177 Comments
User's avatar
James Shelton's avatar

You should focus on Iowa State Senate District 1 Special Election. Could be a game changer.

Expand full comment
Maggie Bennett's avatar

Go Gavin Newsom!

Expand full comment
homerun1's avatar

Wow. California redistricting! California Democrats may actually attempt to do this thing. It isn't just Newsom daydreaming.

~~~

From: https://politicalwire.com/2025/07/17/house-democrats-ready-to-redistrict-california/

House Democrats Ready to Redistrict California

“California Democrats are charging ahead with an ambitious and potentially expensive plan to squeeze between five and seven more Democratic seats out of their congressional map,” Punchbowl News reports."

“California Democrats were overwhelmingly on board with drawing a new map, but members want input in how the lines are drawn.”

Expand full comment
homerun1's avatar

I was skeptical before, but this could work. Since we have supermajorities in both CA chambers (meaning the Repubs can do nothing to stop it), they can place a Proposition on the ballot for the electorate to vote on changing the state constitution.

There would need to be a special statewide election called (either by the legislature or the governor) just for this ballot measure well in advance of the June 2026 primary to allow time for the new CD lines to be drawn. (it might be best to push back the June date a few months, too).

Also, I would just change it to just remove the House redistricting role from the Citizens Commission, while leaving it in place to still do the state legislative lines in 2032 (which might be a good idea to help sell the Proposition to the voters).

Here's another story. From the Sacramento Bee:

Gov. Gavin Newsom mulls special election to redistrict California

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article310796670.html

Expand full comment
Toiler On the Sea's avatar

I'm thinking the way CA districts are currently structured there's less potential for dummymanders than in Texas?

Expand full comment
Aaron Apollo Camp's avatar

This will run into intra-party headwinds at some point in the process, either in the state legislature, or, if it reaches that far, the ballot box.

Expand full comment
Zack from the SFV's avatar

Yes, I am very skeptical that this will happen, or is even doable. At least the primary will be in June, not March. In presidential years the CA primary is nowadays held in early March, but without it we are back to the traditional June primary in the Golden State.

Even if such a ballot measure succeeds (and I am doubtful that it would pass), that is not much time to draw the districts, have candidate filing and get to early June with it all ready to go.

Expand full comment
homerun1's avatar

A one-time push back of the primary date from June to say Aug could easily be included in the deal to get more time if needed.

The far bigger problem is how to market a gerrymander to the voters.

The GOP, California & national party, will fight tooth and nail, spend massively, and will demonize this scheme in every way possible.

Expand full comment
ArcticStones's avatar

In these dark times, it is heartening and highly amusing how Agent Orange is unwittingly helping liberal and democratically-minded parties throughout the Western World and elsewhere: Canada, Australia, Germany, Norway, Brazil, etc etc.

Expand full comment
Toiler On the Sea's avatar

Yeah he's been single-handidly pushing out life-vests to previously doomed left of center global leaders since February.

Expand full comment
John Carr's avatar

Until we can get a national federal law uniformly putting commissions in place in all states, I guess we have no choice but to do this. I’m still very disappointed that Dems didn’t go more aggressive in NY (I.e. attaching parts of Lower Manhattan to Staten Island for NY-11 and swapping out Lawler’s best parts of Rockland for more of Westchester in NY-17). That probably would have given Dems two more seats.

Expand full comment
PollJunkie's avatar

https://x.com/electionsjoe/status/1945636913110479274

Electionsjoe eliminates an Austin and an Houston seat and it's a dummymander if Democrats win Biden margins among minorities. (which imo is a very real possibility)

Expand full comment
Patntx's avatar

What are we looking at here? The two pictures look identical.

Expand full comment
dragonfire5004's avatar

We’re at the point of the Trump term where Democrats are so mad, Democratic candidates running for GOP held seats are raising what used to be 3 month fundraising numbers in only 1 or 2 days.

https://nitter.poast.org/jamesd0wns/status/1945623372148125817#m

James Downs @jamesd0wns

4h

#PA10: Janelle Stelson (D) raises $500k in her first ~48~ hours since launching her rematch campaign against Rep. Scott Perry

Expand full comment
Brad Warren's avatar

Perry needs to be gone yesterday.

Expand full comment
Zero Cool's avatar

Gone like the other Perry, Rick Perry, hopefully!

