I also think he's pretty stuck up and self-centered, but there's a certain charm in candidates like that. Millions of people agree when they willingly vote for the president - not that they can be compared. But at least Schlossberg is proudly an asshole and doesn't pretend to be nice like most politicians.
They're all human and prone to being both nice and not nice. But they're also all subject to greed and lust for power as well as an immense amount of pride.
Flip NC, ME and AK and it takes it down to 50/50. Hold MI and it stays 50/50. Flip OH...majority. The reason I left out NC, ME and AK is because they seem like easier seats to win than OH and IA. Not sure about this MI race.
There's no sugarcoating that this is worrisome. Given what the electorate should be and how in tilt-R North Carolina Cooper has polled better when both are open seats, and given the challenges in the Michigan Govs race, Michigan could well become our biggest headache to hold.
Even in 2024 where Slotkin routinely overperformed in polling VS. Rogers only to win by the slimmest of margins. He seems to be an overperformer in general.
I have a serious feeling we are not going to see a 2006 redux but instead a 2018 wave that materializes only in the House but not Senate.
There's no need for apocalyptic freakouts. There's a reason Rogers can't get above 45% of the vote against McMorrow and Stevens despite having a huge name rec advantage. The AES numbers are the concern here. I hate to say it, but I fear much of the discrepancy is driven by aversion to his name and Islamophobia. Some of his positions on past things are not helpful either, but I doubt many people outside those plugged in are really aware of those.
Democrats have been vastly overperforming 2024 margins in special elections, but I noticed that AL Republican Norman Crow won his special election 64-36 in a district that Trump only won 58-41 in 2024. Any concern by that rare over performance for the GOP against all the blue over performances we had been seeing prior?
There's no such thing as a uniform swing, there will be underperformances, I'm not worried about how one special election result in Alabama affects the overall situation.
When does the University of Alabama get back from winter break? The previous Digest said that this district contains part of the University of Alabama campus, and if the district's Democratic base is therefore college students and they aren't back from break yet, that would explain the Democratic underperformance.
That was my first thought too. I wouldn't doubt if the special election was scheduled with that timing in mind, ensuring the student population would be out of town.
This last set of special elections results across the board were the worst for Democrats since before Trump got elected again. Is the GOP base awake again over the ICE murders (which they love)? Or is this an abnormal blip that’ll go back to the normal over performances we’ve been used to seeing? Only time will tell.
I’d lean thinking it’s an aberration, but definitely worth watching the special elections results in February and/or late January.
2/4 of the results last night were outstanding for Dems, one was good, and one was poor. Not sure you can read anything into that, but to me it doesn’t look like any sort of GOP reenergized
I am interested in why a Dem underperformed Spanberger in one of the Virginia races, while in the other three races they have matched or slightly exceeded her numbers
The core dem base in the district (U Alabama) was barely in session at the time of this election. From what I've heard there was basically no mention of it.
In the South, Rs tend to be higher propensity as core dem constituencies rely heavily on lower propensity groups like rural African Americans or younger voters, while educated areas haven't shifted as left as they have in other parts of the country due to religiousity.
Sucks it happened like this, but it's why you average out specials. Also worth mentioning the 2 great overperformances in that one VA seat and that Connecticut seat.
And, as posted last night, a poll taken by Alaska Survey Research last week (1/8-1/11) found Peltola leading Sullivan by 48%-46%. On favorability, the poll found Peltola was +5 while Sullivan is -11.
AOC has endorsed Peltola and is fundraising for her—something that would not have happened if Peltola hadn't sought the endorsement.
It also underscores how much things have changed since 2020, when battleground House candidates returned AOC's PAC donations to avoid being associated with her.
I was one of the people who contributed to Peltola's campaign on the first day. I am happy to see a strong Democratic candidate in the Last Frontier. She represents the best of Alaskan politics and has the authenticity that people want in political leaders. I don't expect to always agree with her positions, but she will be a hell of a lot better than the anonymous backbencher that is Dan Sullivan.
As a Californian I don't support the existence of the US House of Lords (and Ladies) in its current form that severely under-represents my home state, but until that changes I will feel free to try to influence politics in a small way in other states, especially in the West. I spent a summer in Alaska (on a student program in Wrangell-St Elias NP) and will always have an appreciation for the 49th state. Love to see the good polling too!
