Small correction on the polling section: Darline Graham spells her name with an I, not an E, apparently being taught to do so by her late brother Lindsey.
What I've read about Hong, she's not a member of DSA and doesn't identify with them, but supports a majority of the same policy positions. The difference in the distinction, I suppose, is in which ones she differs with them on. And to what degree.
I think her biggest problem is her past support for abolishing the police. I remember how much ‘defund the police’ cost Dems a few House seats in 2020 so we know how salient it is with voters.
I wonder how much of that was active proximity to the very widely publicized riots in 2020 or the crime spike in 2021-early 2022. Neither of those have much purchase in the national zeitgeist now
Still bad policy on the merits and as an electoral effort, but I wonder how different that lands now vs six years ago when it was very clearly utter deadweight
She’s also made it clear in the here and now that she doesn’t support that policy anymore. Doesn’t mean it won’t hurt her or be used as a cudgel but not actively supporting it might soften the blow ever so slightly
Really it’ll all come down to whether or not she can keep voters focused on her economic populism, especially in regards to her anti-data center policy. At a time where crime is falling to record lows, and right off the heels of a police shooting in Madison, whinging endlessly about a position Hong isn’t actively campaigning on might not be as salient as one would think (in that RMG push poll linked in the article, only 3% of voters said crime was their top/primary issue - but it could definitely be that low simply because the poll seemed to be hyper focused on economic/tax issues and thus tried to direct respondents towards that).
But I’m also less confident about Hong in a swing state as I am with a candidate in the likes of AES. Frankly if it weren’t for her past positions on policing it’d be over before the cows sing. I say that as someone with a less favorable view of policing in the US - being critical of the police as an institution rather than just the bad apples is unpopular and is probably one of the few wedge issues that could help a Republican win in this environment. I think police reform is very necessary but progressives have got to be extremely careful with their messaging there. And as someone who *used to* share the policy of “abolishing the police”… do NOT, under any circumstances, run for office with that as a policy plank. Better to have that be an unfortunate byproduct of getting into politics as a teenager in early 2020 than something officially on your record.
I think people still have a hangover from the early 2020s crime wave and probably still think crime is at an all-time high. I don't think her message will be any less problematic for voters now than it would have been four years ago.
I do think the circumstances are different, though. Walker was an incumbent and even unpopular incumbents tend to get a bit of a boost unless their numbers are devastatingly shit. 2018 was also, as of what we know now, less blue than what 2026 is shaping up to be. So she’s definitely polling weaker than she should be, but we’re not currently staring down the barrel of a horrific loss, not even close. The race was always going to be close given how weak the field was, but while Hong appears to be the weakest of the bunch as of yet, the fact she was able to actually gain traction in the primary without imploding like almost every other opponent makes me feel a bit more confident about her. Winning the primary doesn’t always make you the strongest candidate or best suited for the general election, but it’s also not meaningless.
Wisconsin is always a state where there is no room for error on both sides. Tiffany isn't the best GOP candidate either so that combined with the wave could save us.
Voters can forgive taking a bad position and “seeing the light” not all but some. I think her anti data center messaging will help a lot especially in rural areas.
I don’t know if it was during the debate but I think she claimed something to the effect of not being a member of the *National* DSA or endorsed by them, making an attempt to distance herself from them after the leader of the NDSA went on Fox News and said the DSA, as an organization, supports a whole slew of pretty unpopular policies, atleast for swing state voters
I decided to look up what quote might be causing the confusion:
'“I do not support the full platform of the national DSA, and I am not endorsed by DSA national. What democratic socialism is is a form of government that puts working-class people first,” she said, before she reiterated her support for stronger public education funding, taxing the rich and investing in universal childcare and affordable housing.'
Other than that I don't think she's claimed to not be a member of the DSA
Thanks. I wonder what she differs with them on. (And, of course, as a socialist, I agree with her take on socialism, but that's kind of beside the point.)
'Fox News host Shannon Bream asked Romer whether DSA supports policies including eliminating the Senate, replacing the president and Supreme Court “as we now know them,” abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), abolishing borders, giving amnesty to anyone in the United States illegally, defunding the Pentagon, abolishing prisons and public ownership of most large corporations.'
I think Hong has explicitly gone against eliminating the Senate and abolishing prisons (even though she supported both in the past). And outside of abolishing ICE I'd wager she would go on record opposing the rest of what Romer claims DSA members support, if only for electability purposes.
As a socialist myself, and one with a leftist tinge among here (I somewhat straddle the line between social democracy and full blown, workers own the business socialism), I would personally say I agree with most of the things listed (some more in spirit - I'd phrase it as a "path to citizenship" rather than amnesty, and I don't really know what "replacing the president and supreme court" is supposed to mean as opposed to extensive reforms to prevent the abuse of power we're seeing from happening again), aside from abolishing borders and prisons, of course. But if I were running for office, particularly in a swing district, these are all of the policies I'd run far away from because they're some of the least popular "Democratic Socialist" policies one can push for (aside from abolishing ICE which has picked up momentum and support since Trump took office). Hong's judgement in the past can be criticized but I do think it's good that she understands it's necessary to back away and distance herself from some of the more fringe beliefs. I'd be more worried if she was a DAC type, who can't even commit to supporting Ukraine without inserting a "but...." like Tulsi Gabbard before she jumped off the deep end
She's a member of the Madison DSA, which is controlled by the DSA Right (reformist socialists) rather than the national DSA, where hardline socialists currently hold a majority.
DSA chapters in New York, Los Angeles, DC, Madison, Maine and Detroit are reformist, while chapters in smaller places, such as Rhode Island, are controlled by hardliners, ultras, or the DSA Left.
The reformists currently do not support defunding the police or the Department of Defense, and they support running as Democrats and working within the Democratic Party.
Anxiously waiting for that next Sienna poll in reference to the NY Governor race - tired of seeing these R aligned polls all over the media. Interestingly enough, back in 2022 when Zeldin was running there were signs for him ALL OVER the island here, and now I have yet to see even one for Blakeman, perhaps it’s too early?
I'm perfectly happy with polls showing Blakeman in striking distance. He's gonna get creamed regardless and maybe this will push the RGA to spend some $ in New York.
Last night I wondered, if the Fox Texas poll were accurate, which candidates are positioned to ride an in-state wave. Bobby Pulido and Johnny Garcia have outraised the De la Cruz siblings, and it seems they are taking their races seriously. I wonder about Katy Padilla Stout in TX-23, since I don’t think she should be getting outraised by a Neo-Nazi. Hopefully our AG and LG candidates get more attention too with the outsized power those offices have in the state.
I think if Talarico wins and takes a majority by more than a point, every newly gerrymandered district + district 23 goes for the Dems. All of these districts had a higher count of Democratic voters than Republican voters in their primaries, so there’s clearly momentum there
I’ll have to read more about Stout and see if there’s anything her campaign is doing poorly, but I also think you could chalk it up to the race being of increased attention after everything that happened with Gonzalez and the… way his replacement is, and thus the GOP investing heavily in it because of the weakness of their candidate, and how bad it would look if this heavy Republican district starts to look competitive.
