VT-Gov: Could teenage independent Dean Roy be a reasonable alternative to Republican Gov. Phil Scott and Democrats? He clearly seems too inexperienced to be a state executive, but I like his style for a possible future run.
Seems like an interesting guy who could definitely have a bright future in government.
I have no objections to him running, since he won't win and won't change the outcome of the election. If Scott runs again, he'll win, and if he doesn't, Democrats will pick up the governorship since it's looking like a Democratic year and Vermont is a blue state.
it's largely gone unnoticed but vermont's democratic majorities in the state legislature are eroding. not saying it will ever be a red state but state party needs to make most out of 26 and reestablish supermajorities so they can override scott's vetoes again
Scott has been slowly building a “different than the national brand” Republican Party in Vermont and has been remarkably successful doing so. Unlike a former VA Governor who unsuccessfully pretended to be moderate for the cameras and in front of voters only.
The GOP now hold 2 state executive offices and have cut the Democratic supermajority in the legislature down by a lot. Democrats would be very relieved if Scott decided to hang it up. Once he goes, the whole experiment on the right falls apart fast as partisanship comes back into play and VT goes back to deep blue.
There's a couple of these kids every year in Vermont and Kansas because of their weird loopholes. They never get more than a handful of votes in any primary.
We've got a couple polls now showing that a Trump endorsement would only move things towards Cornyn by a few points, and that matches my read of the race. A Trump endorsement of Paxton on the other hand would effectively end it. Follows the pattern of Trump being able to easily torpedo candidates for being insufficiently MAGA, but struggling to get his supporters to give up on candidates who are obviously more MAGA than their opponent.
There was that one poll generated by Cornyn's team that claimed a Trump endorsement would take the race from tied to Cornyn +30, gee I wonder if they'd have any incentive to show such an absurd impact from Trump's endorsement! Trump more than anything wants to pick the winner and end the race, but what he's really worried about is picking the loser. So, he dithers.
This pertains to embassy comms in conflict specifically but to me encapsulates the issues the GOP has: absolutely nothing that even whiffs of criticism of or independence from The Boss can be brooked, even if it’s meant to help, because he’s always right and everyone else is thus always wrong. The only place this is not always the case is the social media space where there’s personalities with their own brands.
Some donors are giving half of what they’d normally contribute to candidates, one Georgia GOP chair told us. Two GOP consultants from another battleground state said that small-dollar donations plummeted in March, after the U.S. launched strikes on Iran.
“Midterm elections are typically rough for an incumbent president’s party. But this year threatens to be brutal. Trump’s approval is lower right now than it was at this point ahead of the 2018 midterm elections, when Democrats won back the House in a historic blue wave. Almost every new poll is a red flag for Republicans: Independents, young voters, and Latinos—groups that were crucial to Trump’s win in 2024—aren’t in the bag anymore. Even non-college-educated white Americans, once the president’s strongest group, have turned on him, according to a CNN polling average. Democratic-leaning voters are 17 points more likely than GOP-aligned voters to say they’re “extremely motivated” to vote in November.”
I saw one article about the recent wisconsin ssc election in which it quoted some donor who said ''Why should we donate if all we do is going to be keep the minority''.
Not only that, but if someone who voted to convict and remove Trump got through a primary, the GOP would probably feel way more empowered to break from him. I still think he's more likely to take 3rd in the primary than win it, but I would LOVE to see him win.
They are not ready to admit it psychologically and in other ways, but lots of MAGA is now starting to look past, and some are starting to move past the President. Trump is slowly slipping into lame duck territory, and that's before this fall's pending shellacking. Trump's "Complete and Total Endorsement" is losing its power, slowly but surely.
It's not easy right now. Americans just like us are struggling to keep up with the cost of food and gas. And yet, YOU made this the highest-raising Q1 in our 21+ year history.
In Orange County's 5th Board of Supervisors district (mine), incumbent Katrina Foley D is being challenged by Assembly member Diane Dixon, a well respected Republican former councilperson and mayor of Newport Beach.
The libertarian/extremely right wing Orange County Register, part of the noxious Southern California News Group, endorsed Foley because of her quality of service since she took over from Michelle Steele.
Gilchrist seems like a genuinely good guy and a great public servant. He seems to want to really do the work. Michigan seems to have an embarrassment of riches in down ticket races right now
100% this, like WTF is wrong with our discourse, an AOC type just won Tony Soprano’s wealthy NJ suburban district by a large margin and we can’t just take the win?
lol, when I first moved to cd-11 in 2022, my brother came to visit and the first thing he wanted to see was the soprano house. cannot imagine how many people drive down that cul-de-sac just to stare at that house daily
When I went to NYC in 2019 I remember an ad for a “Sopranos Tour” where it starts by recreating the drive from the opening credits. No word on whether said drive just has “Woke up this Morning” blasting on repeat but I hope it did lol
In past cycles, the Republican would have won or at the very least Mejia would’ve underperformed the Harris margin in the district. Neither of which happened, which means Democrats are more united in voting for Democrats regardless of the nominees ideology/brand/baggage. I’m sure many of our voters either held their nose or voted with trepidation for someone more progressive than they are, but they still did so, which is a big change from past elections.
This is a very good thing for our party because we’ve lost a ton of races over this last decade because our voters crossed over from policy/brand disagreements, 2 of the biggest being Bob Casey and Mandela Barnes with dire consequences. Maybe this is only for when Trump is in office, but hopefully our party voters get over any unhappiness they have with Democrats for whatever reason and realize every Republican will be much worse.
That’s why I also included brand and not just ideology for the reasons Democrats have lost prior races in my post. Casey lost because he’d been in the seat forever and people were willing to give the new guy, who sounded like a moderate, a chance.
So it was Casey’s brand that caused him to lose Democrats to McCormick. Other older/longtime Democratic incumbents survived 2024 even while Trump won their states, but he didn’t because his brand was bad.
He absolutely would’ve won if he campaigned as hard as other Democratic incumbents did the full election cycle, instead of only gearing up at the last minute as he realized too late that he was in trouble. But it was his brand that caused him to lose nonetheless in the actual circumstances of the 2024 election.
Casey had no business losing that race. I think he was so used to winning relatively easily that he did not gear up enough for a tough race and to fend off the attacks on him. I think his brand was still good. If he were running this year he’d win by at least 10 points.
Completely agree, he shouldn’t have lost and the reasons he did are obvious in hindsight, but if he loses, even in a red year, when other Democrats win other states more Republican than PA at the same time, that absolutely definitively in my mind means their brand causes them to lose. Why exactly is completely up for debate, but not imo whether they had a brand problem.
