Disappointed that Wiener is opposing Proposition D - it seems like common sense, and an important disincentive for corporations to pay their CEOs absurdly bloated salaries.
I appreciate Wiener's work on affordable housing, and was supporting him before this. Maybe enough pressure might get him to reconsider his position.
I wonder how much it'd actually do that. SF salaries are very high relative to the rest of the country. The companies being targeted are primarily going to be the largest ones, who are primarily going to be tech companies in the context of SF.
What's a typical median salary for a tech office in SF? If it's $200k/year, then the 100x would be $20m/year.
I bet little would happen to those properties because of various, redundant environmental impact studies and neighbors shrieking about the fearsome shadows that these buildings cast.
Yes but SF is also not that liberal either. It's more center left and moderate than Berkeley, where I live, which is a pro-tenant city. Has been this way ever since Willie Brown was elected Mayor back in the mid 90's.
Best to know about the Bay Area in ideological makeup:
East Bay from Rodeo all the way to San Leandro (including Alameda, Berkeley and Oakland) - The most liberal and social justice part of the Bay Area. San Francisco pales by comparison as it's big money interests prevent it being another Oakland.
East Bay from Alamo to San Ramon - More center left and moderate. Danville as an example is pretty conservative, as is Clayton.
Daniel Lurie? He's apolitical. Very much right in the middle but more closely aligned with Scott Weiner and former San Francisco Mayor London Breed on housing.
Yes. Wiener is far more progressive than all of those guy. Arguably more progressive than the whole field if you look at policies and constituent services targeted to help renters and the working class
As someone who has followed Weiner since he was Supervisor back in the day and was living in San Francisco at the time, he's got a strange habit of being bold on one singular issue of housing but on every other issue, he's really not inspiring to me.
Back in the day, Weiner had a habit of being a square as a Supervisor on issues such as passing law that prevented nudity. I found Weiner as a gay Supervisor to be quite strange taking on such a trivial issue considering the gay community in the Castro has always been very free spirited and non-systematic. I mean, the Folson Street Fair and the Love Parade and other events have traditionally shown nude gay people here for a long time.
Chakrabarti? There is a reason he has zero working class support in my hometown. Chan I get (but strongly oppose for her NIMBY votes). But Chakrabarti would say absolutely anything to get elected. In person, he really comes across as slimy (when he bothers to show up).
FL-6: Dan Bilzerian, whose numerous exploits have given him both legal trouble and a massive social media following, will primary Republican Rep. Randy Fine. Bilzerian is known to be antisemitic, and Fine is Jewish.
Bilzerian is too, he is just very antisemitic. He's working out of the office of Lake County commissioner Anthony Sabatini, known to be extreme on these issues.
I think scheduling a referendum/initiative on a Republican runoff is a slightly different tactical move than scheduling it in the random dead of summer. That said, I still consider it a sign that the Republican Party truly does not know its voters or its opposition. The Democratic Party is now a group of people with a My Strange Addiction level obsession with voting. Republicans can barely be bothered. Despite this "sneaky referenda" move failing in Louisiana last year and a loss of their Obama-era special election advantage post-2017, that this is still their M.O. is incompetence.
Probably desperation more than incompetence. I think they’re at wit’s end. In their shoes and with their value system, what strategic choice would you make to increase the GOP’s odds of success? That’s a sincere question.
I like what Michael said but also what you say. It is both in my opinion because Republicans are desperate that they can't sell their agenda to the majority of the electorate anymore showing their methods are incompetence in representing their constituents, overall.
I don't know Iowa well enough to dare make a bold prediction like that. However, I think anywhere north of Sand +5 probably drags Turek over the line. That's my ignorant guess from afar as to what might be good enough.
I change my mind every day on which of Texas, Alaska, Ohio and Iowa are the two most winnable seats. You can make a good argument for each pairing or ordering.
I'm old enough to remember when Iowa was quite swingy, and when Eastern Iowa was dark blue. Some older Iowans in Cedar Rapids, Dubuque, and Davenport may surprise you.
Also, Iowa is better educated than most people realize.
