A federal judge striked down several Arkansas laws restricting the ballot initiative process on Tuesday, several days before the petition delivery deadline for the ballot initiative protection amendment.
I'm curious whether they exceeded the 90K signatures required or not. AR Rs are going to fight like hell to keep it off the ballot in November, and use every trick in the book to keep it off like they did with the 2024 abortion initiative.
Outgoing Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who has been hospitalized for a prolonged period of time, was apparently taken unconscious from his home in Washington after a rumored heart attack last month.
This pattern is familiar to me. It's been nearly 3 weeks since he entered the hospital and little information has been given. Rep. Tom Kean just returned from a similar situation after 4 months.
I think they changed it so that the legislature sends the Governor a list of names he has to pick from. Beshear vetoed it but they overrode, Beshear said the law was unconstitutional so maybe he fights it in court.
EDIT: I was wrong, they removed gubernatorial appointment entirely, special election only.
In most states, I believe the Governor appoints an interim US. Senator and a Special election is held the next even year election - Rev. Warnock and Mark Kelly come to mind. And the special election in OH where Sherrod Brown is running this year. (Gov. DeWine appointed Husted to the seat previously held by J.D. Vance). I don't think you can leave it vacant the way we do a US House seat.
For House seats special elections are common and these are the ones that get called at odd times - often at the whim of the governor. This is governed by the state constitution which controls the rules of who calls them and when.
I know VA has very strict rules about speedy special elections and uses firehouse primaries. Gov. Spanberger wasn't seated when she ran for Governor, but the Lt. Governor was. When a sitting state delegate ran and won the Firehouse primary for her seat in the state senate, there was another primary just two weeks later to fill his seat in the House of Delegates. (Had he lost he would have retained his state Senate seat.
But both FL and TX give the Governor a lot of latitude in setting the date for special elections and they have both delayed multiple elections when it suited them (e.g., in very blue districts) while holding speedy special elections in very red districts.
Gov. Whitmer delayed a special election in the state legislature when she was apparently worried the red wave could result in the flip of one of the chambers in MI. And of course the GOP howled when Gavin Newsom scheduled a US House special election on the last allowable date when a GOP congressman died in office. And if I'm not mistaken this was one of the districts redrawn due to prop 50.
Being that El-Sayed is closely aligned with AOC on the issues ideologically-wise, I'd say this is more AOC lending support because she sees him as the right choice who will talk about economic issues she raises awareness of.
She had plenty of time to do this earlier in the process, when it could have made more of a difference, which to me suggests she's trying to avoid alienating future Senate colleagues. She was not going to endorse anyone but El-Sayed, and she waited until he was clearly leading to do so, meaning there's less risk of having a future Senator Stevens or McMorrow who responds in kind. This follows her lack of endorsements in House primaries. She's carefully building alliances and strategically avoiding making enemies.
This is not true at all. He was one of AOC's first endorsements back in 2018, they've worked together on Bernie's campaign and they're both his protégés. This endorsement follows the usual pattern: Bernie endorses early in the race, while AOC endorses during the month before the primary for maximum impact, and only when candidates have a good or great chance of winning, strong grassroots support, and strong fundraising. If anything, her endorsement of him makes me think she's aiming for the forbidden election.
Endorsing him early on might’ve given him a slight boost earlier but would’ve lost relevance/impact as the campaign went on. Endorsing him when he’s in the middle of a surge of momentum ensures that he keeps that momentum going until August
In fact, can Trump use his evil powers for good for once and Tweet at FIFA that the red card is rigged and get them to overturn it or something. As a recipient of the FIFA peace prize he knows what's best.
No primaries until AZ on 7/21 lol. Don't even think there's a mayoral or state leg special until then. DE filing deadline is 7/14, and RI candidates who met the initial filing deadline have to submit signatures by 7/12 to actually qualify for the ballot if folks wanna look forward to that haha.
Now that 21 gubernatorial primaries have took place (not including runoffs), I’ve been looking at elections where running mates are chosen by the governor. Who do people think the following candidates/nominees could choose?
I can't speak to many of them, but I know Deb Haaland said she wants Public Lands Commissioner Stephanie Garcia Richard as her LG pick. I believe that since NM primary voters pick the LG and the candidate dropped out, a state party committee picks the new nominee, but I'd be surprised if she didn't get her choice.
Victor Marx is so crazy he'll probably pick a fully loaded AK-47 as his running mate.
Hobbs is said to be considering Corporation Commissioner and former state Sen. Anna Tovar, as well as former Mesa mayor John Giles, a Republican. I say it'll be Tovar.
But if Hobbs wants to appease a growing progressive movement she could also nominate Tucson mayor Regina Romero.