I also donated to her campaign on the first day and could not have better described what makes Peltola so special as a political leader. So well said. And I have also spent time in Alaska and would love to spend more.
Finally, I am also a Californian and resent that we have the same number of senators as a state with less than 2% of our population. Insane and so undemocratic. Decided long ago that donations in senate races are worth a lot more in small states so I'm much more apt to donate to races in AK, MT, etc than in my own state.
Yes, you make an excellent point about how donations are more effective in senate races in smaller states. Over the years I have given to races in those states as well as NV, NM and OR. I attended events with Jeff Merkley and Martin Heinrich when they first ran for their senate seats.
Mayor Meh, I mean Greenberg, may have been involved in discussions about the nonpartisan elections law, but neither Metro Council nor we voters got a say. As a Louisvillian, I can live with it, and I can even see a small-d democratic argument for it, but I am not happy with how it was done.
I'll probably vote for Parrish-Wright, since she's the only candidate other than Greenberg who I know is a Democrat, and the only other one (aside from Republican perennial Bob DeVore) I know anything at all about. Personally, I'd like to see them finish 1-2, just to flip a metaphorical bird at the General Ass-embly.
Totally agree. Using commas and semi-colons to separate everything in one blob of text is not reader-friendly. I realize it's the site's style, and it works in most cases, but not this time.
It also helps that the MI Democratic trifecta helped loosen and make voting much more accessible during that 2023-2024 trifecta too (esp making a permanent absentee voting list). And pre-processing ballots so there won't be any more red mirages come 2026 and 2028.
I posted this last night, saw it didn't make it to Wednesday's Morning Digest: a Democrat won the Fort Pierce city commission special runoff election last night by 31 votes. His win flips the majority on the commission to Democratic control.
"Axios: Michigan Rep. Haley Stevens is blasting her Democratic rivals in the state's critical Senate primary, criticizing one of her opponents for supporting the Green New Deal and calling the other weak on manufacturing.
GND has always been a centrist attack line but negative attacks this early show her desperation and possibly bad internal polling. McMorrow and AES have taken potshots at each other but mild based on policy. They should go nuclear on Stevens.
It's about many things like that, plus him also being a dog abuser, someone who mistreats women, and someone who has shown love for Russia's government
That feels like an attainable over-performance from Peltola. Wouldn't surprise me if it wound up being even more than that when all is said and done. I'm trying not to get too excited about this race, but I am increasingly bullish on it.
I'm interested in those rural numbers, it feels like she should be winning by a lot more (look at her margins in the Alaska Bush), maybe they are counting the Kenai Peninsula as rural as opposed to Southcentral
Hopefully he's working Laura Kelly behind the scenes to change her mind. There's not much benefit to jumping in the race early for her. Her announcing on filing day would be enough to catch Republicans by surprise.
Agreed. Running someone who has already won statewide seems like the easiest path (and it could be good with Kelly) but sometimes it doesn't work out. A fresher candidate is best. I'd be fine with either, personally.
Not sure I agree. Firstly, I think Kelly is probably a better statewide candidate than Davids. Secondly, Davids has shown an ability to hold down her house seat - hate to give that up.
Sara Gideon, the Democratic nominee who challenged Senator Susan Collins in 2020, has contributed $4,000 from her former campaign committee to Gov. Janet Mills' 2026 U.S. Senate bid.
Gideon's PAC reported approximately $3.3 million in cash on hand as of Sep. 2025.
I'm cynical about both candidates in this primary and disappointed by national Democrats continuing to perpetuate people like Mills and Gideon into the spotlight only to lose. And I'm prone to sarcasm.
I'm failing to see the similarities between Mills and Gideon aside from their gender. One has won statewide twice, has deep Maine roots, and is from the rural part of the state. The other did not have any of that.
Mills is vulnerable on the age front and some of her decisions as governor. My frustration is people not being intellectually honest about Platner's weaknesses in this primary while being quick to diss Mills.
The filibuster point is true. I hope she changes her mind on it. But she is absolutely attacking Collins. Pretty savagely on social media. It's disingenuous or misinformed to say she's not.
