The most disgusting thing about Duke Cunningham isn't the hot tub, it's that he apparently ate "very well done" filet mignon. They should've dropped the corruption charges and sought the death penalty for that.
Some of that damage has already been done to the Republican brand in general, because it just reminds everyone that many of their policies and views are callous and inhumane. It's part of the zeitgeist of this election season, even with Ernst not running. So I do think Hinson, along with many other Republicans across the country, will lose a few votes because of what Ernst said.
Maybe a few, but it's very hard to call this anything other than Lean R, and I'd say its closer to Likely R than it is to Tossup. We should contest it aggressively for sure, but we should be clear-eyed about our chances here.
Ernst won re-election by a smaller margin back in 2020 than what she did back in 2014. This was years before her BBB and “we’re all going to die” PR fiasco.
Additionally, in the original IA-GOV gubernatorial race back in 2018, Kim Reynolds beat Democratic Candidate Fred Hubbell by less than 3% points.
This is the first open Senate race in IA since 2014, when the midterms featured really low turnout. Besides Ernst having been elected to the Senate back in 2014, IA had Tom Harkin in the seat since 1985 and Chuck Grassley in his own since 1981.
Lean-R makes sense, but if it's likely-R, either Hinson is significantly more popular than Ernst or the polls are getting things wrong, and there's also the huge Democratic trend in Iowa special elections to consider.
There's little need to even go that far. Just question and call out Hinson on her vote for the Big Bill. It's still gonna be just as unpopular by November 2026 as it is now, if not moreso. You wouldn't even need to drag Ernst, let alone Trump into the attacks yet. Congress itself has been very incompetent and corrupt. BBB will be the millstone around the GOP's necks that will sink their careers.
At the moment probably a little tougher than Ernst but plenty of room for her to make her own mistakes and as MPC says she is a solid vote for all of the messy policies. Hopefully the primary is messy, It also puts her house seat more into play.
She'll inevitably face a contested primary. I'm not sold on her being stronger than an incumbent, even a weakened one, in and of itself. But I think even in that scenario Hinson has a big added penalty in that she will almost certainly need to dump lots of time and money on winning a primary. Possibly even force her to move to the right to win more of their base over.
That puts republicans at parity with whoever our candidate is, instead of putting us at a net disadvantage.
I don't think Matt Whitaker will be the one to put a scare in Hinson if one comes. The GOP voters that I know well in my state are kind of tired of him. Someone will get Hinson on the record about contraception or limited situations where she would ok with abortion rights, and that will likely thrust some well spoken social conservative into the race.
It'd be nice if MO voters could get that constitutional amendment (aka "Respect MO Voters") on the ballot next year to keep the legislature from overturning the will of the voters on initiated statutes like the paid leave and $15/hr minimum wage.
We start gathering signatures for that next week. You need to gather a certain number in 6 out of 8 congressional districts, so this redistricting mess could complicate strategy. But I think the campaign will be successful.
To an extent, but voters in heavily Republican states in general and Missouri in particular have shown no hesitation to vote for Democratic priorities Republican politicians try to oppose, annul and sabotage at every turn while voting to reelect those same Republican politicians by a landslide. It's maddening, but it very clearly demonstrates the difference between voters voting their interests on issues and their whiteness , exclusionary Christian supremacism, anti-LGBT bigotry, xenophobic or just pure identity in terms of political parties.
Beyond all the forms of bigotry at play, it's also a consequence of voters and the media severing the link between elections and policy. Not severed in actual election consequences of course, but mentally severed in their assessments of how to vote.
It's also crazy in light of the fact that every time we lose an election (sometimes even when we win) everyone comes out of the woodwork to insist we needed to talk about policy more.
I wish I knew how to re-establish the link between policy and politics in the minds of voters. It would do a lot to help us. Either directly by making democrats do better, or indirectly by making republicans less bad on policy.
Probably, although state politicians will do everything they can to make this as hard as possible. Wouldn’t be surprised if they try to “reinterpret” rules.
At some point, maybe Missouri voters will recognize their cognitive dissonance of continually voting for policies that their chosen elected officials keep twisting themselves into pretzels to cancel democracy over.
It's actually not actually cognitive dissonance. According to Osita Nwanevu, the 60% who support legal abortion and gay marriage, the 60% who support paid leave and minimum wage etc are not the same 60% percent of the electorate. They are not the same coalition of voters.
The Republican coalition is made up of fiscal libertarians and social conservatives. Unpopular Republican policies come in a package for their voters.
I'm skeptical that on the 2024 minimum wage initiative that there was insufficient overlap for the 58% of Trump voters and the 58% of Yes voters to where cognitive dissonance was not substantially in play. The county and precinct maps don't hint at any deep reservoirs of fiscal libertarian voters who went for Harris and "No" on the $15 minimum wage to offset each other by way of dueling coalitions. Occam's Razor here suggests it's just a matter of Trump's working-class cult of personality winning over hundreds of thousands of converts from people who still connect with the Democrats on bread-and-butter issues so long as party labels aren't attached.....and casting their ballot accordingly.
It doesn't really matter if a district has 60 percent of voters supporting both stances. Because the non-Harris "Yes" voters may be from different parts of the Republican coalition.
Scratch Lina Khan off that very long list of candidates being bandied around for Nadler's seat. She told The Bulwark's Tim Miller she is not interested in running for Nadler's seat.
