Seems to me that Ken Paxton and Jasmine Crocket share two key qualities: a massive ego and unearned self-esteem. That, of course, raises a third disturbing element: either would bring a serious handicap to their party in the general election. And this Texas race is vital to keeping the Senate Red or flipping it Blue.
For these reasons, I really do hope it’ll be Talarico vs Paxton in November!
Is Cornyn that screwed with GOP primary voters in TX? Wow. And the ratfucking they did with getting Jasmine Crockett to run for the Senate seat might end up with her and Cornyn not being on the Nov ballot.
My MAGA mom thinks Paxton is too corrupt and Cornyn is too old. I almost have her talked into Talarico. I prob can’t get her to vote in a Dem primary, but I have a strong chance of getting her to pull the lever for Talarico in the general, esp if Paxton is on the ballot. (Btw, she thinks Crockett is crazy).
Not even on her radar. He’s significant enough to cause a run-off between Paxton and Cornyn though, extending that race and directing money to be spent against each other until May.
Isn't "unearned self-esteem" a little harsh toward Crockett? Sure, we wish she hadn't run for the Senate and would just support Talarico, but she's been great in the House. I love seeing her being a confident House member and just wish she had stayed in the House.
Idk man, while i was originally a Crockett fan, the mess with Allred and just her overall primary campaign has convinced me that she's all sizzle/no steak.
She'd be lovely as a liberal media correspondent, but the 2010s style ID-pol forward campaign isn't suitable for this current climate, and is especialy unsuitable in a Trump+14 state
Don’t get me wrong, I love Crocket and her great takedowns of Trump and MAGA Trumpists! But although it may seem a bit harsh, Crocket’s ego dictating that she is ready for the Senate and can win in Texas, well – it may seem harsh – but I think that self-esteem is premature and unearned.
It was evident during the debate as well that she isn’t ready. She’s great in the house though, repping a solid blue district. Wish she had stayed there. Talarico flipped a red district and is as measured and sure-footed a candidate I’ve ever seen. Republicans are right to be scared of him. I knock on doors daily for him. We must get him to the general.
The recent gerrymander pretty much destroyed Crockett's district. It's not a given she could have stayed in the House. All over the state, Republicans played the game of pitting the powerhouses against each other so they could knock out at least one of them. Just like they did with Cesar and Doggett.
Yes, definite power games afoot. Republicans are extremely good at them. But as an accomplished lawyer she could have filed for a something with excellent state power, like Lt. Gov or AG.
Not really? Although she was (just barely) drawn out of her district, it didn't change that much, especially compared to other DFW area Dems, and no one would have faulted her for running for re-election in a district she doesn't quite live in. The fact no notable candidate was prepared to run against her in the primary suggests the seat was hers if she wanted it.
I agree. Crocket reminds me of Katie Porter in California who was not ready for the Senate and lost to Adam Schiff. Both Porter and Crocket should have stayed in the House where they are needed.
Crockett probably would have stayed in the House if Abbott and Dan Patrick hadn't gerrymandered her district out of existence when they supposedly created five seats for Trump in the gerrymander. So, with the Republicans taking credit for sending her push polls that she could win right after they took her district away sure makes it look like they think the only way they can win in the general is against her and by playing the race card with their base.
Now, that said, it doesn't mean she can't thread the needle and win even if they play the race card. But the Allred "mediocre black man" kerfuffle makes me very nervous. I actually think she's too smart to play into the Republicans' trap. I mean, how insulting that they think they can just "run" her that way?
Yes, they squeezed her out of the house by design. But then her having Allred file back in the house so she could run against Talarico is self-aggrandizing behavior and not what we need right now. She should have sought a different path that would have diminished intra-party fighting, not favor it.
Fair assessment although I think Porter is a smarter messenger and strategist contrast to Crockett. She’s more suitable to serve in the Senate than Crockett.
The Talarico campaign is contending with the fallout from his allegedly having referred to Colin Allred, the Democratic nominee for Senate in the last cycle, as "a mediocre black man." The Crockett-Talarico race is threatening to polarize the state's black and Latino populations.
Talarico is white not Latino, and the source of the allegation was a "pro-woke" social media influencer. Talarico later admitted to calling Allred's campaign "mediocre" but denied using the racial descriptor "mediocre Black man". Allred went on a very harsh rant even insulting Talarico's faith by saying that Rev Warnock had already reclaimed Christianity for Dems and it need not be preached by a mediocre racist.