Platner has never polled behind Mills in all 4 general election polls against Collins done till now. And his scandals are very well known.
The similarity is that Mills and Gideon are both establishment moderate Democrats picked by the DSCC.
You are not being honest about Platner by comparing him to Crockett and calling it sexism. Crockett is running in R+13 state which is fundamentally different than Maine and Platner hasn't trailed in general election polls like El-Sayed. He's been polling a bit better than Mills despite all of scandals getting dished every day on newspapers. If Crockett was running in Maine, I would support her over both of them.
I probably would, too, because the only thing that's controversial about her is some remarks about politicians and the fact that she says exactly what she means and doesn't temper it. She has no personal controversies as far as I think anyone knows.
It's fine to be cynical or disappointed about national Dems promoting people like Mills and Gideon (though Mills hasn't lost--yet.) But it's also fine to criticise the personality cultism that many have developed around Platner--and, in another Senate race, Jasmine Crockett who is probably a much likelier loser than any Maine Democrat.
And if Mills and other choices by national Democratic committees are dull or not "inspiring", well, so what? I can't be the only one who is sick of politics and government having to be entertainment. And if you won't vote for someone because they didn't sufficiently excite or "inspire" you, then it's you that's really the problem, not the candidate.
Of course. They're the problem. I think that part of the issue is that the Democratic Party hasn't realized that politics IS entertainment now. Whether we like it or not. Dems have had better policies, platforms and ideas for the last 30 years and yet we keep falling behind further and further behind the 8-Ball that may be impossible to come out from at this juncture without massive reforms that only politics of personality might be able to back.
And if Platner loses because *shocker* it turns out people don’t want to vote for someone who knowingly had a Nazi tattoo on his chest for years, what will the answer be?
Let me make myself clear. We are all on the same side. I am not picking and choosing who to support. I have and will repeatedly say that in this race, I don't currently support a candidate. Janet Mills is part of the establishment. She is boring. The same goes for many other leading Senate candidates that happen to be men. I don't support Graham Platner and hope he either bows out of the race or loses horribly. Like you all, I'd like to see someone other than Susan Collins hold this seat next year.
This thread started because of a sarcastic comment I made regarding how milquetoast candidates like Mills and Gideon are. Not because I value them less because they are women.
I'm not excusing the controversy of any other candidate by criticizing one in particular.
Darn, Kasky was probably my preferred candidate out of the small armada running.
I'd predict Micah Lasher to win but I would like to see Jack Schlossberg (unpopular opinion, apparently) or maybe Alex Bores
Schlossberg came out publicly against DC statehood so that's a "never" from me.
I also think he's pretty stuck up and self-centered, but there's a certain charm in candidates like that. Millions of people agree when they willingly vote for the president - not that they can be compared. But at least Schlossberg is proudly an asshole and doesn't pretend to be nice like most politicians.
Some are genuinely nice. Jerry Nadler always seemed to me to be nice.
They're all human and prone to being both nice and not nice. But they're also all subject to greed and lust for power as well as an immense amount of pride.
Jack Schlossberg is a mess.
I sort of lean toward Bores, but Lasher doesn't seem awful. I will miss Kasky's chaotic twink energy on the campaign lol
MI Senate: Detroit News poll:
Rogers 44 Stevens 44
Rogers 46 McMorrow 42
Rogers 48 El-Sayed 42
https://x.com/umichvoter/status/2011387571507450010?s=20
Ugh
Rogers has far greater name ID and was running even with Slotkin at this point 2 years ago.
In other words, Rogers offers nothing to his Senate campaign.
It’s early in the game, a lot can change – in both directions.
Those polls for governor in the digest are worrisome. Control of the Senate could hinge on the neighboring Michigan and Ohio.
Huh. I am not sure that Senate hinges on there. Which means already flipping NC, ME, IA, AK.
Flip NC, ME and AK and it takes it down to 50/50. Hold MI and it stays 50/50. Flip OH...majority. The reason I left out NC, ME and AK is because they seem like easier seats to win than OH and IA. Not sure about this MI race.
It is tough to imagine a scenario where we are winning NC or AK and not MI....
