MAGAs are denouncing Tony Gonzales as a "spineless moderate". Seems to me that the Republican lawmakers being attacked by MAGA are the only ones showing even a hint of a spine!
The rest of the GOP has gone full Fascist – and is marching in lockstep.
Yep, the list of Republican politicians with any spine at all is still pretty much Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger (neither of whom have any prayer of being elected to office anytime soon).
Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE) was the only Republican to vote against renaming the Gulf of Mexico. He has openly criticized Trump's support for Russia, his tariff policy, and his cuts to various domestic programs. Bacon even refuses to say whom he voted for in 2024. Of course, his dissidence is made easier by the fact that Biden and Harris carried his district in 2020 and 2024, respectively, and by the fact that he might very well not run for reelection.
Gonzales is also WAY to the right of Bacon and Kinzinger . . .for all the talk of progressive purity tests the right-wing version is significantly more extreme.
Even then, he has lent full support to Trump's deportation efforts and national guard deployment even supporting mass deportations of non-criminal aliens. He is somewhat performative like Susan Collins and lends his vote in every legislation where the margins are small while criticizing others,
Only within the context of MAGA extremism can Gonzales be considered a "moderate." He endorsed Trump for president, has voted for almost all of Trump's initiatives, and consistently blames Democrats for everything. Gonzales has an "A" rating from the NRA and a 0% lifetime score from the AFL-CIO. He has an 8% rating from the League of Conservation Voters, and, despite the fact that his district includes the majestic Big Bend National Park, he has a 0% score from the National Parks Conservation Association.
If a MAGA successfully primaries Tony Gonzales from the right, Democrats will definitely have a chance at flipping TX-23.
They just need the right recruit. However, as far as I can tell, it's only near some-dude level candidates running right now. Santos Limon, who ran in 2024 and is a Hispanic civil engineer, is running again.
He raised over $100K in 2024, so he's not the worst option if nobody else steps up...but clearly, he'll need more outside support to win.
Can Governor Tim Walz and Minnesota Democrats prevent Republican lawmakers from taking advantage of this assassination and attempted assassination? (As heinous as that exploitation might be.)
How do you mean by taking advantage? If you mean preventing the GOP from using their new house majority, the legislature isn't currently in session so I don't think there's any immediate capacity for exploitation (Minnesota has a part-time legislature).
I'm not fully certain on the rules for special elections, but here's the link to the MN Statute on special elections (note that some of these subdivisions were amended by legislation passed this year). I think subd. 3 is the clause that applies here? If so, then it seems like a special election can be called in time for Hortman's successor to take office before the opening of the 2026 session.
I would love to see Senator Mike Lee step down or apologize for his awful meme making fun of Hortman's assassination. But knowing how MAGA he is, he won't but he'll probably delete that post.
You know what I would love to see? Senate Democrats introduce a censure resolution. But I almost fell off my chair laughing after I wrote that. There still has been no institutional response to the Padilla assault.
We need a federal challenge to the state legislature map too. Unfortunately, we probably won't be able to get fair state maps until we flip back control of the state Supreme Court (a la Wisconsin).
Yeah. If control of SCONC flips in 2028, voting rights groups and their attorneys need to file their challenges to both state and Congressional maps directly to the court the day after the new judges are sworn in (like January 3, 2029).
I think Riggs and Earls should be petty and have the state legislative maps drawn to favor 60% of Democrats, give Destin Hall and Phil Berger a taste of their own medicine. And then draw former state House speaker Tim Moore out of his Congressional seat for good measure.
Would those maps end up infront of SCOTUS though? I'm not disagreeing with you -- I would love to see those maps. I'm just wondering if we would actually get to *have* those maps
The 6-3 SCOTUS majority is fine with partisan gerrymandering but still give lip service to the racial gerrymandering part of the Voter Rights Act. They and the SCONC let Republicans gerrymander the hell out of our state.
I want payback. Crack and pack those rural Republican dominated counties, baby.
Maps like that would run afoul of the state constitution. Certain counties have to be grouped together and districts have to be fully nested within counties if the population allows for it. Would be nice if the congressional districts had to follow those same rules.
The issue is that Republican voters don’t care about following rules. Democratic voters do. If any of our major Democratic politicians started acting like that, they would be in political trouble.
Unfortunately I don’t have much hope for this. I will say that no state pisses me off more than NC when it comes to redistricting. If they would just keep Guilford county whole and leave the rest of the map as is, I could almost settle for it. The state legislature has county clustering rules in the state constitution that make gerrymandering that too much a bit tougher. It would sure be nice if the congressional maps had the same rules.