Although I am not a Christian, this really irked me and I rage donated to Julie Johnson. Why couldn't Allred simply call Talarico? Then Crockett further fanned the flames.
embellishing 100 percent, which is why we are here. Can't always tell what's in someone's heart, but Talarico doesn't strike me as someone who would call anyone mediocre.
Is there dispute about whether he used the word "mediocre"? I was under the (mis)impression that the debate was over the alleged use of the phrase "Black man".
He called Allred's campaign mediocre (accurately, imo). The phrase "mediocre Black man" was not used by anyone except the person trying to tar Talarico with it.
This reminds me that I heard that the GOP is worried about the the race to replace MTG in Georgia's special election because there are 16 Republicans running and only 3 Democrats and the GOP is worried that they will get locked out since this race will have a top 2 runoff.
I don't get why national progressive senators and groups skipped this race? They seem to be interested in Maine, Michigan, Minnesota and Texas but not Illinois.
Is it because two progressive Black women are running and they didn't want to weigh in?
Klobuchar vs. Lindell would be a blowout. But Klobuchar can really damage Demuth by accurately making her the face of the ICE raids in Minneapolis alongside Noem and TACO.
Payroll employment numbers are initially collected the week of the 12th of each month and published the first Friday of the next month. They're then often significantly revised in the next two monthly reports as more data come in, and there is usually a big revision in March of the next year based largely on unemployment insurance tax payments. Basically, the survey data allow for quick estimates but miss a lot, and BLS needs the slower-moving administrative data to make the eventual more accurate estimates.
Reporting is that Paxton’s main financial supporter, oilman Tim Dunn, is not financing Paxton for this election. He wanted him to run/stay as AG. But yes, the hardcore MAGA hate John Cornyn. Plus, in state GOP legislative races, the knives are out. Miriam Adelson wants to open a casino in Dallas and is funding her own slate of GOP state house and senate candidates. The religious/non gambling wing (maybe overlaps with Paxton supporters?) is big time pissed. If this causes a big rift that doesn’t heal, November general elections could be a GOP nightmare. 🍿
If voters manage to overcome our gerrymandered GOP majority this year (unlikely but the state TX Senate race makes me hopeful), I want the Dem NC legislative majority to do the same thing. And put in teeth to keep the rogue GOP state courts in line.
Best shot to do that is flipping the Court in 2028. Need to win 3 of 4 in the next two cycles. Defend Anita Earls this year, then win 2 of 3 GOP seats in 2028. Dem court can overturn the congressional and state legislative gerrymanders.
We do have a path to flipping the state House this year in a blue wave / tsunami. State Senate is tougher but yes, the most likely path to flipping back control of the legislature and Congressional maps is a 4-3 or 5-2 Democratic controlled state Supreme Court after 2028.
But if the unlikely situation happened this year (and Earls gets re-elected to her seat), NC Dems are going to be doing what VA Dems did back in 2020-2021 when they regained their trifecta.
Unfortunately for democracy, after they get fair legislative maps, the Dems need to gerrymander the state house and state senate maps as soon as they win both chambers to prevent future GOP gerrymanders. 2022 was hugely disappointing at the state legislative level because not only did Dems lose control of the state supreme court, but they also failed to pick up either chamber with fair maps. As soon as they lost the Court, the GOP made the state legislative chambers borderline unwinnable even in waves. NC will always shift with its state supreme court. A GOP supreme court will always permit the GOP to gerrymander if they control both legislatures. Have to make sure you always control 1 of the 3 (Supreme Court, House, or Senate)
The one way to keep that from happening is to implement an independent redistricting amendment, written like in MI or the failed one in OH. Cut out the General Assembly entirely, have a 13-to-15-person commission draw the maps. That way it keeps the 50-50 partisan split of the state and keeps a GOP majority minimal (and forces them to moderate). The state Supreme Court would only intervene with the map drawing if the decision on the maps isn't unanimous and there would be guardrails to keep a rogue GOP state judiciary from giving their party a win.
And if the state Supreme Court goes from 5-2 Republican to Democratic majority, as soon as the Dems regain a state legislative trifecta, need to make judicial elections retention elections akin to Pennsylvania.
Again, this seems very naive. How's the commission working in Utah right now? How is the anti-gerrymandering constitutional amendment doing in Florida right now? How about Iowa? Or Ohio? I have no doubts that if the GOP controlled the MI SC, the state house, the state senate, and the governorship, they would do everything in their power to overturn the commission when it came time to redistrict. Hell, look what Dems are doing in California and Virginia. The *only* play for Democrats is to gain enough redistricting power that Republicans are forced to agree to nationwide federal standards. Taking opportunities where you can gerrymander in your favor and turn them into neutral, fair maps, while the GOP gerrymanders TX, OK, TN, KY, FL, GA, IA, MO, KY, AL, MS, SC, OH, LA, AR, and IN is exactly how you relegate yourself to permanent minority status.