AK-Sen: While the Supreme Court ruled that the second Dan Sullivan can appear on the ballot, apparently the Division of Elections (overseen by the Lieutenant Governor) is printing ballots showing a) Dan J. Sullivan without any party label, despite filing as a Republican and b) listening Dan S. Sullivan as the incumbent, which Alaska elections officials haven't done with any other incumbent in at least the last five elections cycles.
we do have the inherent disadvantage of having shame. while the 1960's were certainly not an era of any type of racial or gender harmony, the notion of shame and the moral high ground/an older definition of "moral authority" allowed for the democratic party to take the moral high ground from those opposed to civil rights, those opposed to medicare and the great society writ large.
the breakdown of the new deal coalition and the concurrent street protests of the late 60's over the hypocritical war in vietnam, really removed any remnants of the idea that we had the moral authority to continue passing remedial and helpful legislation, culminating in carter basically running a center right campaign by 1980.
while I support planter, it's a shame his warts are so public because if we ever want to reset the national discourse to something of a modern parallel to the pre-Watergate era, when people believed in the idea government could and should do good, we have to return to our party to being perceived as squeaky clean--even though the republicans get to openly loot the treasury in real time.
Bulwark's Sarah Longwell is out with a meaty piece in The Bulwark today about whether the DSA wave of 2026 is the Dem version of the Tea Party wave that remade the GOP and our country back in the 2010s based off data from the focus groups she does on a regular basis.
It is unfortunately paywalled and Substack doesn't offer gift links, but the gist of the article is that Democrats are looking for people they believe are fighting Trump. They've been looking around and in many cases the only ones that appear to give off that vibe are DSA or DSA adjacent candidates.
Longwell noted that Josh Shapiro, Mark Kelly, Pete Buttigieg, JB Pritzker, Jon Ossoff and Gavin Newsom who actually know how to effectively communicate in 2026 have come up positively in her focus groups. Down in Colorado while Melat Kiros was romping to a nearly 15 point win over Diana DeGette who's been in the House for 30 years, Phil Weiser ruined Michael Bennet's coronation as Colorado's next governor thanks to the fact Weiser could point to the fact he wakes up in the morning and sues' Trump while Bennet voted for no less than 10 of Trump's odious cabinet picks.
i don't agree with shapiro on several issues, but he comes across eminently more likable than gavin. Gavin's west coast style mixed with his individual personality, or lack thereof, has me wincing even when I agree with what he's saying
Gavin doesn't have a personality, which is a strike against him for 2028. Maybe he can change that beginning next year when he's out of the governor's mansion.
I'd argue that Newsom's problem is that he doesn't seem to have a personal ideological core. He chases whatever he thinks will advance his career. He took a sharp right turn in tone after 2024, starting a podcast and inviting far right figures onto it. Then he abandoned that when it seemed to no longer fit the political moment.
Newsom's ideology is whatever he thinks is best for himself. I can't find someone like that to be likable.
Shapiro's electoral performances should tell you everything. Take 2020 for example Biden lost heavily WWC Luzerne County by 15 points while Shapiro as AG won the county on the same ballot. Same deal in 2022 and likely this year, he knows how to communicate and win.
Third Way did a poll of Dem voters back in February, and they found that the most appealing candidate across the board would be a "Candidate has the guts to stand up to Trump and the MAGA wing of the Republican Party"
The last time Kansas elected a Governor from a party that had already been in that office for 8 or more years was 1954. It'd be epic if Dems were the party to break that streak.
Here's some backstory: my diehard MAGA grandparents live outside of the country, but their American mailing address is at my house.
Today Trump and the RNC sent them a "Ballot for America's Future". Inside the ballot, which you would generally think would involve voting, it prompts you to donate various amounts to the RNC, including $35, $75, $150, $250, $500, and, I'm not making this up, $2026. The money is so Republicans can keep their congressional majorities in November.
If you donate, the "Yes!" side says "I am fully committed to helping defend our Republican Congressional Majorities this November to ensure you have the legislative leverage to keep working to Make America Great Again. I promise to stand with you and Republican candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. Senate, Governorships, and state and local officials and legislative positions across the country during the critical 2026 midterm elections. To help the Republican Party promote your record of accomplishment (sic) and to aid in the election of the leaders who will work with you and bring lasting change and reform to our nation, I am sending the Republican National Committee a contribution of:" (then it lists the prices).
If you choose not to donate, the "No." side says "I am turning my back on you, President Trump, and also deserting the Republican Party. You and the Republican candidates are on your own to face the vicious Democrats, well-funded liberal special interests, and the hateful, bitter, biased media who desperately want to elect Democrat Majorities in Congress, cut your term in half, and start impeachment hearings against you. I long for a return of Joe Biden's failed, inflationary open borders. I want endless government growth and higher taxes. I believe America should apologize for our strength and success. And I want liberal Democrats to restrict my Constitutional rights and censor the political speech of my friends and neighbors."
You can't make this shit up. They're so scared they'll beg for money and try to guilt trip seniors like my grandparents into giving it to them.
This was a long time coming, but Republicans finally surpassed Democrats in voter registration in Louisiana.
