When preferences among delegates at a convention differ so drastically from actual primary results, that's not an issue with the primary voters. That's an issue with the delegates, and how they're selected, and how the conventions are organized. And that's true for both parties.
Frankly, these nominating conventions being so massively unrepresentative of actual primary voters reminds me of the presidential caucuses that many states used to use to allocate presidential delegates. For very good reason, almost all of those states have switched to primaries more recently. It's time for Utah, Colorado, and any other state that still uses such a system to get rid of those absurdly unrepresentative conventions and actually respect the will of their own party's primary voters.
I mean, primaries in both states still determine who the nominee is. In DeGette's case, she could have easily collected the 1,500 signatures needed for ballot access. She chose to go the caucus route knowing the types of dems who show up to them. That's on her, not the delegates.
Our longtime MA Secretary of State (technically Secretary of the Commonwealth) Bill Galvin always gets creamed at the convention, but handily wins his primaries. He only needs 15% at the convention, so it's really just a an embarrassment rather than an actually setback.
This is in part because the convention is somewhat more progressive than the electorate, but also because the issues that people are unhappy with Galvin for are rather insider baseball, and not widely known by the voters at large.
DeGette is my congressperson. In 2022 the progressives went after DeGette with a much more qualified candidate, Neal Walia, who had been a Hicklooper staffer. She won 81-18. Kiros is a PhD student. She went to law school and never practiced law or was even admitted into a state bar, as far as I could tell looking her up in three states. She grew up in a neighboring district and went to college and law school out of state. DeGette is wildly popular in the district. DeGette will easily get the signatures and easily win the primary and election. The caucuses are part of Colorado politics. They are not going away. If DeGette had not participated it would have been held against her.
Well, I did some research. Bizarrely the date to file the petition is today and the date to file the signatures is tomorrow. But even more ridiculous is holding the caucus days before the deadline to file signatures. It doesn't affect DeGette, who had 35% and is above the 30% threshold, but it does hurt Wanda James, who would likely do better than Kiros in the primary, since she is on the Board of Regents. They are pledged delegates so presumably they can't switch.
yeah, California would like a word about its Dem party delegates' close relationship with Betty Yee that is way disproportionate to her standing with actual voters.
Unfortunately, in my area in Northern Virginia the outreach through media, mailing, and yard signs overwhelmingly favors the No side. Not sure if the Yes side takes Northern Virginia for granted.
Amendment 3, which would ban abortion, leads 47-40. This is likely because of the "ballot candy" language to ban "transgender minors from receiving puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones or gender transition surgeries," which is already illegal in Missouri.
Voters oppose the new gerrymander 41-44.
Voters support sales tax over income tax 52-29. Missouri republicans want to ask voters in the fall to eliminate income tax and replace it with a sales tax hike on whatever Missouri politicians decide to tax. When asked about specific types of sales taxes, however, voters disapproved. They oppose a tax on home sales 34-53, a tax on car repair services 29-60, streaming services 43-44, and gas and diesel 34-55.
Seems like, as per usual, a lot of penniless rural Missourians will be the architects of their own demise by voting to pivot from an income to a sales tax and vastly increasing their own tax burden and lighten it on the state's upscale.
The worst part about all these GOP attempts to introduce an income tax is that they make a VAT (which would, by second-order effects, be slightly progressive) radioactive to the American populace. Which sucks as from what i understand a well implemented VAT with necessities exemption would bring in a more than sufficient amount of revenue.
You're right, I meant to say introduce a single sales tax.
VATs are regressive when taking their direct effects and if not implemented correctly but over the entire cycle of consumption can be progressive. VATs by taxing at each level of production unlike sales taxes, which only tax at the purchase level, serve as de-facto luxury taxes on the conspicuous consumption that the wealthy engage in - expensive products generally take more steps to make.
When people mention the regressiveness of VATs they connect it to taxing the consumption of necessities and how that affects lower-income people, where the tax is a higher proportion of their income earned and spent on said products vs higher income people. This could be solved by not taxing foodstuffs, medical, utilities, etc - exempting essentials from the tax.
And then the other major way that VAT can be progressive is from the large tax base that it creates - allowing for funding the programs sustainably.
Talarico is the source of a lot of energy and excitement on the Democratic side, and he's really the ticket-leader rather than the gubernatorial candidate, so it makes sense for the entire GOP to go after him.
I'd add that Hinojosa is largely unknown, so attacking her would raise her profile. As you said, attacking Talarico effectively hurts the whole ticket, so it has the same upsides but fewer of the downsides as campaigning against Hinojosa.
No, if Talarico wins he's almost certainly not bringing her with him, sadly. Abbott has way more money and nothing there's nothing about him that's objectionable enough in what is still a red state.
I did watch Joe Trippi talk on a podcast with Laura Belin about the Iowa races and how Congressional districts 1 and 3 could flip. Belin seemed less bullish about the open Senate seat flipping though.
That’s basically what happened in 2018. Dems won 3/4 congressional districts (IA-02 was a bit more D than currently) and actually won the House popular vote due to Steve King way underperforming in IA-04, but only picked up one office statewide (state auditor) because other incumbent Republicans (governor, Secretary of State) were able to get normal Republican margins in IA-04.