I guess it depends on how much worse Hinojosa and other Dems statewide perform compared to Talarico. If the rest of statewide Dems lose but maybe run 2-3 points Behind Talarico, assuming he's as close to 50-50 while still winning, I think all of those seats are flippable. But if Talarico's victory is more of an anomaly and statewide Dems come in more than 5 points behind him, the seats might be just out of reach. I specify the two because an anomalous win rarely, if ever, translates to *significant* downballot coattails. For example, Josh Stein won by a landslide in 2024 and won all but one of North Carolina's congressional districts, but as we know, Democrats didn't actually win 13 congressional districts in that state alone. But if Kamala and other Democrats had also won the state by such a large margin, or even just a few points less, we likely would've won many more of those districts. The same applies for Texas, I feel, especially if the candidates contesting these districts are credible and strong in their own right.
The primary vote has zero relationship to the general election vote. You would be better off using chicken entrails to predict general election voting patterns. This is especially true where there are ancestral voters and one party dominates at the local level. (E.g., by primary vote, Kentucky Dems should have one 2-1 in 2010).
That said, these voters were putting up decent numbers for Biden, so its clear that some have at least been willing to vote for Dems.
Yes but you also have to consider the political environment in which it takes place and how that effects the way independents vote. 2010 was a red wave so it makes sense why primary turnout didn't extrapolate to the general election. Same reason why the last time Dems had higher primary turnout in Texas didn't lead to a win - it was a better year for Republicans.
But now, we're looking at a great year for Democrats, and the primary turnout shows that Democrats are very motivated to get out there and vote. Even if more Republicans turn out on election day than Dems, the fact is we have a very good floor to work with, meaning Talarico has a lot more wiggle-room in terms of how many undecided/independent voters he needs to win (especially given who his opponent is).
I'm pretty bullish on Padilla Stout. Herrera is unbelievably toxic (disqualifyingly so but he's a Republican and they don't care) and in a Dem-friendly environment with strong top-of-the-ballot candidates, I think she can pull off a win. Plus, more votes were cast in the Dem primary versus the Rep primary, for what it's worth
We really need to take advantage of the wave and steal a bunch of Trump +5-15 districts. Most of them will be one term wonders but a few will survive longer and those candidates will be strong statewide candidates.
Mike Johnson was in Texas yesterday raising funds for Brandon Herrera, the "AK Guy" who manufactures guns and jokes about veteran suicides and the Holocaust. The DCCC should add TX-23 to its red to blue list; Katy Padilla Stout is in every respect superior to the 2nd Amendment nut.
Probably not honestly. Herrera *just* missed Gonzalez by a tiny margin in 2024 and had finished ahead of Gonzalez in the first primary. Paxton's victory in the runoff probably carries Herrera with him
Oh, definitely. Were it not for the Gonzalez scandal, there would have been a lot more talk about how insane Republicans were to dump him for Herrera. Instead, the latter just slides in as the de facto nominee, no chance for a more normal Republican to oppose him.
TX-09 is another district to keep an eye on. The Democratic candidate hasn't done well with fundraising, but it's an open seat in a new district, and the Republican (Mealer) is somewhat known for being more conservative. And in a wave, money might not matter much.
It's worth recalling that in 2018, a lot of suburban/exurban districts in Texas that weren't being seriously contested got shockingly close to flipping to Democrats, simply because Beto's campaign brought people out. TX-24 comes to mind in that regard, where the Dem candidate raised basically nothing but came within 3% of flipping the seat.
District 9 is one of the gerrymandered districts that goes from "Safe R" to a Lean R at best when you look at how it would've performed in non-2024 elections. It's definitely worth looking at
Not to worry; Politico—promptly repackaged and amplified by Politicalwire—might arrive to assure us breathlessly that women have been known to wield similar influence.
Sexually abusing women or using their positions of power to coerce women into sex. At the very least stop running for office if you know you've used your position to coerce women into sex or committed sexual abuse.
I have a theory that the reason politics has so many sex pests is because it is a magnet for sociopaths and psychopath who don't believe that rules apply to them.
That's logical, but it could also be the case that they are represented in the same percentage in other walks of life but have more scope for abuse when they have more power.
I find it funny that Fox buried the lede on Abbott only tracking a point ahead of Hinojosa in their article mentioning Talarico polling ahead of Paxton.
Apparently, she's been running a good campaign focused on affordability and data centers but her fundraising is nowhere near Abbott or Talarico. She's being advised by Morris Katz.
FWIW, this breakdown among Black voters lines up much more closely with what I've been hearing from community organizers in Detroit.
Stevens isn't Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden, both of whom spent years building deep relationships with Black elected officials and community leaders. At the same time, Abdul El-Sayed isn't Bernie Sanders. He's spent years leading the health departments in Detroit and Wayne County, showing up consistently and building trust with Black communities and local leaders.
Most younger Black voters also know that Obama hasn't endorsed Stevens and that AIPAC is funding those "If Obama trusts Haley Stevens, so should Michigan and you" ads implying that.
El-Sayed also appears much more comfortable campaigning in Black churches than Bernie ever did. Black voters are not simply ideologically "moderate" —they tend to place a high value on trust, familiarity, and long-term relationships, and those factors often matter more than ideology alone.
That has nothing to do with his general election viability.
It seems like a lot of Dem voters are in the mood to put up protest/anger type candidates in races that don't have an obvious frontrunner (e.g. Ohio, Alaska, NC Senate races). Platner was the most pure anger candidate of the cycle, and he easily beat the sitting governor in the primary before he imploded. El-Sayed is clearly the anger candidate in this race, and he seems headed for an easy win this year even though he got buried in the governor primary in 2018. Hong doesn't seem to come across as angry, but she's a pure protest candidate. The one exception to that was Texas where Talarico beat Crockett, but even there Crockett did better than I thought she would.
Disagree with this comment but particularly, there wasn't much of any ideological or “fighter” difference between Talarico and Crockett. The usual progressive coalition of young voters, men and Latinos backed him and so did electability focused voters as the “establishment” candidate in the race, Colin Allred, dropped out.
The anger/protest distinction has nothing to do with ideology. It's all about attitude. Crockett is much more of a firebrand than Talarico is, just like Platner is more aggressive than Mills and El-Sayed more aggressive than Stevens.
Side note, whenever I see polls like this where the crosstabs reveal something like 13% of "progressive socialists" backing Stevens, I *really* want to get to know the people who chose that. It makes me so curious.
Totally agreed. Not backing Democrats in general elections just because you differ from them somewhat on ideology is inexcusable. Only if they are guilty of true moral turpitude is it understandable not to back them.
Yep. This year has given two cases of where I can clearly break from "Vote Blue no matter Who", and they're both out of the race now (Platner and Galindo). Every other contentious race, I would get behind the winner and drop all my primary election reservations.
Apparently Hillary Scholten made a big fuss about how she won't stand by Abdul El-Sayed if he wins because... drumroll please... he appeared on Hasan Piker's stream.
I'd really, *REALLY* like to see a poll of how many voters, both El-Sayed voters and Stevens voters, are basing their votes based off a streamer.
She doesn't even have to like him or endorse him, but I just know that if Rashida Tlaib or AOC made a fuss about not backing Stevens, we'd never hear the end of it.
