Agree with this and having more visibly disabled members and who use wheelchairs, but just pointing out there are quite a few more disabled electeds beyond Duckworth and Abbott.
Gently, this kind of "inspiration" fits into the charity model of disability. Turek is passionate and understands from his own life the need to make decisions with disabled people in mind as users and recipients of government programs. That's what we should be lauding, not his ability to simply live his life as a wheelchair user.
I know it's little comfort when you've had experiences like that out in the world but I hope you know you are welcome and valued here (among many other places!).
Far as I'm concerned, Turek had this race in the bag as soon as he started running ads of him wheeling up a steep hill in a wheelchair. I suspect Wahls probably realized it when he saw that ad too, and wondered, "How can I compete with that?!"
The total number of R-aligned votes in that district was oddly high too.. about 48% between Kiley and the Republican. My fear is that the blue shift won’t be as strong as people believe because many Dems just gave up on the Gov race because it came together so late and are waiting to sort it out in November.
I think another concern is that a blue shift happens, but a lot of the late voters didn't necessarily know to vote for Richard Pan, and he doesn't receive enough to take the second spot.
But it's also possible a lot of the late conservative voters didn't know Kiley was a Republican and he falls from the 1st spot to 3rd. We really have to wait and see on that one, and sadly, it sounds like Sacramento County and Placer County don't plan to post updates anytime soon.
Surprised by Feenstra losing and that Johnson might not even make the runoff. Think we're seeing something similar to the 2018 primaries where most House members seeking promotion lost nomination bc voters were punishing them for aiding an unpopular Trump government.
Encouraging folks to donate to the Dem-aligned nominee in MT's nonpartisan SC, Amy Eddy, who's seeking to replace retiring liberal justice, Beth Baker, and to keep a liberal majority on the court.
The largest city in SD, Sioux Falls, has an open mayoral election will go to a runoff that we could flip with a Dem challenge from Jamie Smith (our 2022 gov nominee against Noem's reelection) against Christine Erickson (former state rep).
The utility rate backlash seems to be continuing to some extent. In both Repub primaries seats up from the MT Public Service Commission, the open seat was won by I think a less establishment former state rep and the incumbent seat is barely hanging on from losing to a perennial candidate.
In other news, there's a lawsuit seeking to punish the Dem nominee (Cindy Burbank) and Legal Marijuana Now nominee (Mike Marvin) for being bad faith candidates who will drop out for Dan Osborn. This basically seems to be the same kind of thing that SOS Bob Evnen failed to make to the state SC asking to strike Burbank from the primary ballot, so idk if punishing them will succeed.
Separately, Evnen has asked the state AG's office for legal advice on removing Burbank from the ballot once she's able after the primary result is certified on 6/8. Evnen wants to keep her on, so she may have to sue to be removed.
Belin posted this in the chat a day or so ago. My memory of her accompanying comment was that she thought Lahn is actually a stronger candidate against Sand bc Feenstra doesn't connect with Repub voters nearly as much to drive them to vote.
That's my take from Iowa too. Lahn probably boosts GOP base turnout compared to Feenstra, and Sand's best path to victory has always been a lethargic base. This race just got tougher for Sand I suspect, but I think the potential exists for Lahn to lose places like Ankeny, Waukee, and Marion worse than Feenstra would have because of the cultural red meat. If you're an Iowa Republican though and have the choice between firing up the base or alienating suburban moderates, you're gonna opt for firing up the base every time.
Might be better to look to one of our likely-freshmen congresspeople in that circumstance. Wahls wouldn't be any less of a weak candidate in 2028 than he was in 2026.
On another note, John Fetterman has described Graham Platner as a “creep” and he “wouldn’t carry water for that guy”. Platner should now win in a landslide…
Considering the likelihood of Fetterman losing the 2028 primary is high and most PA Democrats want him out, I’d say Conor Lamb has probably the best chance at coalescing the base and elected officials to support his candidacy. But if not, hopefully someone else will.
"Context: In the first batches of votes counted in the 2022 California primary, Rick Caruso led Karen Bass 42/37. The final result of the primary had Bass ahead 43% to 36%.
In the November election, the first batch had Caruso up 51/49. Bass won 55/45."
It may well end up being Bass against Raman in the end. I hadn't realized we do November runoffs. Our myriad systems are so weird. When's the final final election, then?
