I’ve been saying, we have a credible candidate in Kansas and there’s no reason to think that in a world in which we’re competitive in Iowa and Nebraska Kansas wouldn’t be in play, especially since everyone recognizes that we at least have a chance at holding the governorship there.
Yeah, it never made much sense. I've been beating that drum for a while. Kansas was within three points of each of Alaska, Texas, and Iowa, and actually bluer than Nebraska in 2024.
An additional consideration with Brown specifically is that he also has a record as a progressive in the Senate - his voting record was overall pretty good. Peltola is also on fairly good terms with the left, although she herself is not on the left, and as far as I know didn’t do anything especially controversial in office. And Cooper was a beloved governor in his state, consistently performed well in elections, and doesn’t have any particularly egregious marks on his record.
Mills, by contrast, had bad blood with unions in her state (who actually recruited Platner), while Haley Stevens and Angie Craig had long, pro-corporate voting records that became primary liabilities, combined with shitty campaigning for the former and a controversial vote for the Laken Riley Act in a state that was home to the brutal ICE occupation of Minneapolis for the latter (and where two non-immigrants were slaughtered in cold blood by ICE for essentially being dissidents), which made them less-than-stellar recruits.
In short, I really think it’s the candidate that matters here.
agreed. when one is down 30-60 in a two-person race, no amount of money is going to salvage that, especially if you are already a governor with 100% name recognition.
It's honestly incredible. They spent all that money for Cornyn to narrowly lead the first round but haven't seemed to spend much in the runoff? What was the point?
It's interesting, but I think those numbers are actually not what they seem. It's pretty clear if you look at the graphic, but one major difference that immediately jumps out at you is that 2018 was mostly incumbents while 2026 is almost completely people running for the first time. The only incumbent listed is Ossoff. It's not fair to compare FL 2018 to 2026 because Nelson was a three term incumbent. It would be shocking if our candidates this year weren't significantly younger. It's clear that Democrats are voting for younger candidates, but I bet if you looked at all the races, not just competitive ones, and only compared races where the Democrat running wasn't an incumbent, the difference would be smaller.
2022 D turnout is not really stellar with no competitive top races. This year, D turnout is particularly heavy with Black voters, driven by the gov race competition.
TBH, I am not sure the current primary ballot edge says too much about the fall.
Primary vote composition is always such a difficult metric to derive apples to apples comparisons from. "Winning" the primary vote composition in a purple state with competition on both sides is certainly good (I'd be unhappy if we weren't) but it's no guarantee of success.
Hoping this is good news for the two Democrats running for the SCOGA races. If it were partisan, I think both ladies have a MUCH better chance of winning.
Relatively heavy turnout, vast majority Black voters in the exurbs south of Atlanta, and the smaller cities.
The core is kinda state avg. Quite low in the northern suburbs. Always very few votes in D primaries in the exurbs without a significant Black population.
If this is the whole pattern to the election day, Duncan probably has little chance to get in the runoff.
I wonder how Trump's war with the Pope went over with those southern Louisiana voters? Is there a possible opening further down the ballot for some Democrats in local elections to build the Democratic Party from grassroots?
FL-14: Despite declining before the redraw, I wonder if Lt. Gov. Jay Collins will run against Rep. Kathy Castor to save his career and end his ill-fated gubernatorial campaign.
MN-HD-58B - Republican Minnesota State Rep. Drew Roach was the only member of the evenly-divided state house to vote against an ban on using AI to create child sexual abuse material:
Roach got 60% of the vote in 2024, but, combined with the national political mood not being in Republicans' favor and Roach being extremely controversial, does the DFL have a chance here?
What happened there when ICE targeted the Twin Cities? Please don't mind all my questions. I have over active curiosity when it comes to the intersection of politics and human behavior. I have been a people watcher from as far back as 5 years old.
This district has a good chunk of the Senate district Democrat Matt Little found a way to win in 2016. That was a fluke though, as evidenced by his defeat four years later.
I would say AI-simulated CSAM is less bad than child marriage, which is abusive to actual people, but certainly not a competition anyone should be trying to win, yeesh!