This election cycle seems to really be putting "vote blue no matter who" to the test, especially in swingy/less blue districts. If I lived in Michigan, I know I'd vote for Stevens - and that's despite the fact that she's quickly becoming one of my least favorite (non-Fetterman or Sinema) Democrats, because the worst Democrat is always better than the best Republican
First off, Scholten needs to knock it off. If AES wins she needs to be behind him. I’m still annoyed at Rashida Tlaib for not endorsing Kamala Harris, but at least she was quiet about it. If AES wins, Scholten needs to at least stop attacking him, and really should endorse him.
That said, it is a little worse than AES just going on Piker’s stream (which I have no problem with, candidates should go everywhere and talk to everyone with only the most extreme cases being exceptions) because El-Sayed has also brought Piker to Michigan to campaign with him. Piker has made some questionable statements, the one that bothers me most is his openly praising the Houthis, a group that literally has the phrase ‘a Curse on the Jews’ in its slogan. (They include the phrase ‘Death to Israel’ separately, so really going out of their way to clarify that they are anti-Zionist AND anti-Semitic). I don’t even necessarily believe that Piker is an anti-Semite, but he’s the type of ideologue who will sympathize with anyone who has the right enemies, which both explains his positive statements about some pretty hateful armed groups in the Middle East and his eagerness to deny the Uyghur Genocide in China and praise the CCP. So I do wish candidates would just stick to going on Piker’s show and stop bringing him out to their events. I think that campaigning beside him is very valid grounds for criticism.
I’m really glad I don’t live in Michigan, cause honestly I’d still probably be voting for El-Sayed over Stevens!
I don't know what Piker not being an antisemite would mean. You mean you're not sure if he personally hates Jews, at the same time that he supports an organization that is openly hateful toward Jews yet denies that China is committing genocidal acts against a Muslim people? I don't think we need to look into people's hearts to determine what they are if we know what they do and say.
Yes your read of my comment is pretty much accurate. I don’t know if he personally hates Jews or if it can be better explained by his manichaen view of the world, combined with the fact that he’s kind of an idiot and that he knows he gets views by being radical.
I tend to consider intent, action, and impact when evaluating people, so to me what he truly believes is salient. But I totally understand why many people feel that intent is kind of impossible to gauge and shouldn’t be a major consideration. And of course one does not need to be a bigot to stoke bigotry.
live in NJ-12, where our longtime congresswoman retired and the nominee for the seat, Adam Hamawy, brought in Piker to campaign for him in the final stretch of the primary campaign. That made me really uncomfortable. I’m going to vote for our nominee, but it really nags at me and worries me that he thought Piker was a good choice for a surrogate for his campaign. As a Jew, it makes me question whether my next congressman will be really committed to representing me or will take the concerns of people like me seriously. I go back and forth about whether I’m doing too much guilt by association here (judging a candidate who appeared with someone who praised an anti-Semitic group) but this would all be a lot easier if democratic candidates would just stop bringing Hasan Piker out to campaign with them!
Right? I mean, are we fighting a fascist takeover of our democracy or not?
If Dems are going to wring their hands about supporting AES or Hong, they shouldn't expect anyone to take them seriously when they talk about the rot in the Republican party. If the GOP is as bad as they say (which I think they are), supporting AES/Hong/whoever is a no-brainer. If a candidate that mild crosses some line for you, then you don't actually think this is an existential fight.
Anyway, I agree. Anyone withholding their support aren't taking the threat seriously enough, and aren't going to fight hard enough. Let someone who understands what's at stake do the job.
It makes sense to go into the lion's den and speak directly to the brainwashed viewers herself instead of letting hacks like Hannity or Ingraham paint her as this "scary socialist immigrant that wants to defund the police."
Buttigieg did it before, during, and after the Biden administration. But he's a much better speaker than Hong is.
The general rule of thumb is that it's a smart, brave thing to do when it's a Democrat we like, and a stupid, craven betrayal when it's a Democrat we don't.
I think it's more so that it's good when they go on and push back against Fox News BS ala Buttigieg vs. Fetterman who goes on and bobblehead dolls his way through interviews.
Thank you. I kind of agree with Tigercourse. She sounded sort of sleepy or something to me. Why is she leading by so much in the primaries? The other Democratic candidates are that bad?
Yeah this is a huge indictment on Wisconsin Dems that they couldn't get a regular center-left candidate with an ounce of charisma and no background scandals who could lead the field. Hong's delivery is like that of an AI bot.
The Lt. Gov raised no money and her finance officer lied to her about how much she had.
The former Lt Gov who ran a credible Senste race before was way behind the whole time.
Neither of them had the sense go get behind banning data centers.
Hong is not particularly charismatic. But she presents as the clearest fighter for working people, and her policy positions on the most salient issues are more popular with Dem primary voters.
People are mad as hell. And in a lot of places are not voting for milktoast any more. Especially in open races.
Just FYI, it’s actually spelled ‘milquetoast’. The word comes from the name of a bland and meek character in a 1920s comic strip. His name was intended to invoke the words milk and toast, since those are both bland and boring things. But for whatever reason the version of the word that’s used is spelled with the q. I spelled it incorrectly for a long time till someone pointed it out to me. But, if you want to keep spelling it milktoast then I will applaud you for being a linguistic maverick!
Split Ticket has updated their projections for the 2026 midterms, which have gone bluer in the last week or two.
88% chance of Democrats flipping the House
53% chance of Democrats flipping the Senate
They have upgraded OH-SEN to Lean Democratic and TX-SEN to Toss-Up (giving Talarico a 55% chance of flipping the seat). They have gradually increased IA-SEN and FL-SEN's chances even though they see those as an R-hold.
I don't have much hope for Florida, especially after Trump's gambits in Venezuela and Cuba and the increased attention being paid to democratic socialism. However, I think Iowa is being seriously underestimated.
Turek is a strong recruit by Schumer with no political baggage, a solid background, and the potential to win over Obama-Trump voters. Hinson is also not the electoral powerhouse many claim she is; according to Split Ticket's WAR metrics, her electoral performances have been fairly middling.
On top of that, Iowa Republicans and Trump are facing weak approval ratings amid a series of state-level crises and a sluggish localized economy.
The problem with Florida is that it's just so damn expensive, and because of their demographics, really wonky, politically. I wouldn't be shocked if Florida is one of the few states in the country where Trump's approvals have increased - well, maybe that's an overstatement, but I don't think Trump's unpopularity will help us there as much as it will in other states.
We have strong candidates there, yes, but the fact is we have a real path to a senate majority without Florida. If investing there means siphoning money away from Maine, Ohio, Alaska, Texas etc, it's not really worth it.
ME-Sen: Unlike the one I posted yesterday, this Troy Jackson scandal has some substance to it. His partner Lena Pelletier, who he has two kids with, is his second cousin. However, this is apparently common in rural areas like northern Maine.
The NY Post is not my only source. Bangor Daily News and obituary sources for a mutual relative have confirmed this.
Despite not being legally married, Jackson has referred to Pelletier as his wife.
Probably more common than we realize since back in the day an Italian-American Catholic marrying, say, a Polish-American Catholic was considered a mixed marriage.
FDR and Eleanor were more distantly related, but I agree that second cousins are a distant enough relationship that most people don't consider it incest.
PA-7: Green Party nominee Andrew Tupone is being accused of being planted by Republican Rep. Ryan Mackenzie so he splits the progressive vote from Democrat Bob Brooks.
A former Republican, Tupone ran for a local judgeship as one in Northampton County. But he denies he is a Republican plant.