County cluster rule itself is NOT in the state constitution. The state constitution has a totally obsolete requirement that NO legislative line splits counties!
Since SCOTUS “one person one vote” ruling, the Democratic majority had long treated this requirement had been inoperative, and drew up many rounds of maps ignoring it, to protect their incumbents. In 2002, Art Pope got some voters filed a lawsuit claiming that redistricting maps violated that requirement. SCONC ruled for them, in a tortuous logic saying that requirement means the least possible split while maintaining population near parity of each district. Hence the clustering rule for a clustering of counties, each cluster with several # of districts roughly pop parity. But no requirement on how WITHIN a cluster the several districts would be carved out, except a minimum split of counties.
A non conservative SCONC majority can simply rule that requirement in NC constitution is in violation of the federal constitution, and get rid of whatever cluster rule as is.
For all the talk of how powerful and controlling the NRA really is, it would not be so without genuine grassroots GOP support. The original sin that Senator John Cornyn of Texas committed similar to Gonzalez was also voting for this post Uvalde bipartisan legislation. He is now hated among Republicans in Texas even though he has a voting record aligning 100% voting with Donald Trump, higher than Ted Cruz. If MAGA didn't have such extreme purity tests, I think it is not implausible that could compete for and win a filibuster bypassing 60 seats.
Another example is that once the Democratic base shifted left on gun control after mass shootings along with white working-class voters in our coalition getting replaced by white suburbanites, pro-gun control activist groups and Super PACs like Giffords grew exponentially with erstwhile pro-gun Democrats like Biden and Walz making a 180-degree turn on the issue.
I was in high school when Columbine happened and I honestly thought nearly 30 years later we would've already experienced a sea change on guns once Millennials became a big part of the electorate. Since then, we've only gone BACKWARDS on gun control even as more school shootings have taken place . . .it's all very disheartening. I don't understand why younger voters have been so "shrug shoulders" at best on the issue, although I'm sure declining social trust/capital has been a significant factor, as it has been for all of our woes.
Is it really a surprise? Millennials have spent our entire lives seeing everything related to gun control fail. We see our elected officials either terrified to talk about it or only bring it up for a few days after a tragedy and then give up when those efforts inevitably run into a brick wall.
Shootings have became normalized, especially for age groups that were young enough when Columbine happened. There have been so many shootings since then that I cannot even remember all of the ones that have been worse.
It's possible we're hamstrung by out political system on this issue more than any other issue. The distribution of senators and the distribution of the pro-guns portion of the electorate makes it exceptionally difficult to get to a 50 vote majority for major reform, unless something happens to change the views of the rapidly pro-gun part of the electorate.
But it's not just cynicism about legislation getting passed . .for years support for gun control has either stagnated or even decreased, including among younger voters.
Speculation: I think the Republican VA Gov poll is a rigged poll trying to portray the race much closer than it really is. I say this because Eagle-Sears is facing serious big donor apathy according to reporting. The money is being invested in NJ instead of VA.
Meanwhile, time keeps on slipping into the future, and there's some complaining on the GOP side that they squandered at least a temporary advantage in terms of having a unified party while Democrats have contested primaries.
Though the VA GOP may not be all that unified, as witness the Youngkin/Reid dustup. Sears meanwhile has yet to appear publicly with her two ticketmates, and most of what apperances she's making have been before smaller and faithfully partisan audiences where she says things that get a warm reception from them but not the general electorate.
In fairness, this term has gotten abused for years by people who should know better, so it basically "broke containment" and now gets misused a lot. But I figured a self-described "PollJunkie" would want to know!
One thing I can with near certainty predict is that Spanberger’s fundraising team will use the poll for a daily barrage of texts and emails about a razor thin lead and the need to pour money into her campaign.
I really wish they would stop the scare tactic fundraising but I know they won’t. It’s beyond frustrating. The text fundraising in general is out of control. The s-t-o-p buttons on my screen would be worn out if I had an old timey keyboard.
It would help to know where in VA the polling data is sampled from.
Abigail Spanberger has been battle tested and she might have some appeal in the less blue parts of VA, especially with her background prior to being in the House.
Some analysts say it may be counterproductive to have two big names battling in a Senate primary. They say Allred and O’Rourke would be more effective in different races.
In a 2018 reelection contest against former Dallas County Sheriff Lupe Valdez, Abbott used some of his resources and organization to help Cruz across the finish line against O’Rourke. Valdez barely raised over $1 million and was not well known outside of Dallas County. If Democrats can’t find a candidate to keep Abbott focused on his 2026 reelection bid, he’ll turn his Goliathian machinery against Democrats across the state. State Rep. James Talarico, D-Austin, who is considering a Senate run, was once thought to be a candidate for governor.