Honestly, I expected Micah Lasher to consolidate the field pretty quick - he’s got support from both establishment types and he’s very close to Mamdani
I think Lasher could be the Biss of NY-12. There are to many other young, talented, progressives who will want to take the generational shot to run for Congress and won't defer to on trying a run of their own (Huynh, Simmons). Plus heavy AIPAC-backed establishment types (Fine). And various ambitious people of varying levels of seriousness/talent from outside elected office (Abughazaleh, et al). Hopefully they've seen that example, and the first category will do a better job of trying to coordinate and have a better chance at preventing at least the second category from winning. (Not as many avenues/incentive to keep anyone from the third from running, as is obvious since they've the biggest source of the clown car-ification of IL-09).
Edit: This isn't to say I think Lasher (or Biss) will lose, just that I'm less sure of consolidation in NY-12.
Ranked-choice voting would doom Abughazaleh and Fine in IL-09 (Abughazaleh is a favorite of high-info progressives, but she recently moved from TX to IL, whereas Fine is the establishment candidate in the most anti-establishment Democratic-leaning Illinois congressional district), but either of them could win due to an extremely split field and plurality-wins voting in use.
David and Jeff: Thanks for a great digest, which took a lot of work! Nice bio of Jerry Nadler, one of the really good guys in public service. A couple of reactions to Digest items: Hilda Solis is not as old as you might think, considering that she's been out of Congress for 14 years: 67. Would she get her seniority back? She probably shouldn't, but I don't know how they do things in the House. It's fine for her to serve a term or two, though all things being equal, someone younger who could build up more seniority and might have the possibility of winning higher office later would be more appealing.
About the settlement with ridehailing companies in California:
"Under the deal, Uber and Lyft will see their insurance obligations reduced in exchange for allowing workers to engage in collective bargaining while still being regarded as independent contractors."
So they still presumably get no benefits or sick pay but can bargain for it. If so, that's still an improvement, and the California Legislature deserves our appreciation and congratulations. It's a good post-Labor Day story.
As far as I remember she would be credited for three of her four terms; i.e. if she was elected in '26 she would be ranked as if she were elected in 2020, I believe.
"Maine brewery owner Dan Kleban (D) announced in a video that he is mounting a Senate bid"
I like the excerpts at the link because he focuses squarely on Collins and doesn't bash Democrats. It's interesting that we now have an oyster farmer and a brewer running.
No, it’s not good for Haley Stevens for the time being.
However, providing she and her Senate campaign don’t continue making more mistakes, she’ll still have plenty of time. The primary, isn’t until next August.
Sounds like the type of thing that is viable in theory, but in practice it would work to closely link Cuomo as "Trump's candidate" and make the electorate favor Mamdani more.
In December 2019, Sliwa declared in an interview that he hated then-President of the United States Donald Trump, calling him a "screwball and a crackpot".[51] In February 2021, weeks after Trump left office, Sliwa switched his registration back to the Republican Party.[52]
I lived in Cunningham's district when his trial and conviction went down. I was amazed how the conservative local press stood by him through the whole thing. An article expressing shock and outrage that he, like all convicts, had wear shackles on his journey from the courtroom to the prison especially stands out.
Anything stopping her from running for something this time? If nothing else maybe the zombie lie that she is a some amazing political talent can die at last.
It doesn’t really matter whether she was an exceptional political talent or just an average politician. She already had strong name recognition, the benefit of her father’s goodwill, and the fact that Florida was much bluer at the time. The 2018 midterms were also a massive blue wave nationally. Gillum ultimately lost not because of the political climate, but largely due to corruption allegations and persistent rumors of drug use that broke before the election. For context, Hillary Clinton lost Florida in 2016 by just 1.2 points, and Joe Biden lost it in 2020 by 3.4 points—both significantly narrower margins than Democrats would face in later years.
It’s not like Florida Democrats are or were adverse to nominating moderates the fact she couldn’t even win a third of them despite having all of those advantages should tell you that average would be a generous description.
There were other moderates in the race especially a billionaire with deep pockets who split the vote. And losing a primary doesn't mean you'd not perform well in the general like Mastriano, Lake, Walker etc etc.
Not even getting a third of the vote despite having "already .. strong name recognition, the benefit of her father’s goodwill," I don't see her doing any better then Sink, Crist or Nelson. Hell Crist was a right wing governor and managed to win the primary four years later without breaking a sweat. The conventional wisdom for years that she would do so much better then Nelson or other Dems in 2018 does not seem to be based in reality.
U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens, a candidate for Michigan's open U.S. Senate seat, incorrectly claimed in a social media post Monday that she had won the endorsement of Berrien County Commissioner Chokwe Pitchford.
Senate hopeful Stevens wrongly claims endorsement by Berrien Co. official
The Bulwark reported that Hakeem Jeffries doesn't want to endorse Mamdani because if he wins the election, it could lead to a domino of other primaries against sitting House Reps and while he deliberates, the NY-DSA isn't ruling out primaries against Jeffries and Goldman either. DSA's Jabari Brisport is being primaried by someone whose campaign is supported by a top Jeffries ally and advisor.
