A lot of us appreciate the humor in dealing with serious topics. It helps us cope with the craziness of the present times. The GOPs are experiencing "Panic ! at Tedisco" over the current polling. That is a good thing...
I'd love to believe that Healthier United poll, but it's an outlier. Bigly. Cooper is in a good spot, but the gap is closer to 8 than 18. I wouldn't worry much, though. Coop is the most popular politician in the state and secured more votes in his primary than ALL other candidates combined. That's on both sides. And it wasn't close. He also has near universal name recognition and a campaign machine that's been winning statewide elections since 2000. Whatley is a neophyte. He's never run for anything, and while that can work in a candidate's favor it seldom does at this level. Add in a depressed voter base, little name recognition and no seeming ambition to change that very much, and you have an unknown candidate who is basically a referendum on Trump. Because his proximity to Trump is pretty much the ONLY attribute he has working for him. so his fortunes are inextricably entwined with Pol Potbelly's. His voters haven't figured out who he is yet and he's running out of racetrack if he wants to change that.
Like I said, if Cooper secured a Stein/Spanberger sized blowout in a midterm year, that would greatly reduce the GOP supermajority in both houses -- if not flip the state House to Democratic control.
Well I figure the only way Cooper wins as big as Stein is if he’s running against Mark Robinson, which is pretty much how Stein won by a Stein-sized margin. Since he’s *not*, I think half a Stein is a reasonable expectation, which should carry enough coattails to swing a sizable number of NCGA seats. If we *do* see a majority in either house, it’ll probably have more to do with Anderson Clayton securing candidates in all 170 legislative districts than anything. I can see a couple of US House districts flipping as well (NC9 and NC11), not becuase of coattails but because the challengers are putting in the work while the incumbents are hiding in their bunkers.
Flipping the state House this year in NC would be a very big deal (especially with the gerrymandering). NC Republicans would no longer be able to pass red meat bills; they would have to meet in the middle with Democrats to pass budgets and common-sense legislation.
The state senate might be an easier lift, just in terms of sheer numbers and bigger (i.e. harder to gerrymander) districts. But either way, the best that flipping just one chamber can (reliably) do is to bring Raleigh to a grinding halt. THe NCGA — at its most fundamental level — has one job: Pass a budget. Which they haven’t done in either of the past 2 FY. But since the state operates on what’s effectively a permanent CR, there’s no incentive to do that since the CR leaves funding at current levels. The PROBLEM with that is that EXPENSES aren’t conforming to that budget plan, and the state constitution mandates a balanced budget, so as X gets more expensive courtesy of the idiots in DC, the budget in Raleigh effectively shrinks because funding levels for FY 2024 don’t buy as much X at 2026 prices.
But there’s enough anger bubbling among the electorate that if they have the opportunity to vote against the Republican incumbent, they just might do it. At that point, it becomes a matter of Doing The Thing You Promised. Because it’s not enough to win a majority if you can’t hold it.
I think the Duke Energy rate increases (which the GOP 'working supermajority' greenlit via their veto override) will play a factor in this midterm election too. Because the Democratic candidates challenging the GOP incumbents can point to that as 'they campaigned on lower prices, but they let Duke Energy raise your bills'.
It won’t help them (the GOP). Especially if Dems tie it to the larger affordability issues being exacerbated every day by Republicans at every level of government. “How much more of this do we have to take?”
Another hit, in a particularly red part of the state will be the still-not-funded hurricane relief. The Republican supermajority forced a bill through in the lame duck session that was *called* a hurricane disaster relief bill, but in fact appropriated NO money for hurricanes relief, and was the vehicle they used take the State Board of Elections out of the control of the governor's office (where it had been since forever) and put it under… the state Auditor? Then appointed a former chair of the NCGOP to oversee elections? Republican voters will forgive a LOT if your name has an “R” behind it, but a betrayal like this — done solely as a partisan power grab — is going to go down badly with them. Assuming the opposition party has the sack to leverage it, which in years gone by I would say they did not. But there’s a new sheriff in town and she’s fierce.
I’ve been following Richard Ojeda since well before he got in the race for NC09. The latest redistributing diluted the district from R+11 to R+8, and the *generic* ballot right now is around D+6. But while Richard Hudson was building out the Bunker Strategy for the NRCC and hiding from his constituents, Ojeda was out working the district street by street — himself, not by proxy. Was it effective? The proof will be in the ballot, but anecdotally I can say I ran into him by chance at the Dropkick Murphys show in Raleigh last month, and in the space of 15-20 minutes no fewer than 3 other people recognized him and wanted photos and promised they’d be voting for him (I don’t live in the 9th so all I can do is send money). This was in *Raleigh*, not a campaign event, in bad lighting, in a mosh pit in between bands. Granted it’s a small sample size, but this was miles away from the district on a Saturday night. And sure, the Venn Diagram of voters who would support Ojeda and DKM fans is probably pretty close to 100% overlap, but it does seem like the name recognition efforts are working.
Well now he’s up with Independents - come on Hochul!!!! There’s no way I’m dealing with another barely 6 point win like last time especially when Sherrill and Spanberger crushed it last Fall….
And her response has been to find this odd centrist lane that manages to piss off both progressives and center-right folks. Her political acumen is just horrendous.
lol never thought I’d say this but “thank you” to conservative leaning Echelon Insights which just released their poll having her up 15 points… I can breathe a little easier here in NY now…
i think it bears noting how much hocul is burning green groups in her push to scale back climate goals for 2030, not saying she's going to lose, but I think the green party nominee will crack at least 5% in the deep blue (not that many) upstate counties of Albany, Erie, Onondoga, and maybe Tompkins.