Honestly, it seems very illogical for so many candidates to run for the Senate seat in Texas. One star candidate cannot carry the entire slate of unknowns for Gov, Lt. Gov, AG, Comptroller etc. The best thing would be the Washington establishment and Schumer stepping in to stop it and offer everyone support for different positions. Allred, O'Rourke, Talarico, Johnson, Nirenberg, Gutierrez and Castro all duking it out in the same Senate primary would be seppuku.
What seems obvious is that everyone is coalescing on the Senate race because Paxton is clearly beatable. I'll go out on a limb and say that any of the three Democrats mentioned here are outright favorites next year. Abbott will be prohibitively hard to beat, and it doesn't make sense for either Allred or Beto to take another loss. Talarico should take one for the team imo, his career can survive a competitive loss against the most powerful Republican in the South.
As for the down ballot stuff, I'd imagine we'll land people for LG and AG if the year shapes up to be blue, but the state party is pretty incompetent. It'd be great to see the Dallas County Judge run for any of the state offices. If nothing else, the state senators who are up in the Presidential year should run for the down ballot stuff just to give the party a real nominee.
Beto cannot win a big race on his own, he can run for another office other tha the Senate or Gov if he wants to, he knows how to energize people. His 2022 Gov performance was better than the 2018 Gov one.
A Dem as an "outright favorite" in a TX senate race? You have got to be kidding. I think any of the Dem options COULD win, but there's no scenario in which Paxton doesn't start out as at least a moderate favorite.
In my perfect world, Allred would run for Senate while Castro ran for Governor. I believe both could build up strong coalitions that help each other out, leading them both to victory.
I also think State Senator Roland Gutierrez would be a strong candidate and could raise the salience of both Uvalde and immigration issues. However, he might focus on running for reelection.
And while Abbott maintains a solid 44% approval rating.
Abbott is not very popular and has not crossed 50% approval in other polls too. The problem is that he is a skillfull campaigner, is very entrenched now with tens of millions in his campaign funds and has built a huge political machine. People thought that Talarico would take him on but he's shied away from it.
Weiser actually got in first and I don't think there has been too much back and forth yet but I'm sure that will change as we get closer to the primary about a year from now if Weiser still thinks he can win. I would probably vote for Weiser out of the two I have had good experiences with the AG's office getting Rental assistance when I was shot and had COVID and in dealing with slumlords his office was responsive. I don't have any major issue with Bennet though.
The poll also shows SOS Griswold at 42% in the AG Dem primary. the next candidate Boulder County DA Michael Dougherty at 8%.
I wouldn’t say 53% is decisive for any incumbent in a primary poll. It’s a very weak showing. In fact, I’d say this is another tea leaf of data to the growing pile of evidence about how angry/discontent Democratic voters are at elected incumbent Democrats in blue areas for not doing enough to fight against Trump and Republicans.
Whether this sentiment is appropriate for Bennet specifically I don’t know enough about to say one way or the other, but it’s a widespread frustration that may just appear across the board against any blue seat Democrat instead of just the ones who have actually done something to piss off our base next year. A “throw the bums out” emotional voter movement like GOP primary voters did in the 2010 tea party wave, because Republicans didn’t fight Obama enough.
It's pretty much name ID from being a U.S. Senator but that said Weiser will have to make up ground over the year. I still think Weiser can win at this point.
I had a cab driver in New Rochelle today who decided to talk politics with me. I found out that Trump supporters think Biden had cancer 4 years ago that was covered up. Had any of you heard that one?
Yes, I have crazy relatives in Arizona. They also suspect he died and was buried in his basement and a look a like filled in, that Harris is a transvestite, and that Trump is the second coming of Jesus.
Btw, I haven't seen these people in years, for cause.
Global warming is a hoax because it still snows and it's being promoted by electric car people and companies that put up solar out on the desert (they enjoy off roading on the desert).
When hospitals triage, they let the (Latinos, because David would kick me off for using their words) go first, especially the undocumented,(which they refer to by a word David bars,), who are first, even if real Americans die of heart attacks.
You can imagine, it was not a constructive conversation, but who asked him to bring up politics? Seems like a bad business practice to gratuitously bring up Trumpism in a Democratic area.
(1) A lot of them have bought into the whole "silent majority" bullshit and believe they are a majority everywhere. Especially if someone looks like they belong in the conservative "good people" demographics, that someone will be assumed to be one of them.