Expand full comment
dragonfire5004's avatar

Ohio Democrats have a solution to whatever the new map looks like.

https://nitter.poast.org/jpelzer/status/1945842120855625912#m

.@AndrewJTobias has a good piece on Dems eyeing a repeal referendum on any Ohio congressional redistricting map GOP lawmakers pass.

Strategist: “I don’t think national Dems would bat an eye at dropping a couple million in Ohio to fund a signature effort"

signalohio.bluelena.io/index…

Expand full comment
John Carr's avatar

I guess we would need to see how bad the map is. I think if Kaptur retires, OH-09 is probably gone even without a redraw unfortunately.

Expand full comment
MPC's avatar

Wouldn't the GOP controlled Ohio Board of Elections purposefully distort and exaggerate the repeal referendum wording? They did that on the independent redistricting amendment last year and successfully got it voted down.

Expand full comment
dragonfire5004's avatar

Yes they would and yes they did, but that doesn’t mean another well funded campaign couldn’t come out successful.

For 1, Ohio voters in 2024 voted to keep what they had as “good enough” and reject change in a No vote. This time voters will be voting on these new maps and whether they reject change from what they had. If the map is as bad as they say it will be, the choice is then completely different to the average voter this time around.

Not to mention running the measure in a likely blue leaning year where Republicans stay home and Democrats turnout. We gotta fight, even if we lose, because it’s worth doing.

Expand full comment
MPC's avatar

I would love to see the OH Supreme Court majority get narrowed down from 6-1 to 5-2 if Dems and independent voters are mad enough.

Expand full comment
John Carr's avatar

The fact that Republicans defended the current redistricting commission (stacked in their favor) as being something that prevents gerrymandering, I think it could lead to an actual successful legit commission ballot campaign if Republicans go too crazy on this redraw. If they try and pull something ridiculous looking with OH-01 (the only way to make that district R leaning), how can they possibly argue that the current commission prevents gerrymandering?

Expand full comment
dragonfire5004's avatar

Exactly, the dynamics are completely inverted from what happened with the 2024 ballot measure. Even if that weren’t the case though, you don’t stop because you lost. You try again and again until you win. The GOP fought for 50 years to undo Roe V Wade until they succeeded, but they never stopped trying. We need to have that stamina and fortitude.

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

They can argue that because Republicans are habitual liars and Republican voters believe the lies or are so stupid and brainwashed, they can't tell the difference and don't care. So yes, it's worth trying, but let's not have confidence that it'll work.

Expand full comment
Buckeye73's avatar

The problem has been that the GOP Secretary of State will play games with the language that appears on the ballot. They have done this twice, and the partisan hacks on the Ohio Supreme Court will allow this.

Expand full comment
Techno00's avatar

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/harry-enten-reality-check-democrats_n_6878be27e4b0b08368f4e74d

Saw this in HuffPost today. Apparently Dems are struggling in polling in the generic ballot, particularly compared to 2018 and 2006. The CNN data analyst seems to think we’re headed for another 2024.

Thoughts? Not sure how I feel about this so I’m curious as to what those here think.

Expand full comment
MPC's avatar

I don't trust anything that comes from CNN. They're the new Fox.

Expand full comment
Paleo's avatar

Have Trump job approval at 44-56.

Expand full comment
Techno00's avatar

Me neither, to be frank. Hence why I asked.

Expand full comment
Brad Warren's avatar

There's going to be a lot of this garbage over the next year and a half, because (1.) the legacy media want another "fizzled wave" à la 2022, and (2.) the legacy media are dying and will do anything to get views and clicks, and they know that giving Democrats heartburn is a surefire way to do so.

Expand full comment
Nathaniel Smith-Tyge's avatar

No one said it was going to be easy but Enten is a clickbait sideshow. Ask yourself if gop internals were looking close would they be trying this Texas redistricting stuff? Would trump be publicly pleading with Nunn to run again in Iowa?

I think the generic numbers reflect more Dem voter frustration with Congressional leadership than some quiet support for trump. Those folks are much likely to come home as the daily nonsense from trump and crew continue. I’m not saying we should light victory cigars but the concern trolling by Enten is just engagement fishing from a more obnoxious version of Kornacki.

Expand full comment
PollJunkie's avatar

We really should replace Schumer with Klobuchar or Schatz, he's taking the party down. I am not even talking about his actions, his image is really bad and his approval is so much worse than Trump.