There is precedence for this, I know we will not have another 2014 this year, but in 2014 cuomo only got 43% in Albany County, 51 in erie, 51 in onondoga, and 52 in tompkins, with each of the aforementioned counties giving the green's 5 % of vote. In albany county the greens got 12% of the vote, and at the time albany was still running one of the last functioning machines in the country. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_New_York_gubernatorial_election
Cuomo got a higher percentage of the vote in Staten Island 56% than Tompkins (college towns). I fear we are looking at a similar outcome here. That said cuomo still won by 14% points statewide by doing better in conservative areas, but the liberal discontent with hocul should not be sidelined, and may give an opening to some downballot republicans in the aforementioned counties. The Time Union, one of the last solid newspapers upstate does great reporting on this regularly. Paper covers Albany Saratoga and Rensselaer Counties. timesunion.com
If your main concern is that polling in March already shows a doubling of a win margin in the closest NY Governor race in decades, I suggest spending your time worrying about something else more useful of your time.
Polls bounce around a lot, it’s normal, that’s why there’s an average, but Hochul has already locked in double the support margin from 2022 in March, 8 months away from the elections. She’s doing pretty good imo.
no disagreement there, shes doing good in polling and if mannion could win in syracuse in 2024, new york results should be just fine. i just think new york could do better than hochul when it comes to the many dem options in the state. jay jacobs and co clearly don't agree
I think you need to differentiate between the 2025 Hochul and 2022 Hochul. She’s shifted left by a lot on a lot of issues as she’s a shrewd politician who can sense the way the wind is blowing in our party, similar to Biden’s gift, it’s a strong suit to change with the times and Democratic 2022 voters wouldn’t recognize her today.
So yes, we could absolutely have better, but comparing her to Cuomo or any other Governor the last quarter century, she’s the most left we’ve really seen a Democrat. Better than Cuomo isn’t a high bar to meet for a Democrat, but she’s exceeded my expectations and we could do WAY worse than her too.
Nate Silver never stopped using his "secret sauce". Which meant no-one could really replicate his methodology or test his results. In this one respect, I always had far more respect for the open-source analysis of Prof. Sam Wang and his Princeton Election Consortium.
I thought the Michigan Poll was interesting. Perry Johnson has spent a ton of money on TV advertising, and yet he is still behind John James. I saw the first ad this weekend for James here in the Detroit Market. The James ad features Trump giving James ringing endorsements filmed at several earlier Trump Rallies. I have seen no Democratic candidates ads yet at all.
I would love to see more polling comparing Benson to Republicans showing the after affects of No Kings Day 3.Did all that signage sway more undecideds?
This is absolutely unbelievable that the courts will allow parents to torture children with conversion therapy, because they're right wing religious zealots, but ban legitimate trans medical treatment.
We have to win the Senate, throw away the filibuster, and expand the court.
Both of the Obama-appointed Justices sided with the conservatives, which is an absolute surprise and especially worrying if it's the beginning of a rightward shift by Sotomayor and Kagan. It's important to note that SCOTUS didn't directly strike down Colorado's conversion therapy ban, but sent the case to a lower court that would likely strike down the law.
Freedom of speech has limits when it directly threatens the health and well-being of innocent people. Hello, “can’t yell fire in a crowded theater”. This was not a free speech decision, this was a religious ideology, driven claim of free speech, but one that has harsh negative long lasting impacts on vulnerable people.
This has nothing to do with yelling fire in a crowded theater. It's like the "heckler's veto" analogy. People don't like what is being said--the verbal counseling--so they want to ban it.
Can we use child abuse statutes to go after parents who do this?
Same way that I've long felt that Democrats should use child abuse laws to force parents to vaccinate their children, since parents who refuse to do so are absolutely committing child abuse.
I believe this ruling against children's rights on free speech grounds opens up a bucket of worms on all types of "parental rights" based on free speech. A lot of these Christian zealots believe the parents have the right to beat children senseless short of killing them. This right wing free speech claim is a slippery slope. Would the same logic overturn child abuse laws?
In an 8-1 vote, the Supreme Court holds that Colorado’s ban on “conversion therapy,” as applied to petitioner's talk therapy, violates the First Amendment because it constitutes viewpoint discrimination
Where do the rights and protection of the children come in. Prior to these types of laws, where children were forced to go through this conversation therapy, we had children committing suicide. That's why these laws were passed. I'm going to side with protecting children from zealot parents.
The free speech grounds for this come across as really tenuous.
The claim from Gorsuch is "it censors speech based on viewpoint." If we're in a place where anything that is otherwise regulated can be called a "censorship" of a "viewpoint" then regulations will only exist for non-conservatives.
The same logic could apply to any regulation that touches on anything that is communicated in some way, shape, or form, and thus could be pretended to be a free speech issue.
Jackson's dissent is as long as Gorsuch's majority opinion and Kagan's concurrence combined. I love her so much.
I don't think it's as bad as it's being made out to be, SCOTUS just remanded the case back to the district court and directed it to be reconsidered in light of the Salazar opinion to not discriminate against speech.
Don't get me wrong, I still don't like the opinion. But it's not as bad as it could have been, and that could be the influence of Kagan/Sotomayor.
If this is true, meaning loyal R voters this year will either vote for Democrats as an F-you to their party or sit out the midterms, the 2026 midterms could be a tsunami.
Best ever result despite being the most unpopular version of the party ever. Like I said before, voters don’t give a fuck what each party does or says, they’ll vote for them to stop whatever party is in power when they’re mad, regardless of what that opposite party looks like or promises.
This is exactly why I advocate the Democratic party moving left overall like the GOP moved far right, we don’t actually lose any voters, but we gain back our progressive/left base who haven’t come out for us at large scale numbers since Obama.
This is the largest recorded party ID advantage DEMs have had in any quarter since Gallup started tracking it in Q1 2015. GOP has never fallen below 40!