Louisiana has elected Republican presidents since 2000, Republican U.S. Senators since 2014, and has had a Republican majority in the U.S. House delegation since 1995.
So, with respect to the existing Kentucky judges, the governor at the time for each had to chose "one of three names provided by a nominating commission." Anyone know who was on the nominating commission, or how it was filled?
In MA, SC judges are picked the Governor but require approval from a solid blue elected committee, so the ones Baker appointed aren't actually right-wing for the most part.
Sorry—Actually this article just talks about the argument based on the US constitution’s 17th amendment. I thought I read somewhere else that there was a KY constitution argument but I’m not finding it right now.
I don't see how a 17th Amendment claim would succeed--not for barring him from making an appointment or forcing him to choose from a nominating committee from the same party if he did. It just says state legs "may empower" an appointment, not "shall". I'm not even sure a state constitutional challenge would work since it concerns a federal body, but happy for him to give it a shot if the need arises.
Here is an article from just a week or so ago where the KY courts sided with the Governor on another case involving appointment power “In a Thursday majority opinion written by Justice Michelle Keller, the high court found a 2021 law shifting control of the State Fair Board from the governor to the agriculture commissioner was unconstitutional and a 2022 law giving other executive branch officials appointment power over the Executive Branch Ethics Commission unconstitutional” https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/kentucky-supreme-court-backs-beshear-145227674.html
Er, I meant Kansas judges, not Kentucky (and not Senate). Per https://kscourts.gov/Judges/Become-a-Judge/Supreme-Court-Nominating-Commission, "The Supreme Court Nominating Commission has nine members. There is one lawyer and one nonlawyer from each of the state’s four congressional districts, plus one lawyer who serves as chairperson. Nonlawyers are appointed by the governor. Lawyers are elected by other lawyers within their congressional districts. The chairperson is elected by lawyers statewide."
AIPAC has launched its first attack ad against Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary, claiming: “A history of disrespecting women, that’s the real Abdul El-Sayed.”
As of July 1, ad reservations tracked by AdImpact Politics show $34.4 million backing Rep. Haley Stevens, AIPAC’s preferred candidate, against $8.9 million for Mallory McMorrow and $2.8 million for El-Sayed.
He apparently said Michelle Obama's focus on children was "uninspired and ineffectual", (as someone who was in public school as she pushed for healthy foods, that's a complicated scenario) apparently said Gretchen Whitmer was "bought and sold" (depending on your definition, she might be), and they also accused him of saying he "didn't want to work with anyone over 40".
A history of disrespecting women. Because he criticized people like Michelle Obama and Whitmer. And was accused of saying something about not wanting to work with women over 40.
The one about not wanting to work with anyone over 40 could damage him, and I don't know how popular Whitmer is now, but right now, it seems like leftist candidates who have charisma are getting free passes for much more than a few problematic remarks that might have sunk a Democratic primary campaign in previous years. None of that is comparable at all to Platner's record.
It struck me that Michael Bennett's failed gubernatorial run almost certainly ends his Senate career which he doesn't even like. Either he steps aside or almost certainly gets primaried by Julie Gonzales but this time with name recognition and pro-Women, progressive and Latino groups behind her along with some high profile endorsements.
"To earn our stamp of approval, candidates must convince our members that they are fighters who will go to Washington and lower prices, stand up to Trump and the billionaire Epstein class, and push back against the influence of dark money.
That’s why, today, MoveOn is endorsing: James Talarico (TX), Sherrod Brown (OH), Roy Cooper (NC), Graham Platner (ME), Dr. Abdul El-Sayed (MI), Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan (MN), and Jon Ossoff (GA).
And these candidates need our help—now. In Michigan, progressive fighter El-Sayed has been outspent on the airwaves by the corporate establishment by a factor of 17-to-1, including from an AIPAC-affiliated PAC."
How many of you remember when MoveOn was Censure and Move On, a bipartisan organization dedicated to censuring President Bill Clinton and putting the Lewinsky scandal behind us that way? It sure has changed a lot since then. Of course it's been a partisan activist organization for a long time now, but it's worth taking a moment to reflect on its origins.
Roy Cooper isn't very progressive and Sherrod Brown has pivoted to the center during his lengthy career after starting as one. Talarico is a moderate with progressive bonafides.
Roy Cooper has a progressive streak. He appointed several progressive justices on our Court of Appeals and state Supreme Court. One fought off Jefferson Griffin from stealing her seat, another is looking to unseat one of the three state GOP Supreme Court judges in 2028.
If you're referring to healthcare, Brown hasn't exactly been flexible with the push for either a Medicare for All, Universal Healthcare, single payer system or a considerable improvement as far as a new public healthcare option.
But as far as I'm aware, Brown has not at all pivoted to the center when it comes to workers. He's a hard core liberal on this issue and has been consistently against free trade agreements and outsourcing of manufacturing jobs. Also very much pro-choice.
