You've got to be sweating right now if you're Shri Thanedar or Jimmy Gomez.
Shri Thanedar is a weirdo animal killing centimillionaire with poor constituent services and strong AIPAC support, and for the first time his progressive opponents, along with moderate Black leaders, have consolidated behind DSA-affiliated state Rep. Donavan McKinney.
Jimmy Gomez used to be a standard progressive Democrat, but ever since he started facing serious challenges from Democratic socialist Davide Kim, he sold himself to AIPAC and the OpenAI Super PACs, especially in 2024. He's now despised by many leftists as well as Republicans who consolidate against him in the general election. Add the Swalwell debacle, the multiple affairs that are under investigation by the House ethics committee, a Gen Z left-wing Latina challenger, Angela Gonzales-Torres, and the fact that he captured only 46% percent of the primary vote before the scandals broke through (his lowest ever), and he looks toast in the general election.
I’m not so sure about that with Gomez. He got 46% support, but all of the others Dems in the primary and the left wing independent only add up to 37%, he was still significantly ahead of them even when they’re all put together.
I would qualify that to say they usually vote against incumbents, regardless of ideology (to the extent they vote at all, there's usually an undervote).
Thanedar is probably going to lose his primary. I read somewhere that Rashida Tlaib, who represents a neighboring Congressional district, has a reputation for providing better constituent services in Thanedar's district than Thanedar.
Doris Matsui def belongs on that list after Mai Vang placed ahead of her in the California jungle primary, and clearly won more Democratic voters. I'd also be worried if I were Wesley Bell, Ed Case, John Larson, or Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.
Larson and DWS have split fields against them that makes winning much, much harder. I'm not quite sure the energy is there against Case, but at least putting him in a head to head gives a better chance.
You have to feel bad for David Kim. He came close to unseating Jimmy Gomez 3 times, and the one cycle he decides to sit out is the one where Gomez has a huge scandal.
They need to have it with themselves... The DNC is not part of these primaries, the DSCC and DCCC are. Except maybe the DNC transfers to the ASDC and direct to state parties to build their infrastructure, which I support.
I'll just say I hope all of these folks comparing the current insurgency to the 2010-14 Tea Party wave in the GOP realize the Tea Party and its offspring the Freedom Caucus have been one of the biggest factors in conservatives not achieving legislative policy wins in the past decade +.
I mean, they've still won in plenty of other ways, up to and including two Trump terms and a total takeover of state legislatures and the federal judiciary
I'm talking particularly about far right insurgent Reps and Senators at the federal level. You can't credit the Tea Party for Trump, the reddening of the Midwest/Plains or gerrymandering.
That's a very narrow interpretation of the Tea Party movement. The wider anti-liberal, populist movement is almost directly responsible for Trump and the push further right of Midwest demos like blue collar White workers. If the Tea Party wasn't as successful as it was, Trump wouldn't have made it past Super Tuesday and Rubio or Bush would've been the 2016 nom.
Trump was anti-tea party especially in his first iteration. Had no big plans to cut spending, pledged to not touch entitlements and was relatively laissez faire on social issues. Club for Growth and Tea Party Patriots all spent big against him.
There was always going to be a RW backlash to Obama, the tea party wave with its inflexibility just ensured that a) GOP lost multiple winnable races in GEs and b) Once in power, leadership often had to go compromise with Pelosi instead of dealing with them because of their impossible demands. Just now the House had to adjourn because they have a handful of House reps who simply DGAF about passing anything.
You think potential DSA wins (some in red/swingy territory) will lead to Dems winning the presidency for 8 years and taking over the courts? I believe the opposite — we’re gonna blow a bunch of winnable seats with candidates who don’t fit their electorates. Republicans have structural advantages with redistricting and the Senate that Dems simply do not have (ie we need to sweep a bunch of deep red states for a Senate majority, while they can lose 3 seats and still keep it).
Legislatively Dems have had way more success than the GOP at the federal level when you look at the big picture, and that's with a severely gerrymandered House and increasingly extremely difficult to win Senate.