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

Not Schatz. Did Klobuchar vote against the Trump budget bill Schumer and Schatz voted for?

Expand full comment
Brad Warren's avatar

Yep, not long ago Enten was touting some poll that (he claimed) showed that "MOAH AMERICANS AGREE WITH MAGA THAN EVAH BEFOAH!"

Yeah, sure Harry.

Expand full comment
slothlax's avatar

I feel like the Peter Principle applies to Enten. He was great on the 538 podcast, but his schtick doesn't translate well on a more mainstream platform like CNN IMO.

Expand full comment
Paleo's avatar

There’s hardly been any GCB polling.

Expand full comment
Toiler On the Sea's avatar

Right. Going off of votehub barely any high quality firms have done GCB polling the past 2 months.

Expand full comment
rayspace's avatar

I think there's a real possibility that generic D continues to do badly, but individual D candidates, even in red or pink areas, do well. It may be that '26 is not as much a national election as some recent mid-terms. The old "I hate Congress, but love my Congressperson" may become "I don't like Democrats overall, but my person is good." And it doesn't have to be someone who's an insufferable moderate, either.

Expand full comment
Zero Cool's avatar

Harry Enten seems to forget that Democrats have been sweeping races all across the country. And not just in blue states.

Also, with all due respect, pollsters were wrong about 2024. Now all of a sudden we’re led to believe they know 2026 will be another 2024?

Expand full comment
Brad Warren's avatar

We now have years of high-quality polling (i.e., actual election results) that shows that Trump's coalition fails to turn out when he's not on the ballot—including in a 2022 midterm that should have been a layup for the GOP.

Expand full comment
Zero Cool's avatar

Yes although it should be noted that in the 2018 midterms Democrats got a net -2 loss in the Senate even while gaining two seats. This takes into account the four Senate seats in Florida, Indiana, Missouri and North Dakota.

FL had pretty good turnout on both the Democratic Party and GOP's side.

Expand full comment
brendan fka HoosierD42's avatar

It's in vogue for Democrats/center-left voters more broadly to hate on the Democratic party so that likely depresses numbers.

Expand full comment
the lurking ecologist's avatar

Right. If a pollster asked me if I approve the the job the Dem party is doing today, I'd say hell no. If they asked who I would vote for in the next election, I'd say Dems, ofc. If they asked which party better reflects your values, I'd again say the Dems. If there was a viable center left party that had better leadership than Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries, my answers might change. But as much as I wish Rainbow Dash and Twilight Sparkle were real, we don't live in Equestria.

Expand full comment
Samuel Sero's avatar

It's completely stupid to compare 2006 and even 2018 midterm numbers any way.

Expand full comment
Techno00's avatar

They actually sell Mexican Coke in supermarkets, which (to my understanding) is made with cane sugar. I’ve seen it at Wegmans. It’s not like it’s impossible to get.

Expand full comment
Aaron Apollo Camp's avatar

I've seen it at Meijer stores, and I live in the southwestern part of their territory.

Expand full comment
Justin Gibson's avatar

Meijer may be expanding to my part of Illinois, with at least one or possibly two stores.

Expand full comment
slothlax's avatar

I absolutely hate Wegmans, total bougie elitist pricks. When they closed their oldest store in Syracuse, which was within walking distance of my house, they weren't even losing money, they were just like "We're better than you, bye!"

Expand full comment
Techno00's avatar

Was unaware of that. I shop there mainly because most of our supermarkets are not great or poorly stocked in our area. Sadly, Wegmans is cheaper than some of them, actually.

Expand full comment
slothlax's avatar

My personal grudge against Wegmans is just that and I don't have any actual problem with anyone who shops at Wegmans, it's also a source of Upstate NY pride that I embrace. I just won't shop there myself.

Expand full comment
MPC's avatar

Wegmans is cheaper than a lot of the mainstays here in NC (save Aldi and Lidl), like Harris Teeter and Food Lion. Their staples are reasonably priced, but my main complaint is how expensive their prepared food is. Although if I'm in a bad mood and I'm in Wegmans, I'll gladly plonk down $15 for their lobster mac and cheese, that stuff is GOOD.

Expand full comment
slothlax's avatar

Wegmans is awesome. That's why I'm so bitter they abandoned me. I got dumped by my grocery store!

