It would be helpful and interesting to include turnout numbers for primaries so that readers start to get an idea of how many people are determining the direction of each state, district, etc.
Landry had it coming with angry voters voting down every single amendment on the ballot.
Legislative Rs here in NC want to put an amendment capping state income tax at 3.49% (to prevent a future Dem trifecta from raising taxes on their donors like Duke Energy). If Landry and Berger’s primary loss is any indication, I expect those to fail in a D leaning midterm.
I mean, the voters are still sour. Democrats are doing this well partly because of a resistance to Trump and the general trend of angst during midterms.
I think this is probably going to come back to bite us later. The Dems are about to be handed a large amount of power simply because they are not Republicans, not because of their policy proposals. We need to start developing a vision for the party and voters to coalesce around, like a new New Deal. If voters don't see results or have something to latch onto, we're just going to see-saw right back to the fascist right-wing.
i agree, however local democratic parties are not nearly as hated and if the end of trump one should teach us anything its that we get an inflated bump up until he is out of office see: e.g., La-Gov 2019, Ky gov 2019, Va state elections 2019, 2020 Georgia runoffs. The problem will be if our next pres nominee has no vision for how to fix and make america the land it should be
Agreed. This has to be sorted out by 2028. I don't see anything like that happening with the current leadership (Martin is incompetent and in over his head, and Schumer and Jeffries are not "ideas" people, they have shadowy donors to please, and they seem to want to just revert back to the good old days). So a new platform for a new future will probably have to be a result of the presidential campaign and the ideas generated by the base and candidates through that whole process.
For sure. But then what? That's the question everyone will have after 2028. If there is no answer, or it's not a good one, we all know what happens next.
We sort of had this problem after 2006 and 2008. Voters voted against Republicans but weren’t really “for” us. Once Bush was gone, our support ended up evaporating very quickly.
They can still model an agenda. Pass bills and let Trump veto them. Moreover, they can start the process of reforming Congress to make it more effective. A big part of the reason why the Executive branch has taken so much power over the years is that the Legislative has grown more and more impotent.
I’d say this all boils down to several fundamental rules:
-Be competent in governing. No disastrous rollouts of important tech and implementations like Healthcare.gov. Please Democrats, work to improve government on an ongoing basis so it works for voters instead of just simply defending things all the time.
-No stupid policy like Chained CPI, TPP that depresses Democrats’ enthusiasm.
-No bad PR like what happened the Affordable Healthcare Act legislative process and explaining to voters what the ACA really contained.
-No more running away from the Democratic Party like what they did when they were wimps to defend Obama even after re-electing him. This includes Democrats in red states too.
If Democrats can’t win in red states, well, running away from the Democratic Party isn’t helping either. Alison Grimes did this back in 2014 and while she had a good turnout machine, she still didn’t beat Mitch McConnell. She was the establishment choice.
At least stand for what you believe in instead of trying to be wishy washy or GOP lite.
I agree on all but I will say on that second bullet point some people would say that they aren't stupid policies but definitely stupid politics-wise. Even then I think that for ex. wrt to free trade some candidates (especially in the sun belt) will find it that running on an agenda that leans that way is probably the best way to go beyond just "repealing the Trump tariffs" and further lowering prices.
I would love to see a blue tsunami, hence my rooting for 2010-in-reverse wave. Especially since Rs and TACO aren't doing squat on gas prices and the Strait of Hormuz.
I know you’re talking about raw numbers of seats when you say 2010 in reverse, but it’s worth pointing out that the GOP only won the generic ballot by 6.8 points in 2010 and in 1994. We’re probably going to win by more on that metric this year than they have in any House election since at least 1946, when Republicans won by 8.5 points and potentially since 1928, when they won by 14.8 points.
I'm rooting for a blue tsunami here in NC to overcome the gerrymandered GOP majority in our state legislature (I know flipping our state Supreme Court in 2028 is more realistic). Because if NC Ds get a one-seat majority like MN did in 2023-2024, they'll be able to pass a TON of legislation on party lines and undo quite a bit of R red meat legislation.