The problem is, it isn’t just DSA. They tried to primary Gustavo Rivera in the State Senate years back and he wasn’t DSA. It’s all progressives. And no, not all progressives are DSA. I’m not, I don’t even like them.
Also, the NYC mayors race is fairly safe blue. I don’t think we’re in danger of, say, Sliwa winning. I don’t think someone like Suozzi is remotely vulnerable, I know multiple people with ties to Long Island, they’ve all said it’s highly conservative. Mamdani winning doesn’t mean Suozzi will be primaried.
Eh, hold on. Comparing Adams in 2021 to Mamdani in 2025 is the farthest thing from an Apples to Oranges comparison in this case. Also, while Schumer and Hochul endorsed Adams, Jeffries did not in 2021. He declined to endorse Adams then. So at least Jeffries has so far been consistent on that end.
The reasoning is ideological. There's no point in twisting ourselves in knots to pretend otherwise.
Progressives, moderates, and everyone in between are all capable of faceplanting or underdelivering. This isn't a unique risk to candidates further to the left. Case in point, the current mayor of NYC is a moderate and is overwhelmingly unpopular. With good reason.
Jeffries et al are reticent to endorse Mamdani because they do not like him ideologically. There's nothing more to it. There's no alternative, more compelling, reasoning available. It is purely ideological.
So the DSA is divisive and “traitors” but centrists aren’t? Was Manchin a loyal Dem when he and Sinema killed half of Biden’s agenda? What about the Dem donors who fled to Trump? Or Fetterman and his ilk constantly vocally trashing Dems in the media when our party is at its lowest?
Also, “biggest government programs”? Are you implying Dems should oppose more government involvement? Why not just join the GOP then?
Also, the grocery store proposal was meant for food deserts, where there are zero supermarkets. Explain to me how the “free market” is supposed to suddenly solve that now when they had plenty of opportunities to do so before.
I’m sick of progressives being lectured about purity tests, then the Dems won’t back us when we win. Who’s giving a purity test now?
He's been an elected democrat for five years, ran in and won a democratic primary, supports democratic policies, and self-identifies as a democrat. Why are you saying he isn't a democrat? People can be DSA and democrats at the same time. DSA isn't a political party.
I think in this case a lot of what makes people think he's a better democrat is he isn't a disgraced ex-governor who had to resign in shame after multiple, repeated, and credible accusations of sexual misconduct were made against him; that he isn't supported by Trump implicitly or explicitly; isn't all-but-convicted guilty of bribery; and that he never spent any time propping up a group of moderate democrats caucusing with republicans so as to prevent democratic policy from becoming law.
Doesn't hurt that he's also a better communicator than a lot of the rest of our party, regardless of if you agree with what he is communicating.
I'm not on fully on board with the idea that they don't like him ideologically. It's more about which of his policies that can actually be enforced and executed. Also, see my comment below about what Jewish voters are more concerned about with Mamdani and coming up short with mobilizing black voters in the primary. I like and support Mamdani and I still believe they will end up endorsing him. Jeffries, Schumer and Hochul all know he's going to be mayor. Why else are they in constant communication with him?
Establishment democrats have had reservations about non-progressive candidates before and still gotten on board and endorsed them happily.
I'm not denying that they're worried about this or that. I'm saying that they're letting that stop, or delay, their endorsement because he's a progressive. How many establishment dems actually did endorse Cuomo in the primary despite everything horrible about him?
Do you think Jeffries' endorsement would be this long in waiting if Cuomo had won the primary? I don't.
Also, I'm not convinced the Democrats official Instagram account wouldn't post anything from Mamdani had they not received some sort of nod of approval or thumbs up from either Jeffries, Schumer or Hochul's teams.
Meh, I'm sure Jeffries doesn't want to take his primary for granted but I think that he's more concerned about the DSA somehow pulling off upset wins against folks like Souzzi. But Jeffries also knows that Mamdani is going to be the next mayor, hence why he's been in constant conversation with him. Even Mamdani's campaign will publicly back up Jeffries teams statements about what they are talking about. Mamdani was also invited to speak to House Democrats on the Hill. So I get why these conversations have been going on and sort of get why everyone has been freaking out about Jeffries not publicly endorsing him yet. But I'm very certain he will and I think Hochul will as well. Schumer's been in touch with him a lot too but I don't know what he'll end up doing. I think the reason they've also been hesitant isn't so much because of Israel and Gaza as we're lead to believe. To be clear, polling has showed that Mamdani wins an overwhelming majority of Jewish voters in NYC but their concerns with him are more about their safety with him as mayor: https://forward.com/fast-forward/760003/jews-prefer-mamdani-to-other-nyc-mayoral-candidates-but-worry-about-their-safety-under-him-poll-finds/
Many Jews surveyed by New York Solidarity Group said they believed their future is in danger — 58% believe the city will be less safe for Jews under Mamdani’s leadership, including a large contingent of older voters.
Sara Forman, the group’s executive director, said she wanted a potential Mayor Mamdani to understand the concerns weighing on Jewish New Yorkers. Other pro-Israel Jewish leaders have told Jewish Insider they are becoming resigned to the idea that Mamdani will prevail in November, leaving them no choice but to advise and work with him.
“As Mr. Mamdani has expressed his interest in engaging with communities outside his base, our poll offers concrete examples of what steps he can take to work with and allay the concerns of Jewish New Yorkers,” Forman said in a statement.