I strongly doubt it will happen due to the immense hurdles to implement, but I wonder if we'll ever see any state adopt mixed-member proportional (MMP) or similar in an effort to decisively end gerrymandering. No need to worry about commissions, bias, influence, courts, or anything at all if the results are fundamentally proportional to the vote by definition.
MMP has that plus the benefit of actual geographic constituencies, which have their upsides and I feel Americans are particularly strongly attached to them as well.
That would need 60% of legislators to vote in lockstep to send to voters to approve as a constitutional amendment. Giving veto power over the state maps to the governor would definitely bring out the Democratic voters.
I’d worry about that, because the hack GOP Supreme Court will probably just overturn it. There needs to be an “unmovable block” for Republicans redrawing in case we don’t win back a majority on the court or enough state legislature seats to sustain a veto in North Carolina. And this new map needs to get redrawn asap.
What type of block that is, is the harder question, but I’d lean giving the Governor veto power over any map, because not even a Republican court would say a Governor can’t have that power given how many other states do have that. Maybe the NC Supreme Court rules against that change, but even the US Supreme Court or a Federal Circuit Appeals Court would slap down that ruling pretty quick.
It'll be too late by that point (in the best case scenario, it would only be for the 2030 election and then the GOP would make new gerrymanders post-census). Need some sort of ruling that outlaws them permanently or Dems manage to hold one chamber after 2030 (which seems unlikely?)
Much needed. We need a Louise Lucas in every state. Primary out incumbents based on lack of party loyalty. Scandals and ideological concerns should still be a factor, but lack of loyalty should be a driving motivator when Republicans have been ruthless in their partisan approaches to gerrymandering and power grabs for decades.
Whole lot of wasted ink about nothing earlier from a large number of Democrats and media pundits/journalists. This was always going to be the end outcome.
Toxic comment thread about AIPAC deleted. Yes, I know, it may feel frustrating that we clamp down on discussions of some topics that show up in the Morning Digest, but that's life.
not arguing. But I have been using the phrase "dark money" a lot, sometimes as a euphemism for AIPAC (since I don't want to open that can of worms either). Is that all right here? I do NOT want to go into foreign policy. I'm just p!ssed that certain dark money groups, including this one, spend $ to boost moderates/ block progressives in Dem primaries, right now IL-09.
45% is a death sentence for most incumbents in hostile territory of either party. If this is her best internal she’s got, she’s in very serious trouble.
Correct. It’s not the fact that she’s necessarily up one point. It’s the fact that she’s in the mid 40s. The only politician I’ve seen really to survive that in this type of environment was Harry Reid in 2010. That was because he had a severely flawed opponent.
Interesting that after the "hear both sides" section Platner drops so much. Could be Collins' pollster trolling us, but could be that voters haven't internalized and moved past Platner's scandals the way many folks online believe.
Who would've guessed? Shock face. What is shocking is that Collins' pollster released the latter part of that informed ballot. She wants to face Platner.
Lol, the push messages weren't disclosed, you're jumping to conclusions that you strongly want to be true.
For all we know, it could be similar to be laughable one Mills put out.
"Graham Platner is a self-described communist who said he was disgusted with the idea of America and that white people living in rural Maine are stupid and racist. Platner said that all cops are, “bastards,” and supports dangerously liberal policies that are bad for Maine, like defunding law enforcement, opening our borders, and creating a socialized healthcare system
that would eliminate all private insurance and drive up Mainers' taxes by thousands of dollars a
year."
With that information, Collins leads Platner 51 percent to 42 percent.
I will stick with the Governor with +8 approvals against an unvetted, unknown risk. This is an elections board. These things are relevant to elections.
Here's an interesting survey on political leanings depending on where you get your news from. Basically Twitter/X is the furthest right (the only place where users mostly approve of Trump, and even among them he's slipping), and furthest left are Reddit, TikTok, and newspapers and broadcast TV--which underlines the stupidity of recent moves at places like CBS and the Washington Post.
The goal at CBS and WaPo is not to make money or inform but to eliminate alternative sources of news. That said, they’ll both be belly up as a result before long Id guess, but that’s a writeoff to Ellison or Bezos
Democrats really ought to push anti-trust laws to prevent more of these billionaire/billionaire associated takeovers of news reporting, as well as break up the media giants.