Talarico identified as a progressive for most of his life and was endorsed by the PCCC for Senate. He only moved to the center on a few issues but throws a few rhetorical bones to the right every now and then.
Gov. Jared Polis of Colorado on Wednesday fired two members of his clemency board after they spoke out against his decision to commute the prison sentence of the election denier Tina Peters.
The board members, Hannah Seigel Proff and Azra Taslimi, had objected to Mr. Polis’s decision in May to release Ms. Peters from prison after pressure from President Trump.
After the commutation, Ms. Proff and Ms. Taslimi revealed that the board — appointed by Mr. Polis — had twice voted unanimously to reject Ms. Peters’s application for a shortened sentence. Mr. Polis, a Democrat, has the final decision, and overruled the board.
It’s disappointing Polis did help build the state party over the last couple decades and now he is ending his promising career on a such a shit note. I met him back when he was a congressman and had much higher hopes for him.
He's obnoxiously wealthy. A lot of wealthy people in particular have been drawn into the conservative culture sphere over the past few years. More so than usual, I mean. Through preferred media sources and social circles.
I wonder if that has happened to him? Pardoning someone like her is the type of thing that would likely play a lot better with that wealthy social/media circle.
This is my interpretation too. It smacks of NYT-style exoticization or infantilization of Trump voters, who can only be visited on special diner safaris and who are treated as strange little creatures who can't possibly understand or intend the harm that they do because they are just trying to espouse Real American Values the best that they can. And so why shouldn't we show a little mercy to this misguided elderly woman to try to heal the division in our country (which is mostly driven by loudmouthed eggheaded hippies, who strangely also seem to criticize the rich and powerful a lot)...
A federal judge striked down several Arkansas laws restricting the ballot initiative process on Tuesday, several days before the petition delivery deadline for the ballot initiative protection amendment.
https://www.ualrpublicradio.org/local-regional-news/2026-07-01/federal-judge-strikes-down-arkansas-laws-restricting-ballot-initiative-process
You love to see it
I'm curious whether they exceeded the 90K signatures required or not. AR Rs are going to fight like hell to keep it off the ballot in November, and use every trick in the book to keep it off like they did with the 2024 abortion initiative.
https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/2026/07/02/mitch-mcconnells-health-status-condition-after-june-hospitalization/90779936007/
Outgoing Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who has been hospitalized for a prolonged period of time, was apparently taken unconscious from his home in Washington after a rumored heart attack last month.
This pattern is familiar to me. It's been nearly 3 weeks since he entered the hospital and little information has been given. Rep. Tom Kean just returned from a similar situation after 4 months.
Remind me has Kentucky changed the law so that the legislature picks an interim Senator should he pass?
I believe so
I think they changed it so that the legislature sends the Governor a list of names he has to pick from. Beshear vetoed it but they overrode, Beshear said the law was unconstitutional so maybe he fights it in court.
EDIT: I was wrong, they removed gubernatorial appointment entirely, special election only.
So the seat remains vacant until the special election?
I’d actually be fine with every vacancy triggering an automatic special election within 120 days as a matter of law
Yep, Brendan is right. Here's NCSL as a ref: https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/vacancies-in-the-united-states-senate
Who schedules the special election?
Not super clear to me, but I would guess the SecState.
https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=54597
⬆️"Who schedules the special election?"
In most states, I believe the Governor appoints an interim US. Senator and a Special election is held the next even year election - Rev. Warnock and Mark Kelly come to mind. And the special election in OH where Sherrod Brown is running this year. (Gov. DeWine appointed Husted to the seat previously held by J.D. Vance). I don't think you can leave it vacant the way we do a US House seat.
For House seats special elections are common and these are the ones that get called at odd times - often at the whim of the governor. This is governed by the state constitution which controls the rules of who calls them and when.
I know VA has very strict rules about speedy special elections and uses firehouse primaries. Gov. Spanberger wasn't seated when she ran for Governor, but the Lt. Governor was. When a sitting state delegate ran and won the Firehouse primary for her seat in the state senate, there was another primary just two weeks later to fill his seat in the House of Delegates. (Had he lost he would have retained his state Senate seat.
But both FL and TX give the Governor a lot of latitude in setting the date for special elections and they have both delayed multiple elections when it suited them (e.g., in very blue districts) while holding speedy special elections in very red districts.
Gov. Whitmer delayed a special election in the state legislature when she was apparently worried the red wave could result in the flip of one of the chambers in MI. And of course the GOP howled when Gavin Newsom scheduled a US House special election on the last allowable date when a GOP congressman died in office. And if I'm not mistaken this was one of the districts redrawn due to prop 50.
Yes, but KY has a law specifically made to disempower the governor, as discussed earlier in the thread.