If the general election today, there'd be a bigger blue wave than 2018's in national environment. Trump's approval + Gallup party ID is a couple points worse compared to this time in 2018 and by Eday 2018.
We are not supposed to debate Democratic presidential primaries, but I think it's clear from the 2020 election results that presidential candidates I supported would have lost. It's clear to me that voters don't give a fuck how horrible the Republicans are if they're mad at the Democrats. It's unclear to me the extent to which the reverse is true.
Polling is always a lagging indicator, now the horrific disapproval on issues is starting to creep into the overall disapproval numbers. Trump never broke below his 40% floor in his first term, now we’re seeing multiple polls with that happening.
Good. Get it -50 for good measure. Crush Trumpism at last and salt the earth over it so we can begin the long, hard process of having other countries taking us half-seriously again
And more corrupt, much more destructive domestically, guilty of crimes of much more turpitude, and more unpredictable than Nixon, and incompetent, too, which Nixon emphatically was not.
Former GA state Sen. Jason Esteves has climbed to second place as the Dem GOV primary likely faces a runoff, according to a poll obtained exclusively by
Thurmond is in last place at 11% but that still puts him ten points ahead of Tony Thurmond, who is running for CA-Gov (and was at 1% in a recent poll).
Which is amazing to me. A Facebook friend of mine thinks he's Nazi-adjacent, and I believe that until very recently, someone with his record would have been forced to drop out.
What's new is the extent to which Democrats don't seem to give a damn about previously campaign-ending things. It wasn't clear that would have been a result of Republican depravity, and I doubt it's really good in the long run, even if it may be necessary now.
Honestly, as a realist, this is a good thing for us to finally come around on. Republicans already don’t care about scandals, so there’s nothing a Republican candidate could do or say that could blow up their campaign. That means if we decide to make it an issue as voters, we always lose. It’s only Democratic campaigns that end in defeat when scandal emerges.
That’s a massive anchor for our party to always have that the GOP never has to worry about. I want to win every race possible and I want Republicans to lose every race possible. In order for that to happen we need to get used to and be comfortable with voting for flawed candidates. It’s either that or Republicans win the race. Ideally, obviously, having morals as an afterthought is how we got into this mess in the first place, but that hasn’t changed in a decade of trying.
So instead of trying to swim against an impossible tide to make average voters care about character, which we’ve been doing since 2015 without success, it’s time to try just floating with the waves alongside whoever is nominated and realize any Democrat is better than every Republican. Luckily I think our party is coming around to this point of view. AG Jay Jones wouldn’t have won his race in VA 5-10 years ago, so we’re moving in the right direction already.
The one exception imo is accusations of committing a violent crime against another person. I think we can all agree that’s a red line when we withdraw our support. But affairs, white collar crime, sex tapes, bad comments, horrific tattoo, all of that is still worth supporting the Democrats nominated who have this baggage if our primary voters choose them to represent us in office.
Kind of crazy in and of itself that a scandal-free incumbent governor is on track to get thoroughly clobbered in an open senate primary. I don't think I've seen polls go into the specifics, but I have to assume this is a consequence of her waiting too long and being too old. Would she be ahead in the polls if she was 60 instead of 78?
On the bright side, her attacking Platner means the story will be old news to the electorate by November. Harder for Collins to damage him.
I don't think anyone could credibly argue Mills being 10 years younger (for comparison, that would be Roy Cooper's age, which no one cares about), would erase a 40 point deficit. There's obviously something much larger going on in ME-Sen than age. If she really is down that much, it's because people just don't like her record, and are seeking a further left, populist outsider instead.
As for waiting too long, it's possible that had some effect, but if she had announced in February 2025 I think we'd still be at the same point now, the only difference is Platner would have started behind and then pulled ahead as opposed to just consistently polling that way.
Maybe not a 40 point deficit, but I think there's been a meaningful impact on the psyche of democratic leaning voters for age after 2024. Regardless of how anyone here feels about the age factors from that year, I think the reality it is a major concern now for many, maybe most, of the typical semi-active dem voters -- people who care enough to vote in primaries but not enough to get as in the weeds as communities like here.
Taken an open seat and put a viable alternative in front of primary voters compared to a more typical but very old candidate, and I think outcomes like this are going to be far more typical.
My instinct, which could absolutely be wrong, is that if Mills was 60 and jumped in early enough that she'd be mildly but not overwhelmingly ahead in the primary. Maybe a 5 point or so lead.
Very underrated point made here. It’s not anti-Mills, it’s a pro-Platner voting coalition. They know about his posts and/or tattoo and they don’t care, they like him. Creating a positive movement from scratch that gets even some Trump voters and Republicans excited about them is insanely difficult. But we’ve already seen that happen 3 times now since 2024 with Mamdani, Talarico and Platner. All very different Democrats, with a very different idea on policy, but all focusing on what they want to do for the people they are running to represent.
There’s not many Democratic upstart first time candidates for statewide office that can go through, what 2 different campaign managers in their first run for office? Losing your treasurer and most campaign staff with the scandal breaking public, yet still be a frontrunner over a 2 term elected Governor. Most campaigns facing what he did in past history would’ve collapsed, especially for a completely untested Democratic candidate.
He didn’t though and we should be asking ourselves why that hasn’t happened. To me the answer is obvious. Maine Democrats like him a lot, “he tells it like it is” level of authenticity that can’t be bought, so any rough edges/scandals/baggage doesn’t bother them 1 bit. They’re all in on Platner to the very end, whether in victory or defeat, they’ve decided to see it through.
The GOP is very unpopular, but so is the establishment. Running on a return to normalcy worked somewhat in 2020, but the people urgently yearn for more, not more of the same.
I actually like that Platner has a shot at being the nominee. Mainers certainly are better experts than I am as to who they want to be their next Senator but if they want a fighter, Platner’s got it.