Every state should use the Iowa redistricting standards, which (among other things) prohibit mapmakers from using partisan data and prohibit dividing counties and cities more than necessary. In other words, a city must be kept whole unless its population is too large to be contained in one district. In that case, it must be divided into the fewest number of districts possible.
Yup. This is the model we should shoot for if we get trifectas in WI and PA after 2026. We should have tried again in OH too as it only failed 53-47 in 2025 with Trump on the ballot. Without him on the ballot and a Dem leaning year, it would have had a better chance of passing in OH, even with the R Secretary of State writing misleading ballot language.
Dems should also be doing something in MO, where ballot initiatives from the public are allowed.
I'd prefer an Arizona- or Michigan- style commission that explicitly promotes political competitiveness as tertiary qualification, after compactness/COI
I get the sentiment, but trying to figure out how this works in practice. At present, Chicago (=2.6m population) stretches out to 8 congressional districts, but if compactness is the standard, it would be 3.5 (assuming districts of 750,000). The suburbs to which most of the present Chicago districts adjoin share many common demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, but they'd be barred from being joined to a Chicago district (except for the .5 Chicago district).
Should a predominantly Black working-class suburb be joined to a wealthy white suburb just for the sake of compactness, or does it make sense for the Black suburb to be part of a Black urban district? Again, it seems like in the Iowa example, it would only be possible to do this with one Chicago district.
I guess my question is, how is the Iowa standard not an example of packing? And if it is a worthy standard, why is compactness so important?
The problem with this is that I'm going to guess mapmakers know the general way most counties and towns voted based on location and size. Also, Iowa's current maps aren't perfect, it's odd that Story County (Ames/Iowa State) is not in the same district as Polk (Des Moines) and Dallas County (purple suburbs), despite being close to each other.
I do not feel sorry for Senator Bill Cassidy. While I applaud that he had the integrity to vote to convict Trump, his subsequent pathetic attempts to get back into Trump's good graces, most notably with advancing the RFK Jr. nomination, will be his Senate legacy.
“When you participate in democracy, sometimes it doesn’t turn out the way you want it to. But you don’t pout. You don’t whine. You don’t claim the election was stolen.”
God, also realizing that with Cassidy gone that we'll end up with Rand Paul as chair of HELP if we don't flip the Senate. James Lankford would succeed Paul at HSGAC.
Still torn on whether I want Paxton to win to give us the best chance to flip the seat, or Cornyn to win cause Paxton is the slimiest worst possible person to be in that role should the GOP still win
I think we need to let go of this idea that Paxton will be worse than Cornyn as a Senator. They will vote exactly the same way, whether their vote matters or not. Paxton will have the added bonus of reminding everyone of the GOP's rampant, ever-present corruption and hypocrisy, which may benefit us in the long term.
It's not about votes. It's about how bipartisan they are behind the scenes in negotiations. This is why losing Cassidy is a big deal; yes he would toe the line in public statements but he was fairly reasonable in backroom dealings. Paxton would be like a combo of Rick Scott and Tuberville.
Cornyn flipped positions on the filibuster just to win this primary. I'm not sure what more he could do to signal he is no longer interested in bipartisanship or good governance. His party certainly does not want that.
But that's exactly what I'm talking about. Coming out against the filibuster was so clearly a performative gesture that did nothing substantially (Trump seemed to agree). In the Senate you have to look at how they interact with colleagues, not the dumb crap they're saying on Fox News. The difference seems small but it's substantial in terms of having a functioning government.
I don't disagree with anything you're saying. I just think the upside of having Paxton as the nominee (i.e. a more likely Senator Talarico) is greater than the downside of having one more clown among many in the Senate.
Well, Texans have voted for Paxton, even with his slimy record, in more than one election, so I'm not sure that enough would desert him this time around.
Piece alleging Repub runoff candidate, Abe Enriquez, in TX-19 (Jodey Arrington retiring) has sex with men while campaigning on anti-queer policies.