Expand full comment
JanusIanitos's avatar

I've never been to one but they're known to be the second best option in New England, after Market Basket. Only hindered by the small number of stores they have in the region, currently only in MA but I think they're expanding out to CT.

It's interesting how strongly we can feel about grocery store options. I'd argue a clear example of the free market failing, as it's a highly competitive industry but has not worked down to prices and services being aggressively matched between chains.

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

A branch of Wegman's opened on Astor Place after years of construction, and I stopped going there after a while when I got some of their premium-priced cheese that had that terrible chemical taste that badly cared-for cheese get in supermarkets. If I'm paying a premium price for your cheese, you don't get a second chance when you do something that bad.

Expand full comment
Ethan (KingofSpades)'s avatar

Chipotle has sold it for years. I don't buy it, though, because I don't often drink any sodas (although I do like Coke Zero, it tastes better than Diet) and almost never sugary ones.

Expand full comment
Zero Cool's avatar

Being that we’re talking about banning high fructose corn syrup from Coke, I support the premise of this.

Except the problem is, Trump isn’t exactly working to ensure the agriculture industry is making the transition away from this element in soda.

Expand full comment
PollJunkie's avatar

Is there any scientific evidence that high fructose corn syrup is worse than cane sugar?

Expand full comment
Zero Cool's avatar

It's worse in that it has a high concentration of fructose, which is meant as a sweetener. Cane sugar has a more genuine taste but I wouldn't go so far as to say it's healthier to have it.

Per what this nurse had posted about it on Healthline, she mentioned that while mild intake of high fructose corn syrup (say one soda per month with it) isn't bad, it's excessive consumption that leads to significant health problems overtime if proper nutrition is not addressed.

The thing is, more and more products in the U.S. were already moving away from high fructose corn syrup so the market shift has been slowly but surely trending for some time. I see this at Safeway, Sprouts and other groceries stores.

ttps://www.healthline.com/nutrition/high-fructose-corn-syrup-vs-sugar

Expand full comment
Mark's avatar

Right. Either he hasn't thought this through enough (imagine that!) or he'll simply tell corn growers "where else are you gonna go?"

Expand full comment
Aaron Apollo Camp's avatar

Interesting that Trump is pushing to remove HFCS from Coke (which Trump is a well-known consumer of) and not Pepsi.

Expand full comment
Zack from the SFV's avatar

I thought that Donald drinks Diet Coke, not the stuff with the sugar. Why should he care?

Expand full comment
Mark's avatar

He probably expects that if Coke leads the charge on this, with the requisite publicity that will come with it, Pepsi and others will follow.

Expand full comment
Martybooks's avatar

FL Supreme Court just eviscerated the FL Fair Districts Amendment and placed all of FL's VRA districts at serious risk. Another redstricting coming in FL? https://supremecourt.flcourts.gov/content/download/2454794/opinion/Opinion_SC2023-1671.pdf

Expand full comment
Paleo's avatar

They upheld the elimination of the AA district in North Florida. Saying that the federal equal protection clause, as interpreted by the Roberts court, trumps Florida’s FDA. The decision preserves the status quo, which is a DeSantis gerrymander

Expand full comment
SCOTT BRIZARD's avatar

Definitely think Newsom and CA Dems should do this and play immediate hardball. The GOP has already gotten away with aggressive gerrymanders in 4 states that cost Dems seats, as previously documented here on downballot ( TN, NC, FL, and TX). California should highlight the fact as press during their upcoming special session!

Expand full comment
Paleo's avatar

They should only do it if Texas redraws its map.

Expand full comment
dragonfire5004's avatar

I mean, if they don’t do it this time, the next Republican president will get them to. May as well try to rip the bandaid off completely now when it’s most likely to succeed. I don’t care about fairness, do whatever it takes to ensure Democrats win power and Trump’s GOP don’t.

Unilateral disarmament in blue states have cost us a blockade of Trump’s agenda right now. So why exactly should we not push forward regardless? Because of a fear that Republicans will do more of what they’ve already done? That doesn’t make sense! Get our partisans on board and cut the GOP held seats to shreds in states we control.

It’s what the opposition was going to do to us eventually. Everyone knows that (and has witnessed parts of it already). Then gain back control in purple states and do the same. This whole “we punch back only after being hit” mantra from Democrats against Republicans needs to end. Punch first and knock them out.

Expand full comment
Guy's avatar

Also blame some very winnable races Dems choked on. FL-GOV 2018, GA-GOV 2018, NC Supreme Court races.