Belin has really bad takes about electoral politics in general. She relies on voter registration numbers to make her case, which is a really bad way of going about analyzing this.
I personally believe that Turek and Wahls could win this thing. My personal preference is Turek. As strange as it sounds, I think there were a ton of soft Trump voters out here. If you can kind of convince them that you're fighting for the little guy again then we might be able to win. Ashley Hinson is crafty, but dhe doesn't come across as fighting for someone that makes 30K a year or less.
Turek is probably the only one who really could. He is the only guy who actually ran against a Republican, let alone winning in difficult turf while on the same ticket as Donald.
I like to presume that Turek is positioned decently to win against a mannequin like Hinson, but it's really just based on vibes at this point. I'm holding out for some kind of data or campaign movement that backs up my hypothesis.
I have only corresponded with Turek by e-mail and physical mail. I wasn’t able to go see him when he came to my town because I lost my job and did not have transportation funds. I have been in the same room as Wahls at an event, but we didn’t get a chance to speak. I am not sure which one is more authentic.
Normally I would say no. But outside of Trump and Hegeseth, no one is more associated with the Iran war than Graham. So depending on how long it lasts and what happens, perhaps he becomes uniquely vulnerable.
I’ve begun to notice a pattern in potentially competitive races for the midterms, along similar lines to what happened in 2018 that isn’t getting much/any coverage or discussion so far. That year, it was the year of the Democratic white women candidates running in swing seats. But in 2026 it’s the year of Democratic white men candidates and “identity” politics has almost entirely disappeared from our party.
I have some mixed feelings about this, because I’m always supportive of more minority representatives to represent Democrats in public office. However, on the political front (just win baby as Pelosi would say), I do think running white men who are Democrats is a way to insulate our nominees from accusations by Republicans of being radical just by being white men (I hate this reality, but I still accept it to be true) and can start earning the trust of men voters back who have felt alienated by our party who feel they have no place in it.
Let’s break down just how many white men are running as favourites or have a chance to win the nomination in competitive federal or Governor races. As you can see below, there’s a lot.
Governor:
AK Claman or Begich or Kreiss-Tomkins, FL Jolly, GA Duncan, IA Sand, KS Corson, ME Jackson or King III, PA Shapiro
47% (7/13) of competitive seats feature white male Democrats.
Senate:
FL Vindman, GA Ossoff, IA Wahls or Turek, ME Platner, MT Bodnar (Ind), NE Osborn (Ind), NH Pappas, NC Cooper, OH Brown, TX Talarico
77% (10/13) of competitive seats feature white male Democrats or Independents.
House: (leaving FL/VA seats out because of redraw)
AKAL Schultz or Hill (Ind), CO03 Romero or Kelloff, CO05 Cavanaugh, CO08 Munsing, ME02 Baldacci or Wood or Dunlap, MI04 McCann, MI07 Maasdam, MI10 Greimel, MN01 Johnson, MT01 Busse or Forstag, NE01 Backemeyer, NE02 Cavanaugh, NY01 Gallant, NC11 Ager, PA01 Harvie, PA07 Brooks or Crosswell
52% (14/27) of competitive seats feature white male Democrats or Independents.
Not all of the above will win their primaries and/or general elections obviously, but it’s a large number of white men running as Democrats in competitive territory for the midterms.
I mean, that's at least assuming Jolly, Duncan and Vindman win their nominations against Black men/Black women running against them and it's not 100% clear if Bodnar will really galvanize the left coalition. And he's still a white man, but Pappas is gay. I think someone like the Women's Congressional Policy Institute or the Rutgers Center for American Women and Politics collect data on women primary campaign statistics at various levels, and at least look at intersectional identity stats if not a similar group looking at raw numbers of non-white candidates as well. We're so early in primary season, so a lot could shake out but interested in a more holistic surveying of the field.
Very true, though I don’t think it’s guaranteed the black candidates win those primaries either. I just find it very interesting that the demographic group who we’ve lost the most ground with over these last decades as we’ve become viewed as the women party, are now running as Democrats in higher numbers this cycle than any other I can recall.
A similar observation was made in 2018 with the high number of white women running as Democrats, which turned out to be a significant effect on the midterms. Maybe it means nothing, maybe it means more than we think, but it’s already created some interesting conversation, which is what I try to bring to the table for us all to enjoy and debate.
I appreciate the work you put into compiling evidence for this insight though I think it’s worth waiting a bit to draw any conclusions, as others have said.
Bigger importance I think is getting white dudes out there more as our messaging arm, more for vibes than anything else. White normie dudes with beards and tats who drive trucks and hate Trump are a valuable commodity for us!
To be fair I absolutely don’t expect all these candidates to win their primaries, but the fact so many white dudes are competing to run as Democrats imo is noteworthy for competitive or potentially competitive races. This wasn’t the case for the first Trump midterm.
I'm guessing their lead comes from (i) low-information voters who are unaware that Republicans are the ones who keep blowing up the debt/deficit and (ii) people who think the deficit is more because of too much spending rather than not enough revenue.
I'd say all but the most contentious policy subjects are heavily coded towards one party.
Republicans talk about the debt the most. Most voters are not well versed on budgetary matters, so they're going to lean towards the party that talks about the problem in the right way or even just talks about that it is a problem.