IN-SOS: I had brought up my thought that Beau Bayh could beat Diego Morales only two days ago. In the intervening time since then, Diego Morales has fucked up the filing instructions/processes for candidates and his office has been found to have utilized state resources in campaign materials.
Can any of the opposition parties bring up a no-confidence vote outside of supply and confidence situations? A no confidence vote would be extremely embarrassing for Starmer since dozens of Labour MPs would likely abstain on said motion which is effectively voting no-confidence in the government.
Yeah, I’m going to need some evidence before I believe that. Posting rumours like this without specifying that it’s your opinion or linking anything anyone can verify is very bad practice.
Same reason some on the left dislike Pelosi. Effective legislative leaders have to cut deals, and occasionally box out the extremist elements of their own party. That rubs said extremist elements the wrong way.
Yeah. One difference is that the militant right is much bigger than the militant left, so Pelosi is still fairly popular among Dems overall while McConnell is usually underwater among Rs.
MAGA differs from old prior conservatives in a lot of ways. If I had to oversimplify it to an extreme for this question I'd say the distinction is that McConnell is a conservative focused on the long term view for his party. MAGA is focused entirely on the here and now. There's little interest in sacrificing now in order to get payoff later: they need instant gratification at all times.
McConnell's success for conservatives is what makes him so easy for them to hate. He successfully represents the "wrong" approach to conservatism for them, in a way that makes him an unlikely convert.
I'd say this is true, but not for all of conservatism - there is a long through line from Goldwater/Birchers to Paleo-Cons like Pat Buchanan to MAGA. MAGA is just the first time this wing of conservatism ended up in the driver's seat.
MAGA and Republican primary voters have shown again and again that they don't give a fuck about electoral strategy, procedural ruthlessness, or electability. They care about "pwning the libs," worshipping Trump, and rage clickbait. McConnell fails on those.
Mickey Tuck, a local activist, embodies the unease. He’s torn between three or four of the leading GOP contenders and no fan of Greene, who he said did a “big disservice” to the district by abruptly resigning after feuding with Trump.
But he’s also convinced Democrats see an opening. In a free-for-all with so many names on the ballot, he said, they have a real shot at grabbing one of the runoff spots — and, however remote — an outside chance at landing both or even winning outright.
“Democrats smell blood in the water,” Tuck said. “And you know they’re going to come out and vote. We could very easily see a Democrat slip in there.”
Back in December, the 14th District GOP issued a warning about the “danger” of complacency even in Greene’s backyard. Local Republicans say that risk is only growing.
Pam Peters, the Floyd County GOP chair, pointed to last year’s Public Service Commission races, when some MAGA voters, angry over rising energy prices, cast protest ballots for Democrats — while others simply stayed home.
“Republicans didn’t show up,” she said of the party’s blowout losses, urging activists to keep the election in mind even on their morning walks. “We need to be engaged.”
Since primary season is upon us (only a month away. Crazy!), I wanted to open up discussion of some downballot races that will have a huge impact on our party:
The veto override caucus, or in other words, the list of Democrats in NC that continue to betray their party and vote with Republicans to override Governor Josh Stein’s vetoes.
I don’t specifically know which reps have, how many times they did, what their districts look like partisanship wise or how many reps there are, but for anyone who does know, how are the primary challenges looking in these races?
And if so inclined, links to donate/support the actual Democrats running would be great to help everyone here get involved to get rid of the GOP enablers in our party.
Josh Stein has endorsed the primary challenger against problematic Democratic incumbent Karla Cunningham who has voted with Republicans on a lot of things.
There was Cecil Brockman from Guilford (reliably blue district), but he resigned last year after statutory sex offense charges. His replacement is a reliably Democratic woman Amanda Cook.
Stein endorsed Rev. Sadler to run against traitor Carla Cunningham. Nasif Majeed, another veto override caucus member, is facing a primary against Veleria Levy and Tucker Neal. Both Cunningham and Majeed are in Mecklenburg, so they need to go along with Traitor Tricia.
Seems to me that Ken Paxton and Jasmine Crocket share two key qualities: a massive ego and unearned self-esteem. That, of course, raises a third disturbing element: either would bring a serious handicap to their party in the general election. And this Texas race is vital to keeping the Senate Red or flipping it Blue.
For these reasons, I really do hope it’ll be Talarico vs Paxton in November!
Is Cornyn that screwed with GOP primary voters in TX? Wow. And the ratfucking they did with getting Jasmine Crockett to run for the Senate seat might end up with her and Cornyn not being on the Nov ballot.