(2) Projection. On the surface this one clashes with the above, but modern conservatism is built on cognitive dissonance so even though it is illogical it's still compatible.
Conservatives like that cab driver are willing to display their political beliefs at (nearly) all times. They will talk to anyone about it, and refuse to back down. American conservatives have shown time and time again that they project their worst behavior onto democrats, because they lack the willingness to consider that not everyone acts/thinks like them. Thus, if you are not bringing up your liberal or progressive political beliefs, they will assume you are not a democrat and thus an ally or potential ally.
I remember the day after Obama won I had three separate old white men tell me "Well the N!$#er won!" in Central FL and just remember thinking life will be better when they die in 5-15 years.
Today a Hispanic electrician was bashing ""Biden's inflation" which, whatever, okay. Then he seemingly attacked him for his kids having student loans. Just... Having them. Idiots.
Conservatives love to to tell you what they think. I've had to listen to countless people tell me what they think of Biden here (New Rochelle and North).
In whatever way you are still in touch/connected with them, I assume you portray an amazing amount of energy-sapping grace, as many of us must with our own family crazies. For that, hugs to you.
Rep. Tony Gonzales (80.2 out of 100), former Rep. Colin Allred (91.2), and former Rep. Abigail Spanberger (99.4) all earned solid A grades as "bridgers" on the non-partisan data-oriented Bridge Grades system for their performance in the 118th Congress.
Let's hope all three of them win their respective races, and nudge the culture of our political representation toward more collaborative and bipartisan governance.
[Note: Those who earn As are governing more collaboratively than their peers and seek win-win consensus solutions for our common interests -- see www.bridgegrades.org to see scores for the full 118th Congress].
We are going to have reps from both parties in office. I’d rather have sane collaborators like Gonzales in his seat than replaced by an ideologue. The blue v red game isn’t going very well. We’d be better off if we identified and supported the least partisan reps from both teams who can collaborate on win wins rather than doubling down on zero sum game.
MAGAs are denouncing Tony Gonzales as a "spineless moderate". Seems to me that the Republican lawmakers being attacked by MAGA are the only ones showing even a hint of a spine!
The rest of the GOP has gone full Fascist – and is marching in lockstep.
Yep, the list of Republican politicians with any spine at all is still pretty much Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger (neither of whom have any prayer of being elected to office anytime soon).
If there are others, I'm all ears!
Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE) was the only Republican to vote against renaming the Gulf of Mexico. He has openly criticized Trump's support for Russia, his tariff policy, and his cuts to various domestic programs. Bacon even refuses to say whom he voted for in 2024. Of course, his dissidence is made easier by the fact that Biden and Harris carried his district in 2020 and 2024, respectively, and by the fact that he might very well not run for reelection.
Bacon is finger-to-the-wind (he was a complete asshole during the Biden presidency), but I think at least some of it is genuine. Good point.
ah moderation: voting to gut medicaid. If only democrats got such leeway
He's cast a lot of toxic votes (that, so far, haven't seemed to catch up to him politically).
Gonzales is also WAY to the right of Bacon and Kinzinger . . .for all the talk of progressive purity tests the right-wing version is significantly more extreme.
Even then, he has lent full support to Trump's deportation efforts and national guard deployment even supporting mass deportations of non-criminal aliens. He is somewhat performative like Susan Collins and lends his vote in every legislation where the margins are small while criticizing others,
Lisa Murkowski?
Only within the context of MAGA extremism can Gonzales be considered a "moderate." He endorsed Trump for president, has voted for almost all of Trump's initiatives, and consistently blames Democrats for everything. Gonzales has an "A" rating from the NRA and a 0% lifetime score from the AFL-CIO. He has an 8% rating from the League of Conservation Voters, and, despite the fact that his district includes the majestic Big Bend National Park, he has a 0% score from the National Parks Conservation Association.
If a MAGA successfully primaries Tony Gonzales from the right, Democrats will definitely have a chance at flipping TX-23.
They just need the right recruit. However, as far as I can tell, it's only near some-dude level candidates running right now. Santos Limon, who ran in 2024 and is a Hispanic civil engineer, is running again.
He raised over $100K in 2024, so he's not the worst option if nobody else steps up...but clearly, he'll need more outside support to win.
So now MAGAs want to piss Elon Musk off as well? He has vented that he believes there is no moderate party.
Can Governor Tim Walz and Minnesota Democrats prevent Republican lawmakers from taking advantage of this assassination and attempted assassination? (As heinous as that exploitation might be.)
The MN legislature wrapped their 2024-2025 session days before Hortman was assassinated. They're not scheduled to meet back until mid-February 2026.
