The Florida Supreme Court only ruled on the racial component of the redistricting amendment as related to federal law. It did not deal with other provisions such as the mandate that districts be compact, contiguous, and follow existing political and geographical boundaries. And the prohibition against districts being drawn or redrawn to favor or disfavor a political party.
Not saying they wouldn't. Just that it would be more legally difficult than the other case because they couldn't use conflict with federal law as justification.
That was the same kind of BS reasoning the GOP controlled SCONC did in April 2023 when they revisited and undid the ruling against partisan gerrymandering. And a lot of people shrugged it off back then.
But after the shenanigans SCONC pulled, plus the NC Court of Appeals, in entertaining Jefferson Griffin's claims of voter fraud ticked off a LOT of NC voters. And should SCONC flip back to Dem control in 2028 or 2030, I want them to redraw the state and Congressional maps to heavily favor Democrats.
I'm all for fighting fire with fire until we get a stronger federal law banning partisan gerrymandering and reform the federal courts enabling it.
Sadly voters have never shown voter restrictions/election law/gerrymandering to be something they will base their votes on. The Dem establishment might have been ticked off but the average voter could probably care less.
It needs to be something Dems do, whenever they have a trifecta again, in the face of loud but ultimately meaningless opposition from Republicans.
Right. People have absolutely no understanding that they've lost control of deciding who wins in elections. If we get a scenario like Trump is pushing for, one party could win by 10+ points nationally yet still be in the minority because of the way the lines are drawn.
Reading the statement is also a bit confusing. Are they going to bring suit against the court to see if they will topple the whole amendment first? Jacob Ogles, a political reporter for the state, also theorizes that this is to preempt DeSantis calling a special session and setting the agenda for them.
Could mean asking the court for an advisory opinion. But I don't see how provisions such as contiguous and compact districts in any way conflict with federal law.
In Virginia, Jay Jones had a positive ad while the current AG went out all negative on Jones. I hope people are sick of these guys and the scare tactics.
Earle-Sears is going to get STEAMROLLED in Virginia this fall. Unforced error after unforced error. And that MAGA attorney general, Miyares, will be swept out along with her.
I hope the VA and NJ elections this year are a bad harbinger for the GOP next year. When voters are pissed off with Trump, it won't matter how hard red states re-gerrymander their districts, Rs WILL lose the House.
And if things really deteriorate in this country, the Senate will flip too.
My God, I hope you are right! I am very worried about the judges Trump is appointing. A Democratic Senate majority would put a stop to that. A House majority will, amongst other things, enable hearings that should prove devastating for Trumpists and MAGAs in 2028.
I think the continuous protests (specially the "Hands Off" ones), plus the special elections so far, show a shift that a lot of MSM outlets are outright ignoring.
If that means Dems sweep the 2026 midterms, flip back the House and gain a 51-52 Senate seat majority, that's a good start.
Here in NC, I'm seeing more anti-Trump signage and single protesters in my suburban area of Durham, NC. I've never ever seen this kind of political activity outside of Raleigh before, even during the last Trump regime.
Trump's DOGE agenda has pissed off a LOT of people, including a portion of his own voters. Just because people don't participate in protests, they are angry, and they are itching to punish the NC GOP for enabling Trump.
I saw protests in Pittsboro during one Hands-Off day near the Chatham County Courthouse -- and it had heavy turnout. There were even protests in ruby red Moore County as well.
I agree that individual anecdotes must be taken with a huge grain of salt but something about this one struck a nerve with me: a neighbor is retired career US Marine officer...ardent MAGA in '16, '20 and'24. Sadly he is dying a slow, miserable death due to cardiac and respiratory issues. He told me yesterday that he will no longer fly the flag because everyone assumes that all flag flyers are MAGA and that he no longer can say he supports trump in anyway let alone consider himself MAGA. Why, "because trump has done so much to undermine the Constitution that I dedicated my life to upholding and my comrades (he actually used that word) died in my arms defending. I know I won't live to see him fall but God will see to it that it happens." I will be at his Military funeral.
It’s everywhere - it’s not reported but it’s grassroots and everywhere. I see a dedicated and growing group outside of Brian Steil’s district office twice a week. Every time I travel on 294 there is at least one overpass protest going on about the Epstein files. I see much more now than at this time in 2017. The disgust is palpable - a lot of ET and posters here missing the signs of pissed off pushback just like in 21-22.
By the way, I think we should retain a strong healthy dose of skepticism in the seemingly unlikely prospect of Democratic U.S. Senate flips in states like Texas, Iowa, Ohio, and of course Collins' seat in Maine.
If Sherrod does run to regain his seat in Ohio next year, it goes to Lean Republican/Toss Up. Outgoing ME governor Janet Mills seems to be warming up to the idea of running to unseat Susan Collins.
BTW, Democrats were not expecting to flip the House in 2006, let alone both houses. But they did because voters were ticked off at Dumbya's actions during his second term. Perhaps we'll see a repeat of 2006.
Or perhaps we'll see a repeat of more recent cycles in which heavily Republican states declined to vote for a Democrat for Senate. And I'm very skeptical that Brown running in Ohio would move that race beyond Lean-R.
Really? At what point in the 2006 cycle did the Dems not think they were picking up the House? By November 2005, it seemed like a pretty solid bet that the House was gone for the GOP by my recollection. You're right about that the Senate though. Even on the night of the election, I didn't think they'd pull off the inside straight that year.
