After the results in TN-07, Republicans are going to get slaughtered next year. Cook Report’s Amy Walter says that Trump+10-15 districts are up for grabs, meaning that Dems could nab 30 seats or more.
Amy Walter and the Cook Political Report tend to be conservative in their assessments on their races.
Walter herself I would argue is saying there is a possibility that Democrats could pick up 30+ House seats. I don’t think she is saying this is certain but probable.
Either way you interpret what Walter and the Cook Political Report is arguing here from the TN-07 election results, House elections are going to be closer than expected in 2026.
Not sure I understand. Are you referring to turnout?
The House elections (and even Senate elections was well depending on how the turnout unfolds state-by-state) are going to get higher-than-normal turnout because of the nature of democracy, accountability towards Trump & the GOP and from the standpoint of the cost of living issue being addressed.
Being that Zohran Mamdani just a few weeks ago got elected as Mayor of NYC, while his election isn’t assured to get Democratic socialists elected everywhere, raising the issue of affordability as a result of the high visibility of his campaign has now become more nationally discussed than it was before. TN-07 Aftyn Behn raised the issue of affordability in her race.
You said "the Cook Political Report is arguing here from the TN-09 election results, House elections are going to be closer than expected in 2026." If they are, then the Democrats will do -more poorly- than anticipated. Waves are not close elections.
Perhaps there's a disconnect here but let me clarify:
1) Amy Walter is arguing there's a possibility Democrats will win 30+ House seats, The majority of them I would argue include swing districts, Lean Republican Districts, any Lean Blue districts currently held by the GOP (Mike Lawler included).
2) Elections for redder districts are going to harder for the GOP to hold like they used to or at least get the same margins of victory as they used to. Of course, the redder the district is, the least likely Democrats will win it. That doesn't mean the turnout isn't going to make the races themselves in these districts closer than expected.
When I say closer than expected, I am referring to turnout being greater than expected than in previous elections. Sorry if I wasn't clear but I am not referring to anything below the blue wave.
Kind of surprising in retrospect that we only picked up 30 in 2006. That seemed like a big number at the time but given the national mood it seems like it should have been 45+.
We missed a bunch of very close races in 2006. CT-04, FL-13, NC-08, NM-01, NY-25, NY-29, OH-01, OH-02, OH-15, and PA-06 all come to mind. We won most of them in 2008. Oddly enough, CT-04, NM-01, and PA-06 were seen as must wins for Dems as early as late 2005 when it still looked doubtful Dems could win the house.
2006 was chaos. We came up short in some seats that John Kerry had won, but almost flipped Wyoming?? Lost the NV senate race by 14 but beat Mike DeWine in OH by 12. Almost flipped TN-Sen but got only 20% in ME-Sen. The lack of polarization was crazy.
I'm currently taking a deep dive into the 2004 Senate races and it's striking to see how parochial things still were then....
Ken Salazar outperformed the Democratic baseline by double-digits in rural southern Colorado.
Betty Castor crushed it Tampa-St. Petersburg and the northern Gulf coast while Mel Martinez won Hispanic-heavy Orange, Osceola, and Miami-Dade counties.
Even as east Kentucky coal counties were shifting away from John Kerry and the Democrats, Dan Mongiardo was winning them with 70+%.
Chris John won most of (and only!) the Cajun parishes of Louisiana in his loss to David Vitter even as they turned hard against Kerry.
Brad Carson held on to the Little Dixie coalition in Oklahoma one final time even though victorious challenger Tom Coburn governed most of the same territory when he was in the House.
It all makes me nostalgic for the time when elections were interesting and it was possible to outrun the top of the ticket by more than 1 or 2 points. Never thought the day would come that I'd be nostalgic for Election 2004 but that's where we are!
Mind you that's with the current environment. There's little evidence that the environment will improve for Trump and Republicans, let alone stay the same. Sure Democrats aren't exactly popular now, but they have the benefit of being the opposition out of power in the House, Senate and Presidency, not to mention the Supreme Court. In all likelihood, things can and should only improve for Democrats now. They would do well to capitalize on this environment now and it seems that Behn took Mamdani's platform and energy to heart and did exceptionally well, given the circumstances.
Kudos to Pressley for not splitting the Progressive vote. Markey will mop the floor with Moulton now. Just like he did with that Kennedy kid. (My ex worked for JK2's heating oil assistance nonprofit and would refer to JK3, who was in and out of the office even though he didn't officially work there, as "the leprechaun".)
Might be four years. Warren will be 80 by 2030. Much as I am a fan of her I hope she would retire by that point. Warren and Pressley are allies, too, so if Warren does retire she would presumably endorse Pressley right away.
I believe the forbidden Democratic Presidential Primary talk applies to current and future primaries, not past ones.
We've had discussion before where we put in hypotheticals of what could have happened if other Democratic Candidates were chosen as the nominees. Unless I'm mistaken, talking about historical context is an exception here.
She and Bernie would have gotten demolished by Trump due to their post-2018 support of decriminalizing border crossings, allowing undocumented immigrants access Medicare as well as M4A and other so-called "woke" proposals. They destroyed their chances of becoming President when they adopted Hillary Clinton's identity politics and turbocharged it to compete for the most radical desires of the base rather than doubling down on economics and class based issues. Warren was one of the first politicians to explicitly raise the salience of transgender rights in political discourse, even before Kamala's interview with the ACLU.
I don't know. I don't think she would have shut down the border. She would face the same problems that Biden did with Afghanistan, supply shocks, Russo-Ukrainian war and the resulting inflation, Manchin, Sinema as well as the border. Maybe there isn’t even a Senate majority.
She would make a terrific candidate and President against Trump in 2016 tho.
Warren was already getting praise early on in her presidential primary by MAGA in states like Iowa and West Virginia over her ability to show up and be empathetic without talking like a normal Democrat. Even Tucker Carlson was praising her economic agenda. When a Trump voter says Warren is a country girl like anyone else, that is not a sign Warren would have gotten demolished.
Besides, the liberal base and women's marches were unstoppable in terms of turnout and activism before COVID-19 happen.
I believe Trump lost re-election right after he won in 2016. I do not believe he ever had a chance at winning re-election in 2020. The COVID-19 problem and social distancing was also making the presidential race more tight in election results due to Democrats being more cautious with canvassing.
KERMIT, W. Va. — It was a startling spectacle in the heart of Trump country: At least a dozen supporters of the president — some wearing MAGA stickers — nodding their heads, at times even clapping, for liberal firebrand Elizabeth Warren.
The sighting alone of a Democratic presidential candidate in this town of fewer than 400 people — in a county where more than four in five voters cast their ballot for Trump in 2016 — was unusual. Warren’s team was apprehensive about how she’d be received.
About 150 people gathered at the Kermit Fire & Rescue Headquarters Station to hear the Massachusetts senator and former Harvard professor talk about what she wants to do to fight the opioid epidemic. Trump-supporting college students in baggy t-shirts, housewives in pearls, and the fire chief dressed in uniform joined liberal retirees wearing rainbow “Persist” shirts and teachers with six-figure student loan debt.
Kermit is one of the epicenters of the opioid addiction epidemic. The toll is visible. The community center is shuttered. Fire trucks are decades old. When Warren asked people at the beginning of the event to raise their hands if they knew somebody who’s been “caught in the grips of addiction,” most hands went up.
“That’s why I’m here today,” she said.
Preece said after the event that he voted for Trump and that the president has revitalized the area economically. But he gave Warren props for showing up.
“She done good,” he said.
Others agreed.
LeeAnn Blankenship, a 38-year-old coach and supervisor at a home visitation company who grew up in Kermit and wore a sharp pink suit, said she may now support Warren in 2020 after voting for Trump in 2016.
“She’s a good ol’ country girl like anyone else,” she said of Warren, who grew up in Oklahoma. “She’s earned where she is, it wasn’t given to her. I respect that.”
Tucker Carlson's praise for Warren's economic agenda is here.
Point being, if Warren was the Democratic Presidential Nominee and did talk about the economic populism that Carlson thought she would based on her discussions in her Two-Income Trap, then that would have been game changing for her.
Unfortunately, Bernie Sanders ran again and Warren couldn't get traction as a result.
In my recent interview with Tucker Carlson, he waited until nearly the end of a long conversation to drop a bomb: He might vote for Sen. Elizabeth Warren in 2020. OK, there’s a “but” and an “if.” Carlson actually said that if Warren focuses on the economic populism ideas articulated in her 2004 book “The Two-Income Trap: Why Middle-Class Parents are Going Broke,” he would consider supporting her. It wasn’t a promise. From the point of view of Donald Trump and the Republican Party, it might be more like a threat.