It's difficult to lose a long term edge on an issue for a party. Even constant mistakes on it can still require consistent and aggressive attention from the other party to wrench back voter support on that topic.
Going viral right now and before you ask, yes this is the same Joe Kent who ran against MGP in WA03. Unheard of for a government official to publicly resign in such a manner even if the loon never was qualified to hold such a position in the first place. Trump’s government administration has more holes in it than Swiss cheese and it’s getting worse by the day.
After much reflection, I have decided to resign from my position as Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, effective today.
I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby.
I saw you mention it yesterday, there really truly is a massive split within the right about Iran right now. And if Trump has officials publicly resigning like this... it cannot be ignored. Everyone from Laura Loomer, Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes, MTG and dozens of the most prominent right wingers have been engaging in bitter, expletive laden recriminations and infighting on there in the last week or so. X really is a cesspool of this, but I have never seen this level of free anti-semitism, and anti-Islam sentiment, openly, without masking or codewords, by relatively prominent public figures like with Ogles last week. One of the most insane things I've seen there in the last few days is Fuentes and others continuously saying now they will be voting Dem to punish the Republicans over Iran, and its getting traction from their supporters.
my jaw dropped when I watched Fuentes, one of the most right wing loons on the internet, defending and pining for Joe Biden. Biden!!! while drawing a comparison of just how badly Trump is doing.
Twitter sentiment is of course not the real world, but if the comms and messaging are looked at, the civil war is in plain sight. Iran is going to go down as probably the worst mistake trump has made, maybe after the 700k covid dead on his hands, and it is going to cost the R's dearly this midterm. Trump won't be on the ballot to juice low-propensity/infrequents, and everything he is doing is destroying enthusiasm among his base.
Well, Richard Spencer of all people voted for Biden back in 2020. Bizarre things certainly can happen with MAGA and the white nationalist supremacist base.
Agreed on all points. I’ve never seen it like this before on social media when it comes to MAGA/RW influencers. They always fall in line on every subject from January 6th to ICE deployments in cities, even with Epstein, they’ve just stopped talking about it, but not with the war, they’re pissed and it’s a massive psychotic break playing out in front of millions of people.
You get far right accounts being accused of being Democrats, being paid, being gaslit, being bought by Israel, siding with Iran, being disloyal, being traitors from every direction and then publicly saying exactly what they’re being attacked over, which is just furthering the schism and pile on, getting them even more angry. It’s exactly what they’ve done to Democrats and the left for a decade now and it’s so satisfying to see them getting to experience it first hand for the first time and how brutal it is.
Want to know why the left has “Trump derangement syndrome”? Imagine feeling this amount of emotional and mental bombardment every single day for 10 years and then see how you feel about the people attacking you after that. If anything we’re being polite.
Then you get some of them waking up saying that Democrats were right and they were idiots to believe Trump and are supporting Democrats in the 2026 midterms posts going viral with other people quote tweeting how stupid they are even if they disagree with the war furthering the online civil war with every side mad at each other. They’re making the exact same arguments Democrats made about Trump except about their own side of politics.
I’m used to seeing these tactics used exclusively against our party, I know how effective it is to sway voters, but I’m not used to seeing it used during a complete clusterfuck brawl within the GOP/Trumpist/MAGA wing before. I’ve got my popcorn and am immensely enjoying the spectacular fireworks show every day.
I also think after 2024 we can stop dismissing social media as not being real life. It is, far more than any other medium. Cable news isn’t. Podcasts isn’t. Campaign stops isn’t. Tv ads isn’t. Social media is. it’s where Americans spend the majority of their free time. It’s far more important than people admit and our party and supporters need to start competing in these spaces because it does influence elections and makes a bigger impact than we realize.
I agree with you. This is his worst, most deadly mistake, and is a war the U.S. is losing and will lose, while causing terrible repercussions for the Iranian people. [Edit: I mean since the unnecessary deaths during the COVID pandemic, which were partly intentional.]
To a point. No way do I believe Trump would do anything because of pressure from Netanyahu, though I could easily imagine him hearing a suggestion from Netanyahu, thinking it was cool because he is a psychopath who likes to kill people and distract from the Epstein files, and do it.
OK-1: Navy JAG Jackson Stallings is in as a Republican, joining state corporation commissioner Kim David and state Rep. Mark Tedford. He is endorsed by Rep. Brandon Gill and former Rep. Steve Largent, who once held the seat.
FLORIDA. Gov Ron DeSantis (R) created a council of 8 conservative, MAGA sheriffs, charged with shaping hardline immigration policy. Instead, 6 of the 8 - all vocal Trump supporters - publicly say they want an end to mass deportations...
The key excerpt on the ask: "The Sheriffs agreed Monday that they would jointly draft and edit the letter to Trump and Congress, imploring the administration to stop deporting undocumented immigrants without a criminal record. Instead, Judd suggested, they could look at civil fines, demand they learn English, or disallow them from living off the taxpayer dime."