A bad night for my “choose an Asian woman in a matchup with a Republican woman” challenge. I sent $50 to Tina Shah and to Jasmeet Bain, believing them to have the most propitious opportunities. Now I’ve got $50 on Nabilah Parkes. Should she come up short I guess I’ll comb the states and try to come up with a promising State
Senate candidate trying for a GOP held office. Be it Parkes or someone identified later, she will join Mary Peltola, JoAnna Mendoza, and Keisha Lance Bottoms as measures of my hypothesis that Democratic women exceed expectations in matchups with Republicans.
Any word on whether Alani Bankhead will drop out in the Montana Senate race to allow Seth Bodnar to run without Democratic opposition? I know Reilly Neil said she wouldn’t if she won the nomination, but I know nothing about Bankhead.
She goes on a mini-speech in that post. And that's not an "opinion." Nixon made a point to resign before impeachment and Watergate was sandbagging him badly.
The good news is, if she waits awhile to drop out it won't look so contrived. Not saying it will happen, but if she raises little money and gets no traction and a lot of advice from senior Democrats that she'll be looked well upon for clearing the race, I can see her dropping out in a few months.
I don't believe so. I think Sand would have beaten Feenstra, especially given such a weak performance in the primary but Lahn is more of a wild card and doesn't have the baggage Feenstra does.
Maybe, but with a wild card you also have a lot more potential for baggage, like we see with Platner. You’re right that Feenstra probably was a likely loser, so maybe taking a chance with someone else is better. That risk backfires if the wild card loses so badly they drag down the downballot ticket like Mark Robinson did. Apparently Lahn invested in cock rings.
I guess someone should get him on the record on things like corn sugar, corn oil (a filthy, filthy seed oil), and maybe corn ethanol. It's the wrong state for paleo diet conservatives.
Deciding he wasn't gonna bother mingling with the little people (other GOP candidates) in either of the two debates was probably the difference.
I always figured Feenstra knew something we didn't....like, for instance, that he had such a lock on evangelicals, particularly in his home district in northwest Iowa, that defeat wasn't a consideration. If that was his calculation, it feel miserably flat. Lahn beat him in Marion County (heavily evangelical Pella) and Feenstra only won his home county, Iowa's reddest county Sioux, 47-40. I'm surprised Feenstra did as well as did with those kinds of numbers among his own people. It was one of the most arrogant campaigns in recent memory.
I forget which recent election it was, maybe the presidential election, but Sioux County was actually not the reddest in the election. Lyon County beat it. I was surprised to see that
I'm in Des Moines so I'll give my thoughts. Zach Lahn represents a very different opponent, not necessarily a stronger one. Feenstra was running the most limp campaign I can ever recall. He is a boring, uncharismatic man who held very few events, avoided all candidate forums and opted not to even participate in the debates. He's low energy, with the baggage of Trump's low approval, and the baggage of evangelicalism. Lahn is running as a populist, outsider. But he's a wealthy private school owner in Kansas. He moved to Iowa 3 years ago so he could run presumably, and still flies to Kansas several times a quarter. He's pretty unvetted (again, Feenstra ran virtually no campaign), so I believe there are likely a lot of skeletons to uncover that haven't been talked about before. He's an unknown, whereas Rob Sand has been building his persona in the state for years now. So we don't yet know if this is a good thing or not, but I think Sand is strong and will definitely run a vigorous campaign.
If a thriving neighborhood business could potentially be pushed out of business with no chance to relocate due to a supervisor arguing the building itself could be redeveloped, that isn't leftist at all. That's quite moderate.
A leftist approach would be to negotiate a compromise for the merchant to remain in business at the building even after the redevelopment or be given a good incentive to relocate as long as it can continue to thrive.
Maybe I'm not understanding your example here, but I dont think leftists would care much about th÷ business. The leftist position is generally, "if you are having trouble with your business, that's your fault".
Yes. That is a problem but they don’t rule the Mission District, which is where LOTS of progressives live in. Same as District 1, which Connie Chan represents.
To give perspective: Scott Weiner narrowly beat Jane Kim in his original State Senate race. If he or Chan win the House race, neither them are likely going to win by double digits.
That would deinetly be "traditional" capitalism. But that's been replaced by a version where they will shovel dark money your way if you are a big business.