This is why he's had to address criticism of use of terms like “globalize the intifada”. They like his policies for the city but what they are afraid is Mamdani might inadvertently cause some folks who are truly anti-semitic to associate with him and commit hate crimes. I agree with Mamdani on what Israel is doing in Gaza and I don't want to go any further than that for the sake of the conversations allowed in the thread. But I also understand this electorate's concern. I'm not worried about Mamdani losing Jewish support going into the election. I'm more concerned about making sure he can mobilize black support away from Cuomo. But if Mamdani needs to show folks like Jeffries, Schumer and Hochul he is putting in the effort to address these concerns to this section of the Jewish electorate and he's making serious inroads with black support in order to get their endorsements, I can understand that.
I can, too, but they should endorse him while working with him on that. Why do you think Suozzi could be susceptible to a socialist opponent in his district?
I agree but I think they need to get some reassurance from him and want to understand what parts of his platform are actually achievable that other Democrats can run on. I think because Suozzi represents a district that went to Trump and because Israel was a big issue in his 2023 special election, he might be overly nervous of a DSA member inspired by Mamdani to mobilze a real primary challenge. I also think that maybe because Mamdani pulled off a win in the primary in Staten Island that he might be nervous of losing. I think Suozzi is being way too overly concerned about Mamdani and I think Jeffries is probably going to really listen to someone like Suozzi because they need to flip seats and hold onto ones like Suozzi. Also, just because Mamdani could pull it off that doesn't mean other DSA candidates can, especially if they can't run disciplined campaigns. DSA can prove to be their own worst enemy at times.
A primary challenge against Jeffries would be extremely difficult. Mamdani won Jeffries's district in the mayoral primary by running up a massive margin in Bed-Stuy, with depressed turnout in the pro-Cuomo/Jeffries parts of the district. That's not something that would be easy to repeat, especially against a sitting House Minority Leader who is potentially on the cusp of becoming the first Black U.S. House Speaker in history.
Goldman, on the other hand, would be extremely vulnerable to a primary challenge from someone like Brad Lander.
Your username checks out.
Blocked and reported.
What bot/human moron vomited out this nonsense?
The most disgusting thing about Duke Cunningham isn't the hot tub, it's that he apparently ate "very well done" filet mignon. They should've dropped the corruption charges and sought the death penalty for that.
Trump is the same way! A former server who worked at one of his casino’s restaurants said he wasn’t happy until his steak could shake on the plate.
And then he put ketchup on it I heard.
My God, he murdered that filet mignon! Unforgivable.
Perhaps some leniency might be in order for Bob Menendez if, on his 250 annual meals out to the steakhouse, he had his medium rare.
As expected, Hinson is in for IA-Sen
She voted for the bill like Ernst did. I hope she gets pummeled on it too.
That would be great!
Who needs Ernst when you have Hinson in the race?
Hinson unfortunately didn't say anything massively tone deaf like Ernst did, ie the "we're all going to die" flap at her disastrous town hall.
Some of that damage has already been done to the Republican brand in general, because it just reminds everyone that many of their policies and views are callous and inhumane. It's part of the zeitgeist of this election season, even with Ernst not running. So I do think Hinson, along with many other Republicans across the country, will lose a few votes because of what Ernst said.
Maybe a few, but it's very hard to call this anything other than Lean R, and I'd say its closer to Likely R than it is to Tossup. We should contest it aggressively for sure, but we should be clear-eyed about our chances here.
Ernst won re-election by a smaller margin back in 2020 than what she did back in 2014. This was years before her BBB and “we’re all going to die” PR fiasco.
Additionally, in the original IA-GOV gubernatorial race back in 2018, Kim Reynolds beat Democratic Candidate Fred Hubbell by less than 3% points.
This is the first open Senate race in IA since 2014, when the midterms featured really low turnout. Besides Ernst having been elected to the Senate back in 2014, IA had Tom Harkin in the seat since 1985 and Chuck Grassley in his own since 1981.
Lean-R makes sense, but if it's likely-R, either Hinson is significantly more popular than Ernst or the polls are getting things wrong, and there's also the huge Democratic trend in Iowa special elections to consider.
Yeah, there’s little spinning that can be done by Hinson.
Voters could tie her to Ernst and then Hinson will really have nowhere to hide.
There's little need to even go that far. Just question and call out Hinson on her vote for the Big Bill. It's still gonna be just as unpopular by November 2026 as it is now, if not moreso. You wouldn't even need to drag Ernst, let alone Trump into the attacks yet. Congress itself has been very incompetent and corrupt. BBB will be the millstone around the GOP's necks that will sink their careers.
At the moment probably a little tougher than Ernst but plenty of room for her to make her own mistakes and as MPC says she is a solid vote for all of the messy policies. Hopefully the primary is messy, It also puts her house seat more into play.
She'll inevitably face a contested primary. I'm not sold on her being stronger than an incumbent, even a weakened one, in and of itself. But I think even in that scenario Hinson has a big added penalty in that she will almost certainly need to dump lots of time and money on winning a primary. Possibly even force her to move to the right to win more of their base over.
That puts republicans at parity with whoever our candidate is, instead of putting us at a net disadvantage.