Plenty of time for people to mourn and have a special election to fill her seat.
How do you mean by taking advantage? If you mean preventing the GOP from using their new house majority, the legislature isn't currently in session so I don't think there's any immediate capacity for exploitation (Minnesota has a part-time legislature).
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/204d.19
I'm not fully certain on the rules for special elections, but here's the link to the MN Statute on special elections (note that some of these subdivisions were amended by legislation passed this year). I think subd. 3 is the clause that applies here? If so, then it seems like a special election can be called in time for Hortman's successor to take office before the opening of the 2026 session.
Thanks!
Based off us holding specials at the beginning of the year within months, seems like one to coincide with Nov municipal elections make sense.
I would love to see Senator Mike Lee step down or apologize for his awful meme making fun of Hortman's assassination. But knowing how MAGA he is, he won't but he'll probably delete that post.
You know what I would love to see? Senate Democrats introduce a censure resolution. But I almost fell off my chair laughing after I wrote that. There still has been no institutional response to the Padilla assault.
What happened to Senator Lee? He was supposed to be this GOP Senator that at one point had Libertarian views.
Wait, you guessed it... He sold out.
Trial begins today in federal district court on the NAACP's challenge to the North Carolina congressional redistricting map.
https://bsky.app/profile/democracydocket.com/post/3lrpuwuaem323
We need a federal challenge to the state legislature map too. Unfortunately, we probably won't be able to get fair state maps until we flip back control of the state Supreme Court (a la Wisconsin).
That already failed.
Yeah. If control of SCONC flips in 2028, voting rights groups and their attorneys need to file their challenges to both state and Congressional maps directly to the court the day after the new judges are sworn in (like January 3, 2029).
I think Riggs and Earls should be petty and have the state legislative maps drawn to favor 60% of Democrats, give Destin Hall and Phil Berger a taste of their own medicine. And then draw former state House speaker Tim Moore out of his Congressional seat for good measure.
Would those maps end up infront of SCOTUS though? I'm not disagreeing with you -- I would love to see those maps. I'm just wondering if we would actually get to *have* those maps
The 6-3 SCOTUS majority is fine with partisan gerrymandering but still give lip service to the racial gerrymandering part of the Voter Rights Act. They and the SCONC let Republicans gerrymander the hell out of our state.
I want payback. Crack and pack those rural Republican dominated counties, baby.
The Supreme Court is fine with -Republican- gerrymandering. I wouldn't put it past them to find some way to go after Democratic gerrymandering.
We could have the maps for an election or two, lawsuits take forever. It’s worth it and always will be.
Lawsuits take forever unless the Supreme Court decides to expedite them.
Maps like that would run afoul of the state constitution. Certain counties have to be grouped together and districts have to be fully nested within counties if the population allows for it. Would be nice if the congressional districts had to follow those same rules.
Since when do Republicans follow the rules? They bend and break them every chance they get, especially the courts they control.
The issue is that Republican voters don’t care about following rules. Democratic voters do. If any of our major Democratic politicians started acting like that, they would be in political trouble.
Unfortunately I don’t have much hope for this. I will say that no state pisses me off more than NC when it comes to redistricting. If they would just keep Guilford county whole and leave the rest of the map as is, I could almost settle for it. The state legislature has county clustering rules in the state constitution that make gerrymandering that too much a bit tougher. It would sure be nice if the congressional maps had the same rules.
County cluster rule itself is NOT in the state constitution. The state constitution has a totally obsolete requirement that NO legislative line splits counties!
Since SCOTUS “one person one vote” ruling, the Democratic majority had long treated this requirement had been inoperative, and drew up many rounds of maps ignoring it, to protect their incumbents. In 2002, Art Pope got some voters filed a lawsuit claiming that redistricting maps violated that requirement. SCONC ruled for them, in a tortuous logic saying that requirement means the least possible split while maintaining population near parity of each district. Hence the clustering rule for a clustering of counties, each cluster with several # of districts roughly pop parity. But no requirement on how WITHIN a cluster the several districts would be carved out, except a minimum split of counties.
A non conservative SCONC majority can simply rule that requirement in NC constitution is in violation of the federal constitution, and get rid of whatever cluster rule as is.
This is a good read of the current clustering. https://sites.duke.edu/quantifyinggerrymandering/files/2021/08/countyClusters2020.pdf
Racial gerrymandering? Which one does NAACP claim beside the 1st?