The sheriffs/police chiefs named in the article are Grady Judd (Polk County) and Bill Prummell (Charlotte County). As to who the other four could be, the options are:
Edit: This piece says others were Gualtieri, Broadway and Goerke, so still missing one. Gualtieri is a bit of a surprise tbh. Extremely MAGA from a formerly quite swing-y county that just rarely if ever had a real Dem opposing him. He also is(/was?) the appointed chair of the public safety commission post-Parkland.
I think a lot of people are underestimating how big of a setback NC Rs got when Berger lost his primary. I think more legislative seats will flip just on lack of money burnt on his own damn primary.
Honestly if I was in his shoes and lost by 23 votes, I would probably ask for a recount. It's highly unlikely to overturn the results but it is in the realm of possibilities
Hard to think of anyone more deserving of losing specifically due to Trump's unpopularity. He's the little yappy dog that always follows a bigger dog around, like in the old cartoon. Used to be McCain, now it's Trump. (Apologies to dogs for the comparison.)
Graham losing would be great, but the numbers tell the difficulty for us. A five point gap seems plausible to close, but Andrews is at 42% in a state where the undecided voters are inherently going to lean red. Getting that last 8% to hit a majority (or a bit less for a plurality) is a huge obstacle to overcome.
Yeah, I don't see the South Carolina seat as a majority-maker, but it's great to have someone solid running there in case a big enough wave crashes on the election.
An emaciated GOP base turnout would be needed for Andrews to pull this one out. I'm guessing Lindsey knows what buttons to push to activate them and save himself in all but the most devastating worst-case scenario.
When preferences among delegates at a convention differ so drastically from actual primary results, that's not an issue with the primary voters. That's an issue with the delegates, and how they're selected, and how the conventions are organized. And that's true for both parties.
Frankly, these nominating conventions being so massively unrepresentative of actual primary voters reminds me of the presidential caucuses that many states used to use to allocate presidential delegates. For very good reason, almost all of those states have switched to primaries more recently. It's time for Utah, Colorado, and any other state that still uses such a system to get rid of those absurdly unrepresentative conventions and actually respect the will of their own party's primary voters.
I mean, primaries in both states still determine who the nominee is. In DeGette's case, she could have easily collected the 1,500 signatures needed for ballot access. She chose to go the caucus route knowing the types of dems who show up to them. That's on her, not the delegates.
Our longtime MA Secretary of State (technically Secretary of the Commonwealth) Bill Galvin always gets creamed at the convention, but handily wins his primaries. He only needs 15% at the convention, so it's really just a an embarrassment rather than an actually setback.
This is in part because the convention is somewhat more progressive than the electorate, but also because the issues that people are unhappy with Galvin for are rather insider baseball, and not widely known by the voters at large.
DeGette is my congressperson. In 2022 the progressives went after DeGette with a much more qualified candidate, Neal Walia, who had been a Hicklooper staffer. She won 81-18. Kiros is a PhD student. She went to law school and never practiced law or was even admitted into a state bar, as far as I could tell looking her up in three states. She grew up in a neighboring district and went to college and law school out of state. DeGette is wildly popular in the district. DeGette will easily get the signatures and easily win the primary and election. The caucuses are part of Colorado politics. They are not going away. If DeGette had not participated it would have been held against her.
It’s too late to get signatures, today is the last day you can file them.
Well, I did some research. Bizarrely the date to file the petition is today and the date to file the signatures is tomorrow. But even more ridiculous is holding the caucus days before the deadline to file signatures. It doesn't affect DeGette, who had 35% and is above the 30% threshold, but it does hurt Wanda James, who would likely do better than Kiros in the primary, since she is on the Board of Regents. They are pledged delegates so presumably they can't switch.
yeah, California would like a word about its Dem party delegates' close relationship with Betty Yee that is way disproportionate to her standing with actual voters.
What are our chances to win that Virginia special election, to clarify I am on about the HD98 special election.
I haven’t seen any polling on it, but based on fundraising and the mood of the electorate I would say it’s favored to pass.
Unfortunately, in my area in Northern Virginia the outreach through media, mailing, and yard signs overwhelmingly favors the No side. Not sure if the Yes side takes Northern Virginia for granted.
i apologize, i meant the HD98 special election.
I believe they’re asking about the HD98 special election in a Trump +15 district, not the ballot amendment.
Ahh, I see. It’s not clear.
yes dragonfire is correct i apologize
No IL preview?
I wonder if a separate post is coming later today
I believe they said the preview was coming in a few hours. Should be interesting.
Have faith in our babka overlords!
IL preview! https://www.the-downballot.com/p/illinois-insanely-expensive-primaries
New Missouri poll:
Amendment 3, which would ban abortion, leads 47-40. This is likely because of the "ballot candy" language to ban "transgender minors from receiving puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones or gender transition surgeries," which is already illegal in Missouri.
Voters oppose the new gerrymander 41-44.
Voters support sales tax over income tax 52-29. Missouri republicans want to ask voters in the fall to eliminate income tax and replace it with a sales tax hike on whatever Missouri politicians decide to tax. When asked about specific types of sales taxes, however, voters disapproved. They oppose a tax on home sales 34-53, a tax on car repair services 29-60, streaming services 43-44, and gas and diesel 34-55.
https://www.slu.edu/research/research-institute/big-ideas/slu-poll/previous-poll-results/february-2026-results.php
Seems like, as per usual, a lot of penniless rural Missourians will be the architects of their own demise by voting to pivot from an income to a sales tax and vastly increasing their own tax burden and lighten it on the state's upscale.