I don't think Matt Whitaker will be the one to put a scare in Hinson if one comes. The GOP voters that I know well in my state are kind of tired of him. Someone will get Hinson on the record about contraception or limited situations where she would ok with abortion rights, and that will likely thrust some well spoken social conservative into the race.
So her seat is now open, giving us an excellent shot at it.
Vowing unwavering allegiance to Trump! Her campaign must think the special election results are low-turnout aberrations.
this one was so long 😕
You're not actually complaining about that, are you?
i’m not complaining. just making an observation. thank you for the feedback.
It'd be nice if MO voters could get that constitutional amendment (aka "Respect MO Voters") on the ballot next year to keep the legislature from overturning the will of the voters on initiated statutes like the paid leave and $15/hr minimum wage.
We start gathering signatures for that next week. You need to gather a certain number in 6 out of 8 congressional districts, so this redistricting mess could complicate strategy. But I think the campaign will be successful.
Oh good. Because if that can get on the ballot (and passed), that means MO voters are sick of Republican overreach.
That should really drive Democratic turnout.
To an extent, but voters in heavily Republican states in general and Missouri in particular have shown no hesitation to vote for Democratic priorities Republican politicians try to oppose, annul and sabotage at every turn while voting to reelect those same Republican politicians by a landslide. It's maddening, but it very clearly demonstrates the difference between voters voting their interests on issues and their whiteness , exclusionary Christian supremacism, anti-LGBT bigotry, xenophobic or just pure identity in terms of political parties.
Beyond all the forms of bigotry at play, it's also a consequence of voters and the media severing the link between elections and policy. Not severed in actual election consequences of course, but mentally severed in their assessments of how to vote.
That’s a big part of it. Hence why so many Repubs go “I bet Trump will institute better healthcare for us because he’s on our team!”
Like… no? But the team sport mentality makes politics a consumable product, whereas policy is divorced from said product to the average voter
It's also crazy in light of the fact that every time we lose an election (sometimes even when we win) everyone comes out of the woodwork to insist we needed to talk about policy more.
I wish I knew how to re-establish the link between policy and politics in the minds of voters. It would do a lot to help us. Either directly by making democrats do better, or indirectly by making republicans less bad on policy.
I'm assuming gather petitions for 26 would mean it would be under the current lines? Not sure though.
Probably, although state politicians will do everything they can to make this as hard as possible. Wouldn’t be surprised if they try to “reinterpret” rules.
At some point, maybe Missouri voters will recognize their cognitive dissonance of continually voting for policies that their chosen elected officials keep twisting themselves into pretzels to cancel democracy over.
Any time now...
It's actually not actually cognitive dissonance. According to Osita Nwanevu, the 60% who support legal abortion and gay marriage, the 60% who support paid leave and minimum wage etc are not the same 60% percent of the electorate. They are not the same coalition of voters.
The Republican coalition is made up of fiscal libertarians and social conservatives. Unpopular Republican policies come in a package for their voters.
I'm skeptical that on the 2024 minimum wage initiative that there was insufficient overlap for the 58% of Trump voters and the 58% of Yes voters to where cognitive dissonance was not substantially in play. The county and precinct maps don't hint at any deep reservoirs of fiscal libertarian voters who went for Harris and "No" on the $15 minimum wage to offset each other by way of dueling coalitions. Occam's Razor here suggests it's just a matter of Trump's working-class cult of personality winning over hundreds of thousands of converts from people who still connect with the Democrats on bread-and-butter issues so long as party labels aren't attached.....and casting their ballot accordingly.
It doesn't really matter if a district has 60 percent of voters supporting both stances. Because the non-Harris "Yes" voters may be from different parts of the Republican coalition.
You didn't mention the word "bigots".
They are social conservatives and fiscal libertarians both because of reasons.
Right.
"What does the president have to do with rising property taxes and higher electricity bills?" lolol that's a good one, Jack Ciattarelli.
And on a related note, how much is Jack Ciattarelli paying for his eggs and gas?
Scratch Lina Khan off that very long list of candidates being bandied around for Nadler's seat. She told The Bulwark's Tim Miller she is not interested in running for Nadler's seat.
https://bsky.app/profile/thebulwark.com/post/3lxwyoynyis2q
Not surprised.
Honestly, I expected Micah Lasher to consolidate the field pretty quick - he’s got support from both establishment types and he’s very close to Mamdani
I think Lasher could be the Biss of NY-12. There are to many other young, talented, progressives who will want to take the generational shot to run for Congress and won't defer to on trying a run of their own (Huynh, Simmons). Plus heavy AIPAC-backed establishment types (Fine). And various ambitious people of varying levels of seriousness/talent from outside elected office (Abughazaleh, et al). Hopefully they've seen that example, and the first category will do a better job of trying to coordinate and have a better chance at preventing at least the second category from winning. (Not as many avenues/incentive to keep anyone from the third from running, as is obvious since they've the biggest source of the clown car-ification of IL-09).
Edit: This isn't to say I think Lasher (or Biss) will lose, just that I'm less sure of consolidation in NY-12.
Ranked-choice voting would doom Abughazaleh and Fine in IL-09 (Abughazaleh is a favorite of high-info progressives, but she recently moved from TX to IL, whereas Fine is the establishment candidate in the most anti-establishment Democratic-leaning Illinois congressional district), but either of them could win due to an extremely split field and plurality-wins voting in use.