For all the talk of how powerful and controlling the NRA really is, it would not be so without genuine grassroots GOP support. The original sin that Senator John Cornyn of Texas committed similar to Gonzalez was also voting for this post Uvalde bipartisan legislation. He is now hated among Republicans in Texas even though he has a voting record aligning 100% voting with Donald Trump, higher than Ted Cruz. If MAGA didn't have such extreme purity tests, I think it is not implausible that could compete for and win a filibuster bypassing 60 seats.
Another example is that once the Democratic base shifted left on gun control after mass shootings along with white working-class voters in our coalition getting replaced by white suburbanites, pro-gun control activist groups and Super PACs like Giffords grew exponentially with erstwhile pro-gun Democrats like Biden and Walz making a 180-degree turn on the issue.
I was in high school when Columbine happened and I honestly thought nearly 30 years later we would've already experienced a sea change on guns once Millennials became a big part of the electorate. Since then, we've only gone BACKWARDS on gun control even as more school shootings have taken place . . .it's all very disheartening. I don't understand why younger voters have been so "shrug shoulders" at best on the issue, although I'm sure declining social trust/capital has been a significant factor, as it has been for all of our woes.
Is it really a surprise? Millennials have spent our entire lives seeing everything related to gun control fail. We see our elected officials either terrified to talk about it or only bring it up for a few days after a tragedy and then give up when those efforts inevitably run into a brick wall.
Shootings have became normalized, especially for age groups that were young enough when Columbine happened. There have been so many shootings since then that I cannot even remember all of the ones that have been worse.
It's possible we're hamstrung by out political system on this issue more than any other issue. The distribution of senators and the distribution of the pro-guns portion of the electorate makes it exceptionally difficult to get to a 50 vote majority for major reform, unless something happens to change the views of the rapidly pro-gun part of the electorate.
But it's not just cynicism about legislation getting passed . .for years support for gun control has either stagnated or even decreased, including among younger voters.
What figures have you been seeing?
Speculation: I think the Republican VA Gov poll is a rigged poll trying to portray the race much closer than it really is. I say this because Eagle-Sears is facing serious big donor apathy according to reporting. The money is being invested in NJ instead of VA.
It could just be an outlier, you know.
Yes, it's described pretty clearly as a partisan poll.
Let them waste a few million on a lost cause race.
She might be Winsome, but Earle-Sears cannot fly like an Eagle. (nice typo...)
Meanwhile, time keeps on slipping into the future, and there's some complaining on the GOP side that they squandered at least a temporary advantage in terms of having a unified party while Democrats have contested primaries.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2025/06/11/virginia-governor-youngkin-spanberger-sears/?itid=co_va_7
Though the VA GOP may not be all that unified, as witness the Youngkin/Reid dustup. Sears meanwhile has yet to appear publicly with her two ticketmates, and most of what apperances she's making have been before smaller and faithfully partisan audiences where she says things that get a warm reception from them but not the general electorate.
"Meanwhile, time keeps on slipping into the future". Hahaha, well done!
A "push poll" has a very specific meaning, and this ain't an example of one! https://politicaldictionary.com/words/push-poll/
I see.
In fairness, this term has gotten abused for years by people who should know better, so it basically "broke containment" and now gets misused a lot. But I figured a self-described "PollJunkie" would want to know!
One thing I can with near certainty predict is that Spanberger’s fundraising team will use the poll for a daily barrage of texts and emails about a razor thin lead and the need to pour money into her campaign.
I really wish they would stop the scare tactic fundraising but I know they won’t. It’s beyond frustrating. The text fundraising in general is out of control. The s-t-o-p buttons on my screen would be worn out if I had an old timey keyboard.
It would help to know where in VA the polling data is sampled from.
Abigail Spanberger has been battle tested and she might have some appeal in the less blue parts of VA, especially with her background prior to being in the House.
https://185.16.38.230/news/politics/2025/06/16/will-a-colin-allred-beto-orourke-senate-primary-showdown-energize-or-hurt-democrats/?__cpo=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZGFsbGFzbmV3cy5jb20
Some analysts say it may be counterproductive to have two big names battling in a Senate primary. They say Allred and O’Rourke would be more effective in different races.