We badly need polling in Iowa's statewide races. To date there's only been 1 poll for the governor race and its by some new or obscure group "Z to A Research" I have never heard of before. I'm not asking for Anne Selzer to return, but Iowa shouldn't be THAT hard to poll, with it's small population.
Why wouldn't it? Less people means you need to poll less potential individual voters to get a more representative and accurate sample size. It would also cost much less money logistically. Compare that to trying to poll in states like Texas and Pennsylvania. I don't doubt that small states have their own issues with polling, but the chance of undersampling and missing potential voters is smaller. You don't have to try and model larger areas like bigger states.
From a statistical level this doesn't matter at the sizes of states.
With a sample size of 1000 in a population of 700k, the statistical margin of error is +/- 3.097 percentage points.
With a sample size of 1000 in a population of 40m, the statistical margin of error is +/- 3.099 percentage points.
Both examples for a 95% confidence level. If we raise it to 99.9% the values are 5.2% and 5.203%.
While a smaller state does see a polling sample as a more representative slice of the population, the polling sizes and population sizes are such that it doesn't matter.
Thats actually not mathematically true. You need certain sample sizes to maintain margin of error rates. It is about the same until you get into really small universes. At that point, qualitative research with multi-level regression makes more sense. There isn't a state small enough that you would shrink your sample size in an accurate poll
for those who missed it last night... Turning Point USA tried to nationalize the Arizona Salt River Project elex, and lost bigly. Sad! Salt River Project is a public utility that provides power to Phoenix and surrounding areas. Clean energy/climate people have been working for years to replace fossil fueled board members with renewable advocates. Last night they won majorities on both the association (water side) and district (power side). This elex is unusual because property votes -- you have to be a landowner, renters can't vote, and your vote is weighted by how much land you own. And it's doubly sweet because even though large landowners skew conservative, we still won. And TPUSA spent a ton of money. They got a president and vice president elected but they are still in the minority. The alt-weekly has the best headline: "Turning Point gets its ass handed to it in the SRP elections." https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/arizona-srp-elections-big-loss-turning-point-candidates-40658264/
If you missed the hype around Turning Point's involvement, this was supposed to be a dry run for its efforts to retake AZ-Gov and various other AZ offices this November. Add this to Wisconsin and I'm feeling pretty good right now.
I posted this last night, but can you imagine what he would think about a Black astronaut being on Artemis II after his "boy, I hope he's qualified" comment?
We did kick TPUSA's ass (roughly 2 to 1 in the per capita seats), though their endorsed candidates for President and VP won (based on per acre votes). Flipping 3 by acreage district seats on the power board is HUGE. We did flip the power board (we now have 8 of 14 seats including 4 at-large per capita seats), we did not flip the water board (we increased from 2 to 4 of 10 seats) or the power council or the water council, though we increased our share of seats on all 3.
This means we make operational and management priorities for the power district but not the water association. We can do things like cancel power plant construction, buy or construct clean power or battery storage projects, change rates/incentives to favor energy efficiency, demand shifting, EV adoption, electrification, distributed renewable generation/storage, etc.
We can't change bylaws (for instance to change voting procedures) without council majorities.
This is huge and excellent progress, but also an incremental win in a decade long struggle that will continue
For those not familiar with the Phoenix area, SRP on the water side provides water to municipalities, but also directly to farmers, commercial , schools, and residences with grandfathered water rights. Older , large lot residences build berms around their 1/2, 1, 2 acre parcels and can flood their property 6-8 inches deep every week or two. This results in landscapes that look straight out of Hawaii rather than the Sonoran Desert. The residential cost for this water abuse is a little over $100 per year.
All lib held seats I think. Two resignations from safe seats, and one seat where their initial 1-vote victory in the general election overturned by the court, ordering a new election.
Some stray thoughts as I listen to the podcast this week:
-Thinking about MRP as a polling technique, and wondering what their accuracy rates have been. I've generally had a dim view of UK polling but think it's gotten better as they got more sophisticated for 2024, and of course the multiple viable parties and strategic voting is an added challenge for them. I have a better view of Australian polling, with a mostly solid two-party system making things a bit easier, with their polling challenge being instant runoff and a bit of a breakdown in the party system with the Greens and now "Teals" (and increasingly One Nation).