I was a teenager so I don't remember it too well personally but I do remember "permanent realignment" was a thing for a while in 2005. I think by 06 though there was some strong indications the house could flip and by that Summer the Senate started looking possible in a stars align sense.
I was working in the House for DCCC Chair Rahm Emanuel. When he proclaimed Democrats would reclaim the House in the midterms he was widely ridiculed. But he led a recruitment drive intending to put as many seats in play as possible so when W’s approval rating collapsed after Katrina, Democrats were prepared to win.
Yes, I readily admit the odds are heavily against us. But by recruiting the best possible candidates and fighting like hell we are raising our odds. That’s the best we can do.
Absolutely! So far, my impression is that recruitment for the House and definitely the Senate has been excellent. That's one of the things that should make us optimistic, but some sobriety is still advisable.
I think we've got quite a good shot in ME and a decent shot in OH, if Brown runs. TX and IA, I agree with you are longshots, although Paxton winning the primary would at least put TX in play.
Agree with in play. It's really unclear to me how much of a shot there is to defeat Collins, and I won't bet against her until she actually loses the vote.
Emphasis on the word "should." All the facts known about Trump should have destroyed his political career 10,000 times over and put him in prison, but the U.S. doesn't put criminal presidents in prison, and therefore, we are in this predicament.
The Spanberger campaign is WAY ahead of where McAuliffe was four years ago. I get calls EVERY week from their field asking to lit drop on the weekend. I've done it twice - both in 90 degree plus weather - and will do so again when I get back to Virginia. The McAuliffe campaign was never on board like this. It's a good sign so far.
I will try to ask this in the most delicate way possible, and if anyone feels offended by it, feel free to have it deleted or flagged. What is is with the GOP attracting the most extreme and quixotic African American candidates? The last moderate African American conservative I can recall was Colin Powell, god rest his soul oh and John James I suppose. I have seen Clarence Thomas, Alan Keyes, Herman Cain, Ben Carson, Larry Elder, Herschel Walker and now Winsome Sears. All of them are either far right or have some controversy of corruption or abuse behind them. I am not sure if there's a pattern here but perhaps someone better versed on the topic of conservatism among African Americans can enlighten me?
I'm likewise going to try and be as broad and circumspect as possible in my response. Basically, (1.) the GOP isn't a party that rewards middle-of-the-road candidates (and hasn't been since at least the Tea Party era), and (2.) there's also a lot of attention/remuneration to be had by being a nonwhite political figure who espouses views that validate and reinforce the ignorance and prejudices of conservative white people.
You forgot Mark Robinson R-NC. He is both far-right and scandal-prone.
I think that many of the GOP Black and Latino candidates are in the game because they are contrarians and just like the attention they receive as candidates, even when their chances of being elected are minimal to nonexistent. For some of them it is pure grift as well; running for office is their job.
John James is not a moderate - he’s a rank and file maga cultist that has never laid claim to an original idea for the duration of his silver spoon existence.
My hopium is both Republicans lose by high single or low double digits in 2025 elections creating a massive stampede of panicked retirements from the GOP in vulnerable seats from people not wanting to lose their careers in the coming wave.
I've learned to take his predictions with a grain of the finest salt, but FWIW, James Carville seems to think that Spanberger is on track for a double-digit rout.
Yeah, the hopium is more directed toward NJ than VA, which I believe will be a rout. I’m nervous NJ is about to transition to being a purple state every cycle rather than a solid Democratic one. I’m also hearing about problems with Spanberger’s support among black voters, which could allow Republicans to hold on in districts they should be losing in a double digit statewide win. But we’ll see if either ends up actually happening or not.
I think NJ is still a blue state, just possibly with a lighter blue tint. It really comes down to whether GOP gains with minority voters who make up 48% of the of the population and, particularly, Hispanic voters (21%) are lasting or not.
You’re allowed to have an opinion different from mine and I’m allowed to have one different from yours. My “gloom and doom” turned out to be very right had I espoused it in 2024. I’m preventing myself from being disappointed and trying to be conservative.
I would suggest you ask my opinion before assuming mine wrongly. I’m just saying what I’ve heard. There’s plenty of time for that to change. It may not matter at all when election day gets tallied, but if you aren’t at least a little concerned in areas Democrats have recently struggled in, then you aren’t trying to be realistic.
I hope NJ is a one-off in 2024. I hope VA has massive rural black voter turnout. Hope isn’t analysis, it’s what you want to happen.
AK-Gov/Sen: Poll from Data for Progress shows Mary Peltola in a strong position for Governor OR Senate, leading Nancy Dahlstrom in a hypothetical final round of RCV 65-35% or trailing Dan Sullivan just 46-45.
I really don’t believe that Governor result in the poll. Makes me suspect the whole sample is a massive outlier. If it’s not, however, 46% for a 2 term incumbent Senator is pretty bad when he won 54% of the vote in his 2020 re-election. But I’m of the opinion to ignore this poll completely due to that ridiculous margin.
The only way Peltola could win 2 to 1 in a hyper polarized country (even if voters are far more willing to split their ticket in a Governors race) is if Dahlstrom got caught with a live boy in bed or a dead person she killed either now or in the past. This feels like a push poll designed to show Peltola she can win in the Senate race (which is her toughest race to win, but also the most valuable to Democrats if she does win election).
To be fair, that’s about as well as LG Gilchrist is polling in Michigan’s Senate race, and the California LG just dropped out of the governor’s race because her polling was pretty comparable to that too.