One good thing that has come from the left having some success gaining a foothold in the Democratic Party is that the Green Party has become unambiguously an absolute joke and almost completely a non-factor as even a spoiler party.
I remember Rick Santorum's campaign doing something similar in 2006 when I still live in Pennsylvania. Most of the signatures for the Green Party candidate in the 2006 U.S. Senate race came from Republicans and Santorum's staffers and Bob Casey's campaign called out Santorum's rat fuckery and I believed challenged the legitimacy of the signatures.
Green= Getting Republicans elected every November. Sometimes its hard to see the difference between the cranks who run for office over and over and keep changing parties and the plants.
Madison County, IL: Madison County Board Chair Chris Slusser (R) is in very hot water over his Facebook comment suggesting Dr. Anthony Fauci be subjected to "public hanging", facing calls for his resignation.
Slusser, of course, doubled down on his excuses by calling his comment "rhetorical hyperbole.”
He should resign in the wake of this.
His office is next up in 2028, and unlike in 2024, the Democrats won't be leaving it uncontested.
I'm currently spending time with MAGA family, albeit overseas, and I'm hearing very similar rhetoric. This is a widespread view. They believe he is a traitor.
Yes. For example, Toni Preckwinkle is the equivalent in populous Cook County.
It's usually executive in most states, some states don't have one, and then you have county judges in Texas, county CEOs in Georgia, and county mayors in Florida.
MN-Sen/St. Paul, MN Mayor - St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her, one of Angie Craig's most notable supporters, is facing two sexual harassment allegations:
"A second high-ranking St. Paul police officer has claimed that St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her created a sexualized work environment, alleging the mayor commented on her breasts and made vulgar noises in the police gym.
The accusations were lodged as part of the ongoing inquiry by an outside law firm into Her’s conduct after St. Paul Police Chief Axel Henry came forward on behalf of himself and other city employees earlier this year.
In a letter to the St. Paul City Attorney’s Office, Henry alleged that Her’s inappropriate behavior “extended beyond isolated incidents.”"
First Eva Lopez Chavez pulled her crazy behavior towards fellow politicians in local and state government. Now this with St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her really takes the cake.
Does Mayor Her think she's above the police department and immune to any scrutiny from them?
Never have I ever thought messing with the police would be a good idea. Good heavens.
Small correction on the polling section: Darline Graham spells her name with an I, not an E, apparently being taught to do so by her late brother Lindsey.
That is so odd, lol. Her birth name is Darlene but she goes by a misspelling because of her brother?
Yep. Immediately dropped her husband's name Nordone as soon as she came into the national spotlight too.
Maybe I just have a bleeding heart but I honestly think it’s kind of sweet, given that Lindsay basically raised her
She and her brother were and are still reprehensible humans, though. But if you dig through trash you’re bound to find something kind of neat
It *is* very sweet. It's just also odd lol.
Thank you!
What I've read about Hong, she's not a member of DSA and doesn't identify with them, but supports a majority of the same policy positions. The difference in the distinction, I suppose, is in which ones she differs with them on. And to what degree.
I think her biggest problem is her past support for abolishing the police. I remember how much ‘defund the police’ cost Dems a few House seats in 2020 so we know how salient it is with voters.
I wonder how much of that was active proximity to the very widely publicized riots in 2020 or the crime spike in 2021-early 2022. Neither of those have much purchase in the national zeitgeist now
Still bad policy on the merits and as an electoral effort, but I wonder how different that lands now vs six years ago when it was very clearly utter deadweight
She’s also made it clear in the here and now that she doesn’t support that policy anymore. Doesn’t mean it won’t hurt her or be used as a cudgel but not actively supporting it might soften the blow ever so slightly
Really it’ll all come down to whether or not she can keep voters focused on her economic populism, especially in regards to her anti-data center policy. At a time where crime is falling to record lows, and right off the heels of a police shooting in Madison, whinging endlessly about a position Hong isn’t actively campaigning on might not be as salient as one would think (in that RMG push poll linked in the article, only 3% of voters said crime was their top/primary issue - but it could definitely be that low simply because the poll seemed to be hyper focused on economic/tax issues and thus tried to direct respondents towards that).
But I’m also less confident about Hong in a swing state as I am with a candidate in the likes of AES. Frankly if it weren’t for her past positions on policing it’d be over before the cows sing. I say that as someone with a less favorable view of policing in the US - being critical of the police as an institution rather than just the bad apples is unpopular and is probably one of the few wedge issues that could help a Republican win in this environment. I think police reform is very necessary but progressives have got to be extremely careful with their messaging there. And as someone who *used to* share the policy of “abolishing the police”… do NOT, under any circumstances, run for office with that as a policy plank. Better to have that be an unfortunate byproduct of getting into politics as a teenager in early 2020 than something officially on your record.
Good post, but funny idea about cows singing. MOOOOO! :-)
I believe she reiterated it today
I think people still have a hangover from the early 2020s crime wave and probably still think crime is at an all-time high. I don't think her message will be any less problematic for voters now than it would have been four years ago.
That is from 5 years ago, though. And she has already disavowed it.
I mean, the GOP will try to make some hay there no doubt. But I question how salient that will be with most voters.
If she is not really DSA in actuality, that is a boon. And I see a poll with her up 1 on Tiffany. Hardly unwinnable. Though I get the skepticism.
Hell, Evers had an election about that close when he ousted Walker in 2018. And he wasn't even a progressive.
I do think the circumstances are different, though. Walker was an incumbent and even unpopular incumbents tend to get a bit of a boost unless their numbers are devastatingly shit. 2018 was also, as of what we know now, less blue than what 2026 is shaping up to be. So she’s definitely polling weaker than she should be, but we’re not currently staring down the barrel of a horrific loss, not even close. The race was always going to be close given how weak the field was, but while Hong appears to be the weakest of the bunch as of yet, the fact she was able to actually gain traction in the primary without imploding like almost every other opponent makes me feel a bit more confident about her. Winning the primary doesn’t always make you the strongest candidate or best suited for the general election, but it’s also not meaningless.
It really can be meaningless for a candidate's general election prospects, and we all know that.
Wisconsin is always a state where there is no room for error on both sides. Tiffany isn't the best GOP candidate either so that combined with the wave could save us.
Publicly changing positions out of political convenience rarely lessens the blow of having a toxic political position in the first place.
I don't know about that. It seems to me, it often does.
Voters can forgive taking a bad position and “seeing the light” not all but some. I think her anti data center messaging will help a lot especially in rural areas.
Police and prisons.
Hmm, her wiki page still states she IS a member of DSA. I think in the debate, she claimed not to be an ACTIVE member.
I don’t know if it was during the debate but I think she claimed something to the effect of not being a member of the *National* DSA or endorsed by them, making an attempt to distance herself from them after the leader of the NDSA went on Fox News and said the DSA, as an organization, supports a whole slew of pretty unpopular policies, atleast for swing state voters
They said the Wisconsin DSA supports positions the national DSA opposes?
I decided to look up what quote might be causing the confusion:
'“I do not support the full platform of the national DSA, and I am not endorsed by DSA national. What democratic socialism is is a form of government that puts working-class people first,” she said, before she reiterated her support for stronger public education funding, taxing the rich and investing in universal childcare and affordable housing.'