-Didn't realize the districts were all from the current Congress and not the post-2024 redistricting. It makes the TX numbers in particular a bit hard to gauge the electoral consequences. Would love to read an update from Morris with the new districts, maybe he'll wait until the FL special session window is over to see if/how those and the VA districts change. Still some possibility of the Callais decision causing a new rush of gerrymanders, so maybe he would wait until after June to run and publish those numbers.
-On WI and GA-14, I obviously think these are informative for the midterms this fall, but think people should remember Whitmer and Shapiro won in blowouts in 2022 and we still lost them in the presidential. So the predictions can only go so far from some takes I've seen floating online of a new, solidly blue WI.
I don't know about Callais causing gerrymanders. The filing deadlines (and even primaries in NC and MS) have already passed in states that would have redraws.
I think the Court, if it makes any changes to the law, will apply the "Purcell doctrine" and not require the state to redistrict for the November election.
We also don’t know if the justices will kill the VRA. Last I heard, Roberts and Gorsuch sounded skeptical in hearings, and Trump threatening Roberts recently + the birthright citizenship case going up in flames indicates that there’s still a possibility they won’t kill it.
The place is almost last in every category, healthcare, education, child mortality and the list goes on. The roads and parks are in major disrepair the state is a mess and they want to take Medicaid away from people. I guess they want to be dead last in everything.
TN-9: Rep. Steve Cohen is at the Tennessee House today instead of doing his job in Washington to mingle with Republicans and antagonize progressive challenger state Rep. Justin Pearson.
He used to be, but even went as far as to leave the CPC. Not very "progressive" to be in office for 44 years, but you could also say the same about Bernie Sanders.
Another poll by Big Data Poll (?) from the same time period has Massie up 52-48, with no undecided. Much better than his previous showing against a "Trump-endorsed Republican" last June which had him trailing 52-23 .
Perhaps on paper Massie might be in danger. However, in that tweet, one commenter mentioned he is a Democrat and is voting for Massie in the primary.
Although this is just one person, I wonder if perhaps there will be an influx of registered Democrats in KY-04 who will vote for Massie. Polling may not pick this up.
All the awful Scott Walker enablers are leaving or voted out of office. Especially Robin Vos and the two Karens he appointed to the SCOWI who decided to retire rather than suffer humiliating re-election losses.
No worries! I follow him, so I get his posts a lot on my feed, that’s the only reason I knew lol. One of the best journalists for covering local/state WI politics.
Heavily Hispanic areas on Milwaukee's south side are shifting sharply toward Democrats, with a 56-point swing in one Lincoln Village precinct. Taylor is getting 91% compared to Harris's 64%.
Milwaukee County overall is running 11 points more Democratic vs. 2024.
Turnout wasn't the only story Tuesday — there's a real GOP backlash brewing in Wisconsin.
Schimel won Clarno Township with 280 votes in 2025, then it swung so hard toward Taylor that she beat the raw vote for Harris in '24 when *3.4M* votes were cast statewide.
I have found 5 municipalities in SW Wisconsin where Chris Taylor received MORE raw votes than Kamala Harris (26v24):
Unlikely, there are only 11 Republican districts within Trump +10, some of which are closer to red than purple. Considering the Dems currently have 45 seats, anything more than 55 seats would be a major surprise.
I think Democrats can get a majority in 2026, but a lot of things still have to go right for us. Geography sucks for our party in the state. Anything more than that and we’ve got a Senate Majority with room to spare. 60 seats realistically isn’t possible. I’m happy with anything above the 50 majority making line. Above 55 would be gravy.
The reason Virginia was so awful for Republicans is that a ton of Harris-won seats were still represented by Republicans and the next tier of districts were just barely won by Trump. All of those flipped blue due to voter backlash and a weak GOP nominee, but Democrats didn’t flip any seat beyond Trump +10 as far as I’m aware in VA 2025 and you need to flip those double digit Trump seats to have that kind of majority in Wisconsin.