The worst part about all these GOP attempts to introduce an income tax is that they make a VAT (which would, by second-order effects, be slightly progressive) radioactive to the American populace. Which sucks as from what i understand a well implemented VAT with necessities exemption would bring in a more than sufficient amount of revenue.
Don't you mean attempts to eliminate an income tax? I thought all forms of sales tax were regressive. Why would a VAT be a good idea?
You're right, I meant to say introduce a single sales tax.
VATs are regressive when taking their direct effects and if not implemented correctly but over the entire cycle of consumption can be progressive. VATs by taxing at each level of production unlike sales taxes, which only tax at the purchase level, serve as de-facto luxury taxes on the conspicuous consumption that the wealthy engage in - expensive products generally take more steps to make.
When people mention the regressiveness of VATs they connect it to taxing the consumption of necessities and how that affects lower-income people, where the tax is a higher proportion of their income earned and spent on said products vs higher income people. This could be solved by not taxing foodstuffs, medical, utilities, etc - exempting essentials from the tax.
And then the other major way that VAT can be progressive is from the large tax base that it creates - allowing for funding the programs sustainably.
Can anyone explain why Abbott is campaigning against Talarico instead of attacking the actual candidate he's facing in the governor's race?
Because if Talarico wins, he's likely bringing Hinojosa over the line with him too.
Abbott thinks he's in a stronger position than Cornyn or Paxton, I guess
It's idiotic, that's what it is.
Talarico is the source of a lot of energy and excitement on the Democratic side, and he's really the ticket-leader rather than the gubernatorial candidate, so it makes sense for the entire GOP to go after him.
I'd add that Hinojosa is largely unknown, so attacking her would raise her profile. As you said, attacking Talarico effectively hurts the whole ticket, so it has the same upsides but fewer of the downsides as campaigning against Hinojosa.
Their attacks on him are rather pathetic IMO. It's the "no true Scotsman" RW Christian fallacy.
No, if Talarico wins he's almost certainly not bringing her with him, sadly. Abbott has way more money and nothing there's nothing about him that's objectionable enough in what is still a red state.
We've had candidates win races where the incumbent or shoo-in was very well funded and enough ticked off voters.
Do not count out Hinojosa.
I don't think it's necessarily the case at all that Talarico couldn't beat Paxton without Honojosa beating Abbott, who is not as controversial.
Democrats recruited more candidates to run in Iowa than Republicans did.
https://x.com/Taniel/status/2033677455752384685
Iowa's deadline passed. Both parties have candidates in all congressional races, & all statewide races.
—For state House:
Dem candidates in 84 of 100 races
GOP candidates in 76 of 100 races
—For state Senate:
Dem candidates in 20 of 25 races
GOP candidates in 19 of 25 races
I did watch Joe Trippi talk on a podcast with Laura Belin about the Iowa races and how Congressional districts 1 and 3 could flip. Belin seemed less bullish about the open Senate seat flipping though.
That’s basically what happened in 2018. Dems won 3/4 congressional districts (IA-02 was a bit more D than currently) and actually won the House popular vote due to Steve King way underperforming in IA-04, but only picked up one office statewide (state auditor) because other incumbent Republicans (governor, Secretary of State) were able to get normal Republican margins in IA-04.
Belin has really bad takes about electoral politics in general. She relies on voter registration numbers to make her case, which is a really bad way of going about analyzing this.
I personally believe that Turek and Wahls could win this thing. My personal preference is Turek. As strange as it sounds, I think there were a ton of soft Trump voters out here. If you can kind of convince them that you're fighting for the little guy again then we might be able to win. Ashley Hinson is crafty, but dhe doesn't come across as fighting for someone that makes 30K a year or less.
Turek is probably the only one who really could. He is the only guy who actually ran against a Republican, let alone winning in difficult turf while on the same ticket as Donald.
I like to presume that Turek is positioned decently to win against a mannequin like Hinson, but it's really just based on vibes at this point. I'm holding out for some kind of data or campaign movement that backs up my hypothesis.
I have only corresponded with Turek by e-mail and physical mail. I wasn’t able to go see him when he came to my town because I lost my job and did not have transportation funds. I have been in the same room as Wahls at an event, but we didn’t get a chance to speak. I am not sure which one is more authentic.
This is an achievement given how many more incumbents Republicans have then Democrats.
Finally an obligatory tossup SC poll!
Can Andrews actually defeat Graham?
Normally I would say no. But outside of Trump and Hegeseth, no one is more associated with the Iran war than Graham. So depending on how long it lasts and what happens, perhaps he becomes uniquely vulnerable.
A 5-point lead, if real, is not insurmountable but surely not a tossup.
Happy primary day to all!
I’ve begun to notice a pattern in potentially competitive races for the midterms, along similar lines to what happened in 2018 that isn’t getting much/any coverage or discussion so far. That year, it was the year of the Democratic white women candidates running in swing seats. But in 2026 it’s the year of Democratic white men candidates and “identity” politics has almost entirely disappeared from our party.