Congresswoman AOC endorses Abdul El-Sayed in his bid for the open MI Senate seat.
https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2026/07/02/congress/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-michigan-senate-endorsement-00985388
Good for her. Many here would say she's just doing this for other ambitions, though.
stevens seems awful, i like mcmorrow but she seems to have petered out, and with AES ahead of rogers in polling why not
She doesn't need DSA progressive cred though.
Being that El-Sayed is closely aligned with AOC on the issues ideologically-wise, I'd say this is more AOC lending support because she sees him as the right choice who will talk about economic issues she raises awareness of.
She had plenty of time to do this earlier in the process, when it could have made more of a difference, which to me suggests she's trying to avoid alienating future Senate colleagues. She was not going to endorse anyone but El-Sayed, and she waited until he was clearly leading to do so, meaning there's less risk of having a future Senator Stevens or McMorrow who responds in kind. This follows her lack of endorsements in House primaries. She's carefully building alliances and strategically avoiding making enemies.
This is not true at all. He was one of AOC's first endorsements back in 2018, they've worked together on Bernie's campaign and they're both his protégés. This endorsement follows the usual pattern: Bernie endorses early in the race, while AOC endorses during the month before the primary for maximum impact, and only when candidates have a good or great chance of winning, strong grassroots support, and strong fundraising. If anything, her endorsement of him makes me think she's aiming for the forbidden election.
Right. It gives more momentum to his campaign if it seems like he's landing big endorsements later on in the campaign.
Endorsing him early on might’ve given him a slight boost earlier but would’ve lost relevance/impact as the campaign went on. Endorsing him when he’s in the middle of a surge of momentum ensures that he keeps that momentum going until August
Slow day huh
World Cup hangover.
In fact, can Trump use his evil powers for good for once and Tweet at FIFA that the red card is rigged and get them to overturn it or something. As a recipient of the FIFA peace prize he knows what's best.
Miller is not letting Trump stand up for a birthright citizenship player - he would rather the US lose 10-0 to Belgium than do that.
Been a rough day for me personally so not much commenting.
I'm sorry to hear that :(
No primaries until AZ on 7/21 lol. Don't even think there's a mayoral or state leg special until then. DE filing deadline is 7/14, and RI candidates who met the initial filing deadline have to submit signatures by 7/12 to actually qualify for the ballot if folks wanna look forward to that haha.
Now that 21 gubernatorial primaries have took place (not including runoffs), I’ve been looking at elections where running mates are chosen by the governor. Who do people think the following candidates/nominees could choose?
Katie Hobbs (D-AZ)
Andy Biggs (R-AZ)
Phil Weiser (D-CO)
Victor Marx (R-CO)
Bryon Donalds (R-FL)
Jocelyn Benson (D-MI)
John James (R-MI)
Lynne Walz (D-NE)
Deb Haaland (D-NM)
Jermaine Johnson (D-SC)
Toby Doeden (R-SD)
Dan Ahlers (D-SD)
I can't speak to many of them, but I know Deb Haaland said she wants Public Lands Commissioner Stephanie Garcia Richard as her LG pick. I believe that since NM primary voters pick the LG and the candidate dropped out, a state party committee picks the new nominee, but I'd be surprised if she didn't get her choice.
Victor Marx is so crazy he'll probably pick a fully loaded AK-47 as his running mate.
Can someone explain the Victor Marx lore to me? I've only heard his name in memes.
He admitted to killing a man at 7 and then refused to say if he's killed since then. He's nearly 61.
Hobbs is said to be considering Corporation Commissioner and former state Sen. Anna Tovar, as well as former Mesa mayor John Giles, a Republican. I say it'll be Tovar.
But if Hobbs wants to appease a growing progressive movement she could also nominate Tucson mayor Regina Romero.
That’s interesting, hadn’t Tovar expressed interest in being chosen by Hobbs in 2024?
Yes, and rumor has it the Giles pick is mostly because Hobbs wants a moderate on the ticket.
On the other side, I could see Andy Biggs picking Jake Hoffman.
AK-Sen: While the Supreme Court ruled that the second Dan Sullivan can appear on the ballot, apparently the Division of Elections (overseen by the Lieutenant Governor) is printing ballots showing a) Dan J. Sullivan without any party label, despite filing as a Republican and b) listening Dan S. Sullivan as the incumbent, which Alaska elections officials haven't done with any other incumbent in at least the last five elections cycles.
https://www.adn.com/politics/2026/06/30/election-officials-sample-ballot-shows-how-they-seek-to-distinguish-two-dan-sullivans-in-us-senate-race/
No such thing as rock bottom for these people.
we do have the inherent disadvantage of having shame. while the 1960's were certainly not an era of any type of racial or gender harmony, the notion of shame and the moral high ground/an older definition of "moral authority" allowed for the democratic party to take the moral high ground from those opposed to civil rights, those opposed to medicare and the great society writ large.
the breakdown of the new deal coalition and the concurrent street protests of the late 60's over the hypocritical war in vietnam, really removed any remnants of the idea that we had the moral authority to continue passing remedial and helpful legislation, culminating in carter basically running a center right campaign by 1980.
while I support planter, it's a shame his warts are so public because if we ever want to reset the national discourse to something of a modern parallel to the pre-Watergate era, when people believed in the idea government could and should do good, we have to return to our party to being perceived as squeaky clean--even though the republicans get to openly loot the treasury in real time.