Other than that I don't think she's claimed to not be a member of the DSA
Thanks. I wonder what she differs with them on. (And, of course, as a socialist, I agree with her take on socialism, but that's kind of beside the point.)
Here's what the DSA co-chair endorsed:
'Fox News host Shannon Bream asked Romer whether DSA supports policies including eliminating the Senate, replacing the president and Supreme Court “as we now know them,” abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), abolishing borders, giving amnesty to anyone in the United States illegally, defunding the Pentagon, abolishing prisons and public ownership of most large corporations.'
I think Hong has explicitly gone against eliminating the Senate and abolishing prisons (even though she supported both in the past). And outside of abolishing ICE I'd wager she would go on record opposing the rest of what Romer claims DSA members support, if only for electability purposes.
As a socialist myself, and one with a leftist tinge among here (I somewhat straddle the line between social democracy and full blown, workers own the business socialism), I would personally say I agree with most of the things listed (some more in spirit - I'd phrase it as a "path to citizenship" rather than amnesty, and I don't really know what "replacing the president and supreme court" is supposed to mean as opposed to extensive reforms to prevent the abuse of power we're seeing from happening again), aside from abolishing borders and prisons, of course. But if I were running for office, particularly in a swing district, these are all of the policies I'd run far away from because they're some of the least popular "Democratic Socialist" policies one can push for (aside from abolishing ICE which has picked up momentum and support since Trump took office). Hong's judgement in the past can be criticized but I do think it's good that she understands it's necessary to back away and distance herself from some of the more fringe beliefs. I'd be more worried if she was a DAC type, who can't even commit to supporting Ukraine without inserting a "but...." like Tulsi Gabbard before she jumped off the deep end
She's a member of the Madison DSA, which is controlled by the DSA Right (reformist socialists) rather than the national DSA, where hardline socialists currently hold a majority.
DSA chapters in New York, Los Angeles, DC, Madison, Maine and Detroit are reformist, while chapters in smaller places, such as Rhode Island, are controlled by hardliners, ultras, or the DSA Left.
The reformists currently do not support defunding the police or the Department of Defense, and they support running as Democrats and working within the Democratic Party.
So we have different levels of DSA Orthodoxy.
A distinction without a difference for swing voters
Dunno about that. Do you think if Mamdani still supported defunding the police, he would have won, anyway?
The Wisconsin governor's race is like a bad soap opera. I'd like a word with the scriptwriters.
This isn’t our fault, even we’re tired of all the twists and turns 😝
Anxiously waiting for that next Sienna poll in reference to the NY Governor race - tired of seeing these R aligned polls all over the media. Interestingly enough, back in 2022 when Zeldin was running there were signs for him ALL OVER the island here, and now I have yet to see even one for Blakeman, perhaps it’s too early?
I'm perfectly happy with polls showing Blakeman in striking distance. He's gonna get creamed regardless and maybe this will push the RGA to spend some $ in New York.
Last night I wondered, if the Fox Texas poll were accurate, which candidates are positioned to ride an in-state wave. Bobby Pulido and Johnny Garcia have outraised the De la Cruz siblings, and it seems they are taking their races seriously. I wonder about Katy Padilla Stout in TX-23, since I don’t think she should be getting outraised by a Neo-Nazi. Hopefully our AG and LG candidates get more attention too with the outsized power those offices have in the state.
I think if Talarico wins and takes a majority by more than a point, every newly gerrymandered district + district 23 goes for the Dems. All of these districts had a higher count of Democratic voters than Republican voters in their primaries, so there’s clearly momentum there
I’ll have to read more about Stout and see if there’s anything her campaign is doing poorly, but I also think you could chalk it up to the race being of increased attention after everything that happened with Gonzalez and the… way his replacement is, and thus the GOP investing heavily in it because of the weakness of their candidate, and how bad it would look if this heavy Republican district starts to look competitive.
I think Talarico himself would win all those districts. It’s a matter of how far behind the House candidates run after him.
I guess it depends on how much worse Hinojosa and other Dems statewide perform compared to Talarico. If the rest of statewide Dems lose but maybe run 2-3 points Behind Talarico, assuming he's as close to 50-50 while still winning, I think all of those seats are flippable. But if Talarico's victory is more of an anomaly and statewide Dems come in more than 5 points behind him, the seats might be just out of reach. I specify the two because an anomalous win rarely, if ever, translates to *significant* downballot coattails. For example, Josh Stein won by a landslide in 2024 and won all but one of North Carolina's congressional districts, but as we know, Democrats didn't actually win 13 congressional districts in that state alone. But if Kamala and other Democrats had also won the state by such a large margin, or even just a few points less, we likely would've won many more of those districts. The same applies for Texas, I feel, especially if the candidates contesting these districts are credible and strong in their own right.
The primary vote has zero relationship to the general election vote. You would be better off using chicken entrails to predict general election voting patterns. This is especially true where there are ancestral voters and one party dominates at the local level. (E.g., by primary vote, Kentucky Dems should have one 2-1 in 2010).
That said, these voters were putting up decent numbers for Biden, so its clear that some have at least been willing to vote for Dems.
Yes but you also have to consider the political environment in which it takes place and how that effects the way independents vote. 2010 was a red wave so it makes sense why primary turnout didn't extrapolate to the general election. Same reason why the last time Dems had higher primary turnout in Texas didn't lead to a win - it was a better year for Republicans.
But now, we're looking at a great year for Democrats, and the primary turnout shows that Democrats are very motivated to get out there and vote. Even if more Republicans turn out on election day than Dems, the fact is we have a very good floor to work with, meaning Talarico has a lot more wiggle-room in terms of how many undecided/independent voters he needs to win (especially given who his opponent is).
Not true. It’s not an iron clad rule but you can definitely see signs of November strength if turnout strongly favors one party in a swing district
I don't think TX-32 is in play at all and TX-9 is very much a reach, but otherwise I agree.
I'm pretty bullish on Padilla Stout. Herrera is unbelievably toxic (disqualifyingly so but he's a Republican and they don't care) and in a Dem-friendly environment with strong top-of-the-ballot candidates, I think she can pull off a win. Plus, more votes were cast in the Dem primary versus the Rep primary, for what it's worth
We really need to take advantage of the wave and steal a bunch of Trump +5-15 districts. Most of them will be one term wonders but a few will survive longer and those candidates will be strong statewide candidates.
Mike Johnson was in Texas yesterday raising funds for Brandon Herrera, the "AK Guy" who manufactures guns and jokes about veteran suicides and the Holocaust. The DCCC should add TX-23 to its red to blue list; Katy Padilla Stout is in every respect superior to the 2nd Amendment nut.
She's also superior to the adulterer whose lover self immolated, but he probably would have won reelection if that story didn't come out.
Do you think he would've survived his primary without the scandal breaking? I think there's a decent shot Herrera would've knocked him out still
Probably not honestly. Herrera *just* missed Gonzalez by a tiny margin in 2024 and had finished ahead of Gonzalez in the first primary. Paxton's victory in the runoff probably carries Herrera with him
Oh, definitely. Were it not for the Gonzalez scandal, there would have been a lot more talk about how insane Republicans were to dump him for Herrera. Instead, the latter just slides in as the de facto nominee, no chance for a more normal Republican to oppose him.