It depends on the ages of the spouses in question. I also have a different attitude from many Americans because I grew up partly in rural Malaysia. There didn't use to be a statutory age of consent in Malaysia, so it was common for teenage lovers to get married, thereby making their children legitimate. Malaysia subsequently instituted an 18-year-old age of consent. The result? There have been a slew of unwed Malay (i.e., Muslim) mothers. That's a permanent blot on their reputations, and while I hope there has been some kind of reform since the last time I checked, I know that it was hard to register such births and have the "illegitimate" children get an education and social services. Basically, in societies that believe in chastity before marriage and discriminate against single parents and the children of unwed parents, allowing teenagers to marry each other is the lesser evil.
Way worse. I don’t agree with it personally but there’s at least an argument for 17 year olds who are emancipated entering into legal contracts like marriage. AI CSAM? Fuck no
Here's Roach's response/reasoning for why he voted no. For clarification, I completely disagree with his vote and think he could have (and should have) voted yes while still advocating for further measures. I think his vote came from something similar to an all-or-nothing mindset, which when it comes to CSAM is inappropriate and dangerous. But good to know he's not actually in support of CSAM.
Material disseminated using nudification technology is “disgusting” and “vile,” and the victims should have accountability and justice, said Rep. Drew Roach (R-Farmington). But he opposes the bill because it doesn’t get at the root cause and prevent it from happening in the future. He noted that the bill wouldn’t prevent someone from nudifying an image or video if they know how to do it themselves.
“What we’re going to do here is we’re going to attack a software, a manufacturer and instead, shifting our focus on that instead of the perpetrators of these crimes,” he said. “If we want to prevent this from happening in the future, we should go after those perpetrators with the full force of the law.”
Also, it gives Trump less to work with because in the spat he had with Mills last year at a meeting with Governors, he argued Mills couldn’t get elected to anything - All because Mills was defending transgender rights.
I interpreted the comment as saying Platner’s controversies would impede him being elected. I don’t think I agree with that sentiment in this environment. Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong though.
Both your statement and BPFish's can be (and, I think, are) true. Platner is the favorite in this environment AND his past behavior is going to make the win harder than it should be.
I mentioned this above
Moskowitz is not Jared Golden.
Would like to see how Sand and Turek/Wahls compare in districts like this too.
I’ve been saying, we have a credible candidate in Kansas and there’s no reason to think that in a world in which we’re competitive in Iowa and Nebraska Kansas wouldn’t be in play, especially since everyone recognizes that we at least have a chance at holding the governorship there.
Yeah, it never made much sense. I've been beating that drum for a while. Kansas was within three points of each of Alaska, Texas, and Iowa, and actually bluer than Nebraska in 2024.
An additional consideration with Brown specifically is that he also has a record as a progressive in the Senate - his voting record was overall pretty good. Peltola is also on fairly good terms with the left, although she herself is not on the left, and as far as I know didn’t do anything especially controversial in office. And Cooper was a beloved governor in his state, consistently performed well in elections, and doesn’t have any particularly egregious marks on his record.
Mills, by contrast, had bad blood with unions in her state (who actually recruited Platner), while Haley Stevens and Angie Craig had long, pro-corporate voting records that became primary liabilities, combined with shitty campaigning for the former and a controversial vote for the Laken Riley Act in a state that was home to the brutal ICE occupation of Minneapolis for the latter (and where two non-immigrants were slaughtered in cold blood by ICE for essentially being dissidents), which made them less-than-stellar recruits.
In short, I really think it’s the candidate that matters here.
I'll reserve judgment on Stevens' campaign until the primary votes come in. She still might win.
agreed. when one is down 30-60 in a two-person race, no amount of money is going to salvage that, especially if you are already a governor with 100% name recognition.
It's honestly incredible. They spent all that money for Cornyn to narrowly lead the first round but haven't seemed to spend much in the runoff? What was the point?
To which my response would be “no shit? What gave you that impression? Dem polling leads in Alaska and Texas and a tied race in Iowa?”
The Kolb crystal ball sees Dem senate pickups at 4-6!
Would be nice to get the higher end of that pickup and have FL and OH as a bonus.
Send in $5 and you can get a detailed list of winners and possible winners/lol
They don't have a messaging problem, they have a Strait of Hormuz problem.
Trump IS the Strait of Hormuz problem. And the GOP is too fucking scared of him.
“The window to act is now”
Yes, doing something on the cost of living when:
1) Trump won’t end the tariffs
2) Trump won’t end the Iran War
Is comedy.