Expand full comment
PollJunkie's avatar

That damn billionaire went scorched earth on Gwen Graham and tanked her in the primary polls, leading to a corrupt progressive druggie mayor becoming the nominee. Without that, Graham closes down Florida during the pandemic, there is no mass MAGA exodus from California and NY to Florida and it remains a swing state.

Expand full comment
Guy's avatar

Also, probably no Rick Scott in the senate. And possibly a quick call for Biden in FL, which kills Stop The Steal in the bud and possibly Trump 2024 with it.

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

Biden winning FL? That seems excessive to even suggest.

Expand full comment
PollJunkie's avatar

Why not? He lost by 3 points and it's well known that Jeb Bush's high approval led to Florida not being in play in 2004. Gretchen Whitmer's approval may also have helped Biden in Michigan.

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

Suggesting a Governor Gwen Graham would have closed down Florida during the pandemic and that she would have been so popular, she was responsible for 3% more votes for Biden seems incongruous.

Expand full comment
PollJunkie's avatar

Polling showed that lockdowns were popular during the first wave and Trump's opposition to them hurt him.

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

Including in Florida?

Expand full comment
slothlax's avatar

I seriously doubt the migration patterns of people moving from NY and CA to FL would change in any meaningful way if Gwen Graham was governor instead of DeSantis.

Expand full comment
PollJunkie's avatar

They movement accelerated because DeSantis was the first to oppose restrictions and mandates. He then heavily touted Florida as the free state. No other close state had as eschewed a migration ratio - more than 2:1 Republican registration.

Expand full comment
slothlax's avatar

Correlation is not causation. DeSantis may be a factor, but only on the margins.

And who knows how Graham's handling of the pandemic would have played out. A lot of incumbents who went through that mess didn't do so great on the back end.

Expand full comment
PollJunkie's avatar

Polling showed that lockdowns were popular during the first wave and Trump's opposition to them hurt him. Whether she would lose or win in 2022 is another matter.

Expand full comment
MPC's avatar

The NC Supreme Court races in 2020 and 2022 were the result of shitty state party leadership. Had Anderson Clayton been in charge during those cycles, we wouldn't have that 5-2 Republican majority -- and nutcase Paul Newby wouldn't be Chief Justice. (And Ted Budd wouldn't be in the U.S. Senate.)

The fact that we fought hard to keep Justice Allison Riggs after she won her race in a presidential year is testament to Anderson's hard work (and outrage from NC residents). Jefferson Griffin's antics pissed off a lot of voters, including Rs who voted for him. And now Justice Anita Earls is favored to win her seat in a D-favorable midterm because of the Riggs/Griffin fight making international headlines. If we keep Earls after 2026, Rs are going to have to spend a LOT here in NC -- not just to retain their majority on SCONC but to keep NC's EVs and Budd in the Senate.

Expand full comment
Guy's avatar

Also the Auditor's race, since control of the BOE is on the line.

Expand full comment
MPC's avatar

If control of SCONC flips after 2028, one of the first lawsuits that will go to the court (apart from the gerrymandering, photo ID and abortion ban) is nullifying that statute giving Boliek the power over the NCSBE.

And if he loses re-election too, that would be sweeter. Republicans are going to be on defense bigly in 2028. Trump won't be on the ballot.

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

We have no way of knowing which party will be on the defensive in 2028 (or for that matter, how free and fair the elections might be, if they happen).

Expand full comment
slothlax's avatar

There's no reason to think the 2028 elections aren't going to happen. Are you aware of something the rest of us aren't?

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

No, we're all aware that events in the next 3 years are unpredictable.

Expand full comment
slothlax's avatar

They aren't that unpredictable, there are going to be elections in 2028.

Expand full comment
Guy's avatar

And that's not to mention the actual close house races Dems lost, not just in 2024, but a few like NY-17 2022, PA-01 2018, and NE-02 across multiple cycles.

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

That may be politically necessary to have a decent chance to get the votes from Californian voters, if that's even possible, but it would be amply justified to do it right now.

Expand full comment
BF's avatar
Jul 17Edited

Well, Innis would be the first //openly// gay Republican senator lol. Obviously at least Larry Craig was at least queer no matter how much he denied it. And your mileage may vary on the accuracy of the Lindsey Graham, Joe McCarthy, Bernie Moreno, Mark Kirk rumors.