TX-09 is another district to keep an eye on. The Democratic candidate hasn't done well with fundraising, but it's an open seat in a new district, and the Republican (Mealer) is somewhat known for being more conservative. And in a wave, money might not matter much.
It's worth recalling that in 2018, a lot of suburban/exurban districts in Texas that weren't being seriously contested got shockingly close to flipping to Democrats, simply because Beto's campaign brought people out. TX-24 comes to mind in that regard, where the Dem candidate raised basically nothing but came within 3% of flipping the seat.
District 9 is one of the gerrymandered districts that goes from "Safe R" to a Lean R at best when you look at how it would've performed in non-2024 elections. It's definitely worth looking at
can men stop doing this?
No. We have been for all of human history.
Not to worry; Politico—promptly repackaged and amplified by Politicalwire—might arrive to assure us breathlessly that women have been known to wield similar influence.
Sorry, stop doing what?
Sexually abusing women or using their positions of power to coerce women into sex. At the very least stop running for office if you know you've used your position to coerce women into sex or committed sexual abuse.
Of course I couldn't agree with you more, but sadly, no party will ever have a monopoly on personal moral turpitude.
I have a theory that the reason politics has so many sex pests is because it is a magnet for sociopaths and psychopath who don't believe that rules apply to them.
That's logical, but it could also be the case that they are represented in the same percentage in other walks of life but have more scope for abuse when they have more power.
I find it funny that Fox buried the lede on Abbott only tracking a point ahead of Hinojosa in their article mentioning Talarico polling ahead of Paxton.
Apparently, she's been running a good campaign focused on affordability and data centers but her fundraising is nowhere near Abbott or Talarico. She's being advised by Morris Katz.
I'm hoping there won't be much ticket splitting in TX come November. Be nice to sweep all those awful Republicans out on the statewide level.
Crosstabs of 2 new polls:
MI Senate crosstabs by Mitchell Research
🟦 Abdul El-Sayed: 52%
🟪 Haley Stevens: 38%
🟨 McMorrow: 4%
——
Age
🔵 18-29: El-Sayed 68-19
🔵 30-44: El-Sayed 62-25
🔵 45-64: El-Sayed 48-39
🟣 65+: Stevens 50-43
—
Ideology
🔵 Progressive Socialists: El-Sayed 80-13
🔵 Progressives: El-Sayed 59-34
🟣 Regular Dems: Stevens 53-35
—
Race/Ethnicity
🔵 White: El-Sayed 51-38
🔵 Black: El-Sayed 47-42
7/28-29 | 406 LV
https://mitchellresearch.net/s/MITCHELL-MI-DEM-Primary-Poll-Press-Release-330PM-7-30-26.pdf
https://x.com/IAPolls2022/status/2083184080544235694
Michigan Senate Dem Primary Crosstabs by @SocalStrategies
🟦 Abdul El-Sayed: 56%
🟪 Haley Stevens: 39%
——
Age
🔵 18-29: El-Sayed +30
🔵 30-44: El-Sayed +46
🔵 45-64: El-Sayed +14
🟣 65+: Stevens +17
—
Race/Ethnicity
🔵 White: El-Sayed +20
🟣 Black: Stevens +6
🔵 Hispanic: El-Sayed +49
—
Gender
🔵 Male: El-Sayed +26
🔵 Female: El-Sayed +11
—
Education
🔵 No College: El-Sayed +17
🔵 College grad: El-Sayed +18
700 LV | ±3.7%
https://x.com/IAPolls2022/status/2083017887707488510
FWIW, this breakdown among Black voters lines up much more closely with what I've been hearing from community organizers in Detroit.
Stevens isn't Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden, both of whom spent years building deep relationships with Black elected officials and community leaders. At the same time, Abdul El-Sayed isn't Bernie Sanders. He's spent years leading the health departments in Detroit and Wayne County, showing up consistently and building trust with Black communities and local leaders.
Most younger Black voters also know that Obama hasn't endorsed Stevens and that AIPAC is funding those "If Obama trusts Haley Stevens, so should Michigan and you" ads implying that.
El-Sayed also appears much more comfortable campaigning in Black churches than Bernie ever did. Black voters are not simply ideologically "moderate" —they tend to place a high value on trust, familiarity, and long-term relationships, and those factors often matter more than ideology alone.
This may be the part where we stop worrying about AES' ability, should he dispatch Stevens, to defeat the gormless Mike Rogers.
At least until the next poll here in about 8-12 hours.
That has nothing to do with his general election viability.
It seems like a lot of Dem voters are in the mood to put up protest/anger type candidates in races that don't have an obvious frontrunner (e.g. Ohio, Alaska, NC Senate races). Platner was the most pure anger candidate of the cycle, and he easily beat the sitting governor in the primary before he imploded. El-Sayed is clearly the anger candidate in this race, and he seems headed for an easy win this year even though he got buried in the governor primary in 2018. Hong doesn't seem to come across as angry, but she's a pure protest candidate. The one exception to that was Texas where Talarico beat Crockett, but even there Crockett did better than I thought she would.
Disagree with this comment but particularly, there wasn't much of any ideological or “fighter” difference between Talarico and Crockett. The usual progressive coalition of young voters, men and Latinos backed him and so did electability focused voters as the “establishment” candidate in the race, Colin Allred, dropped out.
The anger/protest distinction has nothing to do with ideology. It's all about attitude. Crockett is much more of a firebrand than Talarico is, just like Platner is more aggressive than Mills and El-Sayed more aggressive than Stevens.
Side note, whenever I see polls like this where the crosstabs reveal something like 13% of "progressive socialists" backing Stevens, I *really* want to get to know the people who chose that. It makes me so curious.
Um, we might not be able to talk about one possible reason, and let's please leave it at that!
I think they are voting based on the so-called electability of Stevens.
That's another possible reason.
Hong went on FOX News today
https://x.com/atrupar/status/2083190500312408532?s=46&t=ur470cc8I-pVBsEowCJVTg
Well, I think the fact of the matter is that AES and Hing are gonna win.
Centrist reps who do not get behind them should face reprecussions next primary season.
And, BTW, the opposite should also be true for progressive reps who would not back Stevens or Crowley if they win.
Totally agreed. Not backing Democrats in general elections just because you differ from them somewhat on ideology is inexcusable. Only if they are guilty of true moral turpitude is it understandable not to back them.
Yep. This year has given two cases of where I can clearly break from "Vote Blue no matter Who", and they're both out of the race now (Platner and Galindo). Every other contentious race, I would get behind the winner and drop all my primary election reservations.
Apparently Hillary Scholten made a big fuss about how she won't stand by Abdul El-Sayed if he wins because... drumroll please... he appeared on Hasan Piker's stream.
I'd really, *REALLY* like to see a poll of how many voters, both El-Sayed voters and Stevens voters, are basing their votes based off a streamer.
She doesn't even have to like him or endorse him, but I just know that if Rashida Tlaib or AOC made a fuss about not backing Stevens, we'd never hear the end of it.
This election cycle seems to really be putting "vote blue no matter who" to the test, especially in swingy/less blue districts. If I lived in Michigan, I know I'd vote for Stevens - and that's despite the fact that she's quickly becoming one of my least favorite (non-Fetterman or Sinema) Democrats, because the worst Democrat is always better than the best Republican
I'm considering donating to El-Sayed and Hong if they win their primaries even though I can't stand either of them.
Girl, same.