Oh that’s not at all what progressives in San Francisco believe in. They are community and neighborhood oriented but just don’t like the corporate powers that be to dictate policy, especially as it relates to housing. Progressives can be quite leftist but back in the days of the 2000’s, it was more nasty politics wise. Nowadays it’s more productive and pragmatic conversation wise.
That said, this should not distract from the fact that more “moderate” supervisors like District 3 Danny Souter want to get more transit reinvigoration to help Fisherman’s Wharf, which I support. They have good ideas just like progressives have good ideas. It’s on housing that it really differs.
Not true at all, many of the SF centrists are in fact centrist of the New Dem variety - liberal on social issues, center to center right on economic issues. All one has to do is look at some of their major outside funders - Trump-aligned or friendly SV groups and leaders.
I'm only somewhat plugged into the political scene there but I wonder how much the lack of an actual leftist in the gubernatorial race (a la Zohran/AOC/Rahman) might've skewed turnout. My actual guess though is that Lurie is one of the best Mayors in the country and is shifting the city's politics towards optimistic and effective liberalism in a way that benefits candidates like Scott Wiener.
I don't see how a more leftist gubernatorial candidate would be needed to make an impact. Tom Steyer won San Francisco County by a decent margin and is considered progressive in the eyes of supporters even while he’s not considered a “leftist” like AOC or Mamdani.
The reality is that since Willie Brown was originally Mayor back in the 90’s, all mayors since him have been moderate, center left or more apolitical (ex: the late Ed Lee, who London Breed replaced as Mayor and Daniel Lurie, who projects an apolitical image as mayor) while at the same time being business friendly. You also have the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, which has its own PAC and is very influential in the city along with corporate development interests.
Lurie may be an effective Mayor but he also bought the 2024 mayoral election. When progressives pushed to move the mayoral election to presidential election years, the goal was to get more turnout which in turn would help benefit progressive voters. Lurie took advantage of this in spite of the measure, which Mayor Breed was actually looking at the measure as a power grab for progressives.
Also, the San Francisco Standard is founded by billionaire tech investor Michael Moritz, a notorious rival of progressives.
This isn’t entirely a fair assessment although I can see where it’s going.
San Francisco Standard points out that a more progressive candidate in District 2 went down in flames. Considering District 2 is the wealthiest and ritziest part of San Francisco, it should be noted it does not have a history of electing progressives. In fact, even if turnout was higher, a more moderate candidate would still win.
Besides, the mayoral races are now held in presidential election years, a measure by the way which progressives did push to get passed. The San Francisco Standard certainly forgot about this.
Also, Boudin was DA during the pandemic and with him and the pervasive problems with crime, it was harder for progressives to be on message. He was a problem but London Breed didn’t do enough to stop the crime. In all fairness to her as Mayor, she had a tough job moving San Francisco away from the pandemic. The economy started to pic up slowly towards the end of Breed’s tenure but Lurie’s accelerated it big time, which may be why he’s favored to win re-election.
I mean, Lurie saving the Macy’s Union Square location from closing down is a BFD for the morale of the city.
Obvi take it with a grain of salt but I found it interesting that, not only did Dems outvote Reps in both IA-01 and IA-02, but the D-R margin was larger in IA-02 than IA-01.
Obvi Ashley Hinson running for Senate could nullify this in November but it's possible that Dems' good geography in Iowa + a strong year could lead to a repeat of 2018 and give them 3 out of 4 House seats next Congress.
Just going by partisanship, it would technically be more likely that Democrats win 3 house seats in Iowa than flip the senate seat. And I think they have a very solid chance to flip the senate seat!
I think it’s great that Turek is from the red 4th district. He and Sand will complement each other very well. Key is both of them getting above 40% in that district.
⬆️"... it's possible that Dems' good geography in Iowa + a strong year could lead to a repeat of 2018 and give them 3 out of 4 House seats next Congress."
Iowa is one of the states for which Postcards to Swing States has a statewide campaign. They will send you the postcards for free, but you are responsible for postage. You can select from three get-out-the-vote messages (IOW, not candidate specific). They are "write and hold" with one of 2 mailing dates in October.
MT-1: Republican Aaron Flint will face Democrat Sam Forstag, who hasn't been called the primary winner, but has enough votes that the numerous other major candidates can't catch up to him.