Per Wikipedia, Enriquez has endorsements from Abbott, CPAC and TPA while Tom Sell has endorsements from the Chamber and various House Repubs (Scalise, Emmer, Jordan, Luna and current/former TX members like Sessions, Ellzey, Combest).
Can anyone provide some insight into the LA ballot items? On the surface it seems the school district and tax measures are decent and the teacher pay one seems like it would be good? I know they were passed by Republicans so maybe they’re not as good as it seems. Did people oppose them simply because they wanted to vote against Landry or were they actually bad measures?
They were bad measures. The teacher pay one would have eliminated several education trust funds, basically defunding them for a one-time teacher pay raise.
The first amendment on the ballot would've given the legislature authority over which state jobs are unclassified and overriding the current civil service protections.
Ah okay. I could immediately tell that I didn't support the civil service one, but yeah that makes more sense for why the teacher pay amendment wasn't supported
FL-9: Farmer Ben Butler will run against Democratic Rep. Darren Soto as a Republican. He is endorsed by Republican Reps. Kat Cammack and Greg Steube.
Butler joins businessman Tom Chalifoux in the Republican primary. Osceola County commissioner Ricky Booth and former state Rep. Mike La Rosa are expected to join.
NC Republicans, in addition to putting a tax cap as a proposed constitutional amendment, want to also put a ban on public bargaining (aka the "right to work" BS) and enshrine protection for the agricultural machine ("right to farm").
Right to farm is tricky. I think most people favor it in the its form of protecting long-standing practices (like fertilizing fields with manure) from unreasonable lawsuits from abutters. However, in many states, the agri interests have expanded them to protect them from any restriction whatsoever.
Yeah, anything the GOP controlled legislature puts on our ballot is ballot candy. They already put a proposed amendment to enshrine photo ID requirements for absentee-by-mail voting for this year... right after they lost their House supermajority in 2024.
It depends on whether the lame duck conservadems like Majeed and Cunningham will vote with the state House Rs to put the proposals on the ballot.
There's also been right-to-race laws, which are designed to forbid noise complaints from being filed against motorsports venues (automobile, motorcycle, etc.) by nearby residents who moved in after the venue in question began operation, passed in a lot of GOP states. Those are less controversial than right-to-farm laws, which can easily be abused to forbid any form of environmental regulation of agriculture whatsoever.
"The Georgia agency that is charged with overseeing judges just said the two liberal candidates running for tomorrow's supreme court elections violated judicial rules, basically by stating their views too openly (e.g. that they support abortion rights).
Note the GOP in Wisconsin used the same argument to try to impeach Justice Protasiewicz in 2023, after they lost that year's Wisconsin supreme court race, but ended up backing down."
I don't care what the GA judicial commission says. The one in NC ignored and buried Justice Anita Earls' complaints against MAGA Chief Justice Paul Newby's conduct.
I think voters should know who their judges are and what their values are, not GOP operatives hiding behind the nonpartisan label. Janet Protasiewicz did a great job conveying her values on the campaign trail in WI.
Is the GA judicial commission staffed by GOP appointees?
A federal judge has blocked the body that oversees state judicial elections in Georgia from issuing ethics criticism against a pair of liberal state Supreme Court candidates
finding that kind of late-campaign disclosure could chill protected political speech without meaningful constitutional review."
A federal judge has blocked the body that oversees state judicial elections in Georgia from issuing ethics criticism against a pair of liberal state Supreme Court candidates
finding that kind of late-campaign disclosure could chill protected political speech without meaningful constitutional review."
But... if GOP polling and strategists couldn't predict two state legislative seats flipping in R-favorable districts -- then Florida is a wild card this year.
Yeah it’s Florida. How many statewide races have there been in the last 20 years where Dems led in polls and then ended up losing on Election Day here?
Not just that, but there's also been many polls that have overestimated Democratic performance. The 2024 Senate race had Scott +5 in polling and Scott +13 in actuality. The 2022 gubernatorial race had DeSantis +12 in polling and +20 in actuality.