This appears to have nothing to do with AK-Sen, lol
I think Hudson Democrat was referring to "no such thing as rock bottom for these people"
Ah
Bulwark's Sarah Longwell is out with a meaty piece in The Bulwark today about whether the DSA wave of 2026 is the Dem version of the Tea Party wave that remade the GOP and our country back in the 2010s based off data from the focus groups she does on a regular basis.
It is unfortunately paywalled and Substack doesn't offer gift links, but the gist of the article is that Democrats are looking for people they believe are fighting Trump. They've been looking around and in many cases the only ones that appear to give off that vibe are DSA or DSA adjacent candidates.
Longwell noted that Josh Shapiro, Mark Kelly, Pete Buttigieg, JB Pritzker, Jon Ossoff and Gavin Newsom who actually know how to effectively communicate in 2026 have come up positively in her focus groups. Down in Colorado while Melat Kiros was romping to a nearly 15 point win over Diana DeGette who's been in the House for 30 years, Phil Weiser ruined Michael Bennet's coronation as Colorado's next governor thanks to the fact Weiser could point to the fact he wakes up in the morning and sues' Trump while Bennet voted for no less than 10 of Trump's odious cabinet picks.
https://www.thebulwark.com/p/the-real-reason-the-democratic-socialists-are-surging
Not too sure about Shapiro and Newsom but the others seem like effective communicators.
i don't agree with shapiro on several issues, but he comes across eminently more likable than gavin. Gavin's west coast style mixed with his individual personality, or lack thereof, has me wincing even when I agree with what he's saying
Gavin doesn't have a personality, which is a strike against him for 2028. Maybe he can change that beginning next year when he's out of the governor's mansion.
How does someone without a personality fix that?
By now, they don't. Being a panderer IS his personality.
I'd argue that Newsom's problem is that he doesn't seem to have a personal ideological core. He chases whatever he thinks will advance his career. He took a sharp right turn in tone after 2024, starting a podcast and inviting far right figures onto it. Then he abandoned that when it seemed to no longer fit the political moment.
Newsom's ideology is whatever he thinks is best for himself. I can't find someone like that to be likable.
Gavin's heavy use of hair gel is a metaphor for his general slickness. He is not my favorite California politician...
Shapiro's electoral performances should tell you everything. Take 2020 for example Biden lost heavily WWC Luzerne County by 15 points while Shapiro as AG won the county on the same ballot. Same deal in 2022 and likely this year, he knows how to communicate and win.
Third Way did a poll of Dem voters back in February, and they found that the most appealing candidate across the board would be a "Candidate has the guts to stand up to Trump and the MAGA wing of the Republican Party"
And third way promptly took that finding and did nothing with it
Yes there is actually quite a lot of good stuff in there, but you are right, they have mostly avoided it.
Anyone denying the long-term socialist or social democratic ideological shifts within the Democratic Party is fooling themselves.
https://www.theargumentmag.com/p/why-centrists-cant-win-the-democratic
As a Kansan, I’d like to add an important point of context to why the Republican’s so despise our Kansas Supreme Court.
Not only were they incensed by the women’s reproductive rights ruling but it’s also about public schools.
The Republicans have tried for years to gut funding to public schools only to be stymied by the Kansas Supreme Court.
In 2014 the KSC ruled that the legislature had not funded public schools equally.
In 2017 the KSC again ruled they had not met their Constitutional obligation.
In 2019 the legislature added $90 million to school funding but the KSC retained jurisdiction to insure compliance.
In 2024 the KSC released jurisdiction.
In the 14 years since the case was originally filed, 1 billion more per year was spent on public schools.
This really made conservative Republicans so angry that they tried to campaign to remove 6 of the 7 justices in 2024 and 2026 retention elections.
So this to me is as much about the GOP trying to deprive and destroy public education as it is about women’s reproductive rights. Equally so.
Kansans need to break that GOP supermajority in the state legislature. Especially if they elect another Democratic governor to follow Laura Kelly.
The last time Kansas elected a Governor from a party that had already been in that office for 8 or more years was 1954. It'd be epic if Dems were the party to break that streak.
I can't like this right now, so I just wanted to let you know that I appreciate your informing us about this eloquently.
Here's some backstory: my diehard MAGA grandparents live outside of the country, but their American mailing address is at my house.
Today Trump and the RNC sent them a "Ballot for America's Future". Inside the ballot, which you would generally think would involve voting, it prompts you to donate various amounts to the RNC, including $35, $75, $150, $250, $500, and, I'm not making this up, $2026. The money is so Republicans can keep their congressional majorities in November.