Don't know, but if she won every district where Trump got less than 60% of the vote (none of which are located in the less-elastic WOW area), then 24 seats
Disappointed that Wiener is opposing Proposition D - it seems like common sense, and an important disincentive for corporations to pay their CEOs absurdly bloated salaries.
I appreciate Wiener's work on affordable housing, and was supporting him before this. Maybe enough pressure might get him to reconsider his position.
It sounds like a way to get big corps to move their offices in SF out of the city. But maybe that would ease a housing affordability crush.
I wonder how much it'd actually do that. SF salaries are very high relative to the rest of the country. The companies being targeted are primarily going to be the largest ones, who are primarily going to be tech companies in the context of SF.
What's a typical median salary for a tech office in SF? If it's $200k/year, then the 100x would be $20m/year.
I bet little would happen to those properties because of various, redundant environmental impact studies and neighbors shrieking about the fearsome shadows that these buildings cast.
More likely it would increase commuters to the Peninsula and South Bay, as many young, single workers do still want to live in SF.
I don't oppose Prop D, but I do think statewide or national tax-the-rich efforts are more effective than local ones.
It's disappointing but not surprising. I feel like Wiener is a mixed bag on a lot of issues. Chan and Chakrabarti are the only solid candidates.
Weiner would be an extremely solid progressive in the House, he only looks moderate by comparison to leftist Bay Area politics.
Yet, some of the most prominent Bay Area politicians (Dan Lurie, Matt Mahan, Eric Swalwell, Sam Liccardo) are further to the right of Wiener, too, no?
Well that falls into the Silicon Valley problem, especially as Big Tech has become more right-wing friendly.
Oh, definitely. Especially Mahan
You'd expect that. The areas they rep aren't as left as SF is.
Apart from Lurie, who is mayor of SF. And the entire Bay Area isn't just SF, either.
Yes but SF is also not that liberal either. It's more center left and moderate than Berkeley, where I live, which is a pro-tenant city. Has been this way ever since Willie Brown was elected Mayor back in the mid 90's.
Best to know about the Bay Area in ideological makeup:
East Bay from Rodeo all the way to San Leandro (including Alameda, Berkeley and Oakland) - The most liberal and social justice part of the Bay Area. San Francisco pales by comparison as it's big money interests prevent it being another Oakland.
East Bay from Alamo to San Ramon - More center left and moderate. Danville as an example is pretty conservative, as is Clayton.
Daniel Lurie? He's apolitical. Very much right in the middle but more closely aligned with Scott Weiner and former San Francisco Mayor London Breed on housing.
Yes. Wiener is far more progressive than all of those guy. Arguably more progressive than the whole field if you look at policies and constituent services targeted to help renters and the working class
As someone who has followed Weiner since he was Supervisor back in the day and was living in San Francisco at the time, he's got a strange habit of being bold on one singular issue of housing but on every other issue, he's really not inspiring to me.
Back in the day, Weiner had a habit of being a square as a Supervisor on issues such as passing law that prevented nudity. I found Weiner as a gay Supervisor to be quite strange taking on such a trivial issue considering the gay community in the Castro has always been very free spirited and non-systematic. I mean, the Folson Street Fair and the Love Parade and other events have traditionally shown nude gay people here for a long time.
Let's just say Weiner is no Mark Leno.
Chakrabarti? There is a reason he has zero working class support in my hometown. Chan I get (but strongly oppose for her NIMBY votes). But Chakrabarti would say absolutely anything to get elected. In person, he really comes across as slimy (when he bothers to show up).
I get that vibe from him too, but he has support from several progressive figures and groups.
I really ought to share more on the Downballot here about the days with Supervisor Chris Daly back in the 2000’s. Now he was the real NIMBY.
Or he knows how real "vote with your feet" can be. Have we learned nothing? It sucks, but it's real.
Is there a final reckoning of D results in MO & OK on Tue?
