denney (CA-01) in 2020, but interesting that he didn't this time with it as a gerrymandered seat. That cycle, he also endorsed against Eliot Engel (NY-16), which was a big deal but I think safer politics, and Josh Gottheimer (NJ-05, lol). And I'd remembered right that he was against Clay in 2020 and Lipinski in both 2020 and 2018.
He endorsed Bush this year against Bell too.
https://www.semafor.com/article/06/16/2026/bernie-sanders-endorses-cori-bushs-comeback-bid
Kiros and Senate candidate Julie Gonzales were on Breaking Points today (I'm not sure what we think of them here, but sometimes they're pretty good. Still part of the media ecosystem that continues to divide us.)
Was that Krystal Ball’s show? I do not like Krystal Ball one bit. I remember her pushing against impeachment during Trump I. I’m quite suspicious of her.
Her as well as Saagar Enjeti, who I don't like, and Ryan Grim, who I do like, are the three main hosts.
I think Ball and Enjeti are idiots, and Grim can be insightful but also twist his brain around into saying really stupid things too. Griffin Davis seems fine from the few bits I've seen, but think he's sort of more an everyman role for the panel. I'm overall not a fan of the show lol
I have one of Grim’s books, We’ve Got People. It’s actually a really interesting look at the background of the progressive movement - goes back to Jesse Jackson in the 80s, mentions some of the progressive Senators like George McGovern and Mike Gravel who lost their seats in the Reagan Revolution, etc.
I do still think he’s an idiot though, particularly recently.
Sometimes I have it on as background noise as I'm doing something else and out of nowhere, I hear a really terrible take by Ball or Enjeti and have to turn it off.
https://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/2026/jun/18/texas-democrats-seek-unity-at-state-convention/
TX-Sen: Rep. Jasmine Crockett is skipping the Texas Democratic convention, and says Black voters will not unite behind James Talarico as the nominee. Additionally, she says that because there is no Black nominee statewide, Black turnout will decrease.
Sounds like she's bitter about her loss.
just a little! so glad she is not the nominee...pretty worthless!! she do her best to get paxton elected!
I don't understand the reasoning behind some of these Crockett voters, saying that Talarico has "to earn their vote" and saying he's not doing it -- like, what? TX voters voted no on Colin Allred in 2024, and they didn't want JC to be the nominee this year.
Talarico would not be pulling this if the reverse happened. He would be hitting every county to get people to vote for Jasmine.
It's so lame and short-sighted. Why do some TX Dems want the cartoonishly corrupt Paxton to replace Cornyn? Talarico would vote for 95-98% of the same policies and federal judges that JC would.
Maybe not *every* county since there's 254 of them (and there's 138 days until Election Day, so that's a heavy lift) but I get your point.
Identity politics.
I think the perception on the ground is that she got a lot less grace in ways that rubbed people the wrong way. We heard similar in 2008 with Clinton. Folks will come around. I think also there is probably a bit of misinformation around Talarico's back story - I had family from Dallas telling me they thought he used to be a Republican, which was wild as hell to me.
Pardon my French but she can fuck aaaall the way off
"Black voters will not unite behind James Talarico as the nominee" if you cared about the outcome, that is something you could assist with, Jasmine!
Sounded like the pro Crockett influencers had way too much sway on her after the primary.
I thought she was above this BS.
What a dumbass! She’s literally openly trying to sabotage us! Now I really don’t want her running for another office in the future. (I wonder if this will end in a party switch to independent or whatever.)
Crockett’s impact may be limited as Talarico has worked a lot post-primary to reach out to black leaders, including several prominent Crockett supporters. He’s likely to get more support from the black vote than what Crockett is implying.
https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/29/politics/james-talarico-black-voters-jasmine-crockett
Your link is a really good read. Thanks for posting it.
Ah, so Crockett is just a massive sore loser and idiot. Got it.
Her comments about the high school track meet stabbing show she has zero political acumen and lives in an online bubble. All the red flags people worried about in the primary have manifested themselves.
More like Crockett‘s got a massive ego which she doesn’t seem to let go.
So Jasmine Crockett doesn’t want to help black voters unite behind James Talarico?
I'm really curious if Talarico reached out and tried to smooth over the emotions of the primary. He should have brought people from her circle of friends and advisors into his campaign. If he tried, seriously, and she is pouting, then shame on her. If he has not tried, or just went through the motions, shame on him. I think Harris, Warnock, Abrams and others in her circle, and whom she respects, need to get involved NOW.
He literally invited her to give the keynote at the TX Dem Convention and she ignored him. He’s done what he can and went out of his way to compliment her throughout the primary and after. There seems to be no winning with her.
By the way:
"Asked whether she would actively support Talarico's campaign, Crockett said: 'I have no idea. I am more focused on down-ballot races in general.'"
Wait, Crockett wants to support down ballot races but has no idea if she’s going to actively support Talarico’s campaign, which is a down ballot race?
Good heavens.
More reason why she's awful and is completely unfit for public office.
https://www.cbsnews.com/atlanta/news/stacey-abrams-father-rev-robert-lee-abrams-dies-at-77-family-says/
Obituaries: The Rev. Robert Abrams, a shipyard worker and the father of popular Georgia politician Stacey, is dead at 77.
As a teenager, the elder Abrams was a civil rights activist, registering Black voters in Mississippi. He was a campaign surrogate when Stacey ran for governor, twice.
RIP.
I don’t think description of Stacey Abrams as a popular politician is accurate. She is a forceful advocate.