I'd have more sympathy if the DSA/Bernie crowd weren't the leaders of "you have to earn our vote".
It's not about sympathy. This kind of comment makes me livid! You're looking into the barrel of dictatorship and saying crap like that!
First off, Scholten needs to knock it off. If AES wins she needs to be behind him. I’m still annoyed at Rashida Tlaib for not endorsing Kamala Harris, but at least she was quiet about it. If AES wins, Scholten needs to at least stop attacking him, and really should endorse him.
That said, it is a little worse than AES just going on Piker’s stream (which I have no problem with, candidates should go everywhere and talk to everyone with only the most extreme cases being exceptions) because El-Sayed has also brought Piker to Michigan to campaign with him. Piker has made some questionable statements, the one that bothers me most is his openly praising the Houthis, a group that literally has the phrase ‘a Curse on the Jews’ in its slogan. (They include the phrase ‘Death to Israel’ separately, so really going out of their way to clarify that they are anti-Zionist AND anti-Semitic). I don’t even necessarily believe that Piker is an anti-Semite, but he’s the type of ideologue who will sympathize with anyone who has the right enemies, which both explains his positive statements about some pretty hateful armed groups in the Middle East and his eagerness to deny the Uyghur Genocide in China and praise the CCP. So I do wish candidates would just stick to going on Piker’s show and stop bringing him out to their events. I think that campaigning beside him is very valid grounds for criticism.
I’m really glad I don’t live in Michigan, cause honestly I’d still probably be voting for El-Sayed over Stevens!
I don't know what Piker not being an antisemite would mean. You mean you're not sure if he personally hates Jews, at the same time that he supports an organization that is openly hateful toward Jews yet denies that China is committing genocidal acts against a Muslim people? I don't think we need to look into people's hearts to determine what they are if we know what they do and say.
Yes your read of my comment is pretty much accurate. I don’t know if he personally hates Jews or if it can be better explained by his manichaen view of the world, combined with the fact that he’s kind of an idiot and that he knows he gets views by being radical.
I tend to consider intent, action, and impact when evaluating people, so to me what he truly believes is salient. But I totally understand why many people feel that intent is kind of impossible to gauge and shouldn’t be a major consideration. And of course one does not need to be a bigot to stoke bigotry.
live in NJ-12, where our longtime congresswoman retired and the nominee for the seat, Adam Hamawy, brought in Piker to campaign for him in the final stretch of the primary campaign. That made me really uncomfortable. I’m going to vote for our nominee, but it really nags at me and worries me that he thought Piker was a good choice for a surrogate for his campaign. As a Jew, it makes me question whether my next congressman will be really committed to representing me or will take the concerns of people like me seriously. I go back and forth about whether I’m doing too much guilt by association here (judging a candidate who appeared with someone who praised an anti-Semitic group) but this would all be a lot easier if democratic candidates would just stop bringing Hasan Piker out to campaign with them!
Right? I mean, are we fighting a fascist takeover of our democracy or not?
If Dems are going to wring their hands about supporting AES or Hong, they shouldn't expect anyone to take them seriously when they talk about the rot in the Republican party. If the GOP is as bad as they say (which I think they are), supporting AES/Hong/whoever is a no-brainer. If a candidate that mild crosses some line for you, then you don't actually think this is an existential fight.
Anyway, I agree. Anyone withholding their support aren't taking the threat seriously enough, and aren't going to fight hard enough. Let someone who understands what's at stake do the job.
Is that a smart thing to do? Also, do I have to download their stupid app to be able to hear the interview?
It makes sense to go into the lion's den and speak directly to the brainwashed viewers herself instead of letting hacks like Hannity or Ingraham paint her as this "scary socialist immigrant that wants to defund the police."
Buttigieg did it before, during, and after the Biden administration. But he's a much better speaker than Hong is.
They'll portray her as a scary socialist no matter what, though.
The general rule of thumb is that it's a smart, brave thing to do when it's a Democrat we like, and a stupid, craven betrayal when it's a Democrat we don't.
I think it's more so that it's good when they go on and push back against Fox News BS ala Buttigieg vs. Fetterman who goes on and bobblehead dolls his way through interviews.
Here is the same clip on BlueSky for those who don't want to go to Twitter:
https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3mrx4n6b5ck2p
Thank you. I kind of agree with Tigercourse. She sounded sort of sleepy or something to me. Why is she leading by so much in the primaries? The other Democratic candidates are that bad?
Yeah this is a huge indictment on Wisconsin Dems that they couldn't get a regular center-left candidate with an ounce of charisma and no background scandals who could lead the field. Hong's delivery is like that of an AI bot.
The Lt. Gov raised no money and her finance officer lied to her about how much she had.
The former Lt Gov who ran a credible Senste race before was way behind the whole time.
Neither of them had the sense go get behind banning data centers.
Hong is not particularly charismatic. But she presents as the clearest fighter for working people, and her policy positions on the most salient issues are more popular with Dem primary voters.
People are mad as hell. And in a lot of places are not voting for milktoast any more. Especially in open races.
Just FYI, it’s actually spelled ‘milquetoast’. The word comes from the name of a bland and meek character in a 1920s comic strip. His name was intended to invoke the words milk and toast, since those are both bland and boring things. But for whatever reason the version of the word that’s used is spelled with the q. I spelled it incorrectly for a long time till someone pointed it out to me. But, if you want to keep spelling it milktoast then I will applaud you for being a linguistic maverick!
Seems the others couldn't get out of their own and each other's way.
Madison
Why does Madison like her so much, though?
Again, she is the only one with a ground game.
Did anybody else watch any of that clip? She speaks very oddly. It's like that was AI.
Split Ticket has updated their projections for the 2026 midterms, which have gone bluer in the last week or two.
88% chance of Democrats flipping the House
53% chance of Democrats flipping the Senate
They have upgraded OH-SEN to Lean Democratic and TX-SEN to Toss-Up (giving Talarico a 55% chance of flipping the seat). They have gradually increased IA-SEN and FL-SEN's chances even though they see those as an R-hold.
I don't have much hope for Florida, especially after Trump's gambits in Venezuela and Cuba and the increased attention being paid to democratic socialism. However, I think Iowa is being seriously underestimated.
Turek is a strong recruit by Schumer with no political baggage, a solid background, and the potential to win over Obama-Trump voters. Hinson is also not the electoral powerhouse many claim she is; according to Split Ticket's WAR metrics, her electoral performances have been fairly middling.
On top of that, Iowa Republicans and Trump are facing weak approval ratings amid a series of state-level crises and a sluggish localized economy.
The problem with Florida is that it's just so damn expensive, and because of their demographics, really wonky, politically. I wouldn't be shocked if Florida is one of the few states in the country where Trump's approvals have increased - well, maybe that's an overstatement, but I don't think Trump's unpopularity will help us there as much as it will in other states.
We have strong candidates there, yes, but the fact is we have a real path to a senate majority without Florida. If investing there means siphoning money away from Maine, Ohio, Alaska, Texas etc, it's not really worth it.
Hopefully, it doesn't mean that.
Trump is underwater in Florida. It varies by tracker.
Civiqs has him at 41-54. -13.
Newsweek has him -10.
GSG has him -6.
Wow! Are they a Democratic organization?
It is progressive leaning, even though Lakshya Jain is conservative in his polling analysis.