In a 2018 reelection contest against former Dallas County Sheriff Lupe Valdez, Abbott used some of his resources and organization to help Cruz across the finish line against O’Rourke. Valdez barely raised over $1 million and was not well known outside of Dallas County. If Democrats can’t find a candidate to keep Abbott focused on his 2026 reelection bid, he’ll turn his Goliathian machinery against Democrats across the state. State Rep. James Talarico, D-Austin, who is considering a Senate run, was once thought to be a candidate for governor.
https://www.texastribune.org/2025/06/16/texas-democrats-candidates-2026-midterms-senate-governor/
Honestly, it seems very illogical for so many candidates to run for the Senate seat in Texas. One star candidate cannot carry the entire slate of unknowns for Gov, Lt. Gov, AG, Comptroller etc. The best thing would be the Washington establishment and Schumer stepping in to stop it and offer everyone support for different positions. Allred, O'Rourke, Talarico, Johnson, Nirenberg, Gutierrez and Castro all duking it out in the same Senate primary would be seppuku.
What seems obvious is that everyone is coalescing on the Senate race because Paxton is clearly beatable. I'll go out on a limb and say that any of the three Democrats mentioned here are outright favorites next year. Abbott will be prohibitively hard to beat, and it doesn't make sense for either Allred or Beto to take another loss. Talarico should take one for the team imo, his career can survive a competitive loss against the most powerful Republican in the South.
As for the down ballot stuff, I'd imagine we'll land people for LG and AG if the year shapes up to be blue, but the state party is pretty incompetent. It'd be great to see the Dallas County Judge run for any of the state offices. If nothing else, the state senators who are up in the Presidential year should run for the down ballot stuff just to give the party a real nominee.
Beto cannot win. Allred (or Castro) have a fighting chance.
Beto cannot win a big race on his own, he can run for another office other tha the Senate or Gov if he wants to, he knows how to energize people. His 2022 Gov performance was better than the 2018 Gov one.
Yes, I wish there was more interest in downballot races.
If we were able to win even ONE statewide job in Texas, it would be huge.
Is Texas Secretary of State an elected office now? I thought it was appointed by the governor.
He nearly won the 2018 Senate race (not governor) by 2.6% and lost the 2022 governor race by 10.9%. I don't think you quite know what you're saying.
Abbott won by 13.3 percentage points in 2018, he won by 10.9 against Beto in 2022. And 2018 was a blue wave year.
Gotcha. Very awkwardly phrased.
Which Castro do you think has a fighting chance, and why do you think they do?
A Dem as an "outright favorite" in a TX senate race? You have got to be kidding. I think any of the Dem options COULD win, but there's no scenario in which Paxton doesn't start out as at least a moderate favorite.
I think Paxton is a slight favorite or tossup depending on where we are next year.
internal republican polling has Paxton down against Allred
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/08/texas-senate-dems-paxton-cornyn-00393332
Umm...where in the article do you see that? In fact, what I see in the artcile explicitly states the opposite:
"Recent polling shows Allred maintaining popularity among Texas Democrats even as he trails in a potential head-to-head with Paxton or Cornyn."
In my perfect world, Allred would run for Senate while Castro ran for Governor. I believe both could build up strong coalitions that help each other out, leading them both to victory.
I also think State Senator Roland Gutierrez would be a strong candidate and could raise the salience of both Uvalde and immigration issues. However, he might focus on running for reelection.
And while Abbott maintains a solid 44% approval rating.
Abbott is not very popular and has not crossed 50% approval in other polls too. The problem is that he is a skillfull campaigner, is very entrenched now with tens of millions in his campaign funds and has built a huge political machine. People thought that Talarico would take him on but he's shied away from it.
What is this, Maine in reverse?
CO-Gov
https://www.denverpost.com/2025/06/16/colorado-governor-election-bennet-weiser-democrats/
"U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet holds decisive lead in Democratic primary for Colorado governor, poll shows"
Bennett at 53%, Weiser 22% another 25% are undecided. This is a Bennet internal poll.
What's Weiser's argument against Bennet?
Weiser actually got in first and I don't think there has been too much back and forth yet but I'm sure that will change as we get closer to the primary about a year from now if Weiser still thinks he can win. I would probably vote for Weiser out of the two I have had good experiences with the AG's office getting Rental assistance when I was shot and had COVID and in dealing with slumlords his office was responsive. I don't have any major issue with Bennet though.
The poll also shows SOS Griswold at 42% in the AG Dem primary. the next candidate Boulder County DA Michael Dougherty at 8%.
He’s more progressive. But either would be better than Polis.
I wouldn’t say 53% is decisive for any incumbent in a primary poll. It’s a very weak showing. In fact, I’d say this is another tea leaf of data to the growing pile of evidence about how angry/discontent Democratic voters are at elected incumbent Democrats in blue areas for not doing enough to fight against Trump and Republicans.
Whether this sentiment is appropriate for Bennet specifically I don’t know enough about to say one way or the other, but it’s a widespread frustration that may just appear across the board against any blue seat Democrat instead of just the ones who have actually done something to piss off our base next year. A “throw the bums out” emotional voter movement like GOP primary voters did in the 2010 tea party wave, because Republicans didn’t fight Obama enough.