My larger point is, especially given our Senate woes, I think people seeing this as a positive politically are fooling themselves. DSA style candidates are not going to help us in Iowa, Montana, Alaska, North Carolina or any tipping point states at the Senate or presidential level (and I don't just mean running there, I mean outside elected reps' comments getting amplified by the national press).
In addition, no-one should be looking at what's happened to the GOP the past 15 years and go "let's do what they did!"-they are a dysfunctional mess. I'm all for a big tent open to center-right moderates and left wing progressives, but candidates like Kiros and Chevalier have foot in mouth syndrome along with bringing over a cohort with ridiculous litmus tests on unpopular issues (see what happened in San Francisco over the weekend). Heck it'd be better of they were just straight old school 1930s socialists.
That’s deeply disappointing, really hoped we’d be ahead in at least one state other than North Carolina and a slim lead in Maine at this point. If we can’t win anything to the left of North Carolina even in this year when everything should be in our favor, then I have no hope for our country or our party. Really hope this changes between now and November.
I hope you're right. It just feels a LOT like 2024 right now with Democrats losing momentum by the day (and more focused on defeating each other than on defeating fascism).
The socials (Bluesky, Threads, X) are absolutely toxic. I don't recommend logging on.
the generic ballots here are super red relative to the national environment. Nate Cohn's discussion of polling methodology makes sense, but it did also shift Ohio and Iowa from D to R leads. It's a not great high quality poll, but throw it on the pile and get back to work. We can win any of these races.
Edit to add that getting to 50/50 is a huge deal because it makes Murkowski the swing vote on everything.
But winning 51-52 seats makes her and Fetterman irrelevant, ie judicial confirmations. Means that Schumer can (and should) not confirm any more Trump appointees should Dems win back the Senate.
Cook finally updated AK-Sen to Toss-Up. Definitely seems to be at the top of the second tier. I almost feel better about Peltola's chances than Platner's.
The Tea Party moment for the Democratic Party, plus the special legislative wins in IA, TX, and FL make me think we're going to win seats that were deemed Safe R. Not necessarily U.S. Sen or House seats, but state legislative seats.
Imagine OH, FL, and AR losing their GOP supermajorities in both state Houses. I think it's guaranteed that NC GOP will lose their legislative supermajorities (and the ability to push bad bills on the ballot as confusing constitutional amendments), maybe the state House outright.
Just found out that Ken Block is running as an independent in the Rhode Island gubernatorial election. Polling higher than the Republican candidate too. Interesting.
I know the record is mixed on Manny Rutinel, but according to this NYT article, Shannon Bird, who was the more moderate of the two, ran AGAINST "aggressive A.I. regulation" -
Important to note because it obviously has major policy implications: if Manny Rutinel and Sam Forstag both win, the 120th congress might have the hottest freshman class of all time.
You've got to be sweating right now if you're Shri Thanedar or Jimmy Gomez.
Shri Thanedar is a weirdo animal killing centimillionaire with poor constituent services and strong AIPAC support, and for the first time his progressive opponents, along with moderate Black leaders, have consolidated behind DSA-affiliated state Rep. Donavan McKinney.
Jimmy Gomez used to be a standard progressive Democrat, but ever since he started facing serious challenges from Democratic socialist Davide Kim, he sold himself to AIPAC and the OpenAI Super PACs, especially in 2024. He's now despised by many leftists as well as Republicans who consolidate against him in the general election. Add the Swalwell debacle, the multiple affairs that are under investigation by the House ethics committee, a Gen Z left-wing Latina challenger, Angela Gonzales-Torres, and the fact that he captured only 46% percent of the primary vote before the scandals broke through (his lowest ever), and he looks toast in the general election.
I’m not so sure about that with Gomez. He got 46% support, but all of the others Dems in the primary and the left wing independent only add up to 37%, he was still significantly ahead of them even when they’re all put together.
Republicans always vote for the left-wing anti-establishment candidate in that district and in many other majority-minority California districts.
https://ballotpedia.org/Jimmy_Gomez
Ah got it, I can see the problem there for him then
I would qualify that to say they usually vote against incumbents, regardless of ideology (to the extent they vote at all, there's usually an undervote).