I have some mixed feelings about this, because I’m always supportive of more minority representatives to represent Democrats in public office. However, on the political front (just win baby as Pelosi would say), I do think running white men who are Democrats is a way to insulate our nominees from accusations by Republicans of being radical just by being white men (I hate this reality, but I still accept it to be true) and can start earning the trust of men voters back who have felt alienated by our party who feel they have no place in it.
Let’s break down just how many white men are running as favourites or have a chance to win the nomination in competitive federal or Governor races. As you can see below, there’s a lot.
Governor:
AK Claman or Begich or Kreiss-Tomkins, FL Jolly, GA Duncan, IA Sand, KS Corson, ME Jackson or King III, PA Shapiro
47% (7/13) of competitive seats feature white male Democrats.
Senate:
FL Vindman, GA Ossoff, IA Wahls or Turek, ME Platner, MT Bodnar (Ind), NE Osborn (Ind), NH Pappas, NC Cooper, OH Brown, TX Talarico
77% (10/13) of competitive seats feature white male Democrats or Independents.
House: (leaving FL/VA seats out because of redraw)
AKAL Schultz or Hill (Ind), CO03 Romero or Kelloff, CO05 Cavanaugh, CO08 Munsing, ME02 Baldacci or Wood or Dunlap, MI04 McCann, MI07 Maasdam, MI10 Greimel, MN01 Johnson, MT01 Busse or Forstag, NE01 Backemeyer, NE02 Cavanaugh, NY01 Gallant, NC11 Ager, PA01 Harvie, PA07 Brooks or Crosswell
52% (14/27) of competitive seats feature white male Democrats or Independents.
Not all of the above will win their primaries and/or general elections obviously, but it’s a large number of white men running as Democrats in competitive territory for the midterms.
I mean, that's at least assuming Jolly, Duncan and Vindman win their nominations against Black men/Black women running against them and it's not 100% clear if Bodnar will really galvanize the left coalition. And he's still a white man, but Pappas is gay. I think someone like the Women's Congressional Policy Institute or the Rutgers Center for American Women and Politics collect data on women primary campaign statistics at various levels, and at least look at intersectional identity stats if not a similar group looking at raw numbers of non-white candidates as well. We're so early in primary season, so a lot could shake out but interested in a more holistic surveying of the field.
Very true, though I don’t think it’s guaranteed the black candidates win those primaries either. I just find it very interesting that the demographic group who we’ve lost the most ground with over these last decades as we’ve become viewed as the women party, are now running as Democrats in higher numbers this cycle than any other I can recall.
A similar observation was made in 2018 with the high number of white women running as Democrats, which turned out to be a significant effect on the midterms. Maybe it means nothing, maybe it means more than we think, but it’s already created some interesting conversation, which is what I try to bring to the table for us all to enjoy and debate.
Interesting observation and insight.
But I doubt Duncan (GA) will even make the top-two. He will not get the nomination.
Agreed, he’s running as a candidate though, which is why I included him.
I appreciate the work you put into compiling evidence for this insight though I think it’s worth waiting a bit to draw any conclusions, as others have said.
Bigger importance I think is getting white dudes out there more as our messaging arm, more for vibes than anything else. White normie dudes with beards and tats who drive trucks and hate Trump are a valuable commodity for us!
To be fair I absolutely don’t expect all these candidates to win their primaries, but the fact so many white dudes are competing to run as Democrats imo is noteworthy for competitive or potentially competitive races. This wasn’t the case for the first Trump midterm.
It's a little odd to describe Jon Ossoff as a "white male" considering he's been pretty open about being openly Jewish.
Can’t remember the last time Democrats held an advantage on the issues of taxes.
https://x.com/IAPolls2022/status/2033912959676662161
Congressional Trust on Issues (net)
🟦 LGBTQ+ rights: D+27
🟦 Medicare/SSA: D+16
🟦 Abortion: D+15
🟦 Healthcare: D+14
🟦 Economy: D+3 (was R+2 in Feb)
🟦 Energy: D+6
🟦 Trade: D+2
🟦 Taxes: D+1
——
⬜ Foreign policy: even (was R+5)
⬜ National debt: even
——
🟥 Immigration: R+6
🟥 National Security: R+4
Morning Consult | 3/13-16 | 2,201 RV
Trump's presidency might be the thing that finally ends the GOP's completely unwarranted lead on National Security they've been milking since 9/11.
They still have a lead on national debt? Even though they are always the ones to blow up it?
I'm guessing their lead comes from (i) low-information voters who are unaware that Republicans are the ones who keep blowing up the debt/deficit and (ii) people who think the deficit is more because of too much spending rather than not enough revenue.
I'd say all but the most contentious policy subjects are heavily coded towards one party.
Republicans talk about the debt the most. Most voters are not well versed on budgetary matters, so they're going to lean towards the party that talks about the problem in the right way or even just talks about that it is a problem.
It's difficult to lose a long term edge on an issue for a party. Even constant mistakes on it can still require consistent and aggressive attention from the other party to wrench back voter support on that topic.