I don’t have a dog in this fight because I dislike both candidates, but what if Platner actually turns out to be less of a Fetterman/Manchin/Sinema in office and more of a Bernie/AOC type representative who votes with the party solidly when necessary, but tries to push the more leftwing policy to shift our party in a more progressive direction? What if he becomes a normal every day voting Democrat who sometimes criticizes the center on some issues/messaging?
You do accept that’s actually possible right? Like I do accept the fact that Platner could very well be a disaster in the election, or for our party, after being elected into office. Be open to what you don’t expect being possible. Every person is different, he should get the benefit of the doubt just like Bean in IL. When he or someone else does wrong (if they do), that’s when we need to look at primarying them out with someone better, but until then we don’t know how they’ll vote or act until after they’re in office.
To clarify, I don't think he's going to be a Manchin or Fetterman type, but I am 100% sure he's going to be a Tlaib or Cori Bush, if possibly worse. He clearly does not have the temperament we should expect from members of congress, and is going to say some incredibly dumb things, because at the end of the day, he's not very smart.
The title of this digest almost made me choke on my coffee. And it’s sure to enter the Downballot Classics Hall of Fame!
A lot of us appreciate the humor in dealing with serious topics. It helps us cope with the craziness of the present times. The GOPs are experiencing "Panic ! at Tedisco" over the current polling. That is a good thing...
While Republicans have Panic! at Tedisco, Democrats can increasingly have High Hopes...
Sanford has the outside trek in this race locked up!
Good one!
I'd love to believe that Healthier United poll, but it's an outlier. Bigly. Cooper is in a good spot, but the gap is closer to 8 than 18. I wouldn't worry much, though. Coop is the most popular politician in the state and secured more votes in his primary than ALL other candidates combined. That's on both sides. And it wasn't close. He also has near universal name recognition and a campaign machine that's been winning statewide elections since 2000. Whatley is a neophyte. He's never run for anything, and while that can work in a candidate's favor it seldom does at this level. Add in a depressed voter base, little name recognition and no seeming ambition to change that very much, and you have an unknown candidate who is basically a referendum on Trump. Because his proximity to Trump is pretty much the ONLY attribute he has working for him. so his fortunes are inextricably entwined with Pol Potbelly's. His voters haven't figured out who he is yet and he's running out of racetrack if he wants to change that.
Like I said, if Cooper secured a Stein/Spanberger sized blowout in a midterm year, that would greatly reduce the GOP supermajority in both houses -- if not flip the state House to Democratic control.
Well I figure the only way Cooper wins as big as Stein is if he’s running against Mark Robinson, which is pretty much how Stein won by a Stein-sized margin. Since he’s *not*, I think half a Stein is a reasonable expectation, which should carry enough coattails to swing a sizable number of NCGA seats. If we *do* see a majority in either house, it’ll probably have more to do with Anderson Clayton securing candidates in all 170 legislative districts than anything. I can see a couple of US House districts flipping as well (NC9 and NC11), not becuase of coattails but because the challengers are putting in the work while the incumbents are hiding in their bunkers.
Flipping the state House this year in NC would be a very big deal (especially with the gerrymandering). NC Republicans would no longer be able to pass red meat bills; they would have to meet in the middle with Democrats to pass budgets and common-sense legislation.
The state senate might be an easier lift, just in terms of sheer numbers and bigger (i.e. harder to gerrymander) districts. But either way, the best that flipping just one chamber can (reliably) do is to bring Raleigh to a grinding halt. THe NCGA — at its most fundamental level — has one job: Pass a budget. Which they haven’t done in either of the past 2 FY. But since the state operates on what’s effectively a permanent CR, there’s no incentive to do that since the CR leaves funding at current levels. The PROBLEM with that is that EXPENSES aren’t conforming to that budget plan, and the state constitution mandates a balanced budget, so as X gets more expensive courtesy of the idiots in DC, the budget in Raleigh effectively shrinks because funding levels for FY 2024 don’t buy as much X at 2026 prices.
But there’s enough anger bubbling among the electorate that if they have the opportunity to vote against the Republican incumbent, they just might do it. At that point, it becomes a matter of Doing The Thing You Promised. Because it’s not enough to win a majority if you can’t hold it.
I think the Duke Energy rate increases (which the GOP 'working supermajority' greenlit via their veto override) will play a factor in this midterm election too. Because the Democratic candidates challenging the GOP incumbents can point to that as 'they campaigned on lower prices, but they let Duke Energy raise your bills'.
It won’t help them (the GOP). Especially if Dems tie it to the larger affordability issues being exacerbated every day by Republicans at every level of government. “How much more of this do we have to take?”
Another hit, in a particularly red part of the state will be the still-not-funded hurricane relief. The Republican supermajority forced a bill through in the lame duck session that was *called* a hurricane disaster relief bill, but in fact appropriated NO money for hurricanes relief, and was the vehicle they used take the State Board of Elections out of the control of the governor's office (where it had been since forever) and put it under… the state Auditor? Then appointed a former chair of the NCGOP to oversee elections? Republican voters will forgive a LOT if your name has an “R” behind it, but a betrayal like this — done solely as a partisan power grab — is going to go down badly with them. Assuming the opposition party has the sack to leverage it, which in years gone by I would say they did not. But there’s a new sheriff in town and she’s fierce.
Id say NC11 might be closer to 50-50. Other than that NC13 is more flippable. 09 might be out of reach.