Like everything, it would be a trade-off. I mean, there are certain perks that you get from working that you don’t get from staying at home. I mean, I get it. OK, but I’m just saying if the average person has the choice, I sincerely believe that a very large number of people would take that option, and I think they should be allowed to. By the way, I’m with Elizabeth Warren on this. She wrote a whole fucking book about it. She wrote a whole book on this called “The Two-Income Trap,” and she made the case that when our society changed in such a way that it took two incomes to support a family, everybody got poorer and less happy. I agree with that.
Strange that she didn't endorse Markey. He is obviously closer to her ideologically than Moulton, and having the much younger Moulton as Senator would limit her own options in the future.
Goldman's the luckiest guy alive. Avilés and Lander will split the progressive vote just like last time, and he'll stroll into re-election. DSA's with Avilés, Mamdani’s with Lander. Totally avoidable mess—and Goldman is genuinely awful.
Goldman is not "genuinely awful". He's a perfectly mainstream Democrat who has voted the right way on everything important in the House. He's probably not quite as far left as his district could support, but that doesn't make him awful.
A good example of a Democrat who is legitimately problematic is Ed Case, since he has a more conservative voting record in a deep blue district.
His refusal to help one of his Jewish constituents—an investigative journalist whose case was written about in the BBC and ABC news—when they were in serious danger, nearly killed in another region as well his statements on social media have been pretty awful but I’m not going to get into the details.
Someone's voting record is not everything. Chuy Garcia and Bowman, both of whom, are also similarly problematic for different reasons, also have a great voting record.
I’m still pissed about his ICC vote. The ICC does a lot more than the forbidden topic, they’re currently going after Putin and some other Russians in Ukraine.
Also, I think representing one’s district effectively is pretty important.
EDIT: I have removed a portion of my comment that was indeed reading too much into someone else's argument.
And frankly, you have a history of reading things into other people's comments that aren't actually there. I think you should try to avoid doing that in the future.
Wish I could like this a hundred times. Taking a step back and reassessing ones words is a sorely lacking talent on the internet. Appreciate your doing it here...
Nearly half (49%) say they would definitely not vote for Jasmine Crockett.This is higher than for any other candidate in the race. Just 43% say they would definitely not vote for Allred, and 40% feel similarly about Talarico. On the Republican side, 44% say they would definitely not vote for Paxton, 43% say they would definitely not vote for Cornyn, and 31% definitely would not vote for Hunt.
Jasmine Crockett currently trails both John Cornyn (49% Cornyn-41% Crockett) and Ken Paxton (50% Paxton-42% Crockett). When asked in general whether they would support a Republican or Democratic candidate, 50% support a Republican candidate while 41% support a Democrat. Representative Crockett does not change the underlying partisan dynamic in this state where a Democratic candidate has not won a statewide race for any office since 1994.
As of today, Democrats hold an edge on voter enthusiasm for next year.A majority (54%) of all voters rate their enthusiasm to vote next year as a 10 out of 10. Democrats are more likely to rate their enthusiasm as a 10 (63%) than either Republicans (50%) or Independents (41%). The most enthusiastic voters split about evenly in the generic U.S. Senate vote and in the specific matchups. The people who rate their enthusiasm as 6–9 solidly support the Republican candidate. The less enthusiastic voters are largely undecided. That dynamic is what can make this race more competitive. Ken Paxton is deeply unpopular with Democrats (81% very unfavorable) and Independents (50% very unfavorable). John Cornyn is unpopular with these voters as well (56% very unfavorable with Democrats; 41% very unfavorable with Independents). An unpopular Democratic candidate can drive up enthusiasm among Republicans who do not currently rate their enthusiasm as a 10.
Hopefully Behn will stay active and run again in 2026 (full term) or for the congressional seat in 2028 ( the country will be in a full-blown Republican Great Recession or depression which means the GOP advantage of 9 points will be nothing) or a statewide office in 2026 or 2028. She is a super candidate.
Agreed. She had a shorter time than in standard campaigns, and she made the most of it. Now that she has greater name recognition--something difficult for Democrats to get in a very red state (I know, because I live in Indiana)--she should build on that recognition and highlight the awful votes of her oppornent.
I think most/all of our close specials in 2017 and 2018 were father behind in the general--some significantly so. Thinking of the South Carolina and Kansas races especially, similar for Ohio, Montana, Arizona. Handel barely winning over Ossoff and then losing to McBath is probably the best recent exception, but those were much narrower margins.
I'm totally unconvinced a less stridently left-wing candidate couldn't do better in that district. Absolutely kudos to her for choosing to run and running hard, but I don't favor her to be the Democratic candidate next fall.
We're not going to have another Great Depression, unless it happens to be climate change induced. The Federal Reserve's proactiveness , potential stimulus measures, minimum wage, unemployment ensurance, social security, FDIC protection, Dodd Frank, etc. ensure this to be the case. At the worst, a downturn could last five years but beyond that, I just don't see it.
I know there's a fear there could be another GD but minor depressions are more probable at this point. The downturn as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic was what I'd call a minor depression, similar to what happened from the post-Spanish flu short depression. in the early 1920's.
So yesterday I said that Van Epps winning by less than 10 would be a great night for Democrats. He won by 9, so yesterday was indeed a great night.
And Republicans can't even point to low turnout being the issue, because turnout wasn't low - it was pretty much the same as in 2022. So this special election is what a midterm electorate looks like.
And that is horrific news for Republicans, since it means that any district that voted for Trump by 13-14% or less is a legitimately strong Democratic target. Even without including California, Texas, or Florida (since the latter might still redistrict), I count 38 such seats across America that are currently held by Republicans. (And if Virginia redraws, it could be even more.) And Democrats only need to pick up a net 5 seats to win control of the House.
Yeah, the swings in both the urban AND rural parts of the district don't bode well for Republicans at all—and they can't be explained away by low turnout.
The late intervention of Trump et al. looks like it juiced the GOP vote on election day, but I'm not sure that's a strategy that can be expanded nationwide next year. It's not like he's holding giant rallies anymore.
Trump really doesn't care about anyone but himself, although I'm sure in his primitive lizard brain he knows that Democratic majorities are not good for him getting his way!
VA had statewide swings towards Democrats in every single House of Delegates distruct in the state. IMO, anyone in the GOP who thought that Trump had a mandate after the 2024 election was totally delusional.
I hope they regret subjugating themselves to Trump for the rest of their sorry lives. Of course I don't have a clue what passes for a conscience these days in the GOP - they are probably quite happy raking it in and wouldn't know shame if it bit them in the butt!
In the next county over from where I live, there's a small-town mayor who clearly has aspirations beyond his current office (I suspect he wants to replace our aging congressman when he finally retires). But instead of running on his personal story, which is actually somewhat interesting (veteran, first-generation American, etc.), he spends most of his time simping Trump and disseminating MAGA rage bait on social media.
It's truly sad how many people have sacrificed their individuality on the altar of this revolting ogre.
This is the big story in all these specials, I think. That rurals are moving our way every bit as much as urban and suburban areas. I don't have all the data, but I'm fairly certain that's different than the movement in specials leading up to previous general elections.
Yeah, although I still think the future of the Democratic Party is mostly in the suburbs, if we could even just stanch the bleeding in rural areas, it would be great.
Even if SCOTUS guts the VRA completely, voters are fed up with the GOP. The House is going to flip to Dem control at how blue these special elections are.
Sheesh that might be the most threadbare Wiki page for a sitting pol I’ve seen! His campaign website ID’s him as a retired 23-year Army vet. https://www.ronnieglynnforstaterep.com/
I hope Cuellar knows that the DOJ didn't cook up a bunch of lies solely because he wasn't 100% on board with immigration and the like. The Biden DOJ ain't the Trump DOJ.
He doesn't do anything out of the goodness of his heart, which he has neither. There's a quo. May not be switching parties, or immediately switching parties, but it's something.
I commented yesterday that I was glad Underwood has been ranking on Homeland Security approps in Cuellar's stead for the past year, and I think caucus rules would automatically restore him once he's formally pardoned (unless someone tries to block it, but there would be carrot/stick quibbles that could encourage him to switch parties even more). I expect him to make even worse concessions than he already would now.