You don’t lose in politics unless you have a brand problem that your opponent can use to beat you. The only time this isn’t the case is when it’s a big wave year, but even then I’d say if you lose you have at least some type of brand problem. Whether it’s too left, too right, too obscure, too old/been there too long etc is up for the individual to decide what they think was the cause.
Tester had a brand problem, Casey had a brand problem, Baldwin didn’t, Gallego didn’t. I know saying something is a brand problem, is a very large net to cast, encompassing an endless list of possibilities in politics, but that was the single biggest problem for these candidates who lost.
Tester and Casey didn’t have a brand problem in 2018, but did in 2024, time passes quickly and when the electorate moves, you better keep up with doing what they want or else voters are going to try someone else new to the scene as a “let’s give them a shot” type vote.
For some, they want to drive a narrative that left candidates are always bad to encourage status quo/corporate Dems.
Truth and honesty and facts have nothing to do with it.
Generally speaking, I don't think Dems lose much moving tonthe left. Up tona point. The GOP certainly moved right with little electoral damage....up to a point.
And in this environment, you can move left and still gain ground.
It's insane. It's the inverse of what happened in 2016 how we traded two blue collar voters in the Midwest for one college-educated white suburbanite in Orange County. It'd be nice if we can maintain and grow our coalition without losing any blocs, but that's not how electoral politics has historically worked.
I agree with you in principle that election coalitions change and blocs come and go over history due to any number of reasons, but I don’t think suddenly these voters, who voted for a Republican who campaigned as and sounded like a moderate Democrat on his campaign issues page, are suddenly lost to our party.
Mejia obviously has a lot of work to do in some sections of her district and I hope she rises to the challenge. It’s 1 race though with unique dynamics (no Republican running in November will run like Hathaway did), so I wouldn’t rule out these voters going back to Democrats in the fall.
Last thing I’ll say is if this pattern does extend into the midterms, regardless of what the outcomes are, it will be an area our party as a whole needs to focus on as this also happened in 2024 and twice would be a pattern that we would be wise not to ignore.
Maybe, but even other Dems have seen pretty big shifts away from them in heavily Jewish areas in the past couple years. Sherrill last year is an example of this despite her otherwise big win. I think the trendline is pretty clear at this point.
It's something we don't want to happen, but it kind of is what it is at a certain point given all that's going on. Some Democrats will do much better at mitigating the losses than others, like Mejia. She'll probably recover some ground herself when people realize the antisemitic fearmongering tactics about her aren't true.
Definitely fair points. I’m not at the point you are in giving up on Jewish Democrats, resigned to them eventually abandoning the party for Republicans. But I get that point of view and do agree it’s a possibility for sure.
To be clear, definitely not "giving up" on Jewish voters by any means. Moreso prioritizing overall party messaging elsewhere with bigger blocs of voters, and voters located in swing states and districts. Now that Florida is no longer a swing state, the political reality is that it's not really worth it to focus disproportionately on the group at the expense of working class, hispanic, or black voters, all of which are generally going to be much more critical in most swingy places.
Ossoff is kind of a good example of this. He's pissed off a lot of the Jewish community in the state with some of his votes, but seems to have made the determination that it's not really an electoral problem since they are less than 2% of the Georgia population. And Ossoff is Jewish!
I was unaware that many Jews were angry at him. I take it, that's because his positions on Israel are those of J Street? You can confirm or deny, but anything more detailed than that is not up for discussion on this site.
There are many Jewish voters who are not under AIPAC/Bibi's sway. Lies about anti-semitism will fool some.
But if this is a pill we have to swallow to do the right thing on the forbidden topic, then so be it.
Especially this year. There may be some races where it matters more than others, of course.
I mean, winning on enthusiasm + matching the electorate is good enough for me. In this environment that is a +12-14 point swing from MVP. Which I think is the better comp as two female POCs.
Your willingness to throw Jews under the bus makes you sound like the Democrats in the '50s who were willing to throw African-Americans under the bus in order to try to appeal to conservative white Southerners.
How big would the Jewish vote need to be for you to think differently? 5% of the American population? 10%?
i usually defer to paleo for nj discourse, but as a resident of that district up until literally last December, it cannot be anything but a good sign that mejia put up better than sherill numbers vis a vi 24 election, and equivalent to sherill 25 numbers while running massively to her left in one of the richest districts in the state
Underperformed by winning by 20% points in a D+5 Leam Blue District?
I’d say these users (outside of the Downballot) should take a couple of weeks of vacation in rural Italy with no technology so they can get their minds cleared.
Again, the margin only shows the enthusiasm of Democratic voters, which isn't nothing, but doesn't matter as much in November compared to special elections. There is no way to spin a 50/50 independent split as anything but less-than-impressive in a very blue enviornment.
Here’s the problem with your assumption: You assume that because she was too left wing she only broke even with independents, however, you are also assuming that because she’s too progressive that all other demographics in electoral voting share would be the exact same except for independents if she were a moderate, which, to be frank is fallacy, not fact.
Did you consider the possibility that her being so left wing turned out the left so much more than any other Democrats would have, eliminating any deficit with I’s? Did you consider that a white moderate candidate would’ve caused Latino/Hispanic margins and turnout to crater? No, of course you didn’t, because you’re stuck in a narrative that used to be true, which now is actually unclear.
Left wing Democrats did face an electoral penalty previously. Now, we get left wing Democrats still outperforming Harris, but by less than those running in the middle. So is it really fair for you to do exactly what you accuse me of, spinning the result, to say definitively she had a less than impressive election performance because she didn’t win I’s by the margins other Democrats did? No, no it isn’t.
Be open to something that isn’t your own personal opinion being true, because often, it isn’t.
It was probably neither. Low information voters voted against the Republican. And she is left wing, but not in a way that pisses most people off. I'd imagine that if she sticks to the AOC model and works her district, her ideology won't hurt or help. Most voters aren't as ideological as you might assume
I assume that voters turned out not because of her, but because Democrats have consistently turned out at much higher rates. I can't "prove" that a different candidate would have done better, but I can make a good prediction.
As for the "spinning", I was speaking more generally abut the narrative I've seen, both on here and off here (including the tweet). And please, let's not go into personal insult territory.
I didn’t personally insult you, I disagreed with your opinion and explained why. Your opinion doesn’t make any sense, because if a candidate so deeply affected one portion of the electorate (I’s) like you’ve asserted, then the candidate almost certainly effected other portions of voters in the electorate. In ways that may not lineup with your assumption.