Trump was on the ballot in 2024 and FL Ds didn't turn out in 2022. That won't be the case this year. 2026 will be a referendum on Trump's disastrous second term and RDS' gubernatorial overreach.
I still expect FL to disappoint but winning one or all three statewide races would be a big coup.
Why are you so skeptical of this poll? Even if it's overestimating Democrats and they don't actually win, a poll like this indicates the GOP won't have the blowouts of 2022 and 2024.
This roughly translates to a Trump 2020 showing for the GOP in the state which is still a win for them.
This is May so still several months left for Vindman to get traction. He also needs to get past the primary, which is when things should really start to shift polling wise for him.
He was in a statistic tie over two months ago. But when pollsters gave "short biographies" of the candidates, the results went for Rodriguez by 2 points.
FL-14: Former Republican state Rep. Mike Beltran will challenge Democratic Rep. Kathy Castor. He considered a bid for the nearby open 16th but ran here after redistricting. He retired from the legislature in 2024 to focus on expanding his law practice, which has enabled him to start off his congressional campaign by self-funding $1 million.
He joins state Rep. Kevin Steele and former congressional staffer Bea Valenti in the Republican primary.
It would be helpful and interesting to include turnout numbers for primaries so that readers start to get an idea of how many people are determining the direction of each state, district, etc.
I am very curious about the Georgia results and data from Tuesday cause that will provide so good insights into 2026.
I'm excited to see the results for the SCOGA races tomorrow. Be nice if the Dem-backed challengers unseat Bethel and Warren.
Small correction on the headline item: the Ford duo held the seat from 1975 to 2007, not 1983 to 2007. It started being numbered as the 9th in 1983.
And Justin Pearson is 31.
Thank you, I've fixed.
Landry had it coming with angry voters voting down every single amendment on the ballot.
Legislative Rs here in NC want to put an amendment capping state income tax at 3.49% (to prevent a future Dem trifecta from raising taxes on their donors like Duke Energy). If Landry and Berger’s primary loss is any indication, I expect those to fail in a D leaning midterm.
NYT/Siena D+10 GCB
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/05/18/polls/times-siena-national-poll-toplines.html
And of course the write-up buries the lede and prefaces it with "but voters are still sour on the Democratic Party . ." 🙄
I mean, the voters are still sour. Democrats are doing this well partly because of a resistance to Trump and the general trend of angst during midterms.
I think this is probably going to come back to bite us later. The Dems are about to be handed a large amount of power simply because they are not Republicans, not because of their policy proposals. We need to start developing a vision for the party and voters to coalesce around, like a new New Deal. If voters don't see results or have something to latch onto, we're just going to see-saw right back to the fascist right-wing.
i agree, however local democratic parties are not nearly as hated and if the end of trump one should teach us anything its that we get an inflated bump up until he is out of office see: e.g., La-Gov 2019, Ky gov 2019, Va state elections 2019, 2020 Georgia runoffs. The problem will be if our next pres nominee has no vision for how to fix and make america the land it should be
Agreed. This has to be sorted out by 2028. I don't see anything like that happening with the current leadership (Martin is incompetent and in over his head, and Schumer and Jeffries are not "ideas" people, they have shadowy donors to please, and they seem to want to just revert back to the good old days). So a new platform for a new future will probably have to be a result of the presidential campaign and the ideas generated by the base and candidates through that whole process.
Even if Dems win both houses with Trump as President they'll basically be able to play prevent defense for 2 years.
For sure. But then what? That's the question everyone will have after 2028. If there is no answer, or it's not a good one, we all know what happens next.
We sort of had this problem after 2006 and 2008. Voters voted against Republicans but weren’t really “for” us. Once Bush was gone, our support ended up evaporating very quickly.
They can still model an agenda. Pass bills and let Trump veto them. Moreover, they can start the process of reforming Congress to make it more effective. A big part of the reason why the Executive branch has taken so much power over the years is that the Legislative has grown more and more impotent.
I’d say this all boils down to several fundamental rules:
-Be competent in governing. No disastrous rollouts of important tech and implementations like Healthcare.gov. Please Democrats, work to improve government on an ongoing basis so it works for voters instead of just simply defending things all the time.