People know their Governor, not the person who takes over for the Governor if they resign/die. See: NC Republicanformer Lt Gov Mark Robinson. They just vote for the party or the Governor if both are on the same ticket. The LG is invisible to most people.
40-42 Peltola-GOP seems eminently more believable. That over half of the people voting for a Republican in
the first round decide to swap over to Peltola if their candidate isn’t nominated is where this runs right off the road for me. I don’t see over 50% of R first round voters suddenly deciding to back Democrat Peltola, even for state government, which has less partisan loyalty than federal races.
We are way too polarized and partisan for that to be possible now. Maybe in the 1990’s you could see it, but not 2026. I know given previous election history in Alaska that GOP voters drop off more from the first round, but I don’t think it’s anywhere close to the amount needed to win 2 to 1 in the last vote. The starting numbers make sense, I could definitely see Peltola earn that 10% of crossover voters to make her Governor, just not by a 30 point margin instead of a less than 5 point close race win.
Re. “It's not clear why Cornyn thinks Texas officials require federal help to interpret YouTube livestreams featuring Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and a backdrop festooned with the URL "jbpritzker.com" to understand that at least some Democrats might be in Illinois.”
Maybe Cornyn is trying to give Kash Patel a win? I mean, it’s not “Where’s Waldo?” or anything requiring that degree of rigor. Maybe he thought Kash Patel could handle it and then he’d have some gloat material to use to distract from Trump’s Epstein files.
Cornyn's debasing of himself is just sad. Dude, you're 73 years old and in your fourth term. Just retire, enjoy the freedom that you've spent a career trying to deny the peons, and maintain a scrap of dignity.
Section 2 of the 14th Amendment requires that the census enumerate "the whole number of persons in each State." It is not clear why Ron De Santis supports Trump's demand that the census include only citizens. Since Florida and Texas are among the states with the highest percentage of non-citizens, they would lose representation to states such as West Virginia, Mississippi, and Montana, in which almost everyone is a citizen and thus counted for the allocation of federal funds and Congressional seats.
The simple answer is that considering undocumented immigrants non-persons is among the first steps in a fascist persecution whose end point in terms of persecution is as yet unclear.
Right, but that's because slaves had value and the rich people in the South wanted to keep them. Institutional enslavement as a stable basis of a plantation economy and dehumanizing people for the purpose of maintaining permanent slavery is very different from wanting to dehumanize people for the purpose of excluding them through expulsion. And I hope no-one reads that as a defense of slavery! Persecutions of Native American and Black people are most of what's horrible about this country, historically and today.
On the generic congressional ballot, Democrats have a 22-point advantage: 54% support the Democratic candidate while 32% support the Republican; 15% are undecided. (60-39 in 2024).
A third of voters (33%) support the proposal to redraw California’s congressional map ahead of the 2026 Midterm Elections, while a quarter (25%) oppose; 42% are unsure.
The opposition to redistricting in CA seems quite low; I would expect it to be at least as much the Republican percentage in the GCB.
The main problem that redistricting opponents are going to face is that the anti-redistricting coalition is Republicans and leftists, two groups of people who don't align on virtually every other political issue, and that's going to be awkward.
Lmao! You have no idea who I am or what I think, you’re obviously new here :) I’m conservative in any analysis, because I’ve been bitten too often for being an optimist. That doesn’t mean I actually hope undecideds split evenly lol! I guess no one’s allowed a different opinion than you eh, since you obviously know better than everyone else. Please see that door and walk right through or scroll on by if you don’t like or agree with my post/s (and it might behoove you to read more than just the only 1 post where I had a negative opinion on the data). You’re allowed to have an opinion just as much as I am. Have a nice day =D
So which is it? I should leave or I can have a different opinion? I’ve read your posts and stand by my question. That’s fine if you’re hesitant to be optimistic but other posters and readers should be aware of that when considering your opinions and predictions.
I’m quite a bit more surprised, given Kounalakis’ initial support and high-profile endorsements. That being said, I love Porter so this is good news for me.
I wasn't expecting that. I know she wasn't at the top of polls or fundraising but the expectation seemed to be that she was going to gain establishment support when Harris announced she wasn't going to run.
Top dems for this are now... Porter, Atkins, and Becerra, I assume?
No doubt Porter is the favorite right now. However, I suspect some of the people who endorsed Kounalakis will now endorse Atkins and try to rally support for her.
My only conceivable explanation? This is a part of an effort to clear the field for Toni Atkins. However, in reality, this might end up benefiting Katie Porter. I just don't see Atkins taking off.
Atkins starts with basically zero name rec. She'd need a big source of $$$ to break through. Porter's the only who was recently in a race that people paid any real attention to and this probably explains why she polls well. I think she would have a better shot if the field stayed splintered than if it came down to her and one or two real alternatives as was the case in 2024 when she got dusted in the Senate primary, getting about a quarter of the Dem vote when Schiff got more than half.
Look, if Trump & DeSantis wanna do another census, that's fine by me. I'd just want to let them know that there are indeed 12 people living at my house in Massachusetts, and no, none of them are dead, cats, or dead cats. ;)
The quacks and MomTok “wellness” influencers were always going to eat their own when their pseudoscientific bullshit didn’t rule the roost immediately but I didn’t expect the infighting to start quite this soon
IMO MAHA is one of the more dangerous pillars of the Trump coalition because this is where they were able to peel a TON of previously moderate-liberal or even leftie independent types off, and the “wellness” world’s grift has accelerated into hyperdrive the last 2-3 years in a way I didn’t think possible. Basically every big podcast about healthy living and exercise has to kowtow to these freaks now
Don't forget how many people in the MAHA movement are involved in some scam such as selling supplements in a pyramid scheme. MAGA is a safe space for every scammer and crackpot in the country.