SD-Gov: Rep. Dusty Johnson and state Rep. Jon Hansen have no way to catch up to incumbent Larry Rhoden and businessman Toby Doeden to make spots in the Republican runoff. Rhoden will not be ousted today, at least.
Worth noting Johnson is the second House Republican to lose a gubernatorial primary this cycle, except Randy Feenstra had Trump's endorsement, who did not endorse here. Looking like we'll at least get Nancy Mace and Ralph Norman both next week.
MT + WY + Dakotas would be one of the most beautiful states/local government units anywhere in the world. Could probably turn Bozeman into a Denver-type metropolis over the course of 50 years too.
The outlier in that push for statehood was the large geography of Montana (which had low population so wasn't split), the combined Dakotas were considered too large geographically to be a state (they are bigger than Montana and already had enough population for 3 house districts at statehood). The only states geographically larger are AK, TX, and CA, all of which have unusual paths to statehood.
Agree with this and having more visibly disabled members and who use wheelchairs, but just pointing out there are quite a few more disabled electeds beyond Duckworth and Abbott.
Seeing Turek pull himself and his wheelchair up full blown steps makes me want to not complain about anything physically ever again. Impressive stuff.
Gently, this kind of "inspiration" fits into the charity model of disability. Turek is passionate and understands from his own life the need to make decisions with disabled people in mind as users and recipients of government programs. That's what we should be lauding, not his ability to simply live his life as a wheelchair user.
I know it's little comfort when you've had experiences like that out in the world but I hope you know you are welcome and valued here (among many other places!).
I often wonder if jerks like the one you ran into in Costco ever realize that they are one accident or illness away being in a wheelchair themselves?
The term "temporarily abled" seems increasingly wise as I get older.
Far as I'm concerned, Turek had this race in the bag as soon as he started running ads of him wheeling up a steep hill in a wheelchair. I suspect Wahls probably realized it when he saw that ad too, and wondered, "How can I compete with that?!"
The total number of R-aligned votes in that district was oddly high too.. about 48% between Kiley and the Republican. My fear is that the blue shift won’t be as strong as people believe because many Dems just gave up on the Gov race because it came together so late and are waiting to sort it out in November.
That is a totally unfounded fear. The VBM data clearly indicates the blue shift will happen.
I think another concern is that a blue shift happens, but a lot of the late voters didn't necessarily know to vote for Richard Pan, and he doesn't receive enough to take the second spot.
But it's also possible a lot of the late conservative voters didn't know Kiley was a Republican and he falls from the 1st spot to 3rd. We really have to wait and see on that one, and sadly, it sounds like Sacramento County and Placer County don't plan to post updates anytime soon.
Need to see what the final count looks like and there may be reasons in that district vs. others.
Surprised by Feenstra losing and that Johnson might not even make the runoff. Think we're seeing something similar to the 2018 primaries where most House members seeking promotion lost nomination bc voters were punishing them for aiding an unpopular Trump government.
Encouraging folks to donate to the Dem-aligned nominee in MT's nonpartisan SC, Amy Eddy, who's seeking to replace retiring liberal justice, Beth Baker, and to keep a liberal majority on the court.
The largest city in SD, Sioux Falls, has an open mayoral election will go to a runoff that we could flip with a Dem challenge from Jamie Smith (our 2022 gov nominee against Noem's reelection) against Christine Erickson (former state rep).
The utility rate backlash seems to be continuing to some extent. In both Repub primaries seats up from the MT Public Service Commission, the open seat was won by I think a less establishment former state rep and the incumbent seat is barely hanging on from losing to a perennial candidate.
In other news, there's a lawsuit seeking to punish the Dem nominee (Cindy Burbank) and Legal Marijuana Now nominee (Mike Marvin) for being bad faith candidates who will drop out for Dan Osborn. This basically seems to be the same kind of thing that SOS Bob Evnen failed to make to the state SC asking to strike Burbank from the primary ballot, so idk if punishing them will succeed.