Interesting that this pardon happens the morning after the big TN special election Dem overperformance. I suspect trying to get Cuellar to switch parties is a sign of desperation from a party that is now effectively certain to lose the House.
Cisneros is from San Antonio, which was removed from the district in redistricting this year. We'd need another Democrat from the Laredo area in order to defeat Cuellar if he switches parties.
I think it's too soon to say this definitively. We'll need to see how next year's results look before declaring that the movement amongst Tejanos is permanent.
Well Cuellar knows if he's guilty or not. He's always been buddy buddy with republicans, that's why they gave him a survivable district. Maybe the Dump White House is hoping he switches after he wins.
I'm usually against primary challenges where an incumbent losing can risk the district, but Cuellar is an exception. He's a disgrace to the House and the Democratic Party as a whole.
If Cooper wins the open Senate race by 3 points or more, Budd is going to be a top target in 2028. Rs are going to be spending heavily to keep Budd, their precious SCONC judicial majority, and the EVs for President in 2028.
I think Jeff Jackson is a VERY strong candidate if he decides to challenge Budd. He's not afraid to take TACO to court and I can imagine him ripping Budd a new one on the debate stage.
If Roy Cooper wins the Senate seat next year, then Ted Budd is next. One more seat in the Senate for Democrats to make it easier for them to get the party agenda implemented.
Maine and Michigan Dem primaries looking to be a complete mess so I'm concerned about that.
And Michigan's general with Duggan as the spoiler could be disastrous as well.
If Crockett jumps into TX Sen then that's also a race we will forfeit.
Seems like the DSCC preferred candidates Mills, Stevens, and Allred are all flops nobody is excited about while the insurgents like Platner and Crockett and ElSayed are problematic for various reasons while candidates like McMorrow and Telarco are at risk of being crowded out.
Candidate recruitment has been a huge mess thus far. Big fails by the party as a whole to coalesce.
Just enjoy the holidays, it's too early to be concerned about this stuff. It's like people being worried about being shut out of the California governors race right now, just calm down and let this be sorted out.
If you’re basing the Michigan concerns off of that Steve Mitchell poll, I would advise not worrying too much. The numbers are laughable on their face and Mitchell is a hack (I’m pretty sure he makes numbers up - in fact I’m almost certain based off of some campaigns in the Obama era where his polling was involved).
We might be heading into an environment where he can pull off a general election victory. To say that I would be unhappy with this guy representing Dems is an understatement, but he might be able to do it. I'd like to see some GE polling.
At this point, the only reason why John Fetterman exists as a Senator is to have one less GOP-held seat to worry about, especially considering he replaced Senator Pat Toomey, who retired.
If Graham Platner is elected in the general election, we can always look at him getting primaried later. However, in seeing Platner speak, I do not get the sense he's exactly another Fetterman. He's more honest, less of a dick and has completely different problems than Fetterman does.
Platner may be more of a loose cannon than we would expect but unless he completely changes and sells out as a Senator like Fetterman did, I don't see any issues otherwise besides the fact that he's closely aligned with Bernie Sanders, AOC, etc. on his agenda.
Besides, Platner is a veteran and would likely be more of a straight shooter than Fetterman is. Unless there's something otherwise revealing about his health, I don't think we'd have another Fetterman-like situation in 2022 where Platner would have health problems that would consume most of his campaign time.
As someone who called Fetterman as a piece of shit from very early on, I think Platner is a disaster. He straight up said that he joined the military because wanted to kill people. He's very likely a worse person than Fetterman. He might be closely aligned with Sanders and AOC but that means little to me, and I doubt those beliefs are set. He's just playing the role he has been given. The man has no experience, no track record, nothing. It's so blindingly obvious that it's insane.
Source about him saying he wanted to kill people? I did not see any reddit posts about that. He said he just wanted to go to war for the United States.
How is Platner saying “want to kill some people” during the time he was going to join the military indicative of any agenda? Perhaps he was a cocky man in his early years as an adult. Platner may have been in his early 20’s at the time.
In Unforgiven, we saw the Schofield kid join Clint Eastwood’s Bill Munny and Morgan Freeman’s Ned Logan to hunt down a group of outlaws. The Schofield kid boasted of how he wanted to kill people like Bill Munny but when he found out the hard way after seeing how the person he killed died, he didn’t feel good about it and didn’t want to kill anymore.
Platner may have been shaken and traumatized with PTSD from the military. A simple statement like what he wrote on Reddit doesn’t reveal that much.
It was said that Margaret Thatcher said her greatest achievement was Tony Blair and New Labour. For Donald Trump, his greatest achievement may be Graham Platner. Not because he necessarily agrees on policy, but because having a politician who uses the r word, other slurs, and everything else that's come out has been normalized for the sake of winning.
If this poll is accurate, it’s not exactly the first sign our base Democratic voters have become far more comfortable supporting unconventional and controversial candidates (in response to both Trump getting elected president twice AND our party’s leaders chosen candidates losing, it’s not 1 or the other, it’s a reaction to both).
I’ve seen this story coming even well after I personally stopped supporting Platner. The real question right now imo is do the Susan Collins 2020 voters stick with her against a Nazi tattoo working class Democrat while Trump is President? I can’t answer that right now, which makes me at the very least concerned.
The money and volunteers on the ground though after he announced told us everything: Democrats on the ground in Maine were and are excited FOR him specifically, not against Collins or against Trump. You don’t generate that kind of authentic enthusiasm that just suddenly disappears because of controversy with a candidate.
In fact, it often leads to the person seeing even more support as voters feel their guy is being unfairly attacked, coalesce around them and they pivot to railing against those who are trying to take them down: see Trump’s primary campaign in 2016. Or to a much lesser extent Mamdani 2025 (and before someone jumps on me, NO, these are not at all equal and I’m not saying they are, but he did have unconventional views at least on some thorny political issues, I think even supporters can admit that much).
If they like you, voters will take all of the warts with you, regardless of what warts they are or how bad they are. Republicans being excited to face Platner feels awfully similar to how Democrats were excited to face Trump all those years ago. Didn’t work out so well for us.
Great post. One of the biggest complaints I've seen is that the Maine newspaper establishment is attacking him with coordinated op-eds from rich out of staters with the same old tropes of "Platner Bros" and "unqualified" etc which is making him a sort of anti establishment hero.
I’m calling it early: Platner bros is going to become next year’s deplorables 2016 moniker, with those attacked proudly embracing the term and it backfiring spectacularly on those pushing it as an attack.
“Damn right I’m a Platner bro, he’s the only one who’s willing to speak up for us and against both parties”. You can copy/paste exactly what Republican voters said in 2016 after Hillary said they were a basket of deplorables (doesn’t matter that they actually were, the attack boomeranged, no question about that).
The more Platner gets attacked, the more his supporters dig in to back him no matter what. I don’t know what would derail his obvious campaign momentum right now, once something like this starts, it’s a never ending reinforcing cycle where every attack against the candidate ironically makes them even stronger.
You can’t win by attacking him, so the only way to beat him is by out organizing him. Collins and her supporters would be wise to focus solely on that task, because they’re way behind already and the race is basically over barring another last minute shakeup or current Platner supporters switching allegiances or not showing up on primary day.
Republicans almost managed to beat Trump in the 2016 primary, but it wasn’t with the candidates who were attacking him, it was on the ground strength of a campaign organization by people who quite pointedly DIDN’T attack him. That’s the path and the only one available for Collins now if this poll is anywhere close to reality (and I strongly suspect it is).
Side point on Hillary's 2016 campaign: She didn't even say all Trump supporters were deplorables, only IIRC half of them, which is way too conservative an estimate. And yeah, it hurt her, but she still would have won enough states without fucking Comey and his bullshit.
No argument here, she was being kind saying only half were and Comey did crash her campaign right at the finish line. I will never forgive him for what he single handedly did to America forever because he put his former party before his oath of office.
We can debate and argue for decades what Hillary being president would mean to Trump, the hypotheticals are endless and the GOP base was always headed where Trump took them, so maybe it’s just a 4 year break before Trump stormed into office anyways. But he also would’ve lost and his entire electoral persona is he’s a winner.
Would America have been spared the catastrophic last decade in the country? Would Haley be president right now after the GOP lost to Hillary and recalibrated to be less insane and lined up to support the anti-Trump: anyone who they thought would end their theoretical 12 year losing streak in presidential elections no matter who that person looked like and what policies they’d have to swallow in order to win moderates?