I always attack the opinion, not the person. If you consider what I wrote above to be a personal attack, then respectfully, you should definitely try to grow thicker skin, because it wasn’t, and considering what other attacks people face being online, is similar to me throwing a leaf at you compared to firing a machine gun at you.
The only spin I see here is your own, fitting some details to fit your opinion instead of letting all the details form your opinion. There’s nothing wrong with a Democrat turning out only Democrats to beat the opposition. Not all candidates can create the same electoral coalitions, she won, by more than Harris. As a proud squad leftist. In a suburban district.
That should be good enough to not disparage her performance as less than impressive based solely on the Independent vote without taking into any consideration the rest of the voters who voted who may not have for a different candidate, but I digress as I’ve already said this and you still haven’t acknowledged that possibility.
Since I think we’re not going to agree, I’m going to leave it at that. Have a great weekend!
Agreed and also, will probably be closer to +21 once late mail and provisionals get added. Mejia is on track to outperform not just Harris but also Biden, Sherrill for Congress, and Sherrill for Governor. "But the party registration of the electorate was a lot bluer than normal." And? It's a bad thing that Mejia was able to get a favorable electorate to turn out?
Weird discourse. Sure Malinowski would have probably won by 25, but also, we're not nominating candidates like Mejia in all the swing states and districts! Really struggling to see how there's any good news for Republicans here.
I don’t know if Malinowski would have won by that much. Any losses he might not have had in towns like Livingston would have been offset by a lower turnout because of less enthusiasm.
I'd bet it would be almost exactly the same. In a different environment, my opinion would change. But right now, negative partisanship seems to explain almost every federal race in the last 6 months. Trump disapproval and democratic performance have been pretty tight together this cycle
Where are they now? - Former Florida Rep. Allen West (and Texas Republican Party chair) has now been forced out of his leadership position at the Dallas GOP.
No idea of the legitimacy of this poll (it appears to be a Cori Bush internal) but this poll just dropped. Quoting the Twitter post:
"⚡️📊 New Poll Shows Cori Bush Tied With Incumbent Wesley Bell in Missouri Primary
🔹A poll commissioned by Cori Bush’s campaign and conducted by HIT Strategies shows Bush and incumbent Congressman Wesley Bell statistically tied among likely Democratic primary voters in Missouri’s 1st congressional district, with Bell at 44% and Bush at 40%, within the survey’s 5.4% margin of error.
🔹The poll, conducted February 19-23 among 401 likely Democratic primary voters, also found Bush holds higher overall favorability than Bell — 52% favorable to Bell’s 45%.
🔹The poll also tested favorability of AIPAC, a major backer of Bell’s 2024 campaign, and ICE — finding 40% and 86% unfavorable ratings respectively among district Democrats."
From @DropSiteNews.
If this poll is even somewhat legit, this race could get interesting.
If even an internal can't get Bush ahead, she is extremely unlikely to win.
And AIPAC having only a 40% disapproval rating, among Democrats, despite all the demagoguery against it, is frankly better than I expected. (I won't say anything more about that, in an effort to avoid the forbidden topic.)
I agree in substance but disagree that objections to AIPAC are "demagoguery." Democrats have strong reasons to oppose an organization that has been supporting a lot of Republican conspiracy-mongers (but I repeat myself) and trying to move the Democratic Party to the right. None of that is about Israel, but it's definitely about Netanyahu, who has also tried to directly interfere in American elections and domestic politics.
Bush didn't lose because Bell is popular. She lost (along with Tish) because that wing of the St Louis party has largely discredited itself. She was a loudmouth, but her constituent services were trash.
There are definitely progressives in St. Louis who can win. But Bush ain't it.
When I lived in St. Louis (2023-2025), all I heard from folks is that her office was unresponsive unless you knew folks in her circle. STL politics are very parochial.
For example, she may have voted like a socialist, and used that rhetoric. But unless you were tight with certain Alderman or precinct folks, good luck with her office helping with daycare assistance or food assistance (a HUGE issue in the City of STL and north STL county)
David Ortiz, a staff attorney at Make The Road NY and the DSA challenger to Assemb. Jenifer Rajkumar, is suing to knock Rajkumar off the ballot over allegations of petition fraud. Quoting City and State NY:
"David Orkin, the immigrant rights’ attorney challenging Assembly Member Jenifer Rajkumar with the support of the New York City Democratic Socialists of America, is accusing Rajkumar’s campaign of election fraud and filed a lawsuit in state court on Thursday seeking to have her thrown off the ballot. In turn, Rajkumar has promoted allegations of fraud against Orkin."
...
"When volunteers on Orkin’s campaign began reviewing Rajkumar’s petitions, they discovered something strange – one of the people listed as signing Rajkumar’s petitions was none other than Cary Tilton, a prominent DSA member and one of Orkin’s own campaign volunteers.
“You can imagine my shock and anger when I saw my own name on a Rajkumar petition sheet with a fraudulent signature,” Tilton told City & State in a statement, noting that he’d actually gathered signatures for Orkin. “Signing this petition would fly in the face of every action and decision I’ve made in years and is an impossibility.”
After that, dozens of DSA volunteers began combing through Rajkumar’s petitions and claim they found still more irregularities. On Thursday, Orkin and one of his supporters sued Rajkumar in Queens Supreme Court. They are asking the court to kick her off the ballot on the grounds that her petitions are full of forged signatures."
...
"In a statement, Rajkumar campaign spokesperson Arvind Sooknanan questioned the validity of Orkin’s own signatures, citing a press release from the group Latinos Against Socialism. (No specific objections were ever filed to Orkin’s petition signatures at the New York City Board of Elections or in state court, however.)"
Assuming this is true, this is not a good look for Rajkumar. I'm already not a fan of hers so I'm on team Ortiz here. (Also a great sign when your source is a group called "Latinos Against Socialism".)
This is the fun and games of the New York system after the filing deadline. When you have volunteers and paid canvassers you never know what you'll get. Lawyers, staff, and volunteers are scouring each other's signatures to clear the field.
People also sign multiple petition without realizing it. And that of course is an area where people challenge. Sometimes they sign the wrong one for the wrong candidate by mistake. A few years ago a candidate stood outside a club meeting in Brooklyn and got members of a club backing his opponent to inadvertently sign for him. It actually has a hilarious and sad conclusion. Both sides challenged each others judicial delegates and both sides won. So there were no judicial delegates elected from that assembly district. That candidate ran for another District Leader spot somewhere else (in the Houseboat district... Google it!) but knocked out his rivals.