Separately, Evnen has asked the state AG's office for legal advice on removing Burbank from the ballot once she's able after the primary result is certified on 6/8. Evnen wants to keep her on, so she may have to sue to be removed.
https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2026/05/29/complaints-about-u-s-senate-candidates-who-hinted-at-helping-osborn-sent-to-nebraska-ag/
https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2026/05/26/u-s-senate-nominee-cindy-burbank-might-have-to-sue-to-get-her-name-off-the-general-election-ballot/
LOTS of good information!
Thank you!
Would love to hear Laura Belin’s and Tyler Mills’s thoughts on a Lahn vs. Sand race.
And Lahn is a Koch connected carpet bagger.
Belin posted this in the chat a day or so ago. My memory of her accompanying comment was that she thought Lahn is actually a stronger candidate against Sand bc Feenstra doesn't connect with Repub voters nearly as much to drive them to vote.
https://laurabelin.substack.com/p/as-feenstra-sinks-gop-establishment
That's my take from Iowa too. Lahn probably boosts GOP base turnout compared to Feenstra, and Sand's best path to victory has always been a lethargic base. This race just got tougher for Sand I suspect, but I think the potential exists for Lahn to lose places like Ankeny, Waukee, and Marion worse than Feenstra would have because of the cultural red meat. If you're an Iowa Republican though and have the choice between firing up the base or alienating suburban moderates, you're gonna opt for firing up the base every time.
Like I said last night, if Turek manages to flip the IA-SEN seat in November, then Wahls can run to replace Grassley in 2028.
Might be better to look to one of our likely-freshmen congresspeople in that circumstance. Wahls wouldn't be any less of a weak candidate in 2028 than he was in 2026.
If they turn out to be strong candidates, wouldn’t we want them in the house to try keep the seat in 2030?
A Senate seat in Iowa for 6 years is worth like 500x what a House seat we'd likely lose in 2030 is.
Did Grassley say he's retiring? You'd think, but wossface, I want to say Arlen Spector but obviously it's not that, died in office at 100.
he looks 184, Grassley.
Strom Thurmond?
If you say that near Grassley he'll start cranking out pushups.
On another note, John Fetterman has described Graham Platner as a “creep” and he “wouldn’t carry water for that guy”. Platner should now win in a landslide…
i know this has been endlessly litigated, but good lord that stroke had to have some sort of an impact.
Fetterman at this point is a chickenhawk considering his support for the Iran War so I'll take Platner's judgement over him any day.
2028 can't come soon enough for Fetterman to be primaried.
I just hope the PA Democrats can rally behind a single primary opponent.
I wish we had ranked choice voting for all primaries - I think the candidate going into the general election would be of a better caliber.
Considering the likelihood of Fetterman losing the 2028 primary is high and most PA Democrats want him out, I’d say Conor Lamb has probably the best chance at coalescing the base and elected officials to support his candidacy. But if not, hopefully someone else will.
Fetterman is the only Senate Democrat so far to come out strongly against Platner.
Will the rest of the vote be more democratic in California? Hopefully Pan can come back in CA-6
Late ballots are expected to be much bluer. Those ballots that put the other R up was the election day vote I believe.
It usually is.
From Daniel Nichanian:
https://x.com/Taniel/status/2062014498630730054
"Context: In the first batches of votes counted in the 2022 California primary, Rick Caruso led Karen Bass 42/37. The final result of the primary had Bass ahead 43% to 36%.
In the November election, the first batch had Caruso up 51/49. Bass won 55/45."
It may well end up being Bass against Raman in the end. I hadn't realized we do November runoffs. Our myriad systems are so weird. When's the final final election, then?
Fetterman and Platner would be some kind of cage match.
A bad night for my “choose an Asian woman in a matchup with a Republican woman” challenge. I sent $50 to Tina Shah and to Jasmeet Bain, believing them to have the most propitious opportunities. Now I’ve got $50 on Nabilah Parkes. Should she come up short I guess I’ll comb the states and try to come up with a promising State
Senate candidate trying for a GOP held office. Be it Parkes or someone identified later, she will join Mary Peltola, JoAnna Mendoza, and Keisha Lance Bottoms as measures of my hypothesis that Democratic women exceed expectations in matchups with Republicans.
Onward and upward!
Meant to write “my ‘choose an Asian woman in a matchup with a Republican officeholder‘ challenge.”
Any word on whether Alani Bankhead will drop out in the Montana Senate race to allow Seth Bodnar to run without Democratic opposition? I know Reilly Neil said she wouldn’t if she won the nomination, but I know nothing about Bankhead.