-No stupid policy like Chained CPI, TPP that depresses Democrats’ enthusiasm.
-No bad PR like what happened the Affordable Healthcare Act legislative process and explaining to voters what the ACA really contained.
-No more running away from the Democratic Party like what they did when they were wimps to defend Obama even after re-electing him. This includes Democrats in red states too.
If Democrats can’t win in red states, well, running away from the Democratic Party isn’t helping either. Alison Grimes did this back in 2014 and while she had a good turnout machine, she still didn’t beat Mitch McConnell. She was the establishment choice.
At least stand for what you believe in instead of trying to be wishy washy or GOP lite.
I agree on all but I will say on that second bullet point some people would say that they aren't stupid policies but definitely stupid politics-wise. Even then I think that for ex. wrt to free trade some candidates (especially in the sun belt) will find it that running on an agenda that leans that way is probably the best way to go beyond just "repealing the Trump tariffs" and further lowering prices.
Ok. Stupid politics vs stupid policies I agree sounds better.
Trade though has to have balance between worker rights and business rights.
50-39 Dem
Trump disapproval 59-37
Here are the GCB polls by pollster since the start of May:
AtlasIntel: D+15
Siena: D+11
RMG: D+9
Cygnal: D+7
Focaldata: D+7
Looks like we’re at a wave on the low end and a tsunami on the high end right now.
I would love to see a blue tsunami, hence my rooting for 2010-in-reverse wave. Especially since Rs and TACO aren't doing squat on gas prices and the Strait of Hormuz.
I know you’re talking about raw numbers of seats when you say 2010 in reverse, but it’s worth pointing out that the GOP only won the generic ballot by 6.8 points in 2010 and in 1994. We’re probably going to win by more on that metric this year than they have in any House election since at least 1946, when Republicans won by 8.5 points and potentially since 1928, when they won by 14.8 points.
I'm rooting for a blue tsunami here in NC to overcome the gerrymandered GOP majority in our state legislature (I know flipping our state Supreme Court in 2028 is more realistic). Because if NC Ds get a one-seat majority like MN did in 2023-2024, they'll be able to pass a TON of legislation on party lines and undo quite a bit of R red meat legislation.
Every state should use the Iowa redistricting standards, which (among other things) prohibit mapmakers from using partisan data and prohibit dividing counties and cities more than necessary. In other words, a city must be kept whole unless its population is too large to be contained in one district. In that case, it must be divided into the fewest number of districts possible.
These standards prevent cracking and packing.
https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/42.4.pdf
Or the MI redistricting amendment that voters enacted in 2018. Both are very good policy.
Yup. This is the model we should shoot for if we get trifectas in WI and PA after 2026. We should have tried again in OH too as it only failed 53-47 in 2025 with Trump on the ballot. Without him on the ballot and a Dem leaning year, it would have had a better chance of passing in OH, even with the R Secretary of State writing misleading ballot language.
Dems should also be doing something in MO, where ballot initiatives from the public are allowed.
They'll probably do that next if they can get their Respect MO Voters amendment on the ballot and enacted.
Yeah, the "don't split counties" rule isn't going to work in the west.
With the exception of Utah, there hasn't been so much Republican gerrymandering in the West, especially compared to the South and Midwest.
I'd prefer an Arizona- or Michigan- style commission that explicitly promotes political competitiveness as tertiary qualification, after compactness/COI
I get the sentiment, but trying to figure out how this works in practice. At present, Chicago (=2.6m population) stretches out to 8 congressional districts, but if compactness is the standard, it would be 3.5 (assuming districts of 750,000). The suburbs to which most of the present Chicago districts adjoin share many common demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, but they'd be barred from being joined to a Chicago district (except for the .5 Chicago district).
Should a predominantly Black working-class suburb be joined to a wealthy white suburb just for the sake of compactness, or does it make sense for the Black suburb to be part of a Black urban district? Again, it seems like in the Iowa example, it would only be possible to do this with one Chicago district.