One obscure rule is if you sign a petition for one candidate you can't carry for another. So if that volunteer did carry petitions for Orkin all of their petitions could be knocked out unless they as they are doing claim something like fraud or forgery. That is a charge that one can only make in court. DOE does not rule on it.
The entire system is one created by Tammany Hall meant to make the system overly complicated and expensive. Which is exactly incumbents of all parties and all ideologies keep them. And is why New York is one of the most expensive states to run in.
bit of a long shot question, but I just finished interviewing a candidate in MT-01, who said he had public polling... I'm not seeing it online, has anyone else seen it? and thoughts about that race?
With pretty much all the votes counted, Mejia's margin (+20) seems to have matched the electorate (D+20), which is to say independent/third party voters broke about 50/50 towards her and Hathaway. The margin is a strong showing in terms of enthusiasm, but does not reflect Mejia's strength as a candidate. This wasn't just because of a poor performance with Jewish voters, she didn't outrun the electorate in a single town in Essex County, including some extremely-not-Jewish places. A win in a win, but she is not the person I want to see defending the seat in a Democratic president midterm, though unfortunately her primary challengers are all bad (Donald Cresitello is awful, Justin Strickland is pro-term limits and similarly too progressive for the district, and Joseph Lewis is a nobody whose campaign website lists no specific policies and only has vague moderate platitudes).
You never see Republicans freak out when their special election victors win by less than normal, like Matt Van Epps. It’s odd. Sure, someone more moderate probably would have won by more. Why should I care when this district is not in danger of flipping?
I doubt any mid-decade redistricting will happen, though I can definitely see her getting drawn in Pou's district in 2032, provided Pou isn't planning to run again.
Why would she get drawn into Pou's district? Isn't that a redder seat that voted for Trump? Or are you predicting that she gets moved into another district to make way for a more moderate candidate
Pou's district is likely to snap back into being bluer than NJ-11, and moving Mejia wouldn't be solely to "make way for a more moderate candidate", but because a fiscally very progressive representative is a better fit for a more urban, working class district.
She got 60% (which may rise to 61% or so) and you want to replace her? She won the district by a bigger margin than Sherrill ever did and you want to replace her?
Obviously we can't just be 50/50 with independents if we want a big november. Yea pretty good turnout but obviously candidate quality does matter for those who think we can run socialists in every district.
https://www.thetimes.com/us/american-politics/article/dean-roy-governor-vermont-child-2qjf6xjxq
VT-Gov: Could teenage independent Dean Roy be a reasonable alternative to Republican Gov. Phil Scott and Democrats? He clearly seems too inexperienced to be a state executive, but I like his style for a possible future run.
He's way too young.
Seems like an interesting guy who could definitely have a bright future in government.
I have no objections to him running, since he won't win and won't change the outcome of the election. If Scott runs again, he'll win, and if he doesn't, Democrats will pick up the governorship since it's looking like a Democratic year and Vermont is a blue state.
it's largely gone unnoticed but vermont's democratic majorities in the state legislature are eroding. not saying it will ever be a red state but state party needs to make most out of 26 and reestablish supermajorities so they can override scott's vetoes again
Also need to topple John Rodgers in the LG race so that Scott has no natural Republican successor.
Scott has been slowly building a “different than the national brand” Republican Party in Vermont and has been remarkably successful doing so. Unlike a former VA Governor who unsuccessfully pretended to be moderate for the cameras and in front of voters only.
The GOP now hold 2 state executive offices and have cut the Democratic supermajority in the legislature down by a lot. Democrats would be very relieved if Scott decided to hang it up. Once he goes, the whole experiment on the right falls apart fast as partisanship comes back into play and VT goes back to deep blue.
There's a couple of these kids every year in Vermont and Kansas because of their weird loopholes. They never get more than a handful of votes in any primary.
New TX GOP runoff poll:
Texas Public Opinion Research poll | 4/6-4/7 LV
US Senate Texas Republican primary 2026
🟥Ken Paxton 48%
🟥John Cornyn 40% (incumbent)
Undceided 11%
——
(If Trump endorsed Cornyn)
🟥Ken Paxton 45%
🟥John Cornyn 42% (incumbent)
Undceided 14%
——
(If Trump endorsed Paxton)
🟥Ken Paxton 55%
🟥John Cornyn 35% (incumbent)
Undecided 14%
Link to poll: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JzOVXlALNq4a4F_IEpdMcg7KDl6B_ouL/view?pli=1
Image
We've got a couple polls now showing that a Trump endorsement would only move things towards Cornyn by a few points, and that matches my read of the race. A Trump endorsement of Paxton on the other hand would effectively end it. Follows the pattern of Trump being able to easily torpedo candidates for being insufficiently MAGA, but struggling to get his supporters to give up on candidates who are obviously more MAGA than their opponent.
There was that one poll generated by Cornyn's team that claimed a Trump endorsement would take the race from tied to Cornyn +30, gee I wonder if they'd have any incentive to show such an absurd impact from Trump's endorsement! Trump more than anything wants to pick the winner and end the race, but what he's really worried about is picking the loser. So, he dithers.
AZ-Gov fundraising:
https://x.com/michbeyer/status/2044902976234672621
“Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs is outraising her Republican opponents several times over ahead of this year’s primary elections.” #AZGov
https://www.kjzz.org/politics/2026-04-16/hobbs-dramatically-outraises-gubernatorial-opponents-schweikert-falls-behind
Hobbs has more than $7.2 million on hand, which is six times what GOP challengers Schweikert and Congressman Andy Biggs have in their war chests.
Biggs has about $1.1 million on hand whereas Schweikert has just $86,000.
Since the beginning of the election cycle, Hobbs has raised a combined total of $7.8 million.
Biggs raised $2.8 million and already spent $1.7 million of that.
Schweikert was the last of the three to jump into the race. He’s raised $1.1 million and spent nearly all of it. Part of that was a $99,000 self-loan.
This pertains to embassy comms in conflict specifically but to me encapsulates the issues the GOP has: absolutely nothing that even whiffs of criticism of or independence from The Boss can be brooked, even if it’s meant to help, because he’s always right and everyone else is thus always wrong. The only place this is not always the case is the social media space where there’s personalities with their own brands.
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/04/17/embassy-cables-detail-how-iran-war-is-hurting-the-us-abroad-00877205
What does this have to do with downballot elections?