Sure, same. It’s just something we need to keep an eye on. I found the argument that it was RFK stans flipping to Trump (low info Joe Rogan and MAHA types) when he dropped out that clinched the election convincing, and these people are legit lunatics with a lot more forward-looking cultural penetration than, say, evangelicals as the country continues to secularize
For sure, but these seem to be the most likely voters to just sit out the midterms if they feel betrayed in anyway by the Republican party. And having some MAHA primary runs that generate a lot of attention online within that community then go down in inevitable failure would turn a lot of those types of voters off.
Pesticides are overused but sometimes important, but antivax is a real killer! (Anti-pesticides would be, too, in a country where malaria is endemic, which the U.S. soon could be as a result of global warming.)
What do you mean? Malaria was endemic in the USA (southeast and gulf coast areas) until drainage projects, sanitation, and enough DDT to drive bald eagles to the endangered species list (which they've long since recovered from thankfully) all but eradicated the mosquito malaria vectors. Malaria was why the Jamestown Settlement had such a hard time and part of the reason General Cornwallis surrendered at Yorktown. New Orleans used to have mosquito-borne yellow fever epidemics too, one of which killed off almost 10% of the city's population.
I’ve heard of concerns related to neonicotinoids and the bee population decline as well, although I’m not in a place where I can really do a deep research dive right now so don’t quote me on this.
Also, I don’t think we should be downplaying the effects of DDT on bird populations — that would be blatantly unethical.
if CA Democrats had the guts and will, they easily could eliminate ALL the GOP districts and gain 9 districts while still maintaining VRA compliance and having contiguous districts. That's not counting potential districts we could gain from New York and New Jersey. There's likely more opportunities for us in blue districts, but the GOP idiots are playing a dangerous game that they won't win.
NY and NJ cannot happen before 2028. CA doing a 52-0 map can happen in time though.
I imagine what they go for depends a lot on what we see out of republican states. If Texas and Florida and Missouri and Indiana and Ohio all re-gerrymander, dems are going to be way more pissed off than they are right now. Currently it's only a hypothetical that most of our officials can ignore because that's how humans work, unfortunately.
Hochul sure seems to think the redraw can happen for 26. You guys remember the Ohio legislature just ignoring the Ohio Supreme Court? It’s not the time to be worried about the rules - the repubs aren’t worried about the rules.
Remember that the process of gerrymandering is called pack-and-crack for a reason. In Texas it involves creating slightly red districts by diluting blue districts with voters from nearby solidly red districts. That also results in red districts getting more blue voters, which makes them more vulnerable. Texas is mathematically very close to the point where gerrymandering could lose more than it wins.
Was that meant to be a reply to my comment? It appears you may have posted it as a separate comment by accident.
Is there a particular reason you believe this? Is it policy, personal scandals, etc.?
The Florida Supreme Court only ruled on the racial component of the redistricting amendment as related to federal law. It did not deal with other provisions such as the mandate that districts be compact, contiguous, and follow existing political and geographical boundaries. And the prohibition against districts being drawn or redrawn to favor or disfavor a political party.
SCOFL has shown no hesitancy to jettison parts of the constitution when it suits them, like the felons' voting rights amendment.
Not saying they wouldn't. Just that it would be more legally difficult than the other case because they couldn't use conflict with federal law as justification.
I mean lately the justification can be as simple as "because we want to" dressed up with pseudo legal language.
That was the same kind of BS reasoning the GOP controlled SCONC did in April 2023 when they revisited and undid the ruling against partisan gerrymandering. And a lot of people shrugged it off back then.
But after the shenanigans SCONC pulled, plus the NC Court of Appeals, in entertaining Jefferson Griffin's claims of voter fraud ticked off a LOT of NC voters. And should SCONC flip back to Dem control in 2028 or 2030, I want them to redraw the state and Congressional maps to heavily favor Democrats.
I'm all for fighting fire with fire until we get a stronger federal law banning partisan gerrymandering and reform the federal courts enabling it.
Sadly voters have never shown voter restrictions/election law/gerrymandering to be something they will base their votes on. The Dem establishment might have been ticked off but the average voter could probably care less.
It needs to be something Dems do, whenever they have a trifecta again, in the face of loud but ultimately meaningless opposition from Republicans.
Right. People have absolutely no understanding that they've lost control of deciding who wins in elections. If we get a scenario like Trump is pushing for, one party could win by 10+ points nationally yet still be in the minority because of the way the lines are drawn.
All that means is that their decision will be a more idiotic read.
Reading the statement is also a bit confusing. Are they going to bring suit against the court to see if they will topple the whole amendment first? Jacob Ogles, a political reporter for the state, also theorizes that this is to preempt DeSantis calling a special session and setting the agenda for them.
Could mean asking the court for an advisory opinion. But I don't see how provisions such as contiguous and compact districts in any way conflict with federal law.
Do Florida state courts offer advisory opinions?
They did when the issue was whether former felons had to pay imposed fines in order to be eligible to vote.
The Florida Supreme Court does, at the request of the governor, concerning a certain range of issues. https://supremecourt.flcourts.gov/News-Media/Advisory-Opinions-to-the-Governor
In Virginia, Jay Jones had a positive ad while the current AG went out all negative on Jones. I hope people are sick of these guys and the scare tactics.