I guess my question is, how is the Iowa standard not an example of packing? And if it is a worthy standard, why is compactness so important?
The problem with this is that I'm going to guess mapmakers know the general way most counties and towns voted based on location and size. Also, Iowa's current maps aren't perfect, it's odd that Story County (Ames/Iowa State) is not in the same district as Polk (Des Moines) and Dallas County (purple suburbs), despite being close to each other.
I do not feel sorry for Senator Bill Cassidy. While I applaud that he had the integrity to vote to convict Trump, his subsequent pathetic attempts to get back into Trump's good graces, most notably with advancing the RFK Jr. nomination, will be his Senate legacy.
I liked his parting shot at Trump in his concession speech.
Yes, but I would like to see some integrity-fueled votes from him during the rest of his time in the Senate.
I would too. Him and Tillis have nothing left to lose.
Tillis is still a spineless coward. I can't wait for Cooper to replace his ass in the U.S. Senate.
I was thinking the same. I'm hoping to see seven months of a Cassidy revenge tour.
What did he say
“When you participate in democracy, sometimes it doesn’t turn out the way you want it to. But you don’t pout. You don’t whine. You don’t claim the election was stolen.”
He and Lindsay Graham proposed a god awful healthcare plan that was going to do serious damage for patients.
God, also realizing that with Cassidy gone that we'll end up with Rand Paul as chair of HELP if we don't flip the Senate. James Lankford would succeed Paul at HSGAC.
For those, such as I, who need the acronyms decoded:
HELP is Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
HSGAC is Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Texas YouGov:
Talarico 45 Paxton 45
Cornyn 45 Talarico 44
Abbott 49 Hinojosa 43
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/67aa7aa3e284b002cd6a420e/t/6a0addffcba58d0751053542/1779097087749/TSUTexasNov2026.pdf
Still torn on whether I want Paxton to win to give us the best chance to flip the seat, or Cornyn to win cause Paxton is the slimiest worst possible person to be in that role should the GOP still win
I think we need to let go of this idea that Paxton will be worse than Cornyn as a Senator. They will vote exactly the same way, whether their vote matters or not. Paxton will have the added bonus of reminding everyone of the GOP's rampant, ever-present corruption and hypocrisy, which may benefit us in the long term.
It's not about votes. It's about how bipartisan they are behind the scenes in negotiations. This is why losing Cassidy is a big deal; yes he would toe the line in public statements but he was fairly reasonable in backroom dealings. Paxton would be like a combo of Rick Scott and Tuberville.
Cornyn flipped positions on the filibuster just to win this primary. I'm not sure what more he could do to signal he is no longer interested in bipartisanship or good governance. His party certainly does not want that.
But that's exactly what I'm talking about. Coming out against the filibuster was so clearly a performative gesture that did nothing substantially (Trump seemed to agree). In the Senate you have to look at how they interact with colleagues, not the dumb crap they're saying on Fox News. The difference seems small but it's substantial in terms of having a functioning government.
I don't disagree with anything you're saying. I just think the upside of having Paxton as the nominee (i.e. a more likely Senator Talarico) is greater than the downside of having one more clown among many in the Senate.
Rich and ignorant?
Well, Texans have voted for Paxton, even with his slimy record, in more than one election, so I'm not sure that enough would desert him this time around.
This is apparently a 2024 modeled electorate, which was Trump +13.
Piece alleging Repub runoff candidate, Abe Enriquez, in TX-19 (Jodey Arrington retiring) has sex with men while campaigning on anti-queer policies.
Per Wikipedia, Enriquez has endorsements from Abbott, CPAC and TPA while Tom Sell has endorsements from the Chamber and various House Repubs (Scalise, Emmer, Jordan, Luna and current/former TX members like Sessions, Ellzey, Combest).
https://www.currentrevolt.com/p/man-alleges-gay-relationship-with
Yaas, get it, gurl. /s
Enriquez: “I’m in love with gay men like you won’t believe.”
Also Enriquez: “I want them oppressed!”