The 2024 Trump coalition is broken.
https://x.com/elainejgodfrey/status/2045110974076604774
Some donors are giving half of what they’d normally contribute to candidates, one Georgia GOP chair told us. Two GOP consultants from another battleground state said that small-dollar donations plummeted in March, after the U.S. launched strikes on Iran.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/2026/04/trump-pope-leo-iran-gas-prices/686819/?gift=zYCTBrO_7y7KHmiTPdBdg2bCaNiS7Ev0aacaevV1Gg0
“Midterm elections are typically rough for an incumbent president’s party. But this year threatens to be brutal. Trump’s approval is lower right now than it was at this point ahead of the 2018 midterm elections, when Democrats won back the House in a historic blue wave. Almost every new poll is a red flag for Republicans: Independents, young voters, and Latinos—groups that were crucial to Trump’s win in 2024—aren’t in the bag anymore. Even non-college-educated white Americans, once the president’s strongest group, have turned on him, according to a CNN polling average. Democratic-leaning voters are 17 points more likely than GOP-aligned voters to say they’re “extremely motivated” to vote in November.”
Music to my ears. Too bad the writer didn't come to NC and talk to the regretful Trump voters here.
Not a surprise.
I saw one article about the recent wisconsin ssc election in which it quoted some donor who said ''Why should we donate if all we do is going to be keep the minority''.
Can’t believe this is actually possible, but Senator Cassidy might actually win his LA primary.
https://x.com/PollTracker2024/status/2045138479751807443
Harris, DeVille & Associates poll | 3/13-3/19 LV
US Senate Louisiana Republican primary 2026 (50% needed to avoid runoff)
🟥Bill Cassidy 45% (incumbent)
🟥Julia Letlow 34%
🟥John Fleming 21%
——
(H2H)
🟥Bill Cassidy 51.2% (incumbent)
🟥John Fleming 48.8%
——
🟥Bill Cassidy 54.5% (incumbent)
🟥Julia Letlow 45.5%
Link to poll: https://cms.stateaffairs.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/State-poll-political-analysis-FINAL.pdf?_gl=1*1393c1k*_ga*MTY4MjE4NDE3MC4xNzc1NzYyNDk4*_ga_MSF0LDFGJK*czE3NzY0MzM1MjYkbzIkZzEkdDE3NzY0MzM4NjckajE1JGwwJGgw
he would be the best option out of those other nuts
Not only that, but if someone who voted to convict and remove Trump got through a primary, the GOP would probably feel way more empowered to break from him. I still think he's more likely to take 3rd in the primary than win it, but I would LOVE to see him win.
Yeah that would be a massive thing to see. If the endorsement loses even an iota of its power then Trump is completely hosed
Especially in a state as red as Louisiana. It’d be one thing if it were a swing state, it’d be another entirely in a deep red state.
They are not ready to admit it psychologically and in other ways, but lots of MAGA is now starting to look past, and some are starting to move past the President. Trump is slowly slipping into lame duck territory, and that's before this fall's pending shellacking. Trump's "Complete and Total Endorsement" is losing its power, slowly but surely.
Hahahaha
Too early to feel confident but if this happens that would be hilarious
$568m Q1 for ActBlue:
https://x.com/actblue/status/2044778597731197351
It's not easy right now. Americans just like us are struggling to keep up with the cost of food and gas. And yet, YOU made this the highest-raising Q1 in our 21+ year history.
Hell has frozen over in Orange County, CA.
https://www.ocregister.com/2026/04/16/endorsement-katrina-foley-for-orange-countys-5th-district/
In Orange County's 5th Board of Supervisors district (mine), incumbent Katrina Foley D is being challenged by Assembly member Diane Dixon, a well respected Republican former councilperson and mayor of Newport Beach.
The libertarian/extremely right wing Orange County Register, part of the noxious Southern California News Group, endorsed Foley because of her quality of service since she took over from Michelle Steele.
2018, only bigger.
https://x.com/CookPolitical/status/2044896452174901538
Among the 14 House Republicans in highly competitive races, half were outraised by their Democratic opponents.
Read this fundraising overview from
@ercovey:
https://www.cookpolitical.com/analysis/house/house-overview/democrats-running-against-vulnerable-house-republicans-rake-cash
Man, how funny would it be if Republicans lost the Michigan gubernatorial race despite the Duggan spoiler because they nominate Perry Johnson?
Apparently the Michigan Democratic convention is this weekend where AG and SOS nominees will be chosen. Who are we rooting for?
I liked Edevbie for SOS, and I guess lightly lean Byrum now but Gilchrist would be fine. I know ever less about the AG candidates lol.
Yeah I liked Edevbie too, was sad when he dropped out. It would be nice to have a black statewide official so I soft prefer Gilchrist.
Gilchrist seems like a genuinely good guy and a great public servant. He seems to want to really do the work. Michigan seems to have an embarrassment of riches in down ticket races right now
Election Twitter rando sums up my thoughts on the Mejia discourse:
https://x.com/Faj1791/status/2045003158695432548
Leftist wins wealthy suburban Kamala + 8 seat by 19 and people somehow think its a bad showing for democrats.
100% this, like WTF is wrong with our discourse, an AOC type just won Tony Soprano’s wealthy NJ suburban district by a large margin and we can’t just take the win?
lol, when I first moved to cd-11 in 2022, my brother came to visit and the first thing he wanted to see was the soprano house. cannot imagine how many people drive down that cul-de-sac just to stare at that house daily
When I went to NYC in 2019 I remember an ad for a “Sopranos Tour” where it starts by recreating the drive from the opening credits. No word on whether said drive just has “Woke up this Morning” blasting on repeat but I hope it did lol
Is some beleaguered ordinary family living in that house?
beleaguered? no, it's a wealthy neighborhood. but regular people yes
Beleaguered from the constant traffic, I meant.
In past cycles, the Republican would have won or at the very least Mejia would’ve underperformed the Harris margin in the district. Neither of which happened, which means Democrats are more united in voting for Democrats regardless of the nominees ideology/brand/baggage. I’m sure many of our voters either held their nose or voted with trepidation for someone more progressive than they are, but they still did so, which is a big change from past elections.
This is a very good thing for our party because we’ve lost a ton of races over this last decade because our voters crossed over from policy/brand disagreements, 2 of the biggest being Bob Casey and Mandela Barnes with dire consequences. Maybe this is only for when Trump is in office, but hopefully our party voters get over any unhappiness they have with Democrats for whatever reason and realize every Republican will be much worse.