Expand full comment
Henrik's avatar

Graham 1000%

Joe McCarthy I’d never heard before though… that would explain a lot

Expand full comment
Burt Kloner's avatar

Roy Cohn! McCarthy's attorney also gay?

Expand full comment
Ethan (KingofSpades)'s avatar

Cohn definitely was.

Expand full comment
Henrik's avatar

Didn’t he die of AIDS at the peak of the crisis?

Expand full comment
Paleo's avatar

Yes. But he called it liver cancer.

Expand full comment
BF's avatar

There are some other referenced rumors on his wikipedia page, but here's an excerpt from this 1999 UC Irvine history dissertation (https://www.academia.edu/98134724/_Eradicating_This_Menace_Homophobia_and_Anti_Communism_in_Congress_1947_1954):

"Hank Greenspun, editor and publisher of the Las Vegas Sun, had come to hate the senator after the latter had referred to him as an "ex-Communist" when he allegedly meant to say "ex-convict." In his nationally syndicated daily column, the feisty editor accused his fellow Republican of being a homosexual and a former Communist, noted the hypocrisy of McCarthy's homophobic attacks on the State Department, and publicized that one of McCarthy's assistants, Ed Babcock, had been arrested and pled guilty to homosexual charges. Most damaging, however, were Greenspun's repeated accusations that McCarthy had "engaged in illicit acts" in a hotel room with William McMahon, a former chairman of the Milwaukee County Young Republicans, at a 1946 Young Republican state convention. Tellingly, the mudslinging Senator never refuted the accusations. The fact that the forty-four-year-old soon married his twenty-seven-year-old secretary, Jean Kerr (with whom he subsequently adopted a child), fueled further rumors that the liaison was merely a cover-up for his sexual ambiguity and shows the strength of the prevailing social norm of married heterosexuality."

Expand full comment
Paleo's avatar

There’s no real evidence that he was. Other than his association with Cohn.

Expand full comment
Ethan (KingofSpades)'s avatar

From what we know, he was an alcoholic and dim-witted. He had been privy to a report of suspected Communists in the State Department and instead of surgically going after and exposing them (like Alger Hiss), he went scorched earth across many sectors and ruined many livelihoods. Senator Johnny Iselin in "The Manchurian Candidate" was a spot-on facsimile of him, including his inability to keep the number of suspected Communists consistent from speech to speech.

Expand full comment
brendan fka HoosierD42's avatar

That's why "openly" is an important qualifier, LGBTQ+ people have been around from the beginning.

Expand full comment
BF's avatar

Yep, that's why I'm pointing out that they didn't.

Expand full comment
brendan fka HoosierD42's avatar

I'm agreeing with you :)

Expand full comment
Paleo's avatar

Craig just had a wide stance.

Expand full comment
Henrik's avatar

And liked to practice tap dancing at MSP Airport’s men’s room, as one does

Expand full comment
PollJunkie's avatar

Lindsay Graham and Tim Scott are 110% LGBTQ.

Expand full comment
Henrik's avatar

South Carolina, the gayest state

Expand full comment
John Carr's avatar

Which is why Graham is so especially petrified of Trump. If Graham ever got on Trump’s bad side this is the first thing Trump would use to attack him. I can just hear Trump saying “I’ve heard some things about Lindsay Graham…”.

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

That wouldn't be enough to do much, would it, considering that everyone's heard things?

Expand full comment
John Carr's avatar

Trump saying it would cause a whole lot more people (I.e. his MAGA base) to believe it and would bring a lot more awareness to it.

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

Sure, especially in the case of people who don't usually pay attention to anything but what's on conspiracy sites. I guess we don't know how much of a difference it might make in voting.

Expand full comment
brendan fka HoosierD42's avatar

In the podcast today Beard pointed out that Adelita Grijalva has a record independent of her father's, but I feel it should be pointed out that similarly, she likely wouldn't have been in the position of Pima County Supervisor without her familial ties either.

I wish her luck in any case

Expand full comment
PollJunkie's avatar

One idea we’ve heard is to have the proposition worded so that the independent redistricting commission would return if other states — like Texas and Florida — institute commissions of their own. Another proposal is to include a sweetener in the proposition to convince GOP voters to back it, such as a voter ID law.

https://punchbowl.news/archive/71725-am-2/

This is really smart.

Expand full comment
ErrorError