So many questions and possibilities, with never ending answers.
That all said, without question the basket of deplorables comment pushed on the fence Republicans (even moderate ones), more into Trump’s camp than if she said nothing. It was the quote used effectively by MAGA and Trump himself in the campaign to portray her as an elitist out of touch with “real” America and it worked.
I was on the PCCC call this morning that included a briefing from the pollster. She went through some Platner vs Mills poll results but didn't present anything regarding either candidate vs Collins. One small bit that stuck with me: both Platner and Mills have very high name recognition at this point -- Mills at or close to 100 percent, Platner at 90 percent or so. Also, she presented a negatives case about each that IMO was a bit too light on Platner's negatives: he's called rural whites racist and stupid (but not his precise quote about Maine rural whites), and softpedaled the tattoo a bit.
On a positive note, Platner agreed to sign the No Fossil Fuel Money pledge when I asked.
I'm going to survey my Maine list at some point and respect their decision. Right now, from the other side of the country, my impression is that this race is approaching PResidential levels of awareness and polarization. Everyone in the state knows about it and everyone in the state has an opinion.
How much do voter registration gaps really matter?
Democrats had a voter registration advantage in all swing states for most of the 2000s and 2010s and still lost them several times. Independents are now a solidly left *leaning* group. Biden lost Florida and NC despite a voter registration advantage. Hillary lost all.
With the rise of Independents, I don't expect the numbers are going to do anything more other than to continue to increase. There's a lot of disillusionment with the Democratic and Republican parties, especially with the approval ratings of each party in Congress low (with Democrats having better approvals than Republicans by contrast).
A New York City-based Republican club will honor a far-right German leader at its annual gala — just eight weeks after its statewide counterpart was disbanded over a group chat in which members praised Adolf Hitler.
The city-based New York Young Republican Club’s gala will recognize Markus Frohnmaier, a political leader from the Alternative for Germany party.
Young Republicans increasingly seem very groyper-ish. I'm not sure how, or if, they will ever deradicalize. Their entire Twitter feeds and r/Conservative are full of groyper- and wignat-type posts. Even those who abhor Hitler and Nazism still align with groyper positions on racism toward groups other than Jews and Slavs. Elon Musk, Vance, DHS and ICE leaders, and other cabinet officials have regularly amplified such accounts by retweeting their non-Nazi content.
It's my hope that after the inevitable pardons, and the (hopeful admittedly) criminal referrals to the Hague for crimes against humanity, the spectacle of a televised prosecution of trump's lackeys for Venezuelan actions, immigration actions, etc will maybe turn a few away out of shame--a al Germany post Nuremburg trials.
I have no confidence in any prosecutions at The Hague. No-one from the Bush Administration ever faced any consequences for mass torture and murder, and no-one at The Hague ever suggested they should stand trial there.
i share your lack of faith, however I am setting goalposts amongst my personal group of friends that there have to be televised trials coupled with a positive vision for the future of the country. we cannot let ourselves be weimar germany by letting these folks off the hook for things that go beyond your typical crimes, but involve illegal use of the most powerful military in the world. In general I think I'm a mainstream Democratic voter, but the damage that has been done must be addressed, and we can't make the same mistakes obama did re bush and cheney's war crimes
I agree, though if Trump pardons everyone on the way out, what is left to do? I would absolutely support sending them to The Hague, but I doubt most Americans would support that.
This is why I have a suspicion that social media platforms are increasingly rewiring Gen Zers brains to the extent where they don’t have the right training to think independently for themselves without the influence of technology.
More evidence we need a technology regulatory agency.
Do Young Republicans ever intend to win in elected office again?
Honestly, it’s become a cult even with the younger Gen Z GOPers. Apparently the recent fiasco in Vermont was a nothing burger to them.
Perhaps they should have learned a long time ago that the once conservative boy darling that spoke at the CPAC during Obama’s first term as POTUS, Jonathan Krohn, became more liberal and anti-conservative later.
After the results in TN-07, Republicans are going to get slaughtered next year. Cook Report’s Amy Walter says that Trump+10-15 districts are up for grabs, meaning that Dems could nab 30 seats or more.
I hope she's right (I'm generally not a fan of her analysis; I remember reading more insightful things on Election Twitter back in the day).
Amy Walter and the Cook Political Report tend to be conservative in their assessments on their races.
Walter herself I would argue is saying there is a possibility that Democrats could pick up 30+ House seats. I don’t think she is saying this is certain but probable.
Either way you interpret what Walter and the Cook Political Report is arguing here from the TN-07 election results, House elections are going to be closer than expected in 2026.
The GOP better hold onto their butts!
I think you mean more Democratic than previously expected.
Not sure I understand. Are you referring to turnout?
The House elections (and even Senate elections was well depending on how the turnout unfolds state-by-state) are going to get higher-than-normal turnout because of the nature of democracy, accountability towards Trump & the GOP and from the standpoint of the cost of living issue being addressed.
Being that Zohran Mamdani just a few weeks ago got elected as Mayor of NYC, while his election isn’t assured to get Democratic socialists elected everywhere, raising the issue of affordability as a result of the high visibility of his campaign has now become more nationally discussed than it was before. TN-07 Aftyn Behn raised the issue of affordability in her race.
You said "the Cook Political Report is arguing here from the TN-09 election results, House elections are going to be closer than expected in 2026." If they are, then the Democrats will do -more poorly- than anticipated. Waves are not close elections.
Perhaps there's a disconnect here but let me clarify:
1) Amy Walter is arguing there's a possibility Democrats will win 30+ House seats, The majority of them I would argue include swing districts, Lean Republican Districts, any Lean Blue districts currently held by the GOP (Mike Lawler included).
2) Elections for redder districts are going to harder for the GOP to hold like they used to or at least get the same margins of victory as they used to. Of course, the redder the district is, the least likely Democrats will win it. That doesn't mean the turnout isn't going to make the races themselves in these districts closer than expected.
When I say closer than expected, I am referring to turnout being greater than expected than in previous elections. Sorry if I wasn't clear but I am not referring to anything below the blue wave.
Also, it's TN-07. I put TN-09 by accident.
30 seats isn't a slaughter, in my opinion. Hopefully we can do better.
30 seats in this environment, with fewer and fewer competitive seats, would be pretty damn good.
I'm probably making a pointless semantic argument. Anyway, hopefully we get 100;)
To keep it semantically accurate, losing 30 seats more than decimates the Republican Caucus in the House.
Kind of surprising in retrospect that we only picked up 30 in 2006. That seemed like a big number at the time but given the national mood it seems like it should have been 45+.
We missed a bunch of very close races in 2006. CT-04, FL-13, NC-08, NM-01, NY-25, NY-29, OH-01, OH-02, OH-15, and PA-06 all come to mind. We won most of them in 2008. Oddly enough, CT-04, NM-01, and PA-06 were seen as must wins for Dems as early as late 2005 when it still looked doubtful Dems could win the house.
Yeah I remember PA-06 being the biggest surprise of the three seats you cited. Jim Gerlach was a freaking warrior beast.
2006 was chaos. We came up short in some seats that John Kerry had won, but almost flipped Wyoming?? Lost the NV senate race by 14 but beat Mike DeWine in OH by 12. Almost flipped TN-Sen but got only 20% in ME-Sen. The lack of polarization was crazy.
I'm currently taking a deep dive into the 2004 Senate races and it's striking to see how parochial things still were then....
Ken Salazar outperformed the Democratic baseline by double-digits in rural southern Colorado.
Betty Castor crushed it Tampa-St. Petersburg and the northern Gulf coast while Mel Martinez won Hispanic-heavy Orange, Osceola, and Miami-Dade counties.
Even as east Kentucky coal counties were shifting away from John Kerry and the Democrats, Dan Mongiardo was winning them with 70+%.
Chris John won most of (and only!) the Cajun parishes of Louisiana in his loss to David Vitter even as they turned hard against Kerry.
Brad Carson held on to the Little Dixie coalition in Oklahoma one final time even though victorious challenger Tom Coburn governed most of the same territory when he was in the House.
It all makes me nostalgic for the time when elections were interesting and it was possible to outrun the top of the ticket by more than 1 or 2 points. Never thought the day would come that I'd be nostalgic for Election 2004 but that's where we are!
Republican gerrymandering is one reason why we picked up “only” 30 House seats in 2006.
For example, we didn’t pick up a single House seat in Virginia in 2006, although we did win the Senate race that year.