Negative ads are theoretically unpopular but work. If this one doesn't, it probably won't be because it's negative.
Earle-Sears is going to get STEAMROLLED in Virginia this fall. Unforced error after unforced error. And that MAGA attorney general, Miyares, will be swept out along with her.
I hope the VA and NJ elections this year are a bad harbinger for the GOP next year. When voters are pissed off with Trump, it won't matter how hard red states re-gerrymander their districts, Rs WILL lose the House.
And if things really deteriorate in this country, the Senate will flip too.
My God, I hope you are right! I am very worried about the judges Trump is appointing. A Democratic Senate majority would put a stop to that. A House majority will, amongst other things, enable hearings that should prove devastating for Trumpists and MAGAs in 2028.
I think the continuous protests (specially the "Hands Off" ones), plus the special elections so far, show a shift that a lot of MSM outlets are outright ignoring.
If that means Dems sweep the 2026 midterms, flip back the House and gain a 51-52 Senate seat majority, that's a good start.
Continuous where? I haven't heard about one in New York for a couple of months or so.
Here in NC, I'm seeing more anti-Trump signage and single protesters in my suburban area of Durham, NC. I've never ever seen this kind of political activity outside of Raleigh before, even during the last Trump regime.
Trump's DOGE agenda has pissed off a LOT of people, including a portion of his own voters. Just because people don't participate in protests, they are angry, and they are itching to punish the NC GOP for enabling Trump.
I hope they do and their votes are counted, but individual protestors are really electorally meaningful?
I saw protests in Pittsboro during one Hands-Off day near the Chatham County Courthouse -- and it had heavy turnout. There were even protests in ruby red Moore County as well.
I agree that individual anecdotes must be taken with a huge grain of salt but something about this one struck a nerve with me: a neighbor is retired career US Marine officer...ardent MAGA in '16, '20 and'24. Sadly he is dying a slow, miserable death due to cardiac and respiratory issues. He told me yesterday that he will no longer fly the flag because everyone assumes that all flag flyers are MAGA and that he no longer can say he supports trump in anyway let alone consider himself MAGA. Why, "because trump has done so much to undermine the Constitution that I dedicated my life to upholding and my comrades (he actually used that word) died in my arms defending. I know I won't live to see him fall but God will see to it that it happens." I will be at his Military funeral.
It’s everywhere - it’s not reported but it’s grassroots and everywhere. I see a dedicated and growing group outside of Brian Steil’s district office twice a week. Every time I travel on 294 there is at least one overpass protest going on about the Epstein files. I see much more now than at this time in 2017. The disgust is palpable - a lot of ET and posters here missing the signs of pissed off pushback just like in 21-22.
Well that's good, but I'd like to hear about other demonstrations being organized in New York because I'd like to take part.
By the way, I think we should retain a strong healthy dose of skepticism in the seemingly unlikely prospect of Democratic U.S. Senate flips in states like Texas, Iowa, Ohio, and of course Collins' seat in Maine.
If Sherrod does run to regain his seat in Ohio next year, it goes to Lean Republican/Toss Up. Outgoing ME governor Janet Mills seems to be warming up to the idea of running to unseat Susan Collins.
BTW, Democrats were not expecting to flip the House in 2006, let alone both houses. But they did because voters were ticked off at Dumbya's actions during his second term. Perhaps we'll see a repeat of 2006.
Or perhaps we'll see a repeat of more recent cycles in which heavily Republican states declined to vote for a Democrat for Senate. And I'm very skeptical that Brown running in Ohio would move that race beyond Lean-R.
Brown was re-elected in 2018 during the first Trump midterm. He lost last year only because FDJT was on the ballot with him.
Really? At what point in the 2006 cycle did the Dems not think they were picking up the House? By November 2005, it seemed like a pretty solid bet that the House was gone for the GOP by my recollection. You're right about that the Senate though. Even on the night of the election, I didn't think they'd pull off the inside straight that year.
I was a teenager so I don't remember it too well personally but I do remember "permanent realignment" was a thing for a while in 2005. I think by 06 though there was some strong indications the house could flip and by that Summer the Senate started looking possible in a stars align sense.
I was working in the House for DCCC Chair Rahm Emanuel. When he proclaimed Democrats would reclaim the House in the midterms he was widely ridiculed. But he led a recruitment drive intending to put as many seats in play as possible so when W’s approval rating collapsed after Katrina, Democrats were prepared to win.
Yes, I readily admit the odds are heavily against us. But by recruiting the best possible candidates and fighting like hell we are raising our odds. That’s the best we can do.
Absolutely! So far, my impression is that recruitment for the House and definitely the Senate has been excellent. That's one of the things that should make us optimistic, but some sobriety is still advisable.
the odds are against us but I would say no longer "heavily" against us.
I think if the economic floor falls out from under us there will be some 2006 level surprises.
Yeah, as of today I strongly suspect we'd get Sen. Cooper in NC, and f*ckall else.
I fear that possibility, and I do think it's quite possible.
I think we've got quite a good shot in ME and a decent shot in OH, if Brown runs. TX and IA, I agree with you are longshots, although Paxton winning the primary would at least put TX in play.
Agree with in play. It's really unclear to me how much of a shot there is to defeat Collins, and I won't bet against her until she actually loses the vote.
Emphasis on the word "should." All the facts known about Trump should have destroyed his political career 10,000 times over and put him in prison, but the U.S. doesn't put criminal presidents in prison, and therefore, we are in this predicament.