My MAGA mom thinks Paxton is too corrupt and Cornyn is too old. I almost have her talked into Talarico. I prob can’t get her to vote in a Dem primary, but I have a strong chance of getting her to pull the lever for Talarico in the general, esp if Paxton is on the ballot. (Btw, she thinks Crockett is crazy).
Wesley Hunt?
Not even on her radar. He’s significant enough to cause a run-off between Paxton and Cornyn though, extending that race and directing money to be spent against each other until May.
Isn't "unearned self-esteem" a little harsh toward Crockett? Sure, we wish she hadn't run for the Senate and would just support Talarico, but she's been great in the House. I love seeing her being a confident House member and just wish she had stayed in the House.
Idk man, while i was originally a Crockett fan, the mess with Allred and just her overall primary campaign has convinced me that she's all sizzle/no steak.
She'd be lovely as a liberal media correspondent, but the 2010s style ID-pol forward campaign isn't suitable for this current climate, and is especialy unsuitable in a Trump+14 state
Don’t get me wrong, I love Crocket and her great takedowns of Trump and MAGA Trumpists! But although it may seem a bit harsh, Crocket’s ego dictating that she is ready for the Senate and can win in Texas, well – it may seem harsh – but I think that self-esteem is premature and unearned.
Ok, I understand what you mean now.
It was evident during the debate as well that she isn’t ready. She’s great in the house though, repping a solid blue district. Wish she had stayed there. Talarico flipped a red district and is as measured and sure-footed a candidate I’ve ever seen. Republicans are right to be scared of him. I knock on doors daily for him. We must get him to the general.
The recent gerrymander pretty much destroyed Crockett's district. It's not a given she could have stayed in the House. All over the state, Republicans played the game of pitting the powerhouses against each other so they could knock out at least one of them. Just like they did with Cesar and Doggett.
Yes, definite power games afoot. Republicans are extremely good at them. But as an accomplished lawyer she could have filed for a something with excellent state power, like Lt. Gov or AG.
Not really? Although she was (just barely) drawn out of her district, it didn't change that much, especially compared to other DFW area Dems, and no one would have faulted her for running for re-election in a district she doesn't quite live in. The fact no notable candidate was prepared to run against her in the primary suggests the seat was hers if she wanted it.
I agree. Crocket reminds me of Katie Porter in California who was not ready for the Senate and lost to Adam Schiff. Both Porter and Crocket should have stayed in the House where they are needed.
Crockett probably would have stayed in the House if Abbott and Dan Patrick hadn't gerrymandered her district out of existence when they supposedly created five seats for Trump in the gerrymander. So, with the Republicans taking credit for sending her push polls that she could win right after they took her district away sure makes it look like they think the only way they can win in the general is against her and by playing the race card with their base.
Now, that said, it doesn't mean she can't thread the needle and win even if they play the race card. But the Allred "mediocre black man" kerfuffle makes me very nervous. I actually think she's too smart to play into the Republicans' trap. I mean, how insulting that they think they can just "run" her that way?
Yes, they squeezed her out of the house by design. But then her having Allred file back in the house so she could run against Talarico is self-aggrandizing behavior and not what we need right now. She should have sought a different path that would have diminished intra-party fighting, not favor it.
Are you thinking of Veasey or Johnson's district?
Veasey
Fair assessment although I think Porter is a smarter messenger and strategist contrast to Crockett. She’s more suitable to serve in the Senate than Crockett.
Crockett's good at trolling Rs, but I get the sense that she's more interested in building her brand than in helping the party.
That's definitely a valid point of view. I love her calling them out, though, and that's needed.
More like Crockett likes the sound of her voice.
The Talarico campaign is contending with the fallout from his allegedly having referred to Colin Allred, the Democratic nominee for Senate in the last cycle, as "a mediocre black man." The Crockett-Talarico race is threatening to polarize the state's black and Latino populations.
Talarico is white not Latino, and the source of the allegation was a "pro-woke" social media influencer. Talarico later admitted to calling Allred's campaign "mediocre" but denied using the racial descriptor "mediocre Black man". Allred went on a very harsh rant even insulting Talarico's faith by saying that Rev Warnock had already reclaimed Christianity for Dems and it need not be preached by a mediocre racist.
Although I am not a Christian, this really irked me and I rage donated to Julie Johnson. Why couldn't Allred simply call Talarico? Then Crockett further fanned the flames.
Who used the phrase "mediocre Black man"? Talarico, or someone embellishing what he said?
embellishing 100 percent, which is why we are here. Can't always tell what's in someone's heart, but Talarico doesn't strike me as someone who would call anyone mediocre.