We have about 20 more House seats than we had going into 2018 (when we picked up 40), so 30 would be pretty damn good IMO.
I think it depends on how things shake up at the end of the redistricting wars.
Mind you that's with the current environment. There's little evidence that the environment will improve for Trump and Republicans, let alone stay the same. Sure Democrats aren't exactly popular now, but they have the benefit of being the opposition out of power in the House, Senate and Presidency, not to mention the Supreme Court. In all likelihood, things can and should only improve for Democrats now. They would do well to capitalize on this environment now and it seems that Behn took Mamdani's platform and energy to heart and did exceptionally well, given the circumstances.
Kudos to Pressley for not splitting the Progressive vote. Markey will mop the floor with Moulton now. Just like he did with that Kennedy kid. (My ex worked for JK2's heating oil assistance nonprofit and would refer to JK3, who was in and out of the office even though he didn't officially work there, as "the leprechaun".)
It also buys her some goodwill 6 years from now. She'll run next time. With a lot of party support.
Might be four years. Warren will be 80 by 2030. Much as I am a fan of her I hope she would retire by that point. Warren and Pressley are allies, too, so if Warren does retire she would presumably endorse Pressley right away.
In my humble opinion, Elizabeth Warren is the best President we never had.
I voted for her in the 2020 primary!
(Hopefully this doesn't violate the ban. That primary was almost 6 years ago, and Warren isn't likely to run for President again.)
I believe the forbidden Democratic Presidential Primary talk applies to current and future primaries, not past ones.
We've had discussion before where we put in hypotheticals of what could have happened if other Democratic Candidates were chosen as the nominees. Unless I'm mistaken, talking about historical context is an exception here.
Fully agreed.
She and Bernie would have gotten demolished by Trump due to their post-2018 support of decriminalizing border crossings, allowing undocumented immigrants access Medicare as well as M4A and other so-called "woke" proposals. They destroyed their chances of becoming President when they adopted Hillary Clinton's identity politics and turbocharged it to compete for the most radical desires of the base rather than doubling down on economics and class based issues. Warren was one of the first politicians to explicitly raise the salience of transgender rights in political discourse, even before Kamala's interview with the ACLU.
I didn’t say she was a great candidate. I said Warren would have made a terrific President.
I don't know. I don't think she would have shut down the border. She would face the same problems that Biden did with Afghanistan, supply shocks, Russo-Ukrainian war and the resulting inflation, Manchin, Sinema as well as the border. Maybe there isn’t even a Senate majority.
She would make a terrific candidate and President against Trump in 2016 tho.
Can we please avoid right-wing words like "illegals"?
This reads like a fox news characterization of that time period, replete with right wing buzzwords like "illegals"
Doubtful.
Warren was already getting praise early on in her presidential primary by MAGA in states like Iowa and West Virginia over her ability to show up and be empathetic without talking like a normal Democrat. Even Tucker Carlson was praising her economic agenda. When a Trump voter says Warren is a country girl like anyone else, that is not a sign Warren would have gotten demolished.
Besides, the liberal base and women's marches were unstoppable in terms of turnout and activism before COVID-19 happen.
I believe Trump lost re-election right after he won in 2016. I do not believe he ever had a chance at winning re-election in 2020. The COVID-19 problem and social distancing was also making the presidential race more tight in election results due to Democrats being more cautious with canvassing.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/11/warren-west-virginia-2020-1317611
KERMIT, W. Va. — It was a startling spectacle in the heart of Trump country: At least a dozen supporters of the president — some wearing MAGA stickers — nodding their heads, at times even clapping, for liberal firebrand Elizabeth Warren.
The sighting alone of a Democratic presidential candidate in this town of fewer than 400 people — in a county where more than four in five voters cast their ballot for Trump in 2016 — was unusual. Warren’s team was apprehensive about how she’d be received.
About 150 people gathered at the Kermit Fire & Rescue Headquarters Station to hear the Massachusetts senator and former Harvard professor talk about what she wants to do to fight the opioid epidemic. Trump-supporting college students in baggy t-shirts, housewives in pearls, and the fire chief dressed in uniform joined liberal retirees wearing rainbow “Persist” shirts and teachers with six-figure student loan debt.
Kermit is one of the epicenters of the opioid addiction epidemic. The toll is visible. The community center is shuttered. Fire trucks are decades old. When Warren asked people at the beginning of the event to raise their hands if they knew somebody who’s been “caught in the grips of addiction,” most hands went up.
“That’s why I’m here today,” she said.
Preece said after the event that he voted for Trump and that the president has revitalized the area economically. But he gave Warren props for showing up.
“She done good,” he said.
Others agreed.
LeeAnn Blankenship, a 38-year-old coach and supervisor at a home visitation company who grew up in Kermit and wore a sharp pink suit, said she may now support Warren in 2020 after voting for Trump in 2016.
“She’s a good ol’ country girl like anyone else,” she said of Warren, who grew up in Oklahoma. “She’s earned where she is, it wasn’t given to her. I respect that.”
Tucker Carlson's praise for Warren's economic agenda is here.
Point being, if Warren was the Democratic Presidential Nominee and did talk about the economic populism that Carlson thought she would based on her discussions in her Two-Income Trap, then that would have been game changing for her.
Unfortunately, Bernie Sanders ran again and Warren couldn't get traction as a result.
https://www.salon.com/2019/01/26/salon-interview-tucker-carlson-bashes-capitalism-says-he-might-vote-for-elizabeth-warren/
.
.
.
In my recent interview with Tucker Carlson, he waited until nearly the end of a long conversation to drop a bomb: He might vote for Sen. Elizabeth Warren in 2020. OK, there’s a “but” and an “if.” Carlson actually said that if Warren focuses on the economic populism ideas articulated in her 2004 book “The Two-Income Trap: Why Middle-Class Parents are Going Broke,” he would consider supporting her. It wasn’t a promise. From the point of view of Donald Trump and the Republican Party, it might be more like a threat.
Like everything, it would be a trade-off. I mean, there are certain perks that you get from working that you don’t get from staying at home. I mean, I get it. OK, but I’m just saying if the average person has the choice, I sincerely believe that a very large number of people would take that option, and I think they should be allowed to. By the way, I’m with Elizabeth Warren on this. She wrote a whole fucking book about it. She wrote a whole book on this called “The Two-Income Trap,” and she made the case that when our society changed in such a way that it took two incomes to support a family, everybody got poorer and less happy. I agree with that.
Michelle Wu is closer to Warren than her.
Strange that she didn't endorse Markey. He is obviously closer to her ideologically than Moulton, and having the much younger Moulton as Senator would limit her own options in the future.
That will come. After all, the election is many moons away.
I don't think it's a given at all that he'll mop the floor with Moulton. The age issue is even more prominent now than it was when he beat JK3.
Goldman's the luckiest guy alive. Avilés and Lander will split the progressive vote just like last time, and he'll stroll into re-election. DSA's with Avilés, Mamdani’s with Lander. Totally avoidable mess—and Goldman is genuinely awful.
Goldman is not "genuinely awful". He's a perfectly mainstream Democrat who has voted the right way on everything important in the House. He's probably not quite as far left as his district could support, but that doesn't make him awful.
A good example of a Democrat who is legitimately problematic is Ed Case, since he has a more conservative voting record in a deep blue district.
His refusal to help one of his Jewish constituents—an investigative journalist whose case was written about in the BBC and ABC news—when they were in serious danger, nearly killed in another region as well his statements on social media have been pretty awful but I’m not going to get into the details.
Someone's voting record is not everything. Chuy Garcia and Bowman, both of whom, are also similarly problematic for different reasons, also have a great voting record.
Could you link the story? I'm not familiar with the case.
Check DM.
I’m still pissed about his ICC vote. The ICC does a lot more than the forbidden topic, they’re currently going after Putin and some other Russians in Ukraine.
Also, I think representing one’s district effectively is pretty important.
EDIT: I have removed a portion of my comment that was indeed reading too much into someone else's argument.
Not sure what you mean by "snarl words".
And frankly, you have a history of reading things into other people's comments that aren't actually there. I think you should try to avoid doing that in the future.
No you're right, I'm working on that. It seems I misread the use of "far left" as an insult.
Wish I could like this a hundred times. Taking a step back and reassessing ones words is a sorely lacking talent on the internet. Appreciate your doing it here...