I heard there were some flips.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5822149-dan-bilzerian-randy-fine-florida-congress/amp/
FL-6: Dan Bilzerian, whose numerous exploits have given him both legal trouble and a massive social media following, will primary Republican Rep. Randy Fine. Bilzerian is known to be antisemitic, and Fine is Jewish.
And Fine is an avowed anti-Muslim.
Bilzerian is too, he is just very antisemitic. He's working out of the office of Lake County commissioner Anthony Sabatini, known to be extreme on these issues.
Fine is a bigoted beluga whale.
Dan Bilzerian is a human herpes sore, in a variety of fashions
I think scheduling a referendum/initiative on a Republican runoff is a slightly different tactical move than scheduling it in the random dead of summer. That said, I still consider it a sign that the Republican Party truly does not know its voters or its opposition. The Democratic Party is now a group of people with a My Strange Addiction level obsession with voting. Republicans can barely be bothered. Despite this "sneaky referenda" move failing in Louisiana last year and a loss of their Obama-era special election advantage post-2017, that this is still their M.O. is incompetence.
Probably desperation more than incompetence. I think they’re at wit’s end. In their shoes and with their value system, what strategic choice would you make to increase the GOP’s odds of success? That’s a sincere question.
I like what Michael said but also what you say. It is both in my opinion because Republicans are desperate that they can't sell their agenda to the majority of the electorate anymore showing their methods are incompetence in representing their constituents, overall.
DC delegate drama on Brooke Pinto having the same individual donors as some Republicans.
https://washingtoncitypaper.com/article/783264/republican-donors-line-up-for-brooke-pinto/
Shocker (/s). Hoping for a Robert White win.
Totally. My daughter interned for White last year. From what she told me, he is a great guy who works all the time
wow Cook moves IOWA Gov to tossup. https://x.com/CookPolitical/status/2042226595549544652?s=20
Yeah, Kim Reynolds and Iowa GOP are even more toxic than I thought.
Sand is leading in both parties' internal polls against Feenstra as well. Need him to run up the score to drag Turek across the finish line.
(or Wahls)
Sure, but hopefully we go with the guy who has proven his ability to win over lots of Republican voters in the past.
I'm just saying, primary hasn't ended yet, we want to support whoever wins.
I will state the obvious next time.
That seems unnecessarily rude
Be nice if Sand wins +10 like you're projecting Cooper for. That would definitely get Turek over the line.
I don't know Iowa well enough to dare make a bold prediction like that. However, I think anywhere north of Sand +5 probably drags Turek over the line. That's my ignorant guess from afar as to what might be good enough.
And ideally we could flip a bunch of the row offices as well and rebuild our bench a bit there.
Yeah AG, SoS, Treasurer and Auditor are all on the ballot as well. Though unlike Gov and Sen, the Republican incumbents are running there.
Yeah that makes me somewhat more optimistic about IA-Sen think it is #4 after AK, ME and NC.
I change my mind every day on which of Texas, Alaska, Ohio and Iowa are the two most winnable seats. You can make a good argument for each pairing or ordering.
I'm old enough to remember when Iowa was quite swingy, and when Eastern Iowa was dark blue. Some older Iowans in Cedar Rapids, Dubuque, and Davenport may surprise you.
Also, Iowa is better educated than most people realize.
I live in Southeast Iowa. A ton of blue collar union area.
We badly need polling in Iowa's statewide races. To date there's only been 1 poll for the governor race and its by some new or obscure group "Z to A Research" I have never heard of before. I'm not asking for Anne Selzer to return, but Iowa shouldn't be THAT hard to poll, with it's small population.
Why would a smaller population make a state easier to poll?
Why wouldn't it? Less people means you need to poll less potential individual voters to get a more representative and accurate sample size. It would also cost much less money logistically. Compare that to trying to poll in states like Texas and Pennsylvania. I don't doubt that small states have their own issues with polling, but the chance of undersampling and missing potential voters is smaller. You don't have to try and model larger areas like bigger states.
You might or might not be right. I assume this has been studied, and someone might know the answer, but I know Alaska is hard to poll, for example.
As is Maine.
From a statistical level this doesn't matter at the sizes of states.