The Spanberger campaign is WAY ahead of where McAuliffe was four years ago. I get calls EVERY week from their field asking to lit drop on the weekend. I've done it twice - both in 90 degree plus weather - and will do so again when I get back to Virginia. The McAuliffe campaign was never on board like this. It's a good sign so far.
Thank you for taking the time out of weekends to do that.
Plus, Youngkin was always stronger than Earle-Sears. (Sadly, being white, male, tall, and rich still counts for a lot in US politics.)
Why the field was cleared for her, I still don't know. It's not like there's any shortage of conservative, rich folks in Virginia.
I will try to ask this in the most delicate way possible, and if anyone feels offended by it, feel free to have it deleted or flagged. What is is with the GOP attracting the most extreme and quixotic African American candidates? The last moderate African American conservative I can recall was Colin Powell, god rest his soul oh and John James I suppose. I have seen Clarence Thomas, Alan Keyes, Herman Cain, Ben Carson, Larry Elder, Herschel Walker and now Winsome Sears. All of them are either far right or have some controversy of corruption or abuse behind them. I am not sure if there's a pattern here but perhaps someone better versed on the topic of conservatism among African Americans can enlighten me?
I'm likewise going to try and be as broad and circumspect as possible in my response. Basically, (1.) the GOP isn't a party that rewards middle-of-the-road candidates (and hasn't been since at least the Tea Party era), and (2.) there's also a lot of attention/remuneration to be had by being a nonwhite political figure who espouses views that validate and reinforce the ignorance and prejudices of conservative white people.
You forgot Mark Robinson R-NC. He is both far-right and scandal-prone.
I think that many of the GOP Black and Latino candidates are in the game because they are contrarians and just like the attention they receive as candidates, even when their chances of being elected are minimal to nonexistent. For some of them it is pure grift as well; running for office is their job.
John James is not a moderate - he’s a rank and file maga cultist that has never laid claim to an original idea for the duration of his silver spoon existence.
My hopium is both Republicans lose by high single or low double digits in 2025 elections creating a massive stampede of panicked retirements from the GOP in vulnerable seats from people not wanting to lose their careers in the coming wave.
I've learned to take his predictions with a grain of the finest salt, but FWIW, James Carville seems to think that Spanberger is on track for a double-digit rout.
Yeah, the hopium is more directed toward NJ than VA, which I believe will be a rout. I’m nervous NJ is about to transition to being a purple state every cycle rather than a solid Democratic one. I’m also hearing about problems with Spanberger’s support among black voters, which could allow Republicans to hold on in districts they should be losing in a double digit statewide win. But we’ll see if either ends up actually happening or not.
I think NJ is still a blue state, just possibly with a lighter blue tint. It really comes down to whether GOP gains with minority voters who make up 48% of the of the population and, particularly, Hispanic voters (21%) are lasting or not.
Agreed. I do feel like the gubernatorial result might offer some hints as to whether the shift is indeed a lasting one.
Do purple states have supermajorities in the legislature? C’mon man the gloom and doom is a bit much.
You’re allowed to have an opinion different from mine and I’m allowed to have one different from yours. My “gloom and doom” turned out to be very right had I espoused it in 2024. I’m preventing myself from being disappointed and trying to be conservative.
I would suggest you ask my opinion before assuming mine wrongly. I’m just saying what I’ve heard. There’s plenty of time for that to change. It may not matter at all when election day gets tallied, but if you aren’t at least a little concerned in areas Democrats have recently struggled in, then you aren’t trying to be realistic.
I hope NJ is a one-off in 2024. I hope VA has massive rural black voter turnout. Hope isn’t analysis, it’s what you want to happen.
I think that's the likely outcome. Northam won by 9 in 2017 and McConnel by 17 (!!!) in 2009.
AK-Gov/Sen: Poll from Data for Progress shows Mary Peltola in a strong position for Governor OR Senate, leading Nancy Dahlstrom in a hypothetical final round of RCV 65-35% or trailing Dan Sullivan just 46-45.
https://x.com/PollTracker2024/status/1953805067061989810?s=19
I really don’t believe that Governor result in the poll. Makes me suspect the whole sample is a massive outlier. If it’s not, however, 46% for a 2 term incumbent Senator is pretty bad when he won 54% of the vote in his 2020 re-election. But I’m of the opinion to ignore this poll completely due to that ridiculous margin.
The only way Peltola could win 2 to 1 in a hyper polarized country (even if voters are far more willing to split their ticket in a Governors race) is if Dahlstrom got caught with a live boy in bed or a dead person she killed either now or in the past. This feels like a push poll designed to show Peltola she can win in the Senate race (which is her toughest race to win, but also the most valuable to Democrats if she does win election).
The first round results are interesting as well:
*Peltola (D): 40*
Businesswoman Bernadette Wilson (R): 11
LG Nancy Dahlstrom (R): 10
Fmr. State Sen. Click Bishop (R): 6
*State Sen. Tom Begich (D): 6*
Dept. of Revenue Commissioner Adam Crum: 4
*AG Treg Taylor (R): 3*
Mat-Su Mayor Edna DeVries (R): 2
*: not officially in the race.
These numbers seem more believable.
10% for Dahlstrom is believable? That seems very low for a Lieutenant Governor. Is she somehow pretty unpopular?
To be fair, that’s about as well as LG Gilchrist is polling in Michigan’s Senate race, and the California LG just dropped out of the governor’s race because her polling was pretty comparable to that too.