Quite the oxymoron there sir!
Can anyone provide some insight into the LA ballot items? On the surface it seems the school district and tax measures are decent and the teacher pay one seems like it would be good? I know they were passed by Republicans so maybe they’re not as good as it seems. Did people oppose them simply because they wanted to vote against Landry or were they actually bad measures?
They were bad measures. The teacher pay one would have eliminated several education trust funds, basically defunding them for a one-time teacher pay raise.
The first amendment on the ballot would've given the legislature authority over which state jobs are unclassified and overriding the current civil service protections.
Ah okay. I could immediately tell that I didn't support the civil service one, but yeah that makes more sense for why the teacher pay amendment wasn't supported
https://floridapolitics.com/archives/796971-ben-butler-jumps-into-arena-against-darren-soto-in-cd-9/
FL-9: Farmer Ben Butler will run against Democratic Rep. Darren Soto as a Republican. He is endorsed by Republican Reps. Kat Cammack and Greg Steube.
Butler joins businessman Tom Chalifoux in the Republican primary. Osceola County commissioner Ricky Booth and former state Rep. Mike La Rosa are expected to join.
*Mike La Rosa
Hmmm, an untested Republican candidate...hopefully there are oppo teams already looking into him! I bet they can find some dirt.
Way to tank your 2028 prospects, JDV.
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/05/16/midwest-republicans-vance-midterms-00924595
https://archive.ph/CQ0xW
Fine with me!
NC Republicans, in addition to putting a tax cap as a proposed constitutional amendment, want to also put a ban on public bargaining (aka the "right to work" BS) and enshrine protection for the agricultural machine ("right to farm").
https://www.wral.com/news/nccapitol/nc-constitutional-amendment-proposal-work-farm-income-tax-may-2026/
Instead of focusing on passing an overdue budget, it's all about R red meat priorities.
Right to farm is tricky. I think most people favor it in the its form of protecting long-standing practices (like fertilizing fields with manure) from unreasonable lawsuits from abutters. However, in many states, the agri interests have expanded them to protect them from any restriction whatsoever.
I'd guarantee whatever is being proposed is just a handout to the chemical lobby.
Yeah, anything the GOP controlled legislature puts on our ballot is ballot candy. They already put a proposed amendment to enshrine photo ID requirements for absentee-by-mail voting for this year... right after they lost their House supermajority in 2024.
It depends on whether the lame duck conservadems like Majeed and Cunningham will vote with the state House Rs to put the proposals on the ballot.
There's also been right-to-race laws, which are designed to forbid noise complaints from being filed against motorsports venues (automobile, motorcycle, etc.) by nearby residents who moved in after the venue in question began operation, passed in a lot of GOP states. Those are less controversial than right-to-farm laws, which can easily be abused to forbid any form of environmental regulation of agriculture whatsoever.
This is so frustrating.
"The Georgia agency that is charged with overseeing judges just said the two liberal candidates running for tomorrow's supreme court elections violated judicial rules, basically by stating their views too openly (e.g. that they support abortion rights).
Note the GOP in Wisconsin used the same argument to try to impeach Justice Protasiewicz in 2023, after they lost that year's Wisconsin supreme court race, but ended up backing down."
https://x.com/Taniel/status/2056397593261846638
https://www.ajc.com/news/2026/05/supreme-court-challengers-violated-judicial-rules-state-watchdog-says/
So now what? How might this effect the election?
The only reason GA Republicans are resorting to BS like this is that they know they're going to lose.
Can this agency actually impose consequences?
I don't care what the GA judicial commission says. The one in NC ignored and buried Justice Anita Earls' complaints against MAGA Chief Justice Paul Newby's conduct.
I think voters should know who their judges are and what their values are, not GOP operatives hiding behind the nonpartisan label. Janet Protasiewicz did a great job conveying her values on the campaign trail in WI.
Is the GA judicial commission staffed by GOP appointees?
What does this actually mean for the election?
I don't think it means squat when GA Dems are fired up.
I meant does this actually affect their ability to serve as judges or the election process? Or is this basically just a hit piece?