In this cycle, it might be plausible to win NC and lose MI. But I have a hard time believing an AK win and a MI loss.
3rd party vote shares tend to precipitously decline closer to eday. I wouldn't look to much into it until like September
McMorrow has half the name ID of AES and Stevens.
Name ID (general election universe)
Rogers 71%
El-Sayed 47%
Stevens 42%
McMorrow 24%
Definitely worrying about El-Sayed being the most known Dem but polling 6 points under. McMorrow has a lot of upside it seems.
There's no sugarcoating that this is worrisome. Given what the electorate should be and how in tilt-R North Carolina Cooper has polled better when both are open seats, and given the challenges in the Michigan Govs race, Michigan could well become our biggest headache to hold.
Even in 2024 where Slotkin routinely overperformed in polling VS. Rogers only to win by the slimmest of margins. He seems to be an overperformer in general.
I have a serious feeling we are not going to see a 2006 redux but instead a 2018 wave that materializes only in the House but not Senate.
There's no need for apocalyptic freakouts. There's a reason Rogers can't get above 45% of the vote against McMorrow and Stevens despite having a huge name rec advantage. The AES numbers are the concern here. I hate to say it, but I fear much of the discrepancy is driven by aversion to his name and Islamophobia. Some of his positions on past things are not helpful either, but I doubt many people outside those plugged in are really aware of those.
par for the course..apocalyptic freakouts!
1) This was not an "apocalyptic freakout".
2) If ever in my lifetime the moment called for an "apocalyptic freakout", this is it.
Is your #2 based on this one poll, or on all the evil insanity that the Trump Administration is doing right now?
re' #2) Nope!
Democrats have been vastly overperforming 2024 margins in special elections, but I noticed that AL Republican Norman Crow won his special election 64-36 in a district that Trump only won 58-41 in 2024. Any concern by that rare over performance for the GOP against all the blue over performances we had been seeing prior?
It's Alabama.
There's no such thing as a uniform swing, there will be underperformances, I'm not worried about how one special election result in Alabama affects the overall situation.
When does the University of Alabama get back from winter break? The previous Digest said that this district contains part of the University of Alabama campus, and if the district's Democratic base is therefore college students and they aren't back from break yet, that would explain the Democratic underperformance.
This is a really good point and, I'm guessing, why the election was scheduled for this week...
That was my first thought too. I wouldn't doubt if the special election was scheduled with that timing in mind, ensuring the student population would be out of town.
https://registrar.ua.edu/academiccalendar/
They got back on the 7th it seems, so that isn't the reason, although it could be that people were too busy settling into their new classes to vote
Surprising! That's a super-early start to a spring term in a U.S. college!
This last set of special elections results across the board were the worst for Democrats since before Trump got elected again. Is the GOP base awake again over the ICE murders (which they love)? Or is this an abnormal blip that’ll go back to the normal over performances we’ve been used to seeing? Only time will tell.
I’d lean thinking it’s an aberration, but definitely worth watching the special elections results in February and/or late January.
The notable exceptions came in places with college towns where students aren't back yet. I'd wait until the end of the month before freaking out.
2/4 of the results last night were outstanding for Dems, one was good, and one was poor. Not sure you can read anything into that, but to me it doesn’t look like any sort of GOP reenergized
I am interested in why a Dem underperformed Spanberger in one of the Virginia races, while in the other three races they have matched or slightly exceeded her numbers
The core dem base in the district (U Alabama) was barely in session at the time of this election. From what I've heard there was basically no mention of it.
In the South, Rs tend to be higher propensity as core dem constituencies rely heavily on lower propensity groups like rural African Americans or younger voters, while educated areas haven't shifted as left as they have in other parts of the country due to religiousity.
Sucks it happened like this, but it's why you average out specials. Also worth mentioning the 2 great overperformances in that one VA seat and that Connecticut seat.
https://floridapolitics.com/archives/773688-evan-power-to-run-for-congress-to-succeed-retiring-neal-dunn/
FL-2: As expected, state GOP chair Evan Power is running for congress.
I suspect Sens. Jay Trumbull and Corey Simon as well as Rep. Jason Shoaf in the legislature are interested, but no word yet.