Don’t see a chance to hold NC01.
davis is a survivor, but it will be tough. if cooper wins by 8 I think davis wins, if cooper wins by 5 davis loses
I’ve been following Richard Ojeda since well before he got in the race for NC09. The latest redistributing diluted the district from R+11 to R+8, and the *generic* ballot right now is around D+6. But while Richard Hudson was building out the Bunker Strategy for the NRCC and hiding from his constituents, Ojeda was out working the district street by street — himself, not by proxy. Was it effective? The proof will be in the ballot, but anecdotally I can say I ran into him by chance at the Dropkick Murphys show in Raleigh last month, and in the space of 15-20 minutes no fewer than 3 other people recognized him and wanted photos and promised they’d be voting for him (I don’t live in the 9th so all I can do is send money). This was in *Raleigh*, not a campaign event, in bad lighting, in a mosh pit in between bands. Granted it’s a small sample size, but this was miles away from the district on a Saturday night. And sure, the Venn Diagram of voters who would support Ojeda and DKM fans is probably pretty close to 100% overlap, but it does seem like the name recognition efforts are working.
recced for "half a Stein". I feel like that should become common nomenclature here...
"Pol Potbelly" is a new one for me. It is amazing how many derogatory nicknames that Mad King Donald has acquired !
I wish I could claim credit for it, but it was Wonkette regular @gallbladder that coined that one.
My favorite one is still Agent Orange.
My favorite of my own creations was Tangerine Cthulhu coined during the pandemic. Also Mr. Tangerine Man, with accompanying parody song of course.
Sienna poll has Hochul lead narrowing down to 13 from 20 😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡
OMG, Blakementum!
Blakemanmentum? Blakemantum?
Well now he’s up with Independents - come on Hochul!!!! There’s no way I’m dealing with another barely 6 point win like last time especially when Sherrill and Spanberger crushed it last Fall….
So why has NY shifted right? Is it just a response to dems being in charge?
Its really more about Hochul being pretty unpopular, and not particularly effective than it is about moving right.
I actually think Long Island will have some pleasant surprises for us in November in some races.
I disagree, the state has shifted right, Trumps 43% proves that
Hard to imagine a scenario where any Dem wins NY-Gov by less than double digits in the current political environment.
Concerning, particularly if, like Zeldin, he has coattails that jeopardize House seats.
There is not much difference between Suozzi, Gillen and run-of-the-mill Republicans.
other than their voting records, but yes they're lack of personalities is remarkably similar
Suozzi has a personality, just a problematic one.
And her response has been to find this odd centrist lane that manages to piss off both progressives and center-right folks. Her political acumen is just horrendous.
All Cuomo era remnants in NY should go. And Hochul qualifies.
Her primary opponent bowed out, so I think it's her or bust.
I haven't heard new stuff from her lately, maybe because I've mostly been in Germany. What's she doing or saying now?
The only positive here is that we’re in an off year blue wave shaping up midterm which SHOULD carry over especially in NYC
lol never thought I’d say this but “thank you” to conservative leaning Echelon Insights which just released their poll having her up 15 points… I can breathe a little easier here in NY now…
i think it bears noting how much hocul is burning green groups in her push to scale back climate goals for 2030, not saying she's going to lose, but I think the green party nominee will crack at least 5% in the deep blue (not that many) upstate counties of Albany, Erie, Onondoga, and maybe Tompkins.
There is precedence for this, I know we will not have another 2014 this year, but in 2014 cuomo only got 43% in Albany County, 51 in erie, 51 in onondoga, and 52 in tompkins, with each of the aforementioned counties giving the green's 5 % of vote. In albany county the greens got 12% of the vote, and at the time albany was still running one of the last functioning machines in the country. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_New_York_gubernatorial_election
Cuomo got a higher percentage of the vote in Staten Island 56% than Tompkins (college towns). I fear we are looking at a similar outcome here. That said cuomo still won by 14% points statewide by doing better in conservative areas, but the liberal discontent with hocul should not be sidelined, and may give an opening to some downballot republicans in the aforementioned counties. The Time Union, one of the last solid newspapers upstate does great reporting on this regularly. Paper covers Albany Saratoga and Rensselaer Counties. timesunion.com
When the next midterm election season comes in 2030, there is hope for NY Democrats to nominate a much better gubernatorial candidate.
If your main concern is that polling in March already shows a doubling of a win margin in the closest NY Governor race in decades, I suggest spending your time worrying about something else more useful of your time.
Polls bounce around a lot, it’s normal, that’s why there’s an average, but Hochul has already locked in double the support margin from 2022 in March, 8 months away from the elections. She’s doing pretty good imo.
Wish I could rec this about a million times...
no disagreement there, shes doing good in polling and if mannion could win in syracuse in 2024, new york results should be just fine. i just think new york could do better than hochul when it comes to the many dem options in the state. jay jacobs and co clearly don't agree
I think you need to differentiate between the 2025 Hochul and 2022 Hochul. She’s shifted left by a lot on a lot of issues as she’s a shrewd politician who can sense the way the wind is blowing in our party, similar to Biden’s gift, it’s a strong suit to change with the times and Democratic 2022 voters wouldn’t recognize her today.
So yes, we could absolutely have better, but comparing her to Cuomo or any other Governor the last quarter century, she’s the most left we’ve really seen a Democrat. Better than Cuomo isn’t a high bar to meet for a Democrat, but she’s exceeded my expectations and we could do WAY worse than her too.
Nate Silver’s analysis isn’t as good as it once was imo but this Substack on Trump approvals I thought was pretty decent:
https://natesilver.substack.com/p/trump-approval-rating-30s-popularity-decline?r=2ikl7j&utm_medium=ios&shareImageVariant=overlay
He's good at pure numbers analysis, and dogshit at absolutely anything outside of that (except poker, I guess).
Nate Silver never stopped using his "secret sauce". Which meant no-one could really replicate his methodology or test his results. In this one respect, I always had far more respect for the open-source analysis of Prof. Sam Wang and his Princeton Election Consortium.
I thought the Michigan Poll was interesting. Perry Johnson has spent a ton of money on TV advertising, and yet he is still behind John James. I saw the first ad this weekend for James here in the Detroit Market. The James ad features Trump giving James ringing endorsements filmed at several earlier Trump Rallies. I have seen no Democratic candidates ads yet at all.