Thanedar is probably going to lose his primary. I read somewhere that Rashida Tlaib, who represents a neighboring Congressional district, has a reputation for providing better constituent services in Thanedar's district than Thanedar.
I heard the same from many people too!
Climate Hawks Vote has endorsed Donavan McKinney. We and other climate groups are phonebanking for him and Will Lawrence (MI-07) all of July.
Doris Matsui def belongs on that list after Mai Vang placed ahead of her in the California jungle primary, and clearly won more Democratic voters. I'd also be worried if I were Wesley Bell, Ed Case, John Larson, or Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.
Lynch is hopefully toast too
Larson and DWS have split fields against them that makes winning much, much harder. I'm not quite sure the energy is there against Case, but at least putting him in a head to head gives a better chance.
You have to feel bad for David Kim. He came close to unseating Jimmy Gomez 3 times, and the one cycle he decides to sit out is the one where Gomez has a huge scandal.
I hope Chuck and Hakeem are having a "come to Jesus" coffee with Ken Martin this morning after the CO primary
None of those three guys have a clue about how to harness the energy of this moment, so hopefully they all just slept in.
If Democrats have a good-to-amazing night on 11/3/26, they're going to be thanking Ken Martin. Not Jeffries or Schumer.
They’re more likely writing a strongly worded letter to the DSA asking them to be nicer to incumbents. They know how to win.
They need to have it with themselves... The DNC is not part of these primaries, the DSCC and DCCC are. Except maybe the DNC transfers to the ASDC and direct to state parties to build their infrastructure, which I support.
I'll just say I hope all of these folks comparing the current insurgency to the 2010-14 Tea Party wave in the GOP realize the Tea Party and its offspring the Freedom Caucus have been one of the biggest factors in conservatives not achieving legislative policy wins in the past decade +.
I mean, they've still won in plenty of other ways, up to and including two Trump terms and a total takeover of state legislatures and the federal judiciary
I'm talking particularly about far right insurgent Reps and Senators at the federal level. You can't credit the Tea Party for Trump, the reddening of the Midwest/Plains or gerrymandering.
That's a very narrow interpretation of the Tea Party movement. The wider anti-liberal, populist movement is almost directly responsible for Trump and the push further right of Midwest demos like blue collar White workers. If the Tea Party wasn't as successful as it was, Trump wouldn't have made it past Super Tuesday and Rubio or Bush would've been the 2016 nom.
Trump was anti-tea party especially in his first iteration. Had no big plans to cut spending, pledged to not touch entitlements and was relatively laissez faire on social issues. Club for Growth and Tea Party Patriots all spent big against him.
There was always going to be a RW backlash to Obama, the tea party wave with its inflexibility just ensured that a) GOP lost multiple winnable races in GEs and b) Once in power, leadership often had to go compromise with Pelosi instead of dealing with them because of their impossible demands. Just now the House had to adjourn because they have a handful of House reps who simply DGAF about passing anything.
You think potential DSA wins (some in red/swingy territory) will lead to Dems winning the presidency for 8 years and taking over the courts? I believe the opposite — we’re gonna blow a bunch of winnable seats with candidates who don’t fit their electorates. Republicans have structural advantages with redistricting and the Senate that Dems simply do not have (ie we need to sweep a bunch of deep red states for a Senate majority, while they can lose 3 seats and still keep it).
They certainly pushed their party and arguably the country's Overton Window very far to the right.
tbf Democrats haven't done a great job at winning & making policy achievements the past decade or so anyways
Legislatively Dems have had way more success than the GOP at the federal level when you look at the big picture, and that's with a severely gerrymandered House and increasingly extremely difficult to win Senate.
My larger point is, especially given our Senate woes, I think people seeing this as a positive politically are fooling themselves. DSA style candidates are not going to help us in Iowa, Montana, Alaska, North Carolina or any tipping point states at the Senate or presidential level (and I don't just mean running there, I mean outside elected reps' comments getting amplified by the national press).