If you donate, the "Yes!" side says "I am fully committed to helping defend our Republican Congressional Majorities this November to ensure you have the legislative leverage to keep working to Make America Great Again. I promise to stand with you and Republican candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. Senate, Governorships, and state and local officials and legislative positions across the country during the critical 2026 midterm elections. To help the Republican Party promote your record of accomplishment (sic) and to aid in the election of the leaders who will work with you and bring lasting change and reform to our nation, I am sending the Republican National Committee a contribution of:" (then it lists the prices).
If you choose not to donate, the "No." side says "I am turning my back on you, President Trump, and also deserting the Republican Party. You and the Republican candidates are on your own to face the vicious Democrats, well-funded liberal special interests, and the hateful, bitter, biased media who desperately want to elect Democrat Majorities in Congress, cut your term in half, and start impeachment hearings against you. I long for a return of Joe Biden's failed, inflationary open borders. I want endless government growth and higher taxes. I believe America should apologize for our strength and success. And I want liberal Democrats to restrict my Constitutional rights and censor the political speech of my friends and neighbors."
You can't make this shit up. They're so scared they'll beg for money and try to guilt trip seniors like my grandparents into giving it to them.
Yes, pretty much all the right wing fundraisers do that.
I got that too. Hilarious no?
https://wgno.com/news/gop-surpasses-democrats-as-louisianas-largest-voter-group/
This was a long time coming, but Republicans finally surpassed Democrats in voter registration in Louisiana.
Louisiana has elected Republican presidents since 2000, Republican U.S. Senators since 2014, and has had a Republican majority in the U.S. House delegation since 1995.
In addition most of the traditionally Catholic Dem southeast parishes are bleeding population.
So, with respect to the existing Kentucky judges, the governor at the time for each had to chose "one of three names provided by a nominating commission." Anyone know who was on the nominating commission, or how it was filled?
In MA, SC judges are picked the Governor but require approval from a solid blue elected committee, so the ones Baker appointed aren't actually right-wing for the most part.
I’ve read that Beshear disagreed with the legislation law limiting his authority to replace a senator is so he may fight it.
Here is an article from 2023 regarding Beshear likely fighting legally against the law [edited comment to remove reference to KY constitution]. https://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article277714983.html
Sorry—Actually this article just talks about the argument based on the US constitution’s 17th amendment. I thought I read somewhere else that there was a KY constitution argument but I’m not finding it right now.
I don't see how a 17th Amendment claim would succeed--not for barring him from making an appointment or forcing him to choose from a nominating committee from the same party if he did. It just says state legs "may empower" an appointment, not "shall". I'm not even sure a state constitutional challenge would work since it concerns a federal body, but happy for him to give it a shot if the need arises.
Here is an article from just a week or so ago where the KY courts sided with the Governor on another case involving appointment power “In a Thursday majority opinion written by Justice Michelle Keller, the high court found a 2021 law shifting control of the State Fair Board from the governor to the agriculture commissioner was unconstitutional and a 2022 law giving other executive branch officials appointment power over the Executive Branch Ethics Commission unconstitutional” https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/kentucky-supreme-court-backs-beshear-145227674.html
Those are all concerning filling vacancies to state officials though.
Er, I meant Kansas judges, not Kentucky (and not Senate). Per https://kscourts.gov/Judges/Become-a-Judge/Supreme-Court-Nominating-Commission, "The Supreme Court Nominating Commission has nine members. There is one lawyer and one nonlawyer from each of the state’s four congressional districts, plus one lawyer who serves as chairperson. Nonlawyers are appointed by the governor. Lawyers are elected by other lawyers within their congressional districts. The chairperson is elected by lawyers statewide."
AIPAC has launched its first attack ad against Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary, claiming: “A history of disrespecting women, that’s the real Abdul El-Sayed.”
As of July 1, ad reservations tracked by AdImpact Politics show $34.4 million backing Rep. Haley Stevens, AIPAC’s preferred candidate, against $8.9 million for Mallory McMorrow and $2.8 million for El-Sayed.
https://x.com/dropsitenews/status/2072719063831257211?s=46&t=sbdQQeYBqp0h_Zql717iTw
I can't open the ad. What are they accusing him of?
He apparently said Michelle Obama's focus on children was "uninspired and ineffectual", (as someone who was in public school as she pushed for healthy foods, that's a complicated scenario) apparently said Gretchen Whitmer was "bought and sold" (depending on your definition, she might be), and they also accused him of saying he "didn't want to work with anyone over 40".
A history of disrespecting women. Because he criticized people like Michelle Obama and Whitmer. And was accused of saying something about not wanting to work with women over 40.
The one about not wanting to work with anyone over 40 could damage him, and I don't know how popular Whitmer is now, but right now, it seems like leftist candidates who have charisma are getting free passes for much more than a few problematic remarks that might have sunk a Democratic primary campaign in previous years. None of that is comparable at all to Platner's record.