Ok, points taken.
Eleni dropped out?!
Gilchrist is running for Governor, but the mix up indicates how low profile his race has been.
People know their Governor, not the person who takes over for the Governor if they resign/die. See: NC Republicanformer Lt Gov Mark Robinson. They just vote for the party or the Governor if both are on the same ticket. The LG is invisible to most people.
40-42 Peltola-GOP seems eminently more believable. That over half of the people voting for a Republican in
the first round decide to swap over to Peltola if their candidate isn’t nominated is where this runs right off the road for me. I don’t see over 50% of R first round voters suddenly deciding to back Democrat Peltola, even for state government, which has less partisan loyalty than federal races.
We are way too polarized and partisan for that to be possible now. Maybe in the 1990’s you could see it, but not 2026. I know given previous election history in Alaska that GOP voters drop off more from the first round, but I don’t think it’s anywhere close to the amount needed to win 2 to 1 in the last vote. The starting numbers make sense, I could definitely see Peltola earn that 10% of crossover voters to make her Governor, just not by a 30 point margin instead of a less than 5 point close race win.
Re. “It's not clear why Cornyn thinks Texas officials require federal help to interpret YouTube livestreams featuring Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and a backdrop festooned with the URL "jbpritzker.com" to understand that at least some Democrats might be in Illinois.”
Maybe Cornyn is trying to give Kash Patel a win? I mean, it’s not “Where’s Waldo?” or anything requiring that degree of rigor. Maybe he thought Kash Patel could handle it and then he’d have some gloat material to use to distract from Trump’s Epstein files.
He's just grandstanding to try and save himself in the primary against Paxton.
No doubt. I’m just trying to highlight what Republican leaders do to carry the discourse away from Epstein—in order to bring it back to Epstein.
Cornyn's debasing of himself is just sad. Dude, you're 73 years old and in your fourth term. Just retire, enjoy the freedom that you've spent a career trying to deny the peons, and maintain a scrap of dignity.
Section 2 of the 14th Amendment requires that the census enumerate "the whole number of persons in each State." It is not clear why Ron De Santis supports Trump's demand that the census include only citizens. Since Florida and Texas are among the states with the highest percentage of non-citizens, they would lose representation to states such as West Virginia, Mississippi, and Montana, in which almost everyone is a citizen and thus counted for the allocation of federal funds and Congressional seats.
The simple answer is that considering undocumented immigrants non-persons is among the first steps in a fascist persecution whose end point in terms of persecution is as yet unclear.
Slaves were not considered people yet southern states wanted them to count in the census just to boost their power.
Right, but that's because slaves had value and the rich people in the South wanted to keep them. Institutional enslavement as a stable basis of a plantation economy and dehumanizing people for the purpose of maintaining permanent slavery is very different from wanting to dehumanize people for the purpose of excluding them through expulsion. And I hope no-one reads that as a defense of slavery! Persecutions of Native American and Black people are most of what's horrible about this country, historically and today.
3/5ths of a person.
Well the south wanted to count them completely.
Furthermore, there are high hurdles and restrictions in order to conduct a census outside of the normal years as I went into detail about yesterday.
California Emerson poll:
On the generic congressional ballot, Democrats have a 22-point advantage: 54% support the Democratic candidate while 32% support the Republican; 15% are undecided. (60-39 in 2024).
A third of voters (33%) support the proposal to redraw California’s congressional map ahead of the 2026 Midterm Elections, while a quarter (25%) oppose; 42% are unsure.
https://emersoncollegepolling.com/california-2026-poll/
It's Emerson, but the initial figures on redistricting, while concerning, are better than I expected.
The high number of unsure voters could work in our favor, assuming we can find a way to convince them to vote for this.
Of course; that's the ballgame.
From my understanding, it will be made contingent on what Texas does. That should help with the undecided.
The opposition to redistricting in CA seems quite low; I would expect it to be at least as much the Republican percentage in the GCB.
The main problem that redistricting opponents are going to face is that the anti-redistricting coalition is Republicans and leftists, two groups of people who don't align on virtually every other political issue, and that's going to be awkward.
Split the undecided and nothing apparently has changed for California voters since 2024. Not very encouraging poll tbqh.
Zero chance the undecideds split evenly. Are you just here to be a constant pessimist?
Lmao! You have no idea who I am or what I think, you’re obviously new here :) I’m conservative in any analysis, because I’ve been bitten too often for being an optimist. That doesn’t mean I actually hope undecideds split evenly lol! I guess no one’s allowed a different opinion than you eh, since you obviously know better than everyone else. Please see that door and walk right through or scroll on by if you don’t like or agree with my post/s (and it might behoove you to read more than just the only 1 post where I had a negative opinion on the data). You’re allowed to have an opinion just as much as I am. Have a nice day =D
So which is it? I should leave or I can have a different opinion? I’ve read your posts and stand by my question. That’s fine if you’re hesitant to be optimistic but other posters and readers should be aware of that when considering your opinions and predictions.
We have one fewer candidate for Governor of California next year. Lieutenant Governor Eleni Koulanakis (D-CA) is running for Treasurer instead. https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/california-news/california-governor-race-eleni-kounalakis/3761429/
Slightly surprised. Probably helps Porter a bit.
I’m quite a bit more surprised, given Kounalakis’ initial support and high-profile endorsements. That being said, I love Porter so this is good news for me.
That and she announced during the Pleistocene epoch.