The sense I got was that she’s likelier to drop
Apparently not, in a recent post where she also wrongfully says Nixon was impeached when he was popular (both are absolutely untrue).
That is pretty silly, but what does her opinion on Nixon have to do with dropping out for Bodnar?
She goes on a mini-speech in that post. And that's not an "opinion." Nixon made a point to resign before impeachment and Watergate was sandbagging him badly.
Of course, but that still wasn't really what I was asking. Are you correlating her poor judgment on Nixon to her poor judgment on the race?
Not really, but it bugs me. It's like if a self-proclaimed horror movie buff said that Jason was the killer in the first "Friday the 13th" film.
She said on social media several hours ago that she was NOT dropping out. Shame.
The good news is, if she waits awhile to drop out it won't look so contrived. Not saying it will happen, but if she raises little money and gets no traction and a lot of advice from senior Democrats that she'll be looked well upon for clearing the race, I can see her dropping out in a few months.
So, is the Lahn upset of Feenstra in IA-GOV a good thing for Dems?
I don't believe so. I think Sand would have beaten Feenstra, especially given such a weak performance in the primary but Lahn is more of a wild card and doesn't have the baggage Feenstra does.
Maybe, but with a wild card you also have a lot more potential for baggage, like we see with Platner. You’re right that Feenstra probably was a likely loser, so maybe taking a chance with someone else is better. That risk backfires if the wild card loses so badly they drag down the downballot ticket like Mark Robinson did. Apparently Lahn invested in cock rings.
https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/elections/2026/05/18/iowa-governor-candidate-zach-lahn-mens-sexual-health-company-firmtech/90059563007/?gnt-cfr=1&gca-cat=p&gca-uir=false&gca-epti=z11xx28p119550l116150c119550u002328e008950v11xx28&gca-ft=14&gca-ds=sophi
Apparently Lahn is a MAHA bro, which screams "baggage" to me.
Here's something: https://nitter.poast.org/PollTracker2024/status/2062206911458562262#m
I guess someone should get him on the record on things like corn sugar, corn oil (a filthy, filthy seed oil), and maybe corn ethanol. It's the wrong state for paleo diet conservatives.
oh hey yeah, that's kind of genius
I mean, sure, why not, diversify the ol/ portfolio
I think Lahn has plenty of baggage but I don't think a single person who voted for Trump in 2024 will ultimately care about any of it.
Except possibly the ones who have forgotten they voted for him and hate Trump now. It's not a huge number but they exist.
If nothing else, it proves that a Trump endorsement isn’t absolute.
I know that Feenstra was considered weak, but I'm not exactly sure why. Maybe just not a good politician?
I believe he only won originally by being Not Steve King
I'm not even sure Steve King's scandals would resonate today (certainly not among the folks most likely to vote in GOP primaries!).
Nope.
Oh that's right: I could swear I read in passing yesterday that Lahn in fact had been endorsed by...Steve King.
but I'd have to go look again and I dunwanna
He did.
(King loathes Feenstra for obvious reasons.)
Deciding he wasn't gonna bother mingling with the little people (other GOP candidates) in either of the two debates was probably the difference.
I always figured Feenstra knew something we didn't....like, for instance, that he had such a lock on evangelicals, particularly in his home district in northwest Iowa, that defeat wasn't a consideration. If that was his calculation, it feel miserably flat. Lahn beat him in Marion County (heavily evangelical Pella) and Feenstra only won his home county, Iowa's reddest county Sioux, 47-40. I'm surprised Feenstra did as well as did with those kinds of numbers among his own people. It was one of the most arrogant campaigns in recent memory.
I forget which recent election it was, maybe the presidential election, but Sioux County was actually not the reddest in the election. Lyon County beat it. I was surprised to see that
I'm in Des Moines so I'll give my thoughts. Zach Lahn represents a very different opponent, not necessarily a stronger one. Feenstra was running the most limp campaign I can ever recall. He is a boring, uncharismatic man who held very few events, avoided all candidate forums and opted not to even participate in the debates. He's low energy, with the baggage of Trump's low approval, and the baggage of evangelicalism. Lahn is running as a populist, outsider. But he's a wealthy private school owner in Kansas. He moved to Iowa 3 years ago so he could run presumably, and still flies to Kansas several times a quarter. He's pretty unvetted (again, Feenstra ran virtually no campaign), so I believe there are likely a lot of skeletons to uncover that haven't been talked about before. He's an unknown, whereas Rob Sand has been building his persona in the state for years now. So we don't yet know if this is a good thing or not, but I think Sand is strong and will definitely run a vigorous campaign.