AK Sen: Mary Peltola raised $1.5 million in the first 24 hours of her senate campaign, a sum greater than Sullivan raised in 3Q. https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/14/mary-peltola-alaska-fundraising-00726856
And, as posted last night, a poll taken by Alaska Survey Research last week (1/8-1/11) found Peltola leading Sullivan by 48%-46%. On favorability, the poll found Peltola was +5 while Sullivan is -11.
AOC has endorsed Peltola and is fundraising for her—something that would not have happened if Peltola hadn't sought the endorsement.
It also underscores how much things have changed since 2020, when battleground House candidates returned AOC's PAC donations to avoid being associated with her.
I was one of the people who contributed to Peltola's campaign on the first day. I am happy to see a strong Democratic candidate in the Last Frontier. She represents the best of Alaskan politics and has the authenticity that people want in political leaders. I don't expect to always agree with her positions, but she will be a hell of a lot better than the anonymous backbencher that is Dan Sullivan.
As a Californian I don't support the existence of the US House of Lords (and Ladies) in its current form that severely under-represents my home state, but until that changes I will feel free to try to influence politics in a small way in other states, especially in the West. I spent a summer in Alaska (on a student program in Wrangell-St Elias NP) and will always have an appreciation for the 49th state. Love to see the good polling too!
I also donated to her campaign on the first day and could not have better described what makes Peltola so special as a political leader. So well said. And I have also spent time in Alaska and would love to spend more.
Finally, I am also a Californian and resent that we have the same number of senators as a state with less than 2% of our population. Insane and so undemocratic. Decided long ago that donations in senate races are worth a lot more in small states so I'm much more apt to donate to races in AK, MT, etc than in my own state.
Yes, you make an excellent point about how donations are more effective in senate races in smaller states. Over the years I have given to races in those states as well as NV, NM and OR. I attended events with Jeff Merkley and Martin Heinrich when they first ran for their senate seats.
Thank you. You inspired me to give to her campaign also. It was only $20 but every little bit adds up.
And unlike the House of Lords, the Senate has actual power
Mayor Meh, I mean Greenberg, may have been involved in discussions about the nonpartisan elections law, but neither Metro Council nor we voters got a say. As a Louisvillian, I can live with it, and I can even see a small-d democratic argument for it, but I am not happy with how it was done.
I'll probably vote for Parrish-Wright, since she's the only candidate other than Greenberg who I know is a Democrat, and the only other one (aside from Republican perennial Bob DeVore) I know anything at all about. Personally, I'd like to see them finish 1-2, just to flip a metaphorical bird at the General Ass-embly.
The Glengariff Poll in the Morning Digest is unreadable, atleast to me.
Totally agree. Using commas and semi-colons to separate everything in one blob of text is not reader-friendly. I realize it's the site's style, and it works in most cases, but not this time.
Yeah, I'm not happy looking at it now in final form. Edited to try something else that I think looks better here.
*miles* better, thank you so much
Michigan Senate: "Definite Voters"
🟦 Haley Stevens: 47%
🟥 Mike Rogers: 42%
—
🟦 Mallory McMorrow: 46.2%
🟥 Mike Rogers: 42.7%
—
🟦 Abdul El-Sayed: 46.6%
🟥 Mike Rogers: 43.3%
——
"Democrats (88%) were significantly more motivated to vote than Republicans (72%)"
https://x.com/IAPolls2022/status/2011442628823585019
It also helps that the MI Democratic trifecta helped loosen and make voting much more accessible during that 2023-2024 trifecta too (esp making a permanent absentee voting list). And pre-processing ballots so there won't be any more red mirages come 2026 and 2028.
Interactive Polls. Are they by phone and online, just online or what?
InteractivePolls is the name of the account. The pollster is Glengariff Group.