KatAbu is the favorite of low info progressives, not high info lmao. All the high-info voters think she's a joke.
Damn, I was hoping for her. Ah well.
She's great, but is freshman Representative the best way she could effect change? I wouldn't blame her for thinking otherwise.
It wouldn't hurt. She could leave the seat for some position in a future populist/progressive admin if that ever happens.
No disagreement there.
Feels like she's a lock for a Mamdani admin role - probably more her than any scary DSA stuff that has the NY business elite in knots.
That would make a lot of sense. I hope you're right!
David and Jeff: Thanks for a great digest, which took a lot of work! Nice bio of Jerry Nadler, one of the really good guys in public service. A couple of reactions to Digest items: Hilda Solis is not as old as you might think, considering that she's been out of Congress for 14 years: 67. Would she get her seniority back? She probably shouldn't, but I don't know how they do things in the House. It's fine for her to serve a term or two, though all things being equal, someone younger who could build up more seniority and might have the possibility of winning higher office later would be more appealing.
About the settlement with ridehailing companies in California:
"Under the deal, Uber and Lyft will see their insurance obligations reduced in exchange for allowing workers to engage in collective bargaining while still being regarded as independent contractors."
So they still presumably get no benefits or sick pay but can bargain for it. If so, that's still an improvement, and the California Legislature deserves our appreciation and congratulations. It's a good post-Labor Day story.
As far as I remember she would be credited for three of her four terms; i.e. if she was elected in '26 she would be ranked as if she were elected in 2020, I believe.
Brendan has it right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seniority_in_the_United_States_House_of_Representatives
"Seniority is calculated by:
1. Number of total terms served (subtracting one term from the number of non-consecutive terms)
2. Number of consecutive terms served
3. Alphabetically by last name"
Another Democrat Runs for Senate in Maine, https://politicalwire.com/2025/09/03/another-democrat-runs-for-senate-in-maine/
"Maine brewery owner Dan Kleban (D) announced in a video that he is mounting a Senate bid"
I like the excerpts at the link because he focuses squarely on Collins and doesn't bash Democrats. It's interesting that we now have an oyster farmer and a brewer running.
This kind of flap is very unlikely to make the difference between winning and losing, especially since it was quickly retracted, but it's not good:
https://politicalwire.com/2025/09/03/democratic-senate-hopeful-claims-false-endorsement/
No, it’s not good for Haley Stevens for the time being.
However, providing she and her Senate campaign don’t continue making more mistakes, she’ll still have plenty of time. The primary, isn’t until next August.
Agreed...this is likely to be a nothing-burger, but maybe presages a lack of campaign discipline....
I'd say it indicates that.
The tweet was deleted, not sure if that's the same as "retracting"
Fair point.
Trump may give positions to Adams and Sliwa to give Cuomo a clear shot at Mamdani: https://politicalwire.com/2025/09/03/trump-advisers-have-discussed-a-job-for-eric-adams/
Nothing smelly or corrupt about that (my sarcasm might not be obvious)...but I don't see it working.
Sounds like the type of thing that is viable in theory, but in practice it would work to closely link Cuomo as "Trump's candidate" and make the electorate favor Mamdani more.
Absolutely.
Their names can't be taken off the ballot regardless
It is kind of amazing that Adams, Cuomo and Sliwa have all told NYC voters in some form or another overtly that they would owe Trump.
Adams may accept it but isn't Silwa a Never Trumper?
From the Wikipedia article about him:
In December 2019, Sliwa declared in an interview that he hated then-President of the United States Donald Trump, calling him a "screwball and a crackpot".[51] In February 2021, weeks after Trump left office, Sliwa switched his registration back to the Republican Party.[52]
Does that make him a never-Trumper?
Accepting a good job from Trump is not a good idea. He fires everyone.
Maybe, Idk actually.
Me neither. It's unclear.
Disgusting. However, Cleaver is 80?!?!?!!! That’s ridiculous no matter what.
I lived in Cunningham's district when his trial and conviction went down. I was amazed how the conservative local press stood by him through the whole thing. An article expressing shock and outrage that he, like all convicts, had wear shackles on his journey from the courtroom to the prison especially stands out.
Jonathan Martin
@jmart
3h
Gwen Graham losing that primary by a few thousand votes in 2018 has a long long tail
Quote
Seung Min Kim
@seungminkim
4h
ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. (AP) — Florida will work to eliminate all child vaccine mandates in the state, officials say.
Gwen Graham
@GwenGraham
I live with it every single day. In a long line of horrible decisions, this latest move by DeSantis is particularly horrific.
https://x.com/GwenGraham/status/1963290368675357028
:(
Probably the most impactful downballot election in the last decade
I’d say that Ossoff’s election in 2020 is up there too since it determined control of the Senate.
Yeah, Ossoff and Warnock winning simultaneously was the thing that prevented Biden from being a lame duck on day 1.
Even Polio?
Even measles. If they could, they'd bring smallpox back...
Anything stopping her from running for something this time? If nothing else maybe the zombie lie that she is a some amazing political talent can die at last.