Don't think the Dutch Reformed consider themselves evangelical, but I take your point as to the religiosity.
Too soon to tell but doubtful. I think Lahn gets the MAGA base excited and out to vote more than Feenstra would have.
https://sfstandard.com/2026/06/03/san-francisco-progressives-election-defeat/
Last night did not go well for the San Francisco left. Basically the left lost almost every race, most of which by enormous margins.
The article blames this on low turnout and lots of outside spending. Thoughts? Do you agree with the article’s assessment?
I’m well aware. When I said the San Francisco left, I’m specifically talking about what San Francisco considers left wing.
Eh, not quite.
If a thriving neighborhood business could potentially be pushed out of business with no chance to relocate due to a supervisor arguing the building itself could be redeveloped, that isn't leftist at all. That's quite moderate.
A leftist approach would be to negotiate a compromise for the merchant to remain in business at the building even after the redevelopment or be given a good incentive to relocate as long as it can continue to thrive.
Maybe I'm not understanding your example here, but I dont think leftists would care much about th÷ business. The leftist position is generally, "if you are having trouble with your business, that's your fault".
Granted that’s also a traditionally capitalist position too
I was gonna say, that's not how I understand "leftist"...
SF is full of technocrats and that's not a good thing.
Yes. That is a problem but they don’t rule the Mission District, which is where LOTS of progressives live in. Same as District 1, which Connie Chan represents.
To give perspective: Scott Weiner narrowly beat Jane Kim in his original State Senate race. If he or Chan win the House race, neither them are likely going to win by double digits.
That would deinetly be "traditional" capitalism. But that's been replaced by a version where they will shovel dark money your way if you are a big business.
Oh that’s not at all what progressives in San Francisco believe in. They are community and neighborhood oriented but just don’t like the corporate powers that be to dictate policy, especially as it relates to housing. Progressives can be quite leftist but back in the days of the 2000’s, it was more nasty politics wise. Nowadays it’s more productive and pragmatic conversation wise.
That said, this should not distract from the fact that more “moderate” supervisors like District 3 Danny Souter want to get more transit reinvigoration to help Fisherman’s Wharf, which I support. They have good ideas just like progressives have good ideas. It’s on housing that it really differs.
Not true at all, many of the SF centrists are in fact centrist of the New Dem variety - liberal on social issues, center to center right on economic issues. All one has to do is look at some of their major outside funders - Trump-aligned or friendly SV groups and leaders.
tbh they suck, I'm not sorry to have left.
I'm only somewhat plugged into the political scene there but I wonder how much the lack of an actual leftist in the gubernatorial race (a la Zohran/AOC/Rahman) might've skewed turnout. My actual guess though is that Lurie is one of the best Mayors in the country and is shifting the city's politics towards optimistic and effective liberalism in a way that benefits candidates like Scott Wiener.
I don't see how a more leftist gubernatorial candidate would be needed to make an impact. Tom Steyer won San Francisco County by a decent margin and is considered progressive in the eyes of supporters even while he’s not considered a “leftist” like AOC or Mamdani.
The reality is that since Willie Brown was originally Mayor back in the 90’s, all mayors since him have been moderate, center left or more apolitical (ex: the late Ed Lee, who London Breed replaced as Mayor and Daniel Lurie, who projects an apolitical image as mayor) while at the same time being business friendly. You also have the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, which has its own PAC and is very influential in the city along with corporate development interests.
Lurie may be an effective Mayor but he also bought the 2024 mayoral election. When progressives pushed to move the mayoral election to presidential election years, the goal was to get more turnout which in turn would help benefit progressive voters. Lurie took advantage of this in spite of the measure, which Mayor Breed was actually looking at the measure as a power grab for progressives.
Also, the San Francisco Standard is founded by billionaire tech investor Michael Moritz, a notorious rival of progressives.
This isn’t entirely a fair assessment although I can see where it’s going.