I don’t think she had that much initial support TBH
I wasn't expecting that. I know she wasn't at the top of polls or fundraising but the expectation seemed to be that she was going to gain establishment support when Harris announced she wasn't going to run.
Top dems for this are now... Porter, Atkins, and Becerra, I assume?
No doubt Porter is the favorite right now. However, I suspect some of the people who endorsed Kounalakis will now endorse Atkins and try to rally support for her.
she kept such a low profile while AG I wonder if this worked against her campaign for Gov.?
Evidently, her profile was so low, it's easy to mix up which office she held!
(LG, not AG).
Also, as this thread shows, nobody can remember how to spell her name...thank god she's not a write-in candidate.
yes, thanks
I'm surprised, particularly after the apparent endorsements. Now will former Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf change to some other race?
WOW! I'm shook.
My only conceivable explanation? This is a part of an effort to clear the field for Toni Atkins. However, in reality, this might end up benefiting Katie Porter. I just don't see Atkins taking off.
Atkins starts with basically zero name rec. She'd need a big source of $$$ to break through. Porter's the only who was recently in a race that people paid any real attention to and this probably explains why she polls well. I think she would have a better shot if the field stayed splintered than if it came down to her and one or two real alternatives as was the case in 2024 when she got dusted in the Senate primary, getting about a quarter of the Dem vote when Schiff got more than half.
Look, if Trump & DeSantis wanna do another census, that's fine by me. I'd just want to let them know that there are indeed 12 people living at my house in Massachusetts, and no, none of them are dead, cats, or dead cats. ;)
The quacks and MomTok “wellness” influencers were always going to eat their own when their pseudoscientific bullshit didn’t rule the roost immediately but I didn’t expect the infighting to start quite this soon
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/08/08/maha-trump-kennedy-pesticides-vaccines-split-00499108
IMO MAHA is one of the more dangerous pillars of the Trump coalition because this is where they were able to peel a TON of previously moderate-liberal or even leftie independent types off, and the “wellness” world’s grift has accelerated into hyperdrive the last 2-3 years in a way I didn’t think possible. Basically every big podcast about healthy living and exercise has to kowtow to these freaks now
Don't forget how many people in the MAHA movement are involved in some scam such as selling supplements in a pyramid scheme. MAGA is a safe space for every scammer and crackpot in the country.
I'm all for dirty hippies primarying Republicans in rural districts on an anti-pesticide platform. Have fun storming the castle!
Sure, same. It’s just something we need to keep an eye on. I found the argument that it was RFK stans flipping to Trump (low info Joe Rogan and MAHA types) when he dropped out that clinched the election convincing, and these people are legit lunatics with a lot more forward-looking cultural penetration than, say, evangelicals as the country continues to secularize
For sure, but these seem to be the most likely voters to just sit out the midterms if they feel betrayed in anyway by the Republican party. And having some MAHA primary runs that generate a lot of attention online within that community then go down in inevitable failure would turn a lot of those types of voters off.
Pesticides are overused but sometimes important, but antivax is a real killer! (Anti-pesticides would be, too, in a country where malaria is endemic, which the U.S. soon could be as a result of global warming.)
What do you mean? Malaria was endemic in the USA (southeast and gulf coast areas) until drainage projects, sanitation, and enough DDT to drive bald eagles to the endangered species list (which they've long since recovered from thankfully) all but eradicated the mosquito malaria vectors. Malaria was why the Jamestown Settlement had such a hard time and part of the reason General Cornwallis surrendered at Yorktown. New Orleans used to have mosquito-borne yellow fever epidemics too, one of which killed off almost 10% of the city's population.
There are some harmful effects from pesticides on humans though.
https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/human-health-issues-related-pesticides
I’ve heard of concerns related to neonicotinoids and the bee population decline as well, although I’m not in a place where I can really do a deep research dive right now so don’t quote me on this.
Also, I don’t think we should be downplaying the effects of DDT on bird populations — that would be blatantly unethical.
Right, but warming is likely to revive malaria in the U.S.
There's a special place in Hades for RFK, Jr. Or at least I hope so.
12 NEW RED SEATS?
House Republicans now look like they are aiming for 12 new GOP seats in their mid-decade redistricting push.
Texas - 5
Florida - 3+
Missouri - 1
Indiana - 1 (we'll see!)
Ohio - 2-3
https://nitter.poast.org/JakeSherman/status/1953814477398302759#m
if CA Democrats had the guts and will, they easily could eliminate ALL the GOP districts and gain 9 districts while still maintaining VRA compliance and having contiguous districts. That's not counting potential districts we could gain from New York and New Jersey. There's likely more opportunities for us in blue districts, but the GOP idiots are playing a dangerous game that they won't win.
NY and NJ cannot happen before 2028. CA doing a 52-0 map can happen in time though.
I imagine what they go for depends a lot on what we see out of republican states. If Texas and Florida and Missouri and Indiana and Ohio all re-gerrymander, dems are going to be way more pissed off than they are right now. Currently it's only a hypothetical that most of our officials can ignore because that's how humans work, unfortunately.
Hochul sure seems to think the redraw can happen for 26. You guys remember the Ohio legislature just ignoring the Ohio Supreme Court? It’s not the time to be worried about the rules - the repubs aren’t worried about the rules.
Remember that the process of gerrymandering is called pack-and-crack for a reason. In Texas it involves creating slightly red districts by diluting blue districts with voters from nearby solidly red districts. That also results in red districts getting more blue voters, which makes them more vulnerable. Texas is mathematically very close to the point where gerrymandering could lose more than it wins.