Nearly half (49%) say they would definitely not vote for Jasmine Crockett.This is higher than for any other candidate in the race. Just 43% say they would definitely not vote for Allred, and 40% feel similarly about Talarico. On the Republican side, 44% say they would definitely not vote for Paxton, 43% say they would definitely not vote for Cornyn, and 31% definitely would not vote for Hunt.
Jasmine Crockett currently trails both John Cornyn (49% Cornyn-41% Crockett) and Ken Paxton (50% Paxton-42% Crockett). When asked in general whether they would support a Republican or Democratic candidate, 50% support a Republican candidate while 41% support a Democrat. Representative Crockett does not change the underlying partisan dynamic in this state where a Democratic candidate has not won a statewide race for any office since 1994.
As of today, Democrats hold an edge on voter enthusiasm for next year.A majority (54%) of all voters rate their enthusiasm to vote next year as a 10 out of 10. Democrats are more likely to rate their enthusiasm as a 10 (63%) than either Republicans (50%) or Independents (41%). The most enthusiastic voters split about evenly in the generic U.S. Senate vote and in the specific matchups. The people who rate their enthusiasm as 6–9 solidly support the Republican candidate. The less enthusiastic voters are largely undecided. That dynamic is what can make this race more competitive. Ken Paxton is deeply unpopular with Democrats (81% very unfavorable) and Independents (50% very unfavorable). John Cornyn is unpopular with these voters as well (56% very unfavorable with Democrats; 41% very unfavorable with Independents). An unpopular Democratic candidate can drive up enthusiasm among Republicans who do not currently rate their enthusiasm as a 10.
https://changeresearch.com/texas-senate-early-findings-2026/
This is evidence to show that it's not needed for Crockett to run in the Senate race.
Hopefully Behn will stay active and run again in 2026 (full term) or for the congressional seat in 2028 ( the country will be in a full-blown Republican Great Recession or depression which means the GOP advantage of 9 points will be nothing) or a statewide office in 2026 or 2028. She is a super candidate.
Agreed. She had a shorter time than in standard campaigns, and she made the most of it. Now that she has greater name recognition--something difficult for Democrats to get in a very red state (I know, because I live in Indiana)--she should build on that recognition and highlight the awful votes of her oppornent.
I think most/all of our close specials in 2017 and 2018 were father behind in the general--some significantly so. Thinking of the South Carolina and Kansas races especially, similar for Ohio, Montana, Arizona. Handel barely winning over Ossoff and then losing to McBath is probably the best recent exception, but those were much narrower margins.
Agree. I'm a fan of hers, but if she runs in that district next year, she'll get smoked, almost certainly by well into the double digits.
Why do you say that?
Because it's a deep red district and we pretty much always OVER-perform in special elections.
It's always deep red until it isn't. It was once blue.
I'm totally unconvinced a less stridently left-wing candidate couldn't do better in that district. Absolutely kudos to her for choosing to run and running hard, but I don't favor her to be the Democratic candidate next fall.
We're not going to have another Great Depression, unless it happens to be climate change induced. The Federal Reserve's proactiveness , potential stimulus measures, minimum wage, unemployment ensurance, social security, FDIC protection, Dodd Frank, etc. ensure this to be the case. At the worst, a downturn could last five years but beyond that, I just don't see it.
I know there's a fear there could be another GD but minor depressions are more probable at this point. The downturn as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic was what I'd call a minor depression, similar to what happened from the post-Spanish flu short depression. in the early 1920's.
There's a risk that incompetent Trump sycophants could gain control over the Fed, and if that happens, look out!
So yesterday I said that Van Epps winning by less than 10 would be a great night for Democrats. He won by 9, so yesterday was indeed a great night.
And Republicans can't even point to low turnout being the issue, because turnout wasn't low - it was pretty much the same as in 2022. So this special election is what a midterm electorate looks like.
And that is horrific news for Republicans, since it means that any district that voted for Trump by 13-14% or less is a legitimately strong Democratic target. Even without including California, Texas, or Florida (since the latter might still redistrict), I count 38 such seats across America that are currently held by Republicans. (And if Virginia redraws, it could be even more.) And Democrats only need to pick up a net 5 seats to win control of the House.
Yeah, the swings in both the urban AND rural parts of the district don't bode well for Republicans at all—and they can't be explained away by low turnout.
The late intervention of Trump et al. looks like it juiced the GOP vote on election day, but I'm not sure that's a strategy that can be expanded nationwide next year. It's not like he's holding giant rallies anymore.
He literally phoned in the day before yesterday at a private Epps rally where Mike Johnson and JD Vance attended in person.
He won't be doing that for 30 House seats next year.
I think you underestimate just how much Trump cares about downballot congressional races
That depends on his health come late summer/fall 2026. He's sundowning pretty bad the last couple days.
Trump really doesn't care about anyone but himself, although I'm sure in his primitive lizard brain he knows that Democratic majorities are not good for him getting his way!
VA had statewide swings towards Democrats in every single House of Delegates distruct in the state. IMO, anyone in the GOP who thought that Trump had a mandate after the 2024 election was totally delusional.
I hope they regret subjugating themselves to Trump for the rest of their sorry lives. Of course I don't have a clue what passes for a conscience these days in the GOP - they are probably quite happy raking it in and wouldn't know shame if it bit them in the butt!
In the next county over from where I live, there's a small-town mayor who clearly has aspirations beyond his current office (I suspect he wants to replace our aging congressman when he finally retires). But instead of running on his personal story, which is actually somewhat interesting (veteran, first-generation American, etc.), he spends most of his time simping Trump and disseminating MAGA rage bait on social media.
It's truly sad how many people have sacrificed their individuality on the altar of this revolting ogre.
This is the big story in all these specials, I think. That rurals are moving our way every bit as much as urban and suburban areas. I don't have all the data, but I'm fairly certain that's different than the movement in specials leading up to previous general elections.
Yeah, although I still think the future of the Democratic Party is mostly in the suburbs, if we could even just stanch the bleeding in rural areas, it would be great.
Totally agree. We play defense in rurals and win in suburbia.
Even if SCOTUS guts the VRA completely, voters are fed up with the GOP. The House is going to flip to Dem control at how blue these special elections are.
Do Dems have a strong bench in Clarksville? Someone from there who obviously spends a lot on Nashville turnout could have made it a real nailbiter.
There's a Democratic state representative in Clarksville - Ronnie Glynn. I don't know anything about him though.
Also his predecessor Jason Hodges, who is a veteran.
Glynn is a veteran as well
He is? His Wikipedia page was barren.
Sheesh that might be the most threadbare Wiki page for a sitting pol I’ve seen! His campaign website ID’s him as a retired 23-year Army vet. https://www.ronnieglynnforstaterep.com/
TX-28: This is bizarre. The GOP got a good candidate in Tano Tijerina, but then Cuellar gets pardoned out of the blue with an overt nudge that his party prosecuted him for wanting strong border security: https://nitter.poast.org/PollTracker2024/status/1996241023085768732#m
I hope Cuellar knows that the DOJ didn't cook up a bunch of lies solely because he wasn't 100% on board with immigration and the like. The Biden DOJ ain't the Trump DOJ.
I would think this means he’s switching parties, but yeah, they just recruited a candidate to challenge him. Interesting.
Switching parties? After Nov and even last night? Boy, that seems like a bad idea.
Not if it got you a pardon.
Eric Adams' life hasn't been exactly glowing since Trump came to his aid, but hey, I'm not the one facing jail time, so it makes sense.
Well, Eric Adams did this to himself. He became corrupt, never apologized and was a Democrat in-name-only.
If Cuellar ultimately doesn't switch parties, then the explanation will be simple. Sometimes Trump does things that don't make any sense.
He doesn't do anything out of the goodness of his heart, which he has neither. There's a quo. May not be switching parties, or immediately switching parties, but it's something.
I commented yesterday that I was glad Underwood has been ranking on Homeland Security approps in Cuellar's stead for the past year, and I think caucus rules would automatically restore him once he's formally pardoned (unless someone tries to block it, but there would be carrot/stick quibbles that could encourage him to switch parties even more). I expect him to make even worse concessions than he already would now.
https://www.the-downballot.com/p/morning-digest-why-republicans-are/comment/183516637?utm_source=activity_item
A surprise retirement could also happen I guess.
Interesting that this pardon happens the morning after the big TN special election Dem overperformance. I suspect trying to get Cuellar to switch parties is a sign of desperation from a party that is now effectively certain to lose the House.
If Cuellar were to switch parties, that would mean that, IIRC, there are no anti-abortion Democrats left in either house of Congress.