I think it's a hit piece.
They were blocked from doing anything about this
Battleground state's Supreme Court race sees bizarre last-minute ethics twist
https://www.rawstory.com/georgia-supreme-court-2676909989/
A federal judge has blocked the body that oversees state judicial elections in Georgia from issuing ethics criticism against a pair of liberal state Supreme Court candidates
finding that kind of late-campaign disclosure could chill protected political speech without meaningful constitutional review."
They were blocked from doing anything about this
Battleground state's Supreme Court race sees bizarre last-minute ethics twist
https://www.rawstory.com/georgia-supreme-court-2676909989/
A federal judge has blocked the body that oversees state judicial elections in Georgia from issuing ethics criticism against a pair of liberal state Supreme Court candidates
finding that kind of late-campaign disclosure could chill protected political speech without meaningful constitutional review."
Another day another poll. Change Research. This one from FL GOV Jolly by 4 https://x.com/davidjollyfl/status/2056448878535455167?s=20
Vindman's up over Moody too. By 2 points, so still within margin of error.
I'll believe it when I see it.
Me too.
But... if GOP polling and strategists couldn't predict two state legislative seats flipping in R-favorable districts -- then Florida is a wild card this year.
Yeah it’s Florida. How many statewide races have there been in the last 20 years where Dems led in polls and then ended up losing on Election Day here?
Not just that, but there's also been many polls that have overestimated Democratic performance. The 2024 Senate race had Scott +5 in polling and Scott +13 in actuality. The 2022 gubernatorial race had DeSantis +12 in polling and +20 in actuality.
Trump was on the ballot in 2024 and FL Ds didn't turn out in 2022. That won't be the case this year. 2026 will be a referendum on Trump's disastrous second term and RDS' gubernatorial overreach.
I still expect FL to disappoint but winning one or all three statewide races would be a big coup.
All of them! Every statewide race in the last 20 years!
I exaggerate but not by a lot.
Why are you so skeptical of this poll? Even if it's overestimating Democrats and they don't actually win, a poll like this indicates the GOP won't have the blowouts of 2022 and 2024.
This roughly translates to a Trump 2020 showing for the GOP in the state which is still a win for them.
Because the last time a poll didn't underestimate Republican strength in Florida was 2012.
But even if this poll does underestimate the GOP by 7-8 here that translates to an underwhelming 5-6 for Moody and 3-4 for Donalds.
This is May so still several months left for Vindman to get traction. He also needs to get past the primary, which is when things should really start to shift polling wise for him.
Can we please link to the actual poll, not a partisan tweet about it? It would be helpful to clarify if this is an internal or not.
https://changeresearch.com/florida-governors-race-may-2026/
Thank you!
Vindman's results are in the link below.
https://changeresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Deep-Dive-into-Florida-1.pdf
Rodriguez is still leading incumbent FL AG James Uthmeier by 4 points in the same polling.
Still? He's lead in a poll before?
He was in a statistic tie over two months ago. But when pollsters gave "short biographies" of the candidates, the results went for Rodriguez by 2 points.
https://floridaphoenix.com/briefs/internal-poll-for-jose-javier-rodriguez-campaign-for-ag-shows-him-down-38-35-vs-james-uthmeier/
If this is any indication, FL Latino voters are going to break for him.
He was up 43-40 at the end of March.
https://floridapolitics.com/archives/790357-poll-democrats-gaining-ground-key-races-tighten-in-florida-as-donald-trump-drags-gop/
Jolly internal
https://floridapolitics.com/archives/797010-mike-beltran-jumps-into-cd-14-race-to-challenge-kathy-castor/
FL-14: Former Republican state Rep. Mike Beltran will challenge Democratic Rep. Kathy Castor. He considered a bid for the nearby open 16th but ran here after redistricting. He retired from the legislature in 2024 to focus on expanding his law practice, which has enabled him to start off his congressional campaign by self-funding $1 million.
He joins state Rep. Kevin Steele and former congressional staffer Bea Valenti in the Republican primary.