Bubbanomics reaction activated.
https://x.com/kirk_bado/status/2033892083912630698
Sign of the times: NRCC renames their McCarthy-era challenger program "Young Guns" with the new moniker "MAGA Majority". Here's the initial slate:
The candidates are:
-AZ-01: Jay Feely (open-Dave Schweikert)
-CA-13: Kevin Lincoln (v Adam Gray)
-IA-02: Joe Mitchell (open-Ashley Hinson)
-ME-02: Paul LePage (open-Jared Golden)
-NY-03: Mike LiPetri (v Tom Suozzi)
-NY-19: Peter Oberacker (v Josh Riley)
-NC-03: Laurie Buckout (v Don Davis)
-TX-28: Tano Tijerina (v Henry Cuellar)
-TX-34: Eric Flores (v Vicente Gonzalez)
Ah yes. "The Young Guns" of Kevin McCarthy, Eric Cantor, and Paul Ryan. How did things work out for those guys anyway?
For Paul Ryan? Pretty ok, he got a VP nomination and 3.5 years as Speaker out of it. Better than most ambitious House members ever do
The other two. lol
Going viral right now and before you ask, yes this is the same Joe Kent who ran against MGP in WA03. Unheard of for a government official to publicly resign in such a manner even if the loon never was qualified to hold such a position in the first place. Trump’s government administration has more holes in it than Swiss cheese and it’s getting worse by the day.
https://x.com/joekent16jan19/status/2033897242986209689
After much reflection, I have decided to resign from my position as Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, effective today.
I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby.
It has been an honor serving under
@POTUS
and
@DNIGabbard
and leading the professionals at NCTC.
May God bless America.
I saw you mention it yesterday, there really truly is a massive split within the right about Iran right now. And if Trump has officials publicly resigning like this... it cannot be ignored. Everyone from Laura Loomer, Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes, MTG and dozens of the most prominent right wingers have been engaging in bitter, expletive laden recriminations and infighting on there in the last week or so. X really is a cesspool of this, but I have never seen this level of free anti-semitism, and anti-Islam sentiment, openly, without masking or codewords, by relatively prominent public figures like with Ogles last week. One of the most insane things I've seen there in the last few days is Fuentes and others continuously saying now they will be voting Dem to punish the Republicans over Iran, and its getting traction from their supporters.
my jaw dropped when I watched Fuentes, one of the most right wing loons on the internet, defending and pining for Joe Biden. Biden!!! while drawing a comparison of just how badly Trump is doing.
https://x.com/MikeNellis/status/2033559400091127835
Twitter sentiment is of course not the real world, but if the comms and messaging are looked at, the civil war is in plain sight. Iran is going to go down as probably the worst mistake trump has made, maybe after the 700k covid dead on his hands, and it is going to cost the R's dearly this midterm. Trump won't be on the ballot to juice low-propensity/infrequents, and everything he is doing is destroying enthusiasm among his base.
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/03/17/they-hold-the-cards-now-trump-allies-fear-iran-is-slipping-beyond-the-presidents-control-00830449
Well, Richard Spencer of all people voted for Biden back in 2020. Bizarre things certainly can happen with MAGA and the white nationalist supremacist base.
Agreed on all points. I’ve never seen it like this before on social media when it comes to MAGA/RW influencers. They always fall in line on every subject from January 6th to ICE deployments in cities, even with Epstein, they’ve just stopped talking about it, but not with the war, they’re pissed and it’s a massive psychotic break playing out in front of millions of people.
You get far right accounts being accused of being Democrats, being paid, being gaslit, being bought by Israel, siding with Iran, being disloyal, being traitors from every direction and then publicly saying exactly what they’re being attacked over, which is just furthering the schism and pile on, getting them even more angry. It’s exactly what they’ve done to Democrats and the left for a decade now and it’s so satisfying to see them getting to experience it first hand for the first time and how brutal it is.
Want to know why the left has “Trump derangement syndrome”? Imagine feeling this amount of emotional and mental bombardment every single day for 10 years and then see how you feel about the people attacking you after that. If anything we’re being polite.
Then you get some of them waking up saying that Democrats were right and they were idiots to believe Trump and are supporting Democrats in the 2026 midterms posts going viral with other people quote tweeting how stupid they are even if they disagree with the war furthering the online civil war with every side mad at each other. They’re making the exact same arguments Democrats made about Trump except about their own side of politics.
I’m used to seeing these tactics used exclusively against our party, I know how effective it is to sway voters, but I’m not used to seeing it used during a complete clusterfuck brawl within the GOP/Trumpist/MAGA wing before. I’ve got my popcorn and am immensely enjoying the spectacular fireworks show every day.
I also think after 2024 we can stop dismissing social media as not being real life. It is, far more than any other medium. Cable news isn’t. Podcasts isn’t. Campaign stops isn’t. Tv ads isn’t. Social media is. it’s where Americans spend the majority of their free time. It’s far more important than people admit and our party and supporters need to start competing in these spaces because it does influence elections and makes a bigger impact than we realize.
I agree with you. This is his worst, most deadly mistake, and is a war the U.S. is losing and will lose, while causing terrible repercussions for the Iranian people. [Edit: I mean since the unnecessary deaths during the COVID pandemic, which were partly intentional.]
I'm taking the over that this is at least partially an excuse to run against Perez again with an appeal to the anti-war vote.
Well, he has until May to file.
I never thought I would utter this sentence but: good for Joe Kent.