Is there dispute about whether he used the word "mediocre"? I was under the (mis)impression that the debate was over the alleged use of the phrase "Black man".
He called Allred's campaign mediocre (accurately, imo). The phrase "mediocre Black man" was not used by anyone except the person trying to tar Talarico with it.
I did not say that Talarico is Latino. However, he seems to be galvanizing Latino support, while Crockett is doing the same with Black voters.
Ohh, I thought you were confused since the surname "Talarico" ends with a vowel.
Yes, the voting coalitions seem to be polarized but I am not sure up to what extent.
There are now 18 declared candidates in the Democratic NJ 12 primary.
Election Day poll workers will have to dust off their best non-answers to "Who should I vote for?"
This reminds me that I heard that the GOP is worried about the the race to replace MTG in Georgia's special election because there are 16 Republicans running and only 3 Democrats and the GOP is worried that they will get locked out since this race will have a top 2 runoff.
That would be a shocker.
That would be a hilarious and well-deserved outcome
Last night Trump endorsed DA Clayton Fuller in order to prevent that outcome.
There's still a lot of time left until June for the field to winnow.
And I thought NY-12 was a clown car.
https://www.instagram.com/p/DUYIYgdkS2o/
IL-Sen: Sen. Elizabeth Warren endorses Stratton
I don't get why national progressive senators and groups skipped this race? They seem to be interested in Maine, Michigan, Minnesota and Texas but not Illinois.
Is it because two progressive Black women are running and they didn't want to weigh in?
Mike Lindell vs Lisa DeMuth could make the MN Gov race the most cost effective for Dems this cycle. Klobuchar should be spreading the wealth.
Klobuchar vs. Lindell would be a blowout. But Klobuchar can really damage Demuth by accurately making her the face of the ICE raids in Minneapolis alongside Noem and TACO.
U.S. employers announced 108,435 layoffs in January, up 205% from December and highest January total since 2009.
Don't count on it being totally reflected in the Trump-controlled Department of Labor monthly report. Whenever it's released.
Jesus. I forget how jobs numbers work, final numbers come in 1-3 months? I don't anticipate them getting revised much rosier, just wondering.
Payroll employment numbers are initially collected the week of the 12th of each month and published the first Friday of the next month. They're then often significantly revised in the next two monthly reports as more data come in, and there is usually a big revision in March of the next year based largely on unemployment insurance tax payments. Basically, the survey data allow for quick estimates but miss a lot, and BLS needs the slower-moving administrative data to make the eventual more accurate estimates.
Thank you!
Reporting is that Paxton’s main financial supporter, oilman Tim Dunn, is not financing Paxton for this election. He wanted him to run/stay as AG. But yes, the hardcore MAGA hate John Cornyn. Plus, in state GOP legislative races, the knives are out. Miriam Adelson wants to open a casino in Dallas and is funding her own slate of GOP state house and senate candidates. The religious/non gambling wing (maybe overlaps with Paxton supporters?) is big time pissed. If this causes a big rift that doesn’t heal, November general elections could be a GOP nightmare. 🍿
It does I guess because in the marquee GOP state senate and state house primaries a couple of years back, Adelson and Dunn backed opposing sides.
And you had Paxton going after GOP house members who voted to impeach him, and Abbott going after those who didn’t vote for his school vouchers.
Democrats in Virginia have agreed on a 10-1 map.
https://x.com/TylerEnglander/status/2019432110613000356?s=20
If voters manage to overcome our gerrymandered GOP majority this year (unlikely but the state TX Senate race makes me hopeful), I want the Dem NC legislative majority to do the same thing. And put in teeth to keep the rogue GOP state courts in line.
Best shot to do that is flipping the Court in 2028. Need to win 3 of 4 in the next two cycles. Defend Anita Earls this year, then win 2 of 3 GOP seats in 2028. Dem court can overturn the congressional and state legislative gerrymanders.
We do have a path to flipping the state House this year in a blue wave / tsunami. State Senate is tougher but yes, the most likely path to flipping back control of the legislature and Congressional maps is a 4-3 or 5-2 Democratic controlled state Supreme Court after 2028.
But if the unlikely situation happened this year (and Earls gets re-elected to her seat), NC Dems are going to be doing what VA Dems did back in 2020-2021 when they regained their trifecta.