Also, we've had corrupt Presidents before Trump, but none of Trump's predecessors have outwardly embraced corruption as much as Trump has.
He loves corruption. Because he's so corrupt, he's impressed by people who are, and believes they should be rewarded.
Imagine the situation if Cuellar switches parties and then loses to a Democrat in his competitive seat. Let it be Jessica Cisneros.
Cisneros is from San Antonio, which was removed from the district in redistricting this year. We'd need another Democrat from the Laredo area in order to defeat Cuellar if he switches parties.
Unless the original map is upheld, which would still have San Antonio
No, this district is even more unfriendly to her than before and not by a little.
The shift right amongst hispanics makes her not competitive. Sadly the only dems wining down there now are the Cuellar types.
I think it's too soon to say this definitively. We'll need to see how next year's results look before declaring that the movement amongst Tejanos is permanent.
Well Cuellar knows if he's guilty or not. He's always been buddy buddy with republicans, that's why they gave him a survivable district. Maybe the Dump White House is hoping he switches after he wins.
TX-28: Cuellar just filed for reelection as a Democrat still (h/t former commenter trowaman): https://nitter.poast.org/trowaman/status/1996264956975804838#m
Phew.
I'm usually against primary challenges where an incumbent losing can risk the district, but Cuellar is an exception. He's a disgrace to the House and the Democratic Party as a whole.
Well, I say you take what you can get.
2026 Pennsylvania 10th Congressional District Poll
🔵 Janelle Stelson - 48%
🔴 Scott Perry (Inc) - 44%
Public Policy Polling
Registered Voters
11/29
Can Cumberland County come through? I hope so.
Shapiro probably wins it by a decent margin. Hopefully he has coattails!
Cumberland County came through this year. Both Tsai and Neuman won it in their judicial elections.
Obviously, this would have to be a win if he want to take back the house.
It's not that simple. There are almost always races that surprisingly don't flip, even in a wave.
TEXAS SENATE GOP PRIMARY POLL
Ken Paxton - 32%
Wesley Hunt - 22%
John Cornyn - 22%
Not sure - 24%
——
Paxton vs Cornyn
Paxton - 44%
Cornyn - 34%
Not sure - 22%
—
Hunt vs Cornyn
Hunt - 45%
Cornyn - 28%
Not sure - 27%
——
Fav-unfav
Hunt: 34-14 (+20)
Paxton: 48-35 (+13)
Cornyn: 29-44 (-15)
——
• PPP for Senate Majority PAC (Dem)
• 12/1-2 | 527 LV
https://semafor.com/article/12/02/2025/cornyn-trails-paxton-in-texas-senate-race-democratic-poll-finds
SMP didn't poll the Dem primary? Unlikely. They didn't like what they saw. Probably Crockett in the lead.
You're correct IG.
Cornyn looks like toast in this poll.
My state MAGA bootlicker Senator Ted Budd is reshuffling his staff to focus on his 2028 re-election campaign. Does he smell trouble on the horizon?
https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article313330855.html
https://archive.ph/5Emo0
If Cooper wins the open Senate race by 3 points or more, Budd is going to be a top target in 2028. Rs are going to be spending heavily to keep Budd, their precious SCONC judicial majority, and the EVs for President in 2028.
We could have the first instance of two Democrat senators from NC since 1973. Run Jeff Jackson!
I think Jeff Jackson is a VERY strong candidate if he decides to challenge Budd. He's not afraid to take TACO to court and I can imagine him ripping Budd a new one on the debate stage.
Oh I hope so!
If Roy Cooper wins the Senate seat next year, then Ted Budd is next. One more seat in the Senate for Democrats to make it easier for them to get the party agenda implemented.
Maine and Michigan Dem primaries looking to be a complete mess so I'm concerned about that.
And Michigan's general with Duggan as the spoiler could be disastrous as well.
If Crockett jumps into TX Sen then that's also a race we will forfeit.
Seems like the DSCC preferred candidates Mills, Stevens, and Allred are all flops nobody is excited about while the insurgents like Platner and Crockett and ElSayed are problematic for various reasons while candidates like McMorrow and Telarco are at risk of being crowded out.
Candidate recruitment has been a huge mess thus far. Big fails by the party as a whole to coalesce.
Just enjoy the holidays, it's too early to be concerned about this stuff. It's like people being worried about being shut out of the California governors race right now, just calm down and let this be sorted out.
He doesn't get the credit usually, but Schumer has for a very long time chosen smartly in must-win primaries, whereas the GOP has flopped horribly.
North Carolina 2020? Iowa 2014? Pennsylvania 2016? Arizona 2018?
Crockett merely running in the primaries doesn't automatically forfeit anything. You're assuming she'd definitely win the nomination? If so, why?
If you’re basing the Michigan concerns off of that Steve Mitchell poll, I would advise not worrying too much. The numbers are laughable on their face and Mitchell is a hack (I’m pretty sure he makes numbers up - in fact I’m almost certain based off of some campaigns in the Obama era where his polling was involved).
TEXAS POLL - SENATE
🟥 Ken Paxton: 50%
🟦 Jasmine Crockett: 42%
—
🟥 John Cornyn: 49%
🟦 Jasmine Crockett: 41%
——
TX Senate Generic Ballot
🟥 Republican: 50%
🟦 Democrat: 41%
——
@ChangePolls | 11/20-26 | 1,109 RV
Crockett disapproval at 40%
Umm did the poll Talirico or Allred?
https://x.com/AndrewSolender/status/1995956232382021641?t=bAEWDO3iefkHgZNuYumxFQ&s=19
New - Senate primary poll - Maine
🔵 Platner 58%
🔵 Mills 38%
Z To A #C - RV - 11/18
We might be heading into an environment where he can pull off a general election victory. To say that I would be unhappy with this guy representing Dems is an understatement, but he might be able to do it. I'd like to see some GE polling.
One indepedent poll shows him leading Collins by 5 while Mills trails her by 1 or something.
I don't know how reliable it was.
That was not an independent poll. That was his own internal.
Sorry, it was by a group that supports his campaign. That was in no way independent. It should be treated as an internal.
https://x.com/wideofthepost/status/1988719837166641655
At this point, the only reason why John Fetterman exists as a Senator is to have one less GOP-held seat to worry about, especially considering he replaced Senator Pat Toomey, who retired.
If Graham Platner is elected in the general election, we can always look at him getting primaried later. However, in seeing Platner speak, I do not get the sense he's exactly another Fetterman. He's more honest, less of a dick and has completely different problems than Fetterman does.
Platner may be more of a loose cannon than we would expect but unless he completely changes and sells out as a Senator like Fetterman did, I don't see any issues otherwise besides the fact that he's closely aligned with Bernie Sanders, AOC, etc. on his agenda.
Besides, Platner is a veteran and would likely be more of a straight shooter than Fetterman is. Unless there's something otherwise revealing about his health, I don't think we'd have another Fetterman-like situation in 2022 where Platner would have health problems that would consume most of his campaign time.
"Besides, Platner is a veteran and would likely be more of a straight shooter"
Well, sure, literally. :-)
As someone who called Fetterman as a piece of shit from very early on, I think Platner is a disaster. He straight up said that he joined the military because wanted to kill people. He's very likely a worse person than Fetterman. He might be closely aligned with Sanders and AOC but that means little to me, and I doubt those beliefs are set. He's just playing the role he has been given. The man has no experience, no track record, nothing. It's so blindingly obvious that it's insane.
Source about him saying he wanted to kill people? I did not see any reddit posts about that. He said he just wanted to go to war for the United States.
https://x.com/wideofthepost/status/1982896186337177809?s=20
https://www.reddit.com/r/DemocraticSocialism/comments/1oljpsv/graham_platner_the_same_year_he_called_himself_a/
How is Platner saying “want to kill some people” during the time he was going to join the military indicative of any agenda? Perhaps he was a cocky man in his early years as an adult. Platner may have been in his early 20’s at the time.
In Unforgiven, we saw the Schofield kid join Clint Eastwood’s Bill Munny and Morgan Freeman’s Ned Logan to hunt down a group of outlaws. The Schofield kid boasted of how he wanted to kill people like Bill Munny but when he found out the hard way after seeing how the person he killed died, he didn’t feel good about it and didn’t want to kill anymore.
Platner may have been shaken and traumatized with PTSD from the military. A simple statement like what he wrote on Reddit doesn’t reveal that much.