Even during the days when Karl Rove was influencing GOP strategy, the party was very much on message. Not the case these days.
It's interesting, but I think those numbers are actually not what they seem. It's pretty clear if you look at the graphic, but one major difference that immediately jumps out at you is that 2018 was mostly incumbents while 2026 is almost completely people running for the first time. The only incumbent listed is Ossoff. It's not fair to compare FL 2018 to 2026 because Nelson was a three term incumbent. It would be shocking if our candidates this year weren't significantly younger. It's clear that Democrats are voting for younger candidates, but I bet if you looked at all the races, not just competitive ones, and only compared races where the Democrat running wasn't an incumbent, the difference would be smaller.
Yeah, that comparison is so misleading its basically useless. Nate Silver just farming for likes and attention now.
As you said, we had 0 retirements (i.e. open seats) in 2018, versus 4 this year.
For the 2 seats we did flip, Sinema and Rosen were 41 and 60 respectively.
Meanwhile, this cycle we have Platner (41), Pappas (45), Cooper (68), Stratton (60), Peltola (52) for presumptive nominees.
The average age of our candidates in MI is 40, MN is 50
Talarico being 36 is the only big outlier, basically another version of Beto (who was 45).
Emerson had a 10 point lead yesterday
It appears this is sexual harassment related but no further details at this time except the fact that the House Ethics Committee is investigating.
That said, this is the same NC-11 that elected Madison Cawthorn. Now Chuck Edwards has to face allegations.
https://www.cnn.com/2026/04/30/politics/chuck-edwards-house-ethics-investigation
2022 D turnout is not really stellar with no competitive top races. This year, D turnout is particularly heavy with Black voters, driven by the gov race competition.
TBH, I am not sure the current primary ballot edge says too much about the fall.
Primary vote composition is always such a difficult metric to derive apples to apples comparisons from. "Winning" the primary vote composition in a purple state with competition on both sides is certainly good (I'd be unhappy if we weren't) but it's no guarantee of success.
Hoping this is good news for the two Democrats running for the SCOGA races. If it were partisan, I think both ladies have a MUCH better chance of winning.
Relatively heavy turnout, vast majority Black voters in the exurbs south of Atlanta, and the smaller cities.
The core is kinda state avg. Quite low in the northern suburbs. Always very few votes in D primaries in the exurbs without a significant Black population.
If this is the whole pattern to the election day, Duncan probably has little chance to get in the runoff.
Why would Letlow need protection? She's leaving.
I wonder how Trump's war with the Pope went over with those southern Louisiana voters? Is there a possible opening further down the ballot for some Democrats in local elections to build the Democratic Party from grassroots?
What is the credibility of Ragnar? Those numbers seem like conservative estimates regarding Democratic overperformance.
The fact that Ciscomani is *still* under even with the conservative bias is hilarious
That was the first thing that leaped to my mind.
These Ragnar polls look out of whack to me, for the most part. No way Nunn is ahead of Trone Garriott like that.
Or they could have an unrealistic likely voter model.
FL-14: Despite declining before the redraw, I wonder if Lt. Gov. Jay Collins will run against Rep. Kathy Castor to save his career and end his ill-fated gubernatorial campaign.
MN-HD-58B - Republican Minnesota State Rep. Drew Roach was the only member of the evenly-divided state house to vote against an ban on using AI to create child sexual abuse material:
https://www.instagram.com/p/DXu5FEJAA3f/?igsh=eGlhMnlpamtwbHYy
Roach got 60% of the vote in 2024, but, combined with the national political mood not being in Republicans' favor and Roach being extremely controversial, does the DFL have a chance here?
What happened there when ICE targeted the Twin Cities? Please don't mind all my questions. I have over active curiosity when it comes to the intersection of politics and human behavior. I have been a people watcher from as far back as 5 years old.
This district has a good chunk of the Senate district Democrat Matt Little found a way to win in 2016. That was a fluke though, as evidenced by his defeat four years later.
Are Minnesota Senate terms 4 years?
Yes except in the immediate aftermath of a reapportionment. After the 2030 cycle, for instance, all of the Senators will be up again in 2032.
Had to do a double take here. That's almost as bad if not worse as Justin Humphrey voting against banning child marriage in Oklahoma.