I would love to see more polling comparing Benson to Republicans showing the after affects of No Kings Day 3.Did all that signage sway more undecideds?
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2026-03-31/supreme-court-lifts-state-bans-on-conversion-therapy-on-free-speech-grounds
This is absolutely unbelievable that the courts will allow parents to torture children with conversion therapy, because they're right wing religious zealots, but ban legitimate trans medical treatment.
We have to win the Senate, throw away the filibuster, and expand the court.
Both of the Obama-appointed Justices sided with the conservatives, which is an absolute surprise and especially worrying if it's the beginning of a rightward shift by Sotomayor and Kagan. It's important to note that SCOTUS didn't directly strike down Colorado's conversion therapy ban, but sent the case to a lower court that would likely strike down the law.
They’re defending freedom of speech. I would have voted the same way.
Freedom of speech has limits when it directly threatens the health and well-being of innocent people. Hello, “can’t yell fire in a crowded theater”. This was not a free speech decision, this was a religious ideology, driven claim of free speech, but one that has harsh negative long lasting impacts on vulnerable people.
This has nothing to do with yelling fire in a crowded theater. It's like the "heckler's veto" analogy. People don't like what is being said--the verbal counseling--so they want to ban it.
Sure… Except a Heckler doesn’t hurt anybody, and conversion therapy does
The same argument could be made about trans counseling and abortion counseling. If you can ban one, you can ban another.
But remember, defending the rights of people is "woke" according to some commenters here.
Well, failing to defend people’s rights is "catatonic".
Can we use child abuse statutes to go after parents who do this?
Same way that I've long felt that Democrats should use child abuse laws to force parents to vaccinate their children, since parents who refuse to do so are absolutely committing child abuse.
I believe this ruling against children's rights on free speech grounds opens up a bucket of worms on all types of "parental rights" based on free speech. A lot of these Christian zealots believe the parents have the right to beat children senseless short of killing them. This right wing free speech claim is a slippery slope. Would the same logic overturn child abuse laws?
Speech versus medical treatment.
In an 8-1 vote, the Supreme Court holds that Colorado’s ban on “conversion therapy,” as applied to petitioner's talk therapy, violates the First Amendment because it constitutes viewpoint discrimination
Where do the rights and protection of the children come in. Prior to these types of laws, where children were forced to go through this conversation therapy, we had children committing suicide. That's why these laws were passed. I'm going to side with protecting children from zealot parents.
Well, then be prepared for bans on trans and abortion therapy among other things. I’ll side with the first amendment.
This has nothing to do with the First Amendment, since conversion therapy isn't speech.
It did in this case.
Fraud should not have legal protection. Conversion therapy is a fraud.
The free speech grounds for this come across as really tenuous.
The claim from Gorsuch is "it censors speech based on viewpoint." If we're in a place where anything that is otherwise regulated can be called a "censorship" of a "viewpoint" then regulations will only exist for non-conservatives.
The same logic could apply to any regulation that touches on anything that is communicated in some way, shape, or form, and thus could be pretended to be a free speech issue.
Jackson's dissent is as long as Gorsuch's majority opinion and Kagan's concurrence combined. I love her so much.
I don't think it's as bad as it's being made out to be, SCOTUS just remanded the case back to the district court and directed it to be reconsidered in light of the Salazar opinion to not discriminate against speech.
Don't get me wrong, I still don't like the opinion. But it's not as bad as it could have been, and that could be the influence of Kagan/Sotomayor.
Nothing those 6 on SCROTUS do surprises me.
And also allowing abortion prohibition.
If this is true, meaning loyal R voters this year will either vote for Democrats as an F-you to their party or sit out the midterms, the 2026 midterms could be a tsunami.
https://newrepublic.com/post/208397/donald-trump-network-messages-voters-iran
The pro MAGA voters are PISSED at Trump's decision to invade Iran. And the cost of gas.
Another NC Poll:
https://x.com/ForwardCarolina/status/2038987821201916136
A second major poll just dropped this morning, and... well, maybe that one in the tweet below wasn't such an outlier after all.
Out today from
@CatawbaCollege
:
NORTH CAROLINA - U.S. SENATE:
🔵
@RoyCooperNC
: 47%
🔴
@WhatleyNC
: 31%
⚪️ Other/DK: 22%
NC - CONGRESSIONAL GENERIC BALLOT:
🔵Democratic: 43%
🔴Republican: 38%
⚪️ Other/DK: 16%
NC - STATE SUPREME COURT:
🔵Democratic: 43%
🔴Republican: 36%
⚪️ Other/DK: 19%
TRUMP APPROVAL: (-13)
STEIN NET APPROVAL: (+22)
Support for U.S. military intervention in Iran: (-10)
Conducted by
@YouGov
, March 9-18, 2026. N=1000 North Carolina residents. MoE 3.58%.
Would like to see Anita Earls closer to 50% but even with the margin of error added it looks like Cooper will carry her over the line in November.
She's leading by 7 in that poll and can presumably lead herself over the line.
Best ever result despite being the most unpopular version of the party ever. Like I said before, voters don’t give a fuck what each party does or says, they’ll vote for them to stop whatever party is in power when they’re mad, regardless of what that opposite party looks like or promises.
This is exactly why I advocate the Democratic party moving left overall like the GOP moved far right, we don’t actually lose any voters, but we gain back our progressive/left base who haven’t come out for us at large scale numbers since Obama.
https://x.com/ChazNuttycombe/status/2038958954521186726
GALLUP LEANED PARTY ID FOR 2026 Q1 NOW OUT:
2025 Q3: 48-41 DEM (+7 D)
2025 Q4: 48-40 DEM (+8 D)
2026 Q1: 49-39 DEM (+10 D)
This is the largest recorded party ID advantage DEMs have had in any quarter since Gallup started tracking it in Q1 2015. GOP has never fallen below 40!