It's a center-left political data analysis website.
IA will get there. Turek has not had that long as the candidate.
https://nypost.com/2026/07/31/us-news/maine-dem-sen-candidate-troy-jackson-has-2-kids-with-cousin-report/
ME-Sen: Unlike the one I posted yesterday, this Troy Jackson scandal has some substance to it. His partner Lena Pelletier, who he has two kids with, is his second cousin. However, this is apparently common in rural areas like northern Maine.
The NY Post is not my only source. Bangor Daily News and obituary sources for a mutual relative have confirmed this.
Despite not being legally married, Jackson has referred to Pelletier as his wife.
My ideal candidate would have to be a populist progressive that doesn't have some strange scandal distracting people from their policies
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQWEra_7xjdSbKRWIRn8oe88b7lxQ4IE8TQhThOU_v19Os-eYrevR9FsRQ&s=10 (fellow ITYSL-heads here will get it)
God what a good show
I mean it's weird but I don't think people will care lol
How Jackson's scandals/shortcomings feel after avoiding the disaster that was Graham Platner: https://tenor.com/view/i-think-you-should-leave-tim-robinson-itysl-netflix-comedy-gif-18172793565512865477
For this race, all of the scandals will be implicitly compared to Platner, and since none of them come close I think voters will give them a big shrug
The Murdochs's are getting desperate. Marriages between 1st cousins are illegal in most states, but 2nd cousins marrying is legal.
& I bet if you look, you'll find this in plenty of Southern Republican politicians (start with Arkansas. Or West Virginia.).
Also, I had to check FDR & Eleanor. I knew they were cousins. Turns out they were 5th cousins.
Rudy Giuliani, not from a rural area, married his second cousin, interestingly. Had it annulled by the church much later.
Probably more common than we realize since back in the day an Italian-American Catholic marrying, say, a Polish-American Catholic was considered a mixed marriage.
Technically, FDR and Eleanor were 5th cousins once removed. FDR was a 5th cousin of Teddy Roosevelt and his brother, Elliott (Eleanor's father).
Who cares. FDR married his cousin.
FDR and Eleanor were more distantly related, but I agree that second cousins are a distant enough relationship that most people don't consider it incest.
5th cousins, at that point your most likely not genetically related anymore.
I didn't realize Troy Jackson was from Shelbyville.
Then he needs to stay out of Springfield
Big deal. Who thinks having a relationship with your second cousin is incest?
The New York Post, apparently.
Like hell they do. Only when a Democrat does it.
The average fraction of DNA shared by second cousins is 1/4th as much as first cousins, and first cousin marriages are legal in Maine.
Does Moreno have a closet problem? https://x.com/ChristopherHale/status/2083220417985089919?s=20
Yes. It has been in the rumor mill for a while.
Nothing classier than employing gay rumors 🙄
https://www.mcall.com/2026/07/31/former-republican-judge-candidate-in-lehigh-valley-will-run-as-green-party-candidate-for-congress/
PA-7: Green Party nominee Andrew Tupone is being accused of being planted by Republican Rep. Ryan Mackenzie so he splits the progressive vote from Democrat Bob Brooks.
A former Republican, Tupone ran for a local judgeship as one in Northampton County. But he denies he is a Republican plant.
Hopefully the national wave and Brooks being endorsed by Bernie will prevent the Greenred from getting too many votes
Greens hate Bernie.
One good thing that has come from the left having some success gaining a foothold in the Democratic Party is that the Green Party has become unambiguously an absolute joke and almost completely a non-factor as even a spoiler party.
Several of the Green Party nominees in AZ are GOP plants:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/sham-green-party-candidates-tied-154443562.html
I hadn't thought of it that way or made that connection. Great catch.
I remember Rick Santorum's campaign doing something similar in 2006 when I still live in Pennsylvania. Most of the signatures for the Green Party candidate in the 2006 U.S. Senate race came from Republicans and Santorum's staffers and Bob Casey's campaign called out Santorum's rat fuckery and I believed challenged the legitimacy of the signatures.
Green= Getting Republicans elected every November. Sometimes its hard to see the difference between the cranks who run for office over and over and keep changing parties and the plants.
Madison County, IL: Madison County Board Chair Chris Slusser (R) is in very hot water over his Facebook comment suggesting Dr. Anthony Fauci be subjected to "public hanging", facing calls for his resignation.
Slusser, of course, doubled down on his excuses by calling his comment "rhetorical hyperbole.”
He should resign in the wake of this.
His office is next up in 2028, and unlike in 2024, the Democrats won't be leaving it uncontested.
https://www.stlpr.org/government-politics-issues/2026-07-31/madison-county-chairman-slusser-defends-fauci-post
I'm currently spending time with MAGA family, albeit overseas, and I'm hearing very similar rhetoric. This is a widespread view. They believe he is a traitor.
Sadly true. Plenty such cases in my county of Madison.
Guessing the GOP internal message is to pivot to relitigating COVID while the economy burns. Bold move, Cotton!
Let's see if it works out for him!
Is County Board Chair the equivalent of County Executive in other states?
Yes. For example, Toni Preckwinkle is the equivalent in populous Cook County.
It's usually executive in most states, some states don't have one, and then you have county judges in Texas, county CEOs in Georgia, and county mayors in Florida.
MN-Sen/St. Paul, MN Mayor - St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her, one of Angie Craig's most notable supporters, is facing two sexual harassment allegations:
"A second high-ranking St. Paul police officer has claimed that St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her created a sexualized work environment, alleging the mayor commented on her breasts and made vulgar noises in the police gym.
The accusations were lodged as part of the ongoing inquiry by an outside law firm into Her’s conduct after St. Paul Police Chief Axel Henry came forward on behalf of himself and other city employees earlier this year.
In a letter to the St. Paul City Attorney’s Office, Henry alleged that Her’s inappropriate behavior “extended beyond isolated incidents.”"
https://www.startribune.com/st-paul-mayor-her-sexual-harassment-investigation-weiner-wednesday-police-chief-gym-comments/601873569?utm_source=gift
Oy, that's awful.
As a Flanagan supporter, I don't see how Mayor Her being a Craig supporter is relevant to the story.
It's not.
Women succeeding in male dominated fields
But seriously why is it so hard for people to be normal
I was thinking a similar thing. A sign of a more equitable world than before, just perhaps not the equality we were hoping for.
First Eva Lopez Chavez pulled her crazy behavior towards fellow politicians in local and state government. Now this with St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her really takes the cake.
Does Mayor Her think she's above the police department and immune to any scrutiny from them?
Never have I ever thought messing with the police would be a good idea. Good heavens.
"Michigan Senate - Here’s what voters say they’ve seen, read, or heard recently about Haley Stevens:
@ZenithPolls
| 7/26-30 | 536 LV"
https://x.com/IAPolls2022/status/2083287572294377719
"Zenith poll | 7/26-7/30 LV
(Michigan Democrats surveyed)
Favorables
✅Barack Obama: 91-9 (+82)
✅Abdul El-Sayed: 69-23 (+46)
✅Gretchen Whitmer: 70-29 (+41)
✅Haley Stevens: 49-44 (+5)
❌AIPAC: 11-59 (-48)"
https://x.com/PollTracker2024/status/2083291154578026670
That Big Gretch endorsement is not gonna be enough.