With a sample size of 1000 in a population of 700k, the statistical margin of error is +/- 3.097 percentage points.
With a sample size of 1000 in a population of 40m, the statistical margin of error is +/- 3.099 percentage points.
Both examples for a 95% confidence level. If we raise it to 99.9% the values are 5.2% and 5.203%.
While a smaller state does see a polling sample as a more representative slice of the population, the polling sizes and population sizes are such that it doesn't matter.
Thats actually not mathematically true. You need certain sample sizes to maintain margin of error rates. It is about the same until you get into really small universes. At that point, qualitative research with multi-level regression makes more sense. There isn't a state small enough that you would shrink your sample size in an accurate poll
for those who missed it last night... Turning Point USA tried to nationalize the Arizona Salt River Project elex, and lost bigly. Sad! Salt River Project is a public utility that provides power to Phoenix and surrounding areas. Clean energy/climate people have been working for years to replace fossil fueled board members with renewable advocates. Last night they won majorities on both the association (water side) and district (power side). This elex is unusual because property votes -- you have to be a landowner, renters can't vote, and your vote is weighted by how much land you own. And it's doubly sweet because even though large landowners skew conservative, we still won. And TPUSA spent a ton of money. They got a president and vice president elected but they are still in the minority. The alt-weekly has the best headline: "Turning Point gets its ass handed to it in the SRP elections." https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/arizona-srp-elections-big-loss-turning-point-candidates-40658264/
If you missed the hype around Turning Point's involvement, this was supposed to be a dry run for its efforts to retake AZ-Gov and various other AZ offices this November. Add this to Wisconsin and I'm feeling pretty good right now.
Charlie Kirk must be turning in his grave out of deep frustration – and I am more than ok with that!
I posted this last night, but can you imagine what he would think about a Black astronaut being on Artemis II after his "boy, I hope he's qualified" comment?
Or a single woman?
The stuff that would come out of his horrible mouth would be awful.
Perhaps at a Turning Point in his grave, you might say....
Sure but let’s be clear, there’s only one Kirk that really has always mattered.
And that is Captain James Tiberius Kirk.
(Preferably portrayed by Chris Pine. I got tired of Shatner.)
We did kick TPUSA's ass (roughly 2 to 1 in the per capita seats), though their endorsed candidates for President and VP won (based on per acre votes). Flipping 3 by acreage district seats on the power board is HUGE. We did flip the power board (we now have 8 of 14 seats including 4 at-large per capita seats), we did not flip the water board (we increased from 2 to 4 of 10 seats) or the power council or the water council, though we increased our share of seats on all 3.
This means we make operational and management priorities for the power district but not the water association. We can do things like cancel power plant construction, buy or construct clean power or battery storage projects, change rates/incentives to favor energy efficiency, demand shifting, EV adoption, electrification, distributed renewable generation/storage, etc.
We can't change bylaws (for instance to change voting procedures) without council majorities.
This is huge and excellent progress, but also an incremental win in a decade long struggle that will continue
For those not familiar with the Phoenix area, SRP on the water side provides water to municipalities, but also directly to farmers, commercial , schools, and residences with grandfathered water rights. Older , large lot residences build berms around their 1/2, 1, 2 acre parcels and can flood their property 6-8 inches deep every week or two. This results in landscapes that look straight out of Hawaii rather than the Sonoran Desert. The residential cost for this water abuse is a little over $100 per year.
thank you for everything you did, and will continue to do, on this important issue!
Four Conservative members of the Canadian House of Commons have defected to the Liberal Party, as has a member of the New Democrats. Mark Carney's Liberals now have 171 seats in the 343-seat House of Commons, one short of a majority, and look set to gain at least two more in special elections due to be held on Monday to fill vacant seats. https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/canada-pm-carney-verge-majority-after-opposition-member-joins-ruling-liberals-2026-04-08/
With 171 out of 340 current members, he already has a majority.
3 vacant seats are up for by elections on Monday. He needs to win one to maintain the majority with the full House. Could sweep all 3.
What are the outgoing parties?
All lib held seats I think. Two resignations from safe seats, and one seat where their initial 1-vote victory in the general election overturned by the court, ordering a new election.