If the general election today, there'd be a bigger blue wave than 2018's in national environment. Trump's approval + Gallup party ID is a couple points worse compared to this time in 2018 and by Eday 2018.
We are not supposed to debate Democratic presidential primaries, but I think it's clear from the 2020 election results that presidential candidates I supported would have lost. It's clear to me that voters don't give a fuck how horrible the Republicans are if they're mad at the Democrats. It's unclear to me the extent to which the reverse is true.
Polling is always a lagging indicator, now the horrific disapproval on issues is starting to creep into the overall disapproval numbers. Trump never broke below his 40% floor in his first term, now we’re seeing multiple polls with that happening.
https://x.com/IAPolls2022/status/2038967823112765661
InteractivePolls
@IAPolls2022
📊 National Poll by YouGov/Economist
Approve: 35% (-3)
Disapprove: 58% (+2)
Trump's lowest approval in either term
——
Trump's net approval on key issues
🟤 Education: -14
🟤 Healthcare: -22
🔴 Iran: -30 (new low)
——
3/27-30 | 1,679 A
Democrats should dream bigger for November.
https://x.com/ForecasterEnten/status/2038990917663600940
A steady fall into the abyss for Trump's net approval, as it falls into Death Valley. He's now at a term 2 low: -18 pts.
Big reason why: Independents. Trump's at -45 pts.
The worst for any prez at this point in term 2. Worse than Nixon (-36 pts) at the height of Watergate!
Needs to go MUCH lower. The lower the approval, the bigger the shellacking.
I couldn't read this comment and not think of Detective Rawls in The Wire saying to McNulty "the longer this goes on, the bigger the payback"
Good. Get it -50 for good measure. Crush Trumpism at last and salt the earth over it so we can begin the long, hard process of having other countries taking us half-seriously again
I would love for Trump's approval to tank so bad that NC regains a Democratic state trifecta after November, gerrymandering be damned.
Because there's a LOT that needs to be done that NC GOP has refused to do since 2011.
the reputational damage will never be reversed
Or if it is, it will take 30 years or more, IMO.
And more corrupt, much more destructive domestically, guilty of crimes of much more turpitude, and more unpredictable than Nixon, and incompetent, too, which Nixon emphatically was not.
He’s not going to endorse lol. Paxton vs Talarico incoming.
https://x.com/IAPolls2022/status/2038965855816466774
📊 TEXAS SENATE RUNOFF
🟥 Ken Paxton: 47%
🟥 John Cornyn: 42%
⬜ Not sure: 12%
"If Trump endorses Cornyn"
🟥 Paxton: 47%
🟥 Cornyn: 43%
——
10 out of 10 enthusiastic about voting
Paxton voters: 85%
Cornyn voters: 70%
——
• GQR for
@MajorityPAC
(Dem)
• 3/19-23 | 600 LV | ±4%
https://senatemajority.com/wp-content/uploads/SMP-GQR-Texas-Republican-Primary-Memo.pdf
GA-Gov: Late Esteves momentum?
https://x.com/abbyyturner_/status/2039005536859873618
Former GA state Sen. Jason Esteves has climbed to second place as the Dem GOV primary likely faces a runoff, according to a poll obtained exclusively by
@njhotline
- Bottoms: 32%
- Esteves: 14%
- Duncan: 12%
- Thurmond: 11%
https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/731407/exclusive-georgia-gov-poll-shows-likely-runoff/?unlock=TWDL1A41H4YODYO2
He’s the only one running a great campaign here on the Democratic side. He has a ground game and only one on-air right now
How is he behind by 18 with a great campaign? I'll believe he's run a great campaign if he wins the primary.
Good, I like him a lot
Thurmond is in last place at 11% but that still puts him ten points ahead of Tony Thurmond, who is running for CA-Gov (and was at 1% in a recent poll).
CA-Gov - Sexual misconduct allegations against Eric Swalwell begin to surface:
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DWjgJEAETWI/?igsh=MTM2N2J1ZW96bHl4
This looks like complete bullshit to me. I'll believe it when I see a legitimate source, and not some social media bot
SCOWIS: Cash race.
https://x.com/jrrosswrites/status/2038963266248937777
'26 SCOWIS fundraising news:
2/3-3/23 @ChrisTaylorWI $2.1 million raised, including $700k transfer from @WisDems
@JudgeMariaLazar $474,395 raised, including $60k transfer from @WisGOP
1/2
@WisDems raised $2.7 million 1/1-3/23. Had $1.3 million cash after $700k transfer to @ChrisTaylorWI
WisGOP raised $239,491. Had $956,251 cash after $60k transfer to @JudgeMariaLazar
3 donors accounted for $230k of what WisGOP raised.
See more in today's AM Update.
ME-Sen: He’s going to be our nominee, whether you like that or not.
https://x.com/IAPolls2022/status/2038977657140805982
Maine Senate Democratic Primary
🟦 Graham Platner: 66%
🟦 Janet Mills: 28%
Conducted for Troy Jackson (candidate for Maine Governor)
——
Impact Research | 3/19-23 | 500 LV
as i've long said, whoever wins the primary has my support. Mills' attack ads were absolute duds, and didn't impact Graham's numbers at all.
Which is amazing to me. A Facebook friend of mine thinks he's Nazi-adjacent, and I believe that until very recently, someone with his record would have been forced to drop out.
Trump rewrote the rules. A felon rapist holds power, while US citizens are being killed in the streets by government agents.
The tattoo is gonna slide.
What's new is the extent to which Democrats don't seem to give a damn about previously campaign-ending things. It wasn't clear that would have been a result of Republican depravity, and I doubt it's really good in the long run, even if it may be necessary now.