What happened with Bob Casey? From which direction was he ideologically opposed? Must’ve missed that.
i thought the issue with bob was he never campaigned in earnest until it was too late, and harris wasn't strong in NEPA
That’s why I also included brand and not just ideology for the reasons Democrats have lost prior races in my post. Casey lost because he’d been in the seat forever and people were willing to give the new guy, who sounded like a moderate, a chance.
So it was Casey’s brand that caused him to lose Democrats to McCormick. Other older/longtime Democratic incumbents survived 2024 even while Trump won their states, but he didn’t because his brand was bad.
He absolutely would’ve won if he campaigned as hard as other Democratic incumbents did the full election cycle, instead of only gearing up at the last minute as he realized too late that he was in trouble. But it was his brand that caused him to lose nonetheless in the actual circumstances of the 2024 election.
Casey had no business losing that race. I think he was so used to winning relatively easily that he did not gear up enough for a tough race and to fend off the attacks on him. I think his brand was still good. If he were running this year he’d win by at least 10 points.
Completely agree, he shouldn’t have lost and the reasons he did are obvious in hindsight, but if he loses, even in a red year, when other Democrats win other states more Republican than PA at the same time, that absolutely definitively in my mind means their brand causes them to lose. Why exactly is completely up for debate, but not imo whether they had a brand problem.
You don’t lose in politics unless you have a brand problem that your opponent can use to beat you. The only time this isn’t the case is when it’s a big wave year, but even then I’d say if you lose you have at least some type of brand problem. Whether it’s too left, too right, too obscure, too old/been there too long etc is up for the individual to decide what they think was the cause.
Tester had a brand problem, Casey had a brand problem, Baldwin didn’t, Gallego didn’t. I know saying something is a brand problem, is a very large net to cast, encompassing an endless list of possibilities in politics, but that was the single biggest problem for these candidates who lost.
Tester and Casey didn’t have a brand problem in 2018, but did in 2024, time passes quickly and when the electorate moves, you better keep up with doing what they want or else voters are going to try someone else new to the scene as a “let’s give them a shot” type vote.
For some, they want to drive a narrative that left candidates are always bad to encourage status quo/corporate Dems.
Truth and honesty and facts have nothing to do with it.
Generally speaking, I don't think Dems lose much moving tonthe left. Up tona point. The GOP certainly moved right with little electoral damage....up to a point.
And in this environment, you can move left and still gain ground.
Amen. I was very confused by some of the comments last night.
It's insane. It's the inverse of what happened in 2016 how we traded two blue collar voters in the Midwest for one college-educated white suburbanite in Orange County. It'd be nice if we can maintain and grow our coalition without losing any blocs, but that's not how electoral politics has historically worked.
I agree with you in principle that election coalitions change and blocs come and go over history due to any number of reasons, but I don’t think suddenly these voters, who voted for a Republican who campaigned as and sounded like a moderate Democrat on his campaign issues page, are suddenly lost to our party.
Mejia obviously has a lot of work to do in some sections of her district and I hope she rises to the challenge. It’s 1 race though with unique dynamics (no Republican running in November will run like Hathaway did), so I wouldn’t rule out these voters going back to Democrats in the fall.
Last thing I’ll say is if this pattern does extend into the midterms, regardless of what the outcomes are, it will be an area our party as a whole needs to focus on as this also happened in 2024 and twice would be a pattern that we would be wise not to ignore.
Maybe, but even other Dems have seen pretty big shifts away from them in heavily Jewish areas in the past couple years. Sherrill last year is an example of this despite her otherwise big win. I think the trendline is pretty clear at this point.
It's something we don't want to happen, but it kind of is what it is at a certain point given all that's going on. Some Democrats will do much better at mitigating the losses than others, like Mejia. She'll probably recover some ground herself when people realize the antisemitic fearmongering tactics about her aren't true.
Definitely fair points. I’m not at the point you are in giving up on Jewish Democrats, resigned to them eventually abandoning the party for Republicans. But I get that point of view and do agree it’s a possibility for sure.
To be clear, definitely not "giving up" on Jewish voters by any means. Moreso prioritizing overall party messaging elsewhere with bigger blocs of voters, and voters located in swing states and districts. Now that Florida is no longer a swing state, the political reality is that it's not really worth it to focus disproportionately on the group at the expense of working class, hispanic, or black voters, all of which are generally going to be much more critical in most swingy places.
Ossoff is kind of a good example of this. He's pissed off a lot of the Jewish community in the state with some of his votes, but seems to have made the determination that it's not really an electoral problem since they are less than 2% of the Georgia population. And Ossoff is Jewish!
Big picture, she was +12 from Harris.
I don't get the hand wringing..
Losing some RW Jewish vote is just fine with me. And most of their anti-semitism fear mongering is BS. It is anti-Bibi/Likud.
I was unaware that many Jews were angry at him. I take it, that's because his positions on Israel are those of J Street? You can confirm or deny, but anything more detailed than that is not up for discussion on this site.
There are many Jewish voters who are not under AIPAC/Bibi's sway. Lies about anti-semitism will fool some.
But if this is a pill we have to swallow to do the right thing on the forbidden topic, then so be it.
Especially this year. There may be some races where it matters more than others, of course.
I mean, winning on enthusiasm + matching the electorate is good enough for me. In this environment that is a +12-14 point swing from MVP. Which I think is the better comp as two female POCs.
Your willingness to throw Jews under the bus makes you sound like the Democrats in the '50s who were willing to throw African-Americans under the bus in order to try to appeal to conservative white Southerners.
How big would the Jewish vote need to be for you to think differently? 5% of the American population? 10%?
Are you talking mainly about Orthodox Jews, or also secular and Reform Jews?
i usually defer to paleo for nj discourse, but as a resident of that district up until literally last December, it cannot be anything but a good sign that mejia put up better than sherill numbers vis a vi 24 election, and equivalent to sherill 25 numbers while running massively to her left in one of the richest districts in the state
After she won the primary I was concerned about her winning the general. She wins by 20, and some people say she underperformed. Crazy.
Underperformed by winning by 20% points in a D+5 Leam Blue District?
I’d say these users (outside of the Downballot) should take a couple of weeks of vacation in rural Italy with no technology so they can get their minds cleared.
Again, the margin only shows the enthusiasm of Democratic voters, which isn't nothing, but doesn't matter as much in November compared to special elections. There is no way to spin a 50/50 independent split as anything but less-than-impressive in a very blue enviornment.
Here’s the problem with your assumption: You assume that because she was too left wing she only broke even with independents, however, you are also assuming that because she’s too progressive that all other demographics in electoral voting share would be the exact same except for independents if she were a moderate, which, to be frank is fallacy, not fact.