It doesn’t really matter whether she was an exceptional political talent or just an average politician. She already had strong name recognition, the benefit of her father’s goodwill, and the fact that Florida was much bluer at the time. The 2018 midterms were also a massive blue wave nationally. Gillum ultimately lost not because of the political climate, but largely due to corruption allegations and persistent rumors of drug use that broke before the election. For context, Hillary Clinton lost Florida in 2016 by just 1.2 points, and Joe Biden lost it in 2020 by 3.4 points—both significantly narrower margins than Democrats would face in later years.
It’s not like Florida Democrats are or were adverse to nominating moderates the fact she couldn’t even win a third of them despite having all of those advantages should tell you that average would be a generous description.
There were other moderates in the race especially a billionaire with deep pockets who split the vote. And losing a primary doesn't mean you'd not perform well in the general like Mastriano, Lake, Walker etc etc.
Not even getting a third of the vote despite having "already .. strong name recognition, the benefit of her father’s goodwill," I don't see her doing any better then Sink, Crist or Nelson. Hell Crist was a right wing governor and managed to win the primary four years later without breaking a sweat. The conventional wisdom for years that she would do so much better then Nelson or other Dems in 2018 does not seem to be based in reality.
U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens, a candidate for Michigan's open U.S. Senate seat, incorrectly claimed in a social media post Monday that she had won the endorsement of Berrien County Commissioner Chokwe Pitchford.
Senate hopeful Stevens wrongly claims endorsement by Berrien Co. official
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2025/09/02/senate-hopeful-stevens-wrongly-claims-endorsement-by-county-official/85946119007/
Another bad day for the Stevens campaign.
Big opening for Mallory McMorrow, as Stevens and El-Sayed have very little overlap in terms of potential voters.
What other bad days has she had?
Just being generally weird and off putting
Weird public interactions, bombed MSNBC interview.
I didn't hear it. Well, I'm glad there are other candidates.
Here's a sign the Democratic Party does not view Mamdani as a liability or boogeyman: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOJzgTOj8sG/?igsh=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ%3D%3D
Also, Jeffries says to stay tuned on endorsement: https://www.capitolconfidential.com/p/stay-tuned-jeffries-says-of-mamdani
The Bulwark reported that Hakeem Jeffries doesn't want to endorse Mamdani because if he wins the election, it could lead to a domino of other primaries against sitting House Reps and while he deliberates, the NY-DSA isn't ruling out primaries against Jeffries and Goldman either. DSA's Jabari Brisport is being primaried by someone whose campaign is supported by a top Jeffries ally and advisor.
Some historical context: https://www.cityandstateny.com/opinion/2023/10/commentary-hakeem-jeffries-socialist-problem/391233/ by Ross Barkan
https://x.com/andersleehere/status/1893424464248918317
Of course. Which is a bad reason not to endorse the only candidate running on the Democratic line. I hope he is primaried out.
They don't want to get roped together if he faceplants or under-delivers.
Yet they backed Adams, who did just that and even during his first campaign had signs of it.
This is clearly ideological.
It's ideological because DSA is very hit or miss electorally. They can also be their own worst enemy.
The problem is, it isn’t just DSA. They tried to primary Gustavo Rivera in the State Senate years back and he wasn’t DSA. It’s all progressives. And no, not all progressives are DSA. I’m not, I don’t even like them.
Also, the NYC mayors race is fairly safe blue. I don’t think we’re in danger of, say, Sliwa winning. I don’t think someone like Suozzi is remotely vulnerable, I know multiple people with ties to Long Island, they’ve all said it’s highly conservative. Mamdani winning doesn’t mean Suozzi will be primaried.
Eh, hold on. Comparing Adams in 2021 to Mamdani in 2025 is the farthest thing from an Apples to Oranges comparison in this case. Also, while Schumer and Hochul endorsed Adams, Jeffries did not in 2021. He declined to endorse Adams then. So at least Jeffries has so far been consistent on that end.
I stand corrected about Jeffries.
That being said, Adams had been known to be corrupt even then. How is he apples and oranges?
The reasoning is ideological. There's no point in twisting ourselves in knots to pretend otherwise.
Progressives, moderates, and everyone in between are all capable of faceplanting or underdelivering. This isn't a unique risk to candidates further to the left. Case in point, the current mayor of NYC is a moderate and is overwhelmingly unpopular. With good reason.
Jeffries et al are reticent to endorse Mamdani because they do not like him ideologically. There's nothing more to it. There's no alternative, more compelling, reasoning available. It is purely ideological.
So the DSA is divisive and “traitors” but centrists aren’t? Was Manchin a loyal Dem when he and Sinema killed half of Biden’s agenda? What about the Dem donors who fled to Trump? Or Fetterman and his ilk constantly vocally trashing Dems in the media when our party is at its lowest?
Also, “biggest government programs”? Are you implying Dems should oppose more government involvement? Why not just join the GOP then?
Also, the grocery store proposal was meant for food deserts, where there are zero supermarkets. Explain to me how the “free market” is supposed to suddenly solve that now when they had plenty of opportunities to do so before.
I’m sick of progressives being lectured about purity tests, then the Dems won’t back us when we win. Who’s giving a purity test now?
Excuse me, you're calling Mamdani a "traitor"? Are you trying to insinuate he should be executed?
He's been an elected democrat for five years, ran in and won a democratic primary, supports democratic policies, and self-identifies as a democrat. Why are you saying he isn't a democrat? People can be DSA and democrats at the same time. DSA isn't a political party.