I posted this last night, saw it didn't make it to Wednesday's Morning Digest: a Democrat won the Fort Pierce city commission special runoff election last night by 31 votes. His win flips the majority on the commission to Democratic control.
https://chiefswire.usatoday.com/story/news/local/st-lucie-county/2026/01/13/chris-dzadovsky-defeats-jaimebeth-galinis-in-tight-race-in-fort-pierce-treasure-coast-florida/88106496007/
https://www.wptv.com/news/region-st-lucie-county/fort-pierce/chris-dzadovsky-wins-fort-pierce-commission-seat-by-31-votes-flips-control-to-democrats
"Axios: Michigan Rep. Haley Stevens is blasting her Democratic rivals in the state's critical Senate primary, criticizing one of her opponents for supporting the Green New Deal and calling the other weak on manufacturing.
https://www.axios.com/2026/01/14/haley-stevens-michigan-senate-mcmorrow-el-sayed"
https://x.com/PollTracker2024/status/2011247087544045828
Stevens goes negative.
Is she trying to lose? Since when is the Green New Deal a Democratic attack line?
Do they really think they can win without any left votes at all?
GND has always been a centrist attack line but negative attacks this early show her desperation and possibly bad internal polling. McMorrow and AES have taken potshots at each other but mild based on policy. They should go nuclear on Stevens.
Stevens is the 3rd best Dem in that race by a wide margin.
Nah, I think Sayed is worse. He associates with extremists like Hasan Piker
I really don’t think Piker is an extremist. Unless this is about the forbidden topic.
It's about many things like that, plus him also being a dog abuser, someone who mistreats women, and someone who has shown love for Russia's government
Do you have any sources for these claims?
Also we can’t talk about Israel and Palestine, the topic is banned here.
We appear to have a set of Democrats who are determined to go with the right-wing flow as we step into this new future.
Stevens went negative on Andy Levin in the 2022 primary, so this is nothing new.
I have a feeling that Andy Levin will have the last laugh and that primary will prove to be her downfall.
Weak on manufacturing? Exactly what makes McMorrow weak on it?
This is bizarre.
Because she is an advocate for diversifying Michigan’s economy and has passed bills encouraging that.
I can see the real threat of diversifying Michigan’s economy. It’s going to take away manufacturing jobs! /s
Desperation is a stinky cologne.
No VRA case today YAY
Not sure if this was posted yet:
Alaska Senate by Alaska Survey Research
Peltola: 48
Sullivan: 46
1/8-11 | RV
Crosstabs in the link
https://x.com/i/status/2011280817281003808
Anchorage metro area: won by both Biden and Harris by 2. Won by Sullivan by 3 in 2020. Peltola up by 9.
That feels like an attainable over-performance from Peltola. Wouldn't surprise me if it wound up being even more than that when all is said and done. I'm trying not to get too excited about this race, but I am increasingly bullish on it.
I'm interested in those rural numbers, it feels like she should be winning by a lot more (look at her margins in the Alaska Bush), maybe they are counting the Kenai Peninsula as rural as opposed to Southcentral
It can't be easy to get a poll of remote parts of Alaska...
Chuck Schumer:
Peltola “was the last piece to the puzzle"
He says Dem path to Senate is Ohio, Alaska, Maine and NC. Democrats are watching Texas and Iowa
Hopefully he's working Laura Kelly behind the scenes to change her mind. There's not much benefit to jumping in the race early for her. Her announcing on filing day would be enough to catch Republicans by surprise.
Nah, run Davids instead. You can get all those upsides while also having someone who has run for congress multiple times and is also much younger
Agreed. Running someone who has already won statewide seems like the easiest path (and it could be good with Kelly) but sometimes it doesn't work out. A fresher candidate is best. I'd be fine with either, personally.
Not sure I agree. Firstly, I think Kelly is probably a better statewide candidate than Davids. Secondly, Davids has shown an ability to hold down her house seat - hate to give that up.
It's arguable but Kelly has shown that she doesn't want to run at all.
Also, it's a house seat Kamala won, Dems can easily hold it. Also axing a house seat to potentially gain a senate seat is always worth the trade off.
All fair points
Not always, but usually if it's a realistic opportunity.
I differ from Schumer
I say the path to the Senate means winning as many Senate seats as humanly possible.
It's more like he has 4 seats in particular he wants to focus on
Sara Gideon, the Democratic nominee who challenged Senator Susan Collins in 2020, has contributed $4,000 from her former campaign committee to Gov. Janet Mills' 2026 U.S. Senate bid.
Gideon's PAC reported approximately $3.3 million in cash on hand as of Sep. 2025.