In addition, no-one should be looking at what's happened to the GOP the past 15 years and go "let's do what they did!"-they are a dysfunctional mess. I'm all for a big tent open to center-right moderates and left wing progressives, but candidates like Kiros and Chevalier have foot in mouth syndrome along with bringing over a cohort with ridiculous litmus tests on unpopular issues (see what happened in San Francisco over the weekend). Heck it'd be better of they were just straight old school 1930s socialists.
Times/Siena poll of four senate races:
Hinson +2, Husted +3, Cooper +7, Sullivan +2.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/01/us/politics/polls-senate-control.html
Sounds about right, and lines up with my latest predictions. I'd think Hinson would outperform Husted.
That sounds about right for four months out
If I had to choose one, would rather be leading in October than now.
That’s deeply disappointing, really hoped we’d be ahead in at least one state other than North Carolina and a slim lead in Maine at this point. If we can’t win anything to the left of North Carolina even in this year when everything should be in our favor, then I have no hope for our country or our party. Really hope this changes between now and November.
Husted, Hinson, and Sullivan are within the swing margin though.
Ugh, I just have a really bad feeling that we end up with a 53-47 R Senate again (win NC, lose MI, everything else status quo).
This is not 2018 or 2024. Relax, take one day at a time.
I hope you're right. It just feels a LOT like 2024 right now with Democrats losing momentum by the day (and more focused on defeating each other than on defeating fascism).
The socials (Bluesky, Threads, X) are absolutely toxic. I don't recommend logging on.
We have to get 49 seats to have at least an even chance of winning back the majority in 2028.
Yeah, I know. Which is why all of this is so damn depressing.
I'm starting to wonder if we can even keep GA.
We’re definitely keeping GA
Cooper +7? Wow, if that's true, then he MIGHT win by double digits by November.
Ds don’t usually outperform the polls in NC. I’m expecting this race to look like his 2020 reelection for governor (52-47 margin).
First lead I've seen for Sullivan since *checks notes* August 2025
the generic ballots here are super red relative to the national environment. Nate Cohn's discussion of polling methodology makes sense, but it did also shift Ohio and Iowa from D to R leads. It's a not great high quality poll, but throw it on the pile and get back to work. We can win any of these races.
Edit to add that getting to 50/50 is a huge deal because it makes Murkowski the swing vote on everything.
But winning 51-52 seats makes her and Fetterman irrelevant, ie judicial confirmations. Means that Schumer can (and should) not confirm any more Trump appointees should Dems win back the Senate.
Its good to get a reality check, every now and then.
Cook finally updated AK-Sen to Toss-Up. Definitely seems to be at the top of the second tier. I almost feel better about Peltola's chances than Platner's.
Peltola has led Sullivan in almost every major poll. If 2026 is an inverse of 2014, she can pull the same kind of upset.
The Tea Party moment for the Democratic Party, plus the special legislative wins in IA, TX, and FL make me think we're going to win seats that were deemed Safe R. Not necessarily U.S. Sen or House seats, but state legislative seats.
Imagine OH, FL, and AR losing their GOP supermajorities in both state Houses. I think it's guaranteed that NC GOP will lose their legislative supermajorities (and the ability to push bad bills on the ballot as confusing constitutional amendments), maybe the state House outright.
I doubt Rs lose their legislative supermajorities in Arkansas.
Just found out that Ken Block is running as an independent in the Rhode Island gubernatorial election. Polling higher than the Republican candidate too. Interesting.
Throwback name there
Too bad Robert Healey won't be able to join him, RIP
I know the record is mixed on Manny Rutinel, but according to this NYT article, Shannon Bird, who was the more moderate of the two, ran AGAINST "aggressive A.I. regulation" -
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/30/us/politics/manny-rutinel-colorado-8th-district-democrats.html
This seems like a massive misread of the electorate in general, but definitely a Democratic primary electorate in 2026.
Important to note because it obviously has major policy implications: if Manny Rutinel and Sam Forstag both win, the 120th congress might have the hottest freshman class of all time.