It struck me that Michael Bennett's failed gubernatorial run almost certainly ends his Senate career which he doesn't even like. Either he steps aside or almost certainly gets primaried by Julie Gonzales but this time with name recognition and pro-Women, progressive and Latino groups behind her along with some high profile endorsements.
He's going to be ranking/chair of the Agriculture Committee next Congress, so he can parlay that into becoming Secretary.
Upcoming Gonzales vs Neguse vs Crow primary?
He seems more fit to be Secretary of Education, but it's his and a Democratic president's prerogative, I guess.
He would make a good Secretary of Education now that you mentioned it.
Wasn't he a big charter school advocate?
Yes.
Announcement MoveOn emailed me:
"To earn our stamp of approval, candidates must convince our members that they are fighters who will go to Washington and lower prices, stand up to Trump and the billionaire Epstein class, and push back against the influence of dark money.
That’s why, today, MoveOn is endorsing: James Talarico (TX), Sherrod Brown (OH), Roy Cooper (NC), Graham Platner (ME), Dr. Abdul El-Sayed (MI), Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan (MN), and Jon Ossoff (GA).
And these candidates need our help—now. In Michigan, progressive fighter El-Sayed has been outspent on the airwaves by the corporate establishment by a factor of 17-to-1, including from an AIPAC-affiliated PAC."
How many of you remember when MoveOn was Censure and Move On, a bipartisan organization dedicated to censuring President Bill Clinton and putting the Lewinsky scandal behind us that way? It sure has changed a lot since then. Of course it's been a partisan activist organization for a long time now, but it's worth taking a moment to reflect on its origins.
Not Josh Turek?
Not Mary Peltola, either. Not progressive enough for them, maybe?
Roy Cooper isn't very progressive and Sherrod Brown has pivoted to the center during his lengthy career after starting as one. Talarico is a moderate with progressive bonafides.
Roy Cooper has a progressive streak. He appointed several progressive justices on our Court of Appeals and state Supreme Court. One fought off Jefferson Griffin from stealing her seat, another is looking to unseat one of the three state GOP Supreme Court judges in 2028.
Brown is super progressive for OH and plenty progressive compared to other Senstors generally.
If you're referring to healthcare, Brown hasn't exactly been flexible with the push for either a Medicare for All, Universal Healthcare, single payer system or a considerable improvement as far as a new public healthcare option.
But as far as I'm aware, Brown has not at all pivoted to the center when it comes to workers. He's a hard core liberal on this issue and has been consistently against free trade agreements and outsourcing of manufacturing jobs. Also very much pro-choice.
Talarico identified as a progressive for most of his life and was endorsed by the PCCC for Senate. He only moved to the center on a few issues but throws a few rhetorical bones to the right every now and then.
Maybe they haven't gotten around to them yet.
It appeared to reach the peak of its power in the Bush years leading up to Obama's first term. Seems like eeons ago now.
Gov. Jared Polis of Colorado on Wednesday fired two members of his clemency board after they spoke out against his decision to commute the prison sentence of the election denier Tina Peters.
The board members, Hannah Seigel Proff and Azra Taslimi, had objected to Mr. Polis’s decision in May to release Ms. Peters from prison after pressure from President Trump.
After the commutation, Ms. Proff and Ms. Taslimi revealed that the board — appointed by Mr. Polis — had twice voted unanimously to reject Ms. Peters’s application for a shortened sentence. Mr. Polis, a Democrat, has the final decision, and overruled the board.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/01/us/jared-polis-tina-peters-clemency-board-fired.html?unlocked_article_code=1.u1A.rdTu._Y-PzGDnJnSL&smid=url-share
So ready for Weiser to be governor
It’s disappointing Polis did help build the state party over the last couple decades and now he is ending his promising career on a such a shit note. I met him back when he was a congressman and had much higher hopes for him.
I’m still baffled why he was so insistent on this
He's obnoxiously wealthy. A lot of wealthy people in particular have been drawn into the conservative culture sphere over the past few years. More so than usual, I mean. Through preferred media sources and social circles.
I wonder if that has happened to him? Pardoning someone like her is the type of thing that would likely play a lot better with that wealthy social/media circle.
This is my interpretation too. It smacks of NYT-style exoticization or infantilization of Trump voters, who can only be visited on special diner safaris and who are treated as strange little creatures who can't possibly understand or intend the harm that they do because they are just trying to espouse Real American Values the best that they can. And so why shouldn't we show a little mercy to this misguided elderly woman to try to heal the division in our country (which is mostly driven by loudmouthed eggheaded hippies, who strangely also seem to criticize the rich and powerful a lot)...
They should impeach and remove him as a lesson. This is beyond the pale. Imagine destroying your career over a psycho like Peters.
No morning Digest today?
They're off until Tuesday for the 4th.