I didn’t realize his wife was killed by terrorists in Syria in 2019, either
To a point. No way do I believe Trump would do anything because of pressure from Netanyahu, though I could easily imagine him hearing a suggestion from Netanyahu, thinking it was cool because he is a psychopath who likes to kill people and distract from the Epstein files, and do it.
Whoa I saw this story but never focused on the name!
https://www.muskogeepolitico.com/2026/03/jackson-stallings-announces-campaign.html
OK-1: Navy JAG Jackson Stallings is in as a Republican, joining state corporation commissioner Kim David and state Rep. Mark Tedford. He is endorsed by Rep. Brandon Gill and former Rep. Steve Largent, who once held the seat.
Those are rookie numbers, you’ve gotta pump those numbers up.
https://x.com/IAPolls2022/status/2033902664770011254
🇺🇸 NATIONAL POLL By Morning Consult
Pres. Trump
Approve: 43% [-1]
Disapprove: 54% [=]
——
Generic Ballot
🟦 Democrats: 48% [+3]
🟥 Republicans: 40% [-2]
D+8: Biggest lead of cycle (was D+2 in Feb)
——
March 13-16 | 2,202 RV
https://pro.morningconsult.com/trackers/donald-trump-congress-policy-republicans-polling
In Florida.
https://x.com/Politics1com/status/2033697129776967913
FLORIDA. Gov Ron DeSantis (R) created a council of 8 conservative, MAGA sheriffs, charged with shaping hardline immigration policy. Instead, 6 of the 8 - all vocal Trump supporters - publicly say they want an end to mass deportations...
https://floridapolitics.com/archives/785561-sheriffs-rebel-against-donald-trumps-gov-desantis-mass-deportation-efforts/
The key excerpt on the ask: "The Sheriffs agreed Monday that they would jointly draft and edit the letter to Trump and Congress, imploring the administration to stop deporting undocumented immigrants without a criminal record. Instead, Judd suggested, they could look at civil fines, demand they learn English, or disallow them from living off the taxpayer dime."
The sheriffs/police chiefs named in the article are Grady Judd (Polk County) and Bill Prummell (Charlotte County). As to who the other four could be, the options are:
-Bob Gualtieri (Pinellas County)
-TK Waters (Jacksonville County)
-Charles Broadway (Kissimmee)
-Ciro Dominguez (Naples)
-Robert Bage (Fort Walton)
-Doug Goerke (St. Cloud)
https://www.fdle.state.fl.us/state-board-of-immigration-enforcement/state-immigration-enforcement-council
Edit: This piece says others were Gualtieri, Broadway and Goerke, so still missing one. Gualtieri is a bit of a surprise tbh. Extremely MAGA from a formerly quite swing-y county that just rarely if ever had a real Dem opposing him. He also is(/was?) the appointed chair of the public safety commission post-Parkland.
https://www.cfpublic.org/politics/2026-03-17/ice-critique-from-an-unusual-quarter-the-florida-cops-who-advise-on-immigration
*Nelson Muntz HA-HA gif*
Sore loser Phil Berger has requested a recount, as is his right.
https://www.wral.com/news/nccapitol/berger-page-recount-request-nc-senate-race-march-2026/
I wonder what kind of shenanigans he'll try after this.
Can he try an independent or write-in campaign? lol
Hah! If he tried that write-in BS, the seat would flip this fall!
I doubt he'll try the same things Griffin did but he's not going to leave his seat quietly.
I wouldn't mind the first outcome hahaha
I think a lot of people are underestimating how big of a setback NC Rs got when Berger lost his primary. I think more legislative seats will flip just on lack of money burnt on his own damn primary.
Poor Rs. <Sarc> They knew what they were getting with him.
Honestly if I was in his shoes and lost by 23 votes, I would probably ask for a recount. It's highly unlikely to overturn the results but it is in the realm of possibilities
We can dream, right?
https://x.com/PpollingNumbers/status/2033900972225741028
New - Senate poll - South Carolina
🔴 Graham 47%
🔵 Andrews 42%
Impact research #B (🔵) - LV - 3/1
If you can figure out how to win over 35% of the white voters, then it's doable.
That, or get them to not vote.
Hard to think of anyone more deserving of losing specifically due to Trump's unpopularity. He's the little yappy dog that always follows a bigger dog around, like in the old cartoon. Used to be McCain, now it's Trump. (Apologies to dogs for the comparison.)
Graham losing would be great, but the numbers tell the difficulty for us. A five point gap seems plausible to close, but Andrews is at 42% in a state where the undecided voters are inherently going to lean red. Getting that last 8% to hit a majority (or a bit less for a plurality) is a huge obstacle to overcome.
Yeah, I don't see the South Carolina seat as a majority-maker, but it's great to have someone solid running there in case a big enough wave crashes on the election.
An emaciated GOP base turnout would be needed for Andrews to pull this one out. I'm guessing Lindsey knows what buttons to push to activate them and save himself in all but the most devastating worst-case scenario.
Bloomberg and Steyer, get your engines ready!
Too bad Steyer is blowing all his money on a vanity project AKA a quest to become California Governor.
Lol, "all his money."
We can knock sense into him. He'll come around before or after the primary.