Some stray thoughts as I listen to the podcast this week:
-Thinking about MRP as a polling technique, and wondering what their accuracy rates have been. I've generally had a dim view of UK polling but think it's gotten better as they got more sophisticated for 2024, and of course the multiple viable parties and strategic voting is an added challenge for them. I have a better view of Australian polling, with a mostly solid two-party system making things a bit easier, with their polling challenge being instant runoff and a bit of a breakdown in the party system with the Greens and now "Teals" (and increasingly One Nation).
-Didn't realize the districts were all from the current Congress and not the post-2024 redistricting. It makes the TX numbers in particular a bit hard to gauge the electoral consequences. Would love to read an update from Morris with the new districts, maybe he'll wait until the FL special session window is over to see if/how those and the VA districts change. Still some possibility of the Callais decision causing a new rush of gerrymanders, so maybe he would wait until after June to run and publish those numbers.
-On WI and GA-14, I obviously think these are informative for the midterms this fall, but think people should remember Whitmer and Shapiro won in blowouts in 2022 and we still lost them in the presidential. So the predictions can only go so far from some takes I've seen floating online of a new, solidly blue WI.
I don't know about Callais causing gerrymanders. The filing deadlines (and even primaries in NC and MS) have already passed in states that would have redraws.
I'm aware lol
You think they'd consider reopening filing just so new maps could go through? Seems risky legally and politically
I think we should wait until the decision comes down lol
I think the Court, if it makes any changes to the law, will apply the "Purcell doctrine" and not require the state to redistrict for the November election.
I think that's unlikely, they're very "Purcell for thee, not for me" in the last few terms.
That's not totally true. And in this instance, it really is late in the game with filing deadlines having passed.
We also don’t know if the justices will kill the VRA. Last I heard, Roberts and Gorsuch sounded skeptical in hearings, and Trump threatening Roberts recently + the birthright citizenship case going up in flames indicates that there’s still a possibility they won’t kill it.
The place is almost last in every category, healthcare, education, child mortality and the list goes on. The roads and parks are in major disrepair the state is a mess and they want to take Medicaid away from people. I guess they want to be dead last in everything.
TN-9: Rep. Steve Cohen is at the Tennessee House today instead of doing his job in Washington to mingle with Republicans and antagonize progressive challenger state Rep. Justin Pearson.
I support Pearson but it's not Cohen's fault the House isn't in session.
He could be working in his district, or at least not be friendly with the Republicans
On that I agree.
I really hope he loses. This is just so out of touch with the moment.
How so?
I'm confused - is Cohen not an ardent progressive?
He used to be, but even went as far as to leave the CPC. Not very "progressive" to be in office for 44 years, but you could also say the same about Bernie Sanders.
Being in office for a long time does not, by itself, cease to make someone progressive.
Yes, which is why I mentioned Sanders as a contrast.
KY-04 Republican primary poll. Massie is definitely in danger.
https://x.com/_AustinHorn/status/2042227128914022716
After an early draft/version was posted & taken down last night, the final
@QuantusInsights
survey comes out this morning at:
Massie - 46.8%
Gallrein - 37.7%
Undecided - 14%
https://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article315347405.html
Another poll by Big Data Poll (?) from the same time period has Massie up 52-48, with no undecided. Much better than his previous showing against a "Trump-endorsed Republican" last June which had him trailing 52-23 .
https://www.bigdatapoll.com/blog/republican-primary-poll-for-kentucky-house-district-4/
Perhaps on paper Massie might be in danger. However, in that tweet, one commenter mentioned he is a Democrat and is voting for Massie in the primary.
Although this is just one person, I wonder if perhaps there will be an influx of registered Democrats in KY-04 who will vote for Massie. Polling may not pick this up.
More running to the exits in Wisconsin - https://x.com/jrrosswrites/status/2042286423974228401?s=46
"More retirement news:
@RepRobBrooks
announced today he won't seek reelection after 12 years in the Assembly.
He's the 9th member of the Assembly to retire or decide to seek higher office."