Much worse, IMO.
I would say AI-simulated CSAM is less bad than child marriage, which is abusive to actual people, but certainly not a competition anyone should be trying to win, yeesh!
It depends on the ages of the spouses in question. I also have a different attitude from many Americans because I grew up partly in rural Malaysia. There didn't use to be a statutory age of consent in Malaysia, so it was common for teenage lovers to get married, thereby making their children legitimate. Malaysia subsequently instituted an 18-year-old age of consent. The result? There have been a slew of unwed Malay (i.e., Muslim) mothers. That's a permanent blot on their reputations, and while I hope there has been some kind of reform since the last time I checked, I know that it was hard to register such births and have the "illegitimate" children get an education and social services. Basically, in societies that believe in chastity before marriage and discriminate against single parents and the children of unwed parents, allowing teenagers to marry each other is the lesser evil.
Do you understand how traditionally religious societies are?
Absolutely. Though if the "adult" in question is 18 and the child is 16, it could be OK.
Way worse. I don’t agree with it personally but there’s at least an argument for 17 year olds who are emancipated entering into legal contracts like marriage. AI CSAM? Fuck no
Seems to open a lane for a GOP primary challenge, if not too late.
Seems to open a lane for a GOP primary challenge, if not too late.
Here's Roach's response/reasoning for why he voted no. For clarification, I completely disagree with his vote and think he could have (and should have) voted yes while still advocating for further measures. I think his vote came from something similar to an all-or-nothing mindset, which when it comes to CSAM is inappropriate and dangerous. But good to know he's not actually in support of CSAM.
copied from https://www.house.mn.gov/sessiondaily/Story/19118
Material disseminated using nudification technology is “disgusting” and “vile,” and the victims should have accountability and justice, said Rep. Drew Roach (R-Farmington). But he opposes the bill because it doesn’t get at the root cause and prevent it from happening in the future. He noted that the bill wouldn’t prevent someone from nudifying an image or video if they know how to do it themselves.
“What we’re going to do here is we’re going to attack a software, a manufacturer and instead, shifting our focus on that instead of the perpetrators of these crimes,” he said. “If we want to prevent this from happening in the future, we should go after those perpetrators with the full force of the law.”
ME-Sen: Mills drops out
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/30/us/politics/janet-mills-drops-out-senate-race-platner-schumer.html
I could see her endorsing Collins before him.
Why? She complimented Collins pretty well a month or so before running.
Because in the article above her spokesperson directly says she will not be voting for Collins
Fair enough. That's a better answer than "oh, she's a Democrat, so she'll always support the left!"
Only if she's really got a chip on her shoulder at Schumer for aggressively recruiting her and setting her up for this humiliation.
What? No chance. People seem to think Mills is some sort of secret MAGA Republican or something. She's not...
I got the sense that her run was a little like Tommy Thompson's against Baldwin a while ago. He was clearly unenthusiastic.
Wow. That's surprising. There were signs, but still.
Wow!
Had Chuck Schumer & Co not pushed Mills to run for the Senate in the first place, I doubt she would have ever considered a campaign.
Good on her for seeing the writing was on the wall. It would’ve been a sad way to end her career in a landslide loss.
Also, it gives Trump less to work with because in the spat he had with Mills last year at a meeting with Governors, he argued Mills couldn’t get elected to anything - All because Mills was defending transgender rights.
Say hello to Senator Plattner. Mills out https://x.com/mwilburn123/status/2049836936102117591?s=61&t=5copDbz1aPl7ASsRCUclLg
Janet Mills was never an obstacle to a Senator Platner. Graham Platner himself is the single biggest obstacle to a Senator Platner.
In this environment, I’m not so sure. Trump and the GOP are loathed enough that I could see Platner winning.
I'm not reading a disagreement from you. Who or what are you suggesting is the biggest obstacle to a Senator Platner?
I interpreted the comment as saying Platner’s controversies would impede him being elected. I don’t think I agree with that sentiment in this environment. Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong though.
Think about it this way: if he loses, what would have caused the loss? That's the point, not whether he will actually lose.
Good point, agreed.
The polling has shown him a consistently stronger candidate against Collins than Mills.
Both your statement and BPFish's can be (and, I think, are) true. Platner is the favorite in this environment AND his past behavior is going to make the win harder than it should be.