In other news, a fork was found in a kitchen.
How is this productive? Many people here love any semblance of pro-Platner news. This is just as relevant to the Maine primary as any of that.
I'm cynical about both candidates in this primary and disappointed by national Democrats continuing to perpetuate people like Mills and Gideon into the spotlight only to lose. And I'm prone to sarcasm.
I'm failing to see the similarities between Mills and Gideon aside from their gender. One has won statewide twice, has deep Maine roots, and is from the rural part of the state. The other did not have any of that.
Mills is vulnerable on the age front and some of her decisions as governor. My frustration is people not being intellectually honest about Platner's weaknesses in this primary while being quick to diss Mills.
They're both establishment friendly, legacy neoliberal career politicians.
Hmm. I don't see that same criticism launched at other forty year politicians like Roy Cooper or Bernie Sanders. "Neoliberal" has lost all meaning.
She's also vulnerable on "won't kill the filibuster front" and the "Won't attack Collins" front.
The filibuster point is true. I hope she changes her mind on it. But she is absolutely attacking Collins. Pretty savagely on social media. It's disingenuous or misinformed to say she's not.
Platner has never polled behind Mills in all 4 general election polls against Collins done till now. And his scandals are very well known.
The similarity is that Mills and Gideon are both establishment moderate Democrats picked by the DSCC.
You are not being honest about Platner by comparing him to Crockett and calling it sexism. Crockett is running in R+13 state which is fundamentally different than Maine and Platner hasn't trailed in general election polls like El-Sayed. He's been polling a bit better than Mills despite all of scandals getting dished every day on newspapers. If Crockett was running in Maine, I would support her over both of them.
I probably would, too, because the only thing that's controversial about her is some remarks about politicians and the fact that she says exactly what she means and doesn't temper it. She has no personal controversies as far as I think anyone knows.
It's fine to be cynical or disappointed about national Dems promoting people like Mills and Gideon (though Mills hasn't lost--yet.) But it's also fine to criticise the personality cultism that many have developed around Platner--and, in another Senate race, Jasmine Crockett who is probably a much likelier loser than any Maine Democrat.
And if Mills and other choices by national Democratic committees are dull or not "inspiring", well, so what? I can't be the only one who is sick of politics and government having to be entertainment. And if you won't vote for someone because they didn't sufficiently excite or "inspire" you, then it's you that's really the problem, not the candidate.
So if Mills loses by not being exciting, are we going to do a Hillary Clinton and blame the voters again?
Of course. They're the problem. I think that part of the issue is that the Democratic Party hasn't realized that politics IS entertainment now. Whether we like it or not. Dems have had better policies, platforms and ideas for the last 30 years and yet we keep falling behind further and further behind the 8-Ball that may be impossible to come out from at this juncture without massive reforms that only politics of personality might be able to back.
And if Platner loses because *shocker* it turns out people don’t want to vote for someone who knowingly had a Nazi tattoo on his chest for years, what will the answer be?
Let me make myself clear. We are all on the same side. I am not picking and choosing who to support. I have and will repeatedly say that in this race, I don't currently support a candidate. Janet Mills is part of the establishment. She is boring. The same goes for many other leading Senate candidates that happen to be men. I don't support Graham Platner and hope he either bows out of the race or loses horribly. Like you all, I'd like to see someone other than Susan Collins hold this seat next year.
This thread started because of a sarcastic comment I made regarding how milquetoast candidates like Mills and Gideon are. Not because I value them less because they are women.
I'm not excusing the controversy of any other candidate by criticizing one in particular.
I appreciate the clarification. I wanted to press after all the pro-Platner stuff that's been pushed in the comments in recent days.
Justice Democrats backs Claire Valdez for the open Ny-7:
https://x.com/justicedems/status/2011430931807007095
The coalitions are interesting:
It's Democratic socialists, Justice Dems, Mamdani and organized labor vs New York's non-DSA progressives, Velazquez and Hasidim.
Virginia Democrats plan to release proposed new congressional maps by January 30.
Ugh. I don't see much upside to this unless they say something like "we'll choose among these three"
Giving people something tangible to support instead of an abstract plan seems like the correct strategy.