He's not an incumbent governor.
It's pretty much name ID from being a U.S. Senator but that said Weiser will have to make up ground over the year. I still think Weiser can win at this point.
I had a cab driver in New Rochelle today who decided to talk politics with me. I found out that Trump supporters think Biden had cancer 4 years ago that was covered up. Had any of you heard that one?
Yes, I have crazy relatives in Arizona. They also suspect he died and was buried in his basement and a look a like filled in, that Harris is a transvestite, and that Trump is the second coming of Jesus.
Btw, I haven't seen these people in years, for cause.
They think Harris is actually a man?
Some probably do. For others it's just racist/misogynist code. People are awful.
Yes.
Others
Global warming is a hoax because it still snows and it's being promoted by electric car people and companies that put up solar out on the desert (they enjoy off roading on the desert).
When hospitals triage, they let the (Latinos, because David would kick me off for using their words) go first, especially the undocumented,(which they refer to by a word David bars,), who are first, even if real Americans die of heart attacks.
You can imagine, it was not a constructive conversation, but who asked him to bring up politics? Seems like a bad business practice to gratuitously bring up Trumpism in a Democratic area.
I think that behavior comes down to two factors.
(1) A lot of them have bought into the whole "silent majority" bullshit and believe they are a majority everywhere. Especially if someone looks like they belong in the conservative "good people" demographics, that someone will be assumed to be one of them.
(2) Projection. On the surface this one clashes with the above, but modern conservatism is built on cognitive dissonance so even though it is illogical it's still compatible.
Conservatives like that cab driver are willing to display their political beliefs at (nearly) all times. They will talk to anyone about it, and refuse to back down. American conservatives have shown time and time again that they project their worst behavior onto democrats, because they lack the willingness to consider that not everyone acts/thinks like them. Thus, if you are not bringing up your liberal or progressive political beliefs, they will assume you are not a democrat and thus an ally or potential ally.
I remember the day after Obama won I had three separate old white men tell me "Well the N!$#er won!" in Central FL and just remember thinking life will be better when they die in 5-15 years.
I wish it were.
The cabbie wasn't many people's idea of a typical Trumper, though we all know they come in all shapes and sizes: he was a Black Caribbean.
Today a Hispanic electrician was bashing ""Biden's inflation" which, whatever, okay. Then he seemingly attacked him for his kids having student loans. Just... Having them. Idiots.
Conservatives love to to tell you what they think. I've had to listen to countless people tell me what they think of Biden here (New Rochelle and North).
What I mean is, Westchester county.
You miss so much of America being in NYC.😂
Well, i unfortunately didn't miss this shit today.
In whatever way you are still in touch/connected with them, I assume you portray an amazing amount of energy-sapping grace, as many of us must with our own family crazies. For that, hugs to you.
yes
NJ-Gov, Citarelli's campaign puts out an internal poll showing him down to Sherrill 45-42: https://newjerseyglobe.com/campaigns/a-ciattarelli-internal-poll-shows-him-starting-within-the-margin-of-error/
Yeah, don't believe it but don't take the race for granted.
That means he’s really down 8-10.
Yeah, there should definitely be investment for Sherrill in the NJ-GOV race.
Rep. Tony Gonzales (80.2 out of 100), former Rep. Colin Allred (91.2), and former Rep. Abigail Spanberger (99.4) all earned solid A grades as "bridgers" on the non-partisan data-oriented Bridge Grades system for their performance in the 118th Congress.
Let's hope all three of them win their respective races, and nudge the culture of our political representation toward more collaborative and bipartisan governance.
[Note: Those who earn As are governing more collaboratively than their peers and seek win-win consensus solutions for our common interests -- see www.bridgegrades.org to see scores for the full 118th Congress].
Why are you hoping for more bipartisan cooperation with an outright fascist party?
We are going to have reps from both parties in office. I’d rather have sane collaborators like Gonzales in his seat than replaced by an ideologue. The blue v red game isn’t going very well. We’d be better off if we identified and supported the least partisan reps from both teams who can collaborate on win wins rather than doubling down on zero sum game.
You actually want to -support- Republicans who are collaborating with an authoritarian to destroy democracy?
On the contrary. We want to reward Republicans who deviate from their parties and punish the partisans who never depart from party lines.
Not by voting for them! And deviate how much?
As long as they are supporting a felonious president in destroying the country, whatever minor deviations they make are -no- reason to support them!