Did you consider the possibility that her being so left wing turned out the left so much more than any other Democrats would have, eliminating any deficit with I’s? Did you consider that a white moderate candidate would’ve caused Latino/Hispanic margins and turnout to crater? No, of course you didn’t, because you’re stuck in a narrative that used to be true, which now is actually unclear.
Left wing Democrats did face an electoral penalty previously. Now, we get left wing Democrats still outperforming Harris, but by less than those running in the middle. So is it really fair for you to do exactly what you accuse me of, spinning the result, to say definitively she had a less than impressive election performance because she didn’t win I’s by the margins other Democrats did? No, no it isn’t.
Be open to something that isn’t your own personal opinion being true, because often, it isn’t.
It was probably neither. Low information voters voted against the Republican. And she is left wing, but not in a way that pisses most people off. I'd imagine that if she sticks to the AOC model and works her district, her ideology won't hurt or help. Most voters aren't as ideological as you might assume
I assume that voters turned out not because of her, but because Democrats have consistently turned out at much higher rates. I can't "prove" that a different candidate would have done better, but I can make a good prediction.
As for the "spinning", I was speaking more generally abut the narrative I've seen, both on here and off here (including the tweet). And please, let's not go into personal insult territory.
I didn’t personally insult you, I disagreed with your opinion and explained why. Your opinion doesn’t make any sense, because if a candidate so deeply affected one portion of the electorate (I’s) like you’ve asserted, then the candidate almost certainly effected other portions of voters in the electorate. In ways that may not lineup with your assumption.
I always attack the opinion, not the person. If you consider what I wrote above to be a personal attack, then respectfully, you should definitely try to grow thicker skin, because it wasn’t, and considering what other attacks people face being online, is similar to me throwing a leaf at you compared to firing a machine gun at you.
The only spin I see here is your own, fitting some details to fit your opinion instead of letting all the details form your opinion. There’s nothing wrong with a Democrat turning out only Democrats to beat the opposition. Not all candidates can create the same electoral coalitions, she won, by more than Harris. As a proud squad leftist. In a suburban district.
That should be good enough to not disparage her performance as less than impressive based solely on the Independent vote without taking into any consideration the rest of the voters who voted who may not have for a different candidate, but I digress as I’ve already said this and you still haven’t acknowledged that possibility.
Since I think we’re not going to agree, I’m going to leave it at that. Have a great weekend!
Agreed and also, will probably be closer to +21 once late mail and provisionals get added. Mejia is on track to outperform not just Harris but also Biden, Sherrill for Congress, and Sherrill for Governor. "But the party registration of the electorate was a lot bluer than normal." And? It's a bad thing that Mejia was able to get a favorable electorate to turn out?
Weird discourse. Sure Malinowski would have probably won by 25, but also, we're not nominating candidates like Mejia in all the swing states and districts! Really struggling to see how there's any good news for Republicans here.
I don’t know if Malinowski would have won by that much. Any losses he might not have had in towns like Livingston would have been offset by a lower turnout because of less enthusiasm.
Also, might the small scandal he was involved in have itself depressed turnout and caused some opposition?
I'd bet it would be almost exactly the same. In a different environment, my opinion would change. But right now, negative partisanship seems to explain almost every federal race in the last 6 months. Trump disapproval and democratic performance have been pretty tight together this cycle
Fox News Host Drops Stunning Take on Election Bloodbath: ‘By Winning Democrats Are Actually Losing’
https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/fox-news-host-drops-stunning-take-on-election-bloodbath-by-winning-democrats-are-actually-losing/
Scott Jennings Mocked By CNN Panel After Declaring A Bad Night For Democrats | Crooks and Liars
https://crooksandliars.com/2025/11/scott-jennings-laughed-cnn-panel-after
'Idiotic to overreact!' JD Vance blames Biden admin for GOP's election blowout - Raw Story
https://www.rawstory.com/jd-vance-2674267963/
I guess they are allowed to think whatever they want. But that is a crazy stupid take by Republicans. It sounds pretty desperate
https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/politics/inside-politics/dallas-gop-chair-allen-west-resigns/287-7e7b8c34-a00a-43a0-9ce7-22e56eb87708
Where are they now? - Former Florida Rep. Allen West (and Texas Republican Party chair) has now been forced out of his leadership position at the Dallas GOP.
What was Allen West expecting by moving to TX? Thinking he could soar in his political career?
MO-01:
https://x.com/DropSiteNews/status/2044157672514011561
No idea of the legitimacy of this poll (it appears to be a Cori Bush internal) but this poll just dropped. Quoting the Twitter post:
"⚡️📊 New Poll Shows Cori Bush Tied With Incumbent Wesley Bell in Missouri Primary
🔹A poll commissioned by Cori Bush’s campaign and conducted by HIT Strategies shows Bush and incumbent Congressman Wesley Bell statistically tied among likely Democratic primary voters in Missouri’s 1st congressional district, with Bell at 44% and Bush at 40%, within the survey’s 5.4% margin of error.
🔹The poll, conducted February 19-23 among 401 likely Democratic primary voters, also found Bush holds higher overall favorability than Bell — 52% favorable to Bell’s 45%.
🔹The poll also tested favorability of AIPAC, a major backer of Bell’s 2024 campaign, and ICE — finding 40% and 86% unfavorable ratings respectively among district Democrats."
From @DropSiteNews.
If this poll is even somewhat legit, this race could get interesting.
If even an internal can't get Bush ahead, she is extremely unlikely to win.
And AIPAC having only a 40% disapproval rating, among Democrats, despite all the demagoguery against it, is frankly better than I expected. (I won't say anything more about that, in an effort to avoid the forbidden topic.)
I believe the disapproval rating is district-specific, as in, MO-01's view of AIPAC. AIPAC's disapproval might be different in a different district.
That said, this indeed is not a great sign for Bush.
I think you could find a solid progressive challenger to Bell in MO-1.
I do not think that person is Cori Bush
Agreed.
The poll was in the field back in mid-February.
I agree in substance but disagree that objections to AIPAC are "demagoguery." Democrats have strong reasons to oppose an organization that has been supporting a lot of Republican conspiracy-mongers (but I repeat myself) and trying to move the Democratic Party to the right. None of that is about Israel, but it's definitely about Netanyahu, who has also tried to directly interfere in American elections and domestic politics.
Ugh at "statistically tied" that is not how statistics works!
Bush didn't lose because Bell is popular. She lost (along with Tish) because that wing of the St Louis party has largely discredited itself. She was a loudmouth, but her constituent services were trash.