Unfortunately for democracy, after they get fair legislative maps, the Dems need to gerrymander the state house and state senate maps as soon as they win both chambers to prevent future GOP gerrymanders. 2022 was hugely disappointing at the state legislative level because not only did Dems lose control of the state supreme court, but they also failed to pick up either chamber with fair maps. As soon as they lost the Court, the GOP made the state legislative chambers borderline unwinnable even in waves. NC will always shift with its state supreme court. A GOP supreme court will always permit the GOP to gerrymander if they control both legislatures. Have to make sure you always control 1 of the 3 (Supreme Court, House, or Senate)
The one way to keep that from happening is to implement an independent redistricting amendment, written like in MI or the failed one in OH. Cut out the General Assembly entirely, have a 13-to-15-person commission draw the maps. That way it keeps the 50-50 partisan split of the state and keeps a GOP majority minimal (and forces them to moderate). The state Supreme Court would only intervene with the map drawing if the decision on the maps isn't unanimous and there would be guardrails to keep a rogue GOP state judiciary from giving their party a win.
And if the state Supreme Court goes from 5-2 Republican to Democratic majority, as soon as the Dems regain a state legislative trifecta, need to make judicial elections retention elections akin to Pennsylvania.
Again, this seems very naive. How's the commission working in Utah right now? How is the anti-gerrymandering constitutional amendment doing in Florida right now? How about Iowa? Or Ohio? I have no doubts that if the GOP controlled the MI SC, the state house, the state senate, and the governorship, they would do everything in their power to overturn the commission when it came time to redistrict. Hell, look what Dems are doing in California and Virginia. The *only* play for Democrats is to gain enough redistricting power that Republicans are forced to agree to nationwide federal standards. Taking opportunities where you can gerrymander in your favor and turn them into neutral, fair maps, while the GOP gerrymanders TX, OK, TN, KY, FL, GA, IA, MO, KY, AL, MS, SC, OH, LA, AR, and IN is exactly how you relegate yourself to permanent minority status.
I strongly doubt it will happen due to the immense hurdles to implement, but I wonder if we'll ever see any state adopt mixed-member proportional (MMP) or similar in an effort to decisively end gerrymandering. No need to worry about commissions, bias, influence, courts, or anything at all if the results are fundamentally proportional to the vote by definition.
MMP has that plus the benefit of actual geographic constituencies, which have their upsides and I feel Americans are particularly strongly attached to them as well.
Dems could also give veto power to the governor in redistrcting, and raise the override threshold to 2/3.
That would need 60% of legislators to vote in lockstep to send to voters to approve as a constitutional amendment. Giving veto power over the state maps to the governor would definitely bring out the Democratic voters.
If they can do that they might as well send independent redistricting to the voters to approve.
I’d worry about that, because the hack GOP Supreme Court will probably just overturn it. There needs to be an “unmovable block” for Republicans redrawing in case we don’t win back a majority on the court or enough state legislature seats to sustain a veto in North Carolina. And this new map needs to get redrawn asap.
What type of block that is, is the harder question, but I’d lean giving the Governor veto power over any map, because not even a Republican court would say a Governor can’t have that power given how many other states do have that. Maybe the NC Supreme Court rules against that change, but even the US Supreme Court or a Federal Circuit Appeals Court would slap down that ruling pretty quick.
It'll be too late by that point (in the best case scenario, it would only be for the 2030 election and then the GOP would make new gerrymanders post-census). Need some sort of ruling that outlaws them permanently or Dems manage to hold one chamber after 2030 (which seems unlikely?)
Yeah any strategy that’s dependent on Dems holding the legislature after the 2030 election is a very foolish one.
OK, so where's the map? The tweet at the link didn't have it.
Supposed to be released today or tomorrow.
We always want dems to be aggressive so here we go.
Much needed. We need a Louise Lucas in every state. Primary out incumbents based on lack of party loyalty. Scandals and ideological concerns should still be a factor, but lack of loyalty should be a driving motivator when Republicans have been ruthless in their partisan approaches to gerrymandering and power grabs for decades.
Great, there were reports that Kaine and Spanberger were still pushing for a 9-2 map but seems like LLL held firm.
I've said they should have gone for 9-2. We'll see if they get over the next two hurdles: the Virginia Supreme Court and the voters.
There’s not much good reason at all to think the second will be a big hurdle. Prop 50 did about 10 points better than Harris’s margin.
Whole lot of wasted ink about nothing earlier from a large number of Democrats and media pundits/journalists. This was always going to be the end outcome.
Toxic comment thread about AIPAC deleted. Yes, I know, it may feel frustrating that we clamp down on discussions of some topics that show up in the Morning Digest, but that's life.
Thank you! I too wish there was much less discussion of AIPAC here, since it's so easy to stray into forbidden territory when discussing it.
not arguing. But I have been using the phrase "dark money" a lot, sometimes as a euphemism for AIPAC (since I don't want to open that can of worms either). Is that all right here? I do NOT want to go into foreign policy. I'm just p!ssed that certain dark money groups, including this one, spend $ to boost moderates/ block progressives in Dem primaries, right now IL-09.
"Fabrizio poll | 1/20-1/24 LV
US Senate Maine 2026
(Commissioned by pro-Susan Collins Super PAC)
🟥Susan Collins 45%
🟦Janet Mills 44%
—
🟥Susan Collins 45%
🟦Graham Platner 44%
——
Final ballot (push poll)
🟥Susan Collins 48%
🟦Janet Mills 42%
—
🟥Susan Collins 51%
🟦Graham Platner 38%
Link to poll: https://subscriber.politicopro.com/f/?id=0000019c-2aaf-d647-addc-abef0b310000
"
https://x.com/PollTracker2024/status/2019451725435085302
I hope we can avoid discussing Mills vs Platner for the millionth time, I can't wait for this primary to be over.
Her own poll has her up 1? Not great.
45% is a death sentence for most incumbents in hostile territory of either party. If this is her best internal she’s got, she’s in very serious trouble.
She hasn't announced her re-election campaign officially as well.
That’s a good point that this poll comes from an allied Super PAC and not her campaign.
Correct. It’s not the fact that she’s necessarily up one point. It’s the fact that she’s in the mid 40s. The only politician I’ve seen really to survive that in this type of environment was Harry Reid in 2010. That was because he had a severely flawed opponent.
Consider - not consider voting for...
Platner: 43-35
Collins: 49-49
Mills: 46-52
https://x.com/IAPolls2022/status/2019455596773150763
Interesting that after the "hear both sides" section Platner drops so much. Could be Collins' pollster trolling us, but could be that voters haven't internalized and moved past Platner's scandals the way many folks online believe.
Who would've guessed? Shock face. What is shocking is that Collins' pollster released the latter part of that informed ballot. She wants to face Platner.
Lol, the push messages weren't disclosed, you're jumping to conclusions that you strongly want to be true.
For all we know, it could be similar to be laughable one Mills put out.
"Graham Platner is a self-described communist who said he was disgusted with the idea of America and that white people living in rural Maine are stupid and racist. Platner said that all cops are, “bastards,” and supports dangerously liberal policies that are bad for Maine, like defunding law enforcement, opening our borders, and creating a socialized healthcare system
that would eliminate all private insurance and drive up Mainers' taxes by thousands of dollars a
year."
With that information, Collins leads Platner 51 percent to 42 percent.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/12/poll-graham-platner-maine-senate-emilys-list-00647389
Most recent election involving a Nazi-related scandal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_North_Carolina_gubernatorial_election
I will stick with the Governor with +8 approvals against an unvetted, unknown risk. This is an elections board. These things are relevant to elections.
Here's an interesting survey on political leanings depending on where you get your news from. Basically Twitter/X is the furthest right (the only place where users mostly approve of Trump, and even among them he's slipping), and furthest left are Reddit, TikTok, and newspapers and broadcast TV--which underlines the stupidity of recent moves at places like CBS and the Washington Post.
https://www.theargumentmag.com/p/twitter-is-not-real-life
The goal at CBS and WaPo is not to make money or inform but to eliminate alternative sources of news. That said, they’ll both be belly up as a result before long Id guess, but that’s a writeoff to Ellison or Bezos
Democrats really ought to push anti-trust laws to prevent more of these billionaire/billionaire associated takeovers of news reporting, as well as break up the media giants.
IN-SOS: I had brought up my thought that Beau Bayh could beat Diego Morales only two days ago. In the intervening time since then, Diego Morales has fucked up the filing instructions/processes for candidates and his office has been found to have utilized state resources in campaign materials.
https://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2026/02/05/confusion-over-paperwork-handling-has-indiana-candidates-scrambling/88524941007/
https://www.wthr.com/article/news/local/indiana-secretary-of-state-campaign-video-investigated-diego-morales-board/531-f52aee02-dff4-4ac4-a000-ce9f2341d5a4
Incumbent secretary of state not knowing how to collect signatures correctly is such crazy levels of incompetent lol.
It seems that Keir Starmer may resign over revelations about New Labour architect Mandelson in the Epstein Files.
I'd love that and think he should, but I've not seen any indication he's actually moving in this direction.
Probably won't be till after the May elections. But it will take more