San Francisco Standard points out that a more progressive candidate in District 2 went down in flames. Considering District 2 is the wealthiest and ritziest part of San Francisco, it should be noted it does not have a history of electing progressives. In fact, even if turnout was higher, a more moderate candidate would still win.
Besides, the mayoral races are now held in presidential election years, a measure by the way which progressives did push to get passed. The San Francisco Standard certainly forgot about this.
Their recent experience with people like Boudin (not the sourdough bread company) probably turned them off.
That’s a fair assessment.
Also, Boudin was DA during the pandemic and with him and the pervasive problems with crime, it was harder for progressives to be on message. He was a problem but London Breed didn’t do enough to stop the crime. In all fairness to her as Mayor, she had a tough job moving San Francisco away from the pandemic. The economy started to pic up slowly towards the end of Breed’s tenure but Lurie’s accelerated it big time, which may be why he’s favored to win re-election.
I mean, Lurie saving the Macy’s Union Square location from closing down is a BFD for the morale of the city.
Obvi take it with a grain of salt but I found it interesting that, not only did Dems outvote Reps in both IA-01 and IA-02, but the D-R margin was larger in IA-02 than IA-01.
Obvi Ashley Hinson running for Senate could nullify this in November but it's possible that Dems' good geography in Iowa + a strong year could lead to a repeat of 2018 and give them 3 out of 4 House seats next Congress.
Just going by partisanship, it would technically be more likely that Democrats win 3 house seats in Iowa than flip the senate seat. And I think they have a very solid chance to flip the senate seat!
I think it’s great that Turek is from the red 4th district. He and Sand will complement each other very well. Key is both of them getting above 40% in that district.
⬆️"... it's possible that Dems' good geography in Iowa + a strong year could lead to a repeat of 2018 and give them 3 out of 4 House seats next Congress."
Iowa is one of the states for which Postcards to Swing States has a statewide campaign. They will send you the postcards for free, but you are responsible for postage. You can select from three get-out-the-vote messages (IOW, not candidate specific). They are "write and hold" with one of 2 mailing dates in October.
https://turnoutpac.org/postcards/
Check out today's post from Jay Kuo:
https://statuskuo.substack.com/p/iowa-is-now-in-play?r=1aiy5t&utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=web
and be sure and watch Josh Turek's launch video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCD3vVVAa7U
We definitely need more fighter's like him!!
https://turek4iowa.com/
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-primary-elections/montana-us-house-district-1-results
MT-1: Republican Aaron Flint will face Democrat Sam Forstag, who hasn't been called the primary winner, but has enough votes that the numerous other major candidates can't catch up to him.
I like Forstag - seems to fit his district quite well
Yeah, the gun advocacy guy didn't seem at all likely to sell in MT.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-primary-elections/south-dakota-governor-results
SD-Gov: Rep. Dusty Johnson and state Rep. Jon Hansen have no way to catch up to incumbent Larry Rhoden and businessman Toby Doeden to make spots in the Republican runoff. Rhoden will not be ousted today, at least.
Worth noting Johnson is the second House Republican to lose a gubernatorial primary this cycle, except Randy Feenstra had Trump's endorsement, who did not endorse here. Looking like we'll at least get Nancy Mace and Ralph Norman both next week.
Plus John Rose in Kentucky and then one of the AZ reps. Only ones who are going to get through are Byron Donalds and the winner of the AZ primary.
I m believe you mean Tennessee, not Kentucky for John Rose
indeed, let's call it greater Appalachia and cut down the GOP Senate majority by 2.
And while you are at it, make the Dakota Territory into one state instead of two, as originally intended.
Let them absorb both wyoming and montana.
Then maybe those states will hit 1,000,000 citizens.
LOL.
MT + WY + Dakotas would be one of the most beautiful states/local government units anywhere in the world. Could probably turn Bozeman into a Denver-type metropolis over the course of 50 years too.
The outlier in that push for statehood was the large geography of Montana (which had low population so wasn't split), the combined Dakotas were considered too large geographically to be a state (they are bigger than Montana and already had enough population for 3 house districts at statehood). The only states geographically larger are AK, TX, and CA, all of which have unusual paths to statehood.
And change the course of the Missouri River (again) so that Omaha is in Iowa.
I think Norman might live until the runoff.