I think in this case a lot of what makes people think he's a better democrat is he isn't a disgraced ex-governor who had to resign in shame after multiple, repeated, and credible accusations of sexual misconduct were made against him; that he isn't supported by Trump implicitly or explicitly; isn't all-but-convicted guilty of bribery; and that he never spent any time propping up a group of moderate democrats caucusing with republicans so as to prevent democratic policy from becoming law.
Doesn't hurt that he's also a better communicator than a lot of the rest of our party, regardless of if you agree with what he is communicating.
I'm not on fully on board with the idea that they don't like him ideologically. It's more about which of his policies that can actually be enforced and executed. Also, see my comment below about what Jewish voters are more concerned about with Mamdani and coming up short with mobilizing black voters in the primary. I like and support Mamdani and I still believe they will end up endorsing him. Jeffries, Schumer and Hochul all know he's going to be mayor. Why else are they in constant communication with him?
Establishment democrats have had reservations about non-progressive candidates before and still gotten on board and endorsed them happily.
I'm not denying that they're worried about this or that. I'm saying that they're letting that stop, or delay, their endorsement because he's a progressive. How many establishment dems actually did endorse Cuomo in the primary despite everything horrible about him?
Do you think Jeffries' endorsement would be this long in waiting if Cuomo had won the primary? I don't.
Also, I'm not convinced the Democrats official Instagram account wouldn't post anything from Mamdani had they not received some sort of nod of approval or thumbs up from either Jeffries, Schumer or Hochul's teams.
Meh, I'm sure Jeffries doesn't want to take his primary for granted but I think that he's more concerned about the DSA somehow pulling off upset wins against folks like Souzzi. But Jeffries also knows that Mamdani is going to be the next mayor, hence why he's been in constant conversation with him. Even Mamdani's campaign will publicly back up Jeffries teams statements about what they are talking about. Mamdani was also invited to speak to House Democrats on the Hill. So I get why these conversations have been going on and sort of get why everyone has been freaking out about Jeffries not publicly endorsing him yet. But I'm very certain he will and I think Hochul will as well. Schumer's been in touch with him a lot too but I don't know what he'll end up doing. I think the reason they've also been hesitant isn't so much because of Israel and Gaza as we're lead to believe. To be clear, polling has showed that Mamdani wins an overwhelming majority of Jewish voters in NYC but their concerns with him are more about their safety with him as mayor: https://forward.com/fast-forward/760003/jews-prefer-mamdani-to-other-nyc-mayoral-candidates-but-worry-about-their-safety-under-him-poll-finds/
Many Jews surveyed by New York Solidarity Group said they believed their future is in danger — 58% believe the city will be less safe for Jews under Mamdani’s leadership, including a large contingent of older voters.
Sara Forman, the group’s executive director, said she wanted a potential Mayor Mamdani to understand the concerns weighing on Jewish New Yorkers. Other pro-Israel Jewish leaders have told Jewish Insider they are becoming resigned to the idea that Mamdani will prevail in November, leaving them no choice but to advise and work with him.
“As Mr. Mamdani has expressed his interest in engaging with communities outside his base, our poll offers concrete examples of what steps he can take to work with and allay the concerns of Jewish New Yorkers,” Forman said in a statement.
This is why he's had to address criticism of use of terms like “globalize the intifada”. They like his policies for the city but what they are afraid is Mamdani might inadvertently cause some folks who are truly anti-semitic to associate with him and commit hate crimes. I agree with Mamdani on what Israel is doing in Gaza and I don't want to go any further than that for the sake of the conversations allowed in the thread. But I also understand this electorate's concern. I'm not worried about Mamdani losing Jewish support going into the election. I'm more concerned about making sure he can mobilize black support away from Cuomo. But if Mamdani needs to show folks like Jeffries, Schumer and Hochul he is putting in the effort to address these concerns to this section of the Jewish electorate and he's making serious inroads with black support in order to get their endorsements, I can understand that.
I can, too, but they should endorse him while working with him on that. Why do you think Suozzi could be susceptible to a socialist opponent in his district?
I agree but I think they need to get some reassurance from him and want to understand what parts of his platform are actually achievable that other Democrats can run on. I think because Suozzi represents a district that went to Trump and because Israel was a big issue in his 2023 special election, he might be overly nervous of a DSA member inspired by Mamdani to mobilze a real primary challenge. I also think that maybe because Mamdani pulled off a win in the primary in Staten Island that he might be nervous of losing. I think Suozzi is being way too overly concerned about Mamdani and I think Jeffries is probably going to really listen to someone like Suozzi because they need to flip seats and hold onto ones like Suozzi. Also, just because Mamdani could pull it off that doesn't mean other DSA candidates can, especially if they can't run disciplined campaigns. DSA can prove to be their own worst enemy at times.
They sure can! I doubt a socialist can win a primary in Suozzi's district. We'll see, though.
A primary challenge against Jeffries would be extremely difficult. Mamdani won Jeffries's district in the mayoral primary by running up a massive margin in Bed-Stuy, with depressed turnout in the pro-Cuomo/Jeffries parts of the district. That's not something that would be easy to repeat, especially against a sitting House Minority Leader who is potentially on the cusp of becoming the first Black U.S. House Speaker in history.
Goldman, on the other hand, would be extremely vulnerable to a primary challenge from someone like Brad Lander.