All the awful Scott Walker enablers are leaving or voted out of office. Especially Robin Vos and the two Karens he appointed to the SCOWI who decided to retire rather than suffer humiliating re-election losses.
Amazing. And it was literally an eternity from 2011-2019 when Walker & Co were ruling WI.
lmao he's a first-term rep in a Trump +47 district
Not a first-term rep; he was redistricted after legislative maps were redrawn in 2024
You're absolutely right, my bad. He was first elected in 2014.
Since you posted already, I deleted my comment, but let’s not forget the 8th retirement that happened a whopping 1 hour before the 9th.
https://x.com/jrrosswrites/status/2042263868341211482
Retirement news:
@RepJerryOConnor, 72, announces he won't seek reelection this fall after two terms in the Assembly.
He is the 8th member of the Assembly to announce plans to retire or seek higher office.
oh I didn't even see that one!
No worries! I follow him, so I get his posts a lot on my feed, that’s the only reason I knew lol. One of the best journalists for covering local/state WI politics.
I’ve seen this before.
https://x.com/VoteHub/status/2041693669712138445
Heavily Hispanic areas on Milwaukee's south side are shifting sharply toward Democrats, with a 56-point swing in one Lincoln Village precinct. Taylor is getting 91% compared to Harris's 64%.
Milwaukee County overall is running 11 points more Democratic vs. 2024.
One of the more encouraging stats from Tuesday imo.
https://x.com/ZacharyDonnini/status/2042265077609361617
Dade County, GA
2022 Governor Election:
🔴 Brian Kemp – 4,969
🔵 Stacey Abrams – 807
2026 GA-14 Special Election:
🔴 Clayton Fuller – 2,007
🔵 Shawn Harris – 910
Democrats are gaining voters, not just benefiting from a low turnout election.
https://x.com/devinremikerwi/status/2042260327341953340
Turnout wasn't the only story Tuesday — there's a real GOP backlash brewing in Wisconsin.
Schimel won Clarno Township with 280 votes in 2025, then it swung so hard toward Taylor that she beat the raw vote for Harris in '24 when *3.4M* votes were cast statewide.
I have found 5 municipalities in SW Wisconsin where Chris Taylor received MORE raw votes than Kamala Harris (26v24):
Steuben (Crawford): 23-17
Clarno (Green): 266-257
Wayne (Lafayette): 68-60
South Wayne (Lafayette): 63-57
White Oak Springs (Lafayette): 22-20
Obviously this won’t happen in November, but the trifecta is absolutely up for grabs.
https://x.com/VoteHub/status/2042237143729213709
Wisconsin State Assembly Districts Won
2024 Presidential:
🔴 Trump 50
🔵 Harris 49
2026 State Supreme Court:
🔵 Taylor 70
🔴 Lazar 29
Taylor carried a supermajority of State Assembly districts.
I think WI Ds can get a 63-64 state Assembly seat majority a la Virginia last year. But if it's just 51-55 seats, that's fine too.
Unlikely, there are only 11 Republican districts within Trump +10, some of which are closer to red than purple. Considering the Dems currently have 45 seats, anything more than 55 seats would be a major surprise.
I think Democrats can get a majority in 2026, but a lot of things still have to go right for us. Geography sucks for our party in the state. Anything more than that and we’ve got a Senate Majority with room to spare. 60 seats realistically isn’t possible. I’m happy with anything above the 50 majority making line. Above 55 would be gravy.
The reason Virginia was so awful for Republicans is that a ton of Harris-won seats were still represented by Republicans and the next tier of districts were just barely won by Trump. All of those flipped blue due to voter backlash and a weak GOP nominee, but Democrats didn’t flip any seat beyond Trump +10 as far as I’m aware in VA 2025 and you need to flip those double digit Trump seats to have that kind of majority in Wisconsin.
What about State Senate districts?
They're nested, 3 Assembly districts per Senate district. So I would guess she won at least 20/33 Senate districts? 70 divided by three is 23 1/3
Don't know, but if she won every district where Trump got less than 60% of the vote (none of which are located in the less-elastic WOW area), then 24 seats