It was said that Margaret Thatcher said her greatest achievement was Tony Blair and New Labour. For Donald Trump, his greatest achievement may be Graham Platner. Not because he necessarily agrees on policy, but because having a politician who uses the r word, other slurs, and everything else that's come out has been normalized for the sake of winning.
If this poll is accurate, it’s not exactly the first sign our base Democratic voters have become far more comfortable supporting unconventional and controversial candidates (in response to both Trump getting elected president twice AND our party’s leaders chosen candidates losing, it’s not 1 or the other, it’s a reaction to both).
I’ve seen this story coming even well after I personally stopped supporting Platner. The real question right now imo is do the Susan Collins 2020 voters stick with her against a Nazi tattoo working class Democrat while Trump is President? I can’t answer that right now, which makes me at the very least concerned.
The money and volunteers on the ground though after he announced told us everything: Democrats on the ground in Maine were and are excited FOR him specifically, not against Collins or against Trump. You don’t generate that kind of authentic enthusiasm that just suddenly disappears because of controversy with a candidate.
In fact, it often leads to the person seeing even more support as voters feel their guy is being unfairly attacked, coalesce around them and they pivot to railing against those who are trying to take them down: see Trump’s primary campaign in 2016. Or to a much lesser extent Mamdani 2025 (and before someone jumps on me, NO, these are not at all equal and I’m not saying they are, but he did have unconventional views at least on some thorny political issues, I think even supporters can admit that much).
If they like you, voters will take all of the warts with you, regardless of what warts they are or how bad they are. Republicans being excited to face Platner feels awfully similar to how Democrats were excited to face Trump all those years ago. Didn’t work out so well for us.
Great post. One of the biggest complaints I've seen is that the Maine newspaper establishment is attacking him with coordinated op-eds from rich out of staters with the same old tropes of "Platner Bros" and "unqualified" etc which is making him a sort of anti establishment hero.
I’m calling it early: Platner bros is going to become next year’s deplorables 2016 moniker, with those attacked proudly embracing the term and it backfiring spectacularly on those pushing it as an attack.
“Damn right I’m a Platner bro, he’s the only one who’s willing to speak up for us and against both parties”. You can copy/paste exactly what Republican voters said in 2016 after Hillary said they were a basket of deplorables (doesn’t matter that they actually were, the attack boomeranged, no question about that).
The more Platner gets attacked, the more his supporters dig in to back him no matter what. I don’t know what would derail his obvious campaign momentum right now, once something like this starts, it’s a never ending reinforcing cycle where every attack against the candidate ironically makes them even stronger.
You can’t win by attacking him, so the only way to beat him is by out organizing him. Collins and her supporters would be wise to focus solely on that task, because they’re way behind already and the race is basically over barring another last minute shakeup or current Platner supporters switching allegiances or not showing up on primary day.
Republicans almost managed to beat Trump in the 2016 primary, but it wasn’t with the candidates who were attacking him, it was on the ground strength of a campaign organization by people who quite pointedly DIDN’T attack him. That’s the path and the only one available for Collins now if this poll is anywhere close to reality (and I strongly suspect it is).
Side point on Hillary's 2016 campaign: She didn't even say all Trump supporters were deplorables, only IIRC half of them, which is way too conservative an estimate. And yeah, it hurt her, but she still would have won enough states without fucking Comey and his bullshit.
No argument here, she was being kind saying only half were and Comey did crash her campaign right at the finish line. I will never forgive him for what he single handedly did to America forever because he put his former party before his oath of office.
We can debate and argue for decades what Hillary being president would mean to Trump, the hypotheticals are endless and the GOP base was always headed where Trump took them, so maybe it’s just a 4 year break before Trump stormed into office anyways. But he also would’ve lost and his entire electoral persona is he’s a winner.
Would America have been spared the catastrophic last decade in the country? Would Haley be president right now after the GOP lost to Hillary and recalibrated to be less insane and lined up to support the anti-Trump: anyone who they thought would end their theoretical 12 year losing streak in presidential elections no matter who that person looked like and what policies they’d have to swallow in order to win moderates?
So many questions and possibilities, with never ending answers.
That all said, without question the basket of deplorables comment pushed on the fence Republicans (even moderate ones), more into Trump’s camp than if she said nothing. It was the quote used effectively by MAGA and Trump himself in the campaign to portray her as an elitist out of touch with “real” America and it worked.
This is an internal. It's useless without corroboration.
All polls, internal or not, have shown Platner in the lead except from a Gen Z MAGA firm.
I was on the PCCC call this morning that included a briefing from the pollster. She went through some Platner vs Mills poll results but didn't present anything regarding either candidate vs Collins. One small bit that stuck with me: both Platner and Mills have very high name recognition at this point -- Mills at or close to 100 percent, Platner at 90 percent or so. Also, she presented a negatives case about each that IMO was a bit too light on Platner's negatives: he's called rural whites racist and stupid (but not his precise quote about Maine rural whites), and softpedaled the tattoo a bit.
On a positive note, Platner agreed to sign the No Fossil Fuel Money pledge when I asked.
I'm going to survey my Maine list at some point and respect their decision. Right now, from the other side of the country, my impression is that this race is approaching PResidential levels of awareness and polarization. Everyone in the state knows about it and everyone in the state has an opinion.
https://open.substack.com/pub/gelliottmorris/p/what-the-special-election-in-tennessees?utm_source=direct&r=5h35x5&utm_campaign=comment-list-share-cta&utm_medium=web&comments=true&commentId=183636202
How much do voter registration gaps really matter?
Democrats had a voter registration advantage in all swing states for most of the 2000s and 2010s and still lost them several times. Independents are now a solidly left *leaning* group. Biden lost Florida and NC despite a voter registration advantage. Hillary lost all.
With the rise of Independents, I don't expect the numbers are going to do anything more other than to continue to increase. There's a lot of disillusionment with the Democratic and Republican parties, especially with the approval ratings of each party in Congress low (with Democrats having better approvals than Republicans by contrast).
A New York City-based Republican club will honor a far-right German leader at its annual gala — just eight weeks after its statewide counterpart was disbanded over a group chat in which members praised Adolf Hitler.
The city-based New York Young Republican Club’s gala will recognize Markus Frohnmaier, a political leader from the Alternative for Germany party.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/12/03/young-republicans-chapter-plans-to-host-far-right-german-leader-after-i-love-hitler-chat-00671540?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=dlvr.it
Young Republicans increasingly seem very groyper-ish. I'm not sure how, or if, they will ever deradicalize. Their entire Twitter feeds and r/Conservative are full of groyper- and wignat-type posts. Even those who abhor Hitler and Nazism still align with groyper positions on racism toward groups other than Jews and Slavs. Elon Musk, Vance, DHS and ICE leaders, and other cabinet officials have regularly amplified such accounts by retweeting their non-Nazi content.
It's my hope that after the inevitable pardons, and the (hopeful admittedly) criminal referrals to the Hague for crimes against humanity, the spectacle of a televised prosecution of trump's lackeys for Venezuelan actions, immigration actions, etc will maybe turn a few away out of shame--a al Germany post Nuremburg trials.
I have no confidence in any prosecutions at The Hague. No-one from the Bush Administration ever faced any consequences for mass torture and murder, and no-one at The Hague ever suggested they should stand trial there.
i share your lack of faith, however I am setting goalposts amongst my personal group of friends that there have to be televised trials coupled with a positive vision for the future of the country. we cannot let ourselves be weimar germany by letting these folks off the hook for things that go beyond your typical crimes, but involve illegal use of the most powerful military in the world. In general I think I'm a mainstream Democratic voter, but the damage that has been done must be addressed, and we can't make the same mistakes obama did re bush and cheney's war crimes
I agree, though if Trump pardons everyone on the way out, what is left to do? I would absolutely support sending them to The Hague, but I doubt most Americans would support that.
This is why I have a suspicion that social media platforms are increasingly rewiring Gen Zers brains to the extent where they don’t have the right training to think independently for themselves without the influence of technology.
More evidence we need a technology regulatory agency.
Do Young Republicans ever intend to win in elected office again?
Honestly, it’s become a cult even with the younger Gen Z GOPers. Apparently the recent fiasco in Vermont was a nothing burger to them.
Perhaps they should have learned a long time ago that the once conservative boy darling that spoke at the CPAC during Obama’s first term as POTUS, Jonathan Krohn, became more liberal and anti-conservative later.
Or maybe they need to just get off the internet.