There are definitely progressives in St. Louis who can win. But Bush ain't it.
I didn't know her constituent services were bad. Why would an ostensible socialist not prioritize working for the people?
When I lived in St. Louis (2023-2025), all I heard from folks is that her office was unresponsive unless you knew folks in her circle. STL politics are very parochial.
For example, she may have voted like a socialist, and used that rhetoric. But unless you were tight with certain Alderman or precinct folks, good luck with her office helping with daycare assistance or food assistance (a HUGE issue in the City of STL and north STL county)
That's really awful!
NY-AD-38:
https://www.cityandstateny.com/politics/2026/04/rajkumar-challenger-sues-kick-her-ballot-alleging-petition-fraud/412926/
David Ortiz, a staff attorney at Make The Road NY and the DSA challenger to Assemb. Jenifer Rajkumar, is suing to knock Rajkumar off the ballot over allegations of petition fraud. Quoting City and State NY:
"David Orkin, the immigrant rights’ attorney challenging Assembly Member Jenifer Rajkumar with the support of the New York City Democratic Socialists of America, is accusing Rajkumar’s campaign of election fraud and filed a lawsuit in state court on Thursday seeking to have her thrown off the ballot. In turn, Rajkumar has promoted allegations of fraud against Orkin."
...
"When volunteers on Orkin’s campaign began reviewing Rajkumar’s petitions, they discovered something strange – one of the people listed as signing Rajkumar’s petitions was none other than Cary Tilton, a prominent DSA member and one of Orkin’s own campaign volunteers.
“You can imagine my shock and anger when I saw my own name on a Rajkumar petition sheet with a fraudulent signature,” Tilton told City & State in a statement, noting that he’d actually gathered signatures for Orkin. “Signing this petition would fly in the face of every action and decision I’ve made in years and is an impossibility.”
After that, dozens of DSA volunteers began combing through Rajkumar’s petitions and claim they found still more irregularities. On Thursday, Orkin and one of his supporters sued Rajkumar in Queens Supreme Court. They are asking the court to kick her off the ballot on the grounds that her petitions are full of forged signatures."
...
"In a statement, Rajkumar campaign spokesperson Arvind Sooknanan questioned the validity of Orkin’s own signatures, citing a press release from the group Latinos Against Socialism. (No specific objections were ever filed to Orkin’s petition signatures at the New York City Board of Elections or in state court, however.)"
Assuming this is true, this is not a good look for Rajkumar. I'm already not a fan of hers so I'm on team Ortiz here. (Also a great sign when your source is a group called "Latinos Against Socialism".)
This is the fun and games of the New York system after the filing deadline. When you have volunteers and paid canvassers you never know what you'll get. Lawyers, staff, and volunteers are scouring each other's signatures to clear the field.
People also sign multiple petition without realizing it. And that of course is an area where people challenge. Sometimes they sign the wrong one for the wrong candidate by mistake. A few years ago a candidate stood outside a club meeting in Brooklyn and got members of a club backing his opponent to inadvertently sign for him. It actually has a hilarious and sad conclusion. Both sides challenged each others judicial delegates and both sides won. So there were no judicial delegates elected from that assembly district. That candidate ran for another District Leader spot somewhere else (in the Houseboat district... Google it!) but knocked out his rivals.
One obscure rule is if you sign a petition for one candidate you can't carry for another. So if that volunteer did carry petitions for Orkin all of their petitions could be knocked out unless they as they are doing claim something like fraud or forgery. That is a charge that one can only make in court. DOE does not rule on it.
The entire system is one created by Tammany Hall meant to make the system overly complicated and expensive. Which is exactly incumbents of all parties and all ideologies keep them. And is why New York is one of the most expensive states to run in.
bit of a long shot question, but I just finished interviewing a candidate in MT-01, who said he had public polling... I'm not seeing it online, has anyone else seen it? and thoughts about that race?
There is - IIRC, Busse is in the lead, followed by Cleveland, Forstag and Rains. I would support Forstag.
All I can recall is a January poll for Zinke. It showed Zinke leading Busse by 6 and Forstag by 10.
found it on the candidate website of all places. Busse in the lead, followed by Cleveland, Forstag, and Rains. Candidate internal poll. Busse and Forstag were clear fundraising winners in 1Q. https://busseformontana.com/2026/04/new-poll-confirms-ryan-busse-as-clear-frontrunner-in-mt-01-democratic-primary/
With pretty much all the votes counted, Mejia's margin (+20) seems to have matched the electorate (D+20), which is to say independent/third party voters broke about 50/50 towards her and Hathaway. The margin is a strong showing in terms of enthusiasm, but does not reflect Mejia's strength as a candidate. This wasn't just because of a poor performance with Jewish voters, she didn't outrun the electorate in a single town in Essex County, including some extremely-not-Jewish places. A win in a win, but she is not the person I want to see defending the seat in a Democratic president midterm, though unfortunately her primary challengers are all bad (Donald Cresitello is awful, Justin Strickland is pro-term limits and similarly too progressive for the district, and Joseph Lewis is a nobody whose campaign website lists no specific policies and only has vague moderate platitudes).
only if you view trump's coalition as durable, or that republicans will return to winning high propensity voters.
You never see Republicans freak out when their special election victors win by less than normal, like Matt Van Epps. It’s odd. Sure, someone more moderate probably would have won by more. Why should I care when this district is not in danger of flipping?
Ding ding ding, correct, I’m flabbergasted at the inability of our side to just accept a win when it’s staring us in the face.
If anything this win is the epitome of more and better democrats
If NJ does mid decade redistricting maybe Sherrill can move her into Pou's seat?
I doubt any mid-decade redistricting will happen, though I can definitely see her getting drawn in Pou's district in 2032, provided Pou isn't planning to run again.
Why would she get drawn into Pou's district? Isn't that a redder seat that voted for Trump? Or are you predicting that she gets moved into another district to make way for a more moderate candidate
Pou's district is likely to snap back into being bluer than NJ-11, and moving Mejia wouldn't be solely to "make way for a more moderate candidate", but because a fiscally very progressive representative is a better fit for a more urban, working class district.
She got 60% (which may rise to 61% or so) and you want to replace her? She won the district by a bigger margin than Sherrill ever did and you want to replace her?
Yes, for reasons I've outlined repeatidly.
Obviously we can't just be 50/50 with independents if we want a big november. Yea pretty good turnout but obviously candidate quality does matter for those who think we can run socialists in every district.