Honestly, as a realist, this is a good thing for us to finally come around on. Republicans already don’t care about scandals, so there’s nothing a Republican candidate could do or say that could blow up their campaign. That means if we decide to make it an issue as voters, we always lose. It’s only Democratic campaigns that end in defeat when scandal emerges.
That’s a massive anchor for our party to always have that the GOP never has to worry about. I want to win every race possible and I want Republicans to lose every race possible. In order for that to happen we need to get used to and be comfortable with voting for flawed candidates. It’s either that or Republicans win the race. Ideally, obviously, having morals as an afterthought is how we got into this mess in the first place, but that hasn’t changed in a decade of trying.
So instead of trying to swim against an impossible tide to make average voters care about character, which we’ve been doing since 2015 without success, it’s time to try just floating with the waves alongside whoever is nominated and realize any Democrat is better than every Republican. Luckily I think our party is coming around to this point of view. AG Jay Jones wouldn’t have won his race in VA 5-10 years ago, so we’re moving in the right direction already.
The one exception imo is accusations of committing a violent crime against another person. I think we can all agree that’s a red line when we withdraw our support. But affairs, white collar crime, sex tapes, bad comments, horrific tattoo, all of that is still worth supporting the Democrats nominated who have this baggage if our primary voters choose them to represent us in office.
Yes, in general elections. Not in primaries.
Kind of crazy in and of itself that a scandal-free incumbent governor is on track to get thoroughly clobbered in an open senate primary. I don't think I've seen polls go into the specifics, but I have to assume this is a consequence of her waiting too long and being too old. Would she be ahead in the polls if she was 60 instead of 78?
On the bright side, her attacking Platner means the story will be old news to the electorate by November. Harder for Collins to damage him.
I don't think anyone could credibly argue Mills being 10 years younger (for comparison, that would be Roy Cooper's age, which no one cares about), would erase a 40 point deficit. There's obviously something much larger going on in ME-Sen than age. If she really is down that much, it's because people just don't like her record, and are seeking a further left, populist outsider instead.
As for waiting too long, it's possible that had some effect, but if she had announced in February 2025 I think we'd still be at the same point now, the only difference is Platner would have started behind and then pulled ahead as opposed to just consistently polling that way.
Maybe not a 40 point deficit, but I think there's been a meaningful impact on the psyche of democratic leaning voters for age after 2024. Regardless of how anyone here feels about the age factors from that year, I think the reality it is a major concern now for many, maybe most, of the typical semi-active dem voters -- people who care enough to vote in primaries but not enough to get as in the weeds as communities like here.
Taken an open seat and put a viable alternative in front of primary voters compared to a more typical but very old candidate, and I think outcomes like this are going to be far more typical.
My instinct, which could absolutely be wrong, is that if Mills was 60 and jumped in early enough that she'd be mildly but not overwhelmingly ahead in the primary. Maybe a 5 point or so lead.
Very underrated point made here. It’s not anti-Mills, it’s a pro-Platner voting coalition. They know about his posts and/or tattoo and they don’t care, they like him. Creating a positive movement from scratch that gets even some Trump voters and Republicans excited about them is insanely difficult. But we’ve already seen that happen 3 times now since 2024 with Mamdani, Talarico and Platner. All very different Democrats, with a very different idea on policy, but all focusing on what they want to do for the people they are running to represent.
There’s not many Democratic upstart first time candidates for statewide office that can go through, what 2 different campaign managers in their first run for office? Losing your treasurer and most campaign staff with the scandal breaking public, yet still be a frontrunner over a 2 term elected Governor. Most campaigns facing what he did in past history would’ve collapsed, especially for a completely untested Democratic candidate.
He didn’t though and we should be asking ourselves why that hasn’t happened. To me the answer is obvious. Maine Democrats like him a lot, “he tells it like it is” level of authenticity that can’t be bought, so any rough edges/scandals/baggage doesn’t bother them 1 bit. They’re all in on Platner to the very end, whether in victory or defeat, they’ve decided to see it through.
The GOP is very unpopular, but so is the establishment. Running on a return to normalcy worked somewhat in 2020, but the people urgently yearn for more, not more of the same.
I'm not sure Platner would have bothered to run if Mills had gotten off to such an early and intimidating start.
she consistently antagonizes labor and green groups, she's not widely liked by the base in maine. schumer keeps schumering
Schumer: “We have to win the Senate seat.”
ME Democrats: “No, we have to nominate someone who will win the seat!”
It's a combo of this and 78 being too old for a six year term.
I actually like that Platner has a shot at being the nominee. Mainers certainly are better experts than I am as to who they want to be their next Senator but if they want a fighter, Platner’s got it.
Can't wait for him to be insufferable in congress
I don’t have a dog in this fight because I dislike both candidates, but what if Platner actually turns out to be less of a Fetterman/Manchin/Sinema in office and more of a Bernie/AOC type representative who votes with the party solidly when necessary, but tries to push the more leftwing policy to shift our party in a more progressive direction? What if he becomes a normal every day voting Democrat who sometimes criticizes the center on some issues/messaging?
You do accept that’s actually possible right? Like I do accept the fact that Platner could very well be a disaster in the election, or for our party, after being elected into office. Be open to what you don’t expect being possible. Every person is different, he should get the benefit of the doubt just like Bean in IL. When he or someone else does wrong (if they do), that’s when we need to look at primarying them out with someone better, but until then we don’t know how they’ll vote or act until after they’re in office.
To clarify, I don't think he's going to be a Manchin or Fetterman type, but I am 100% sure he's going to be a Tlaib or Cori Bush, if possibly worse. He clearly does not have the temperament we should expect from members of congress, and is going to say some incredibly dumb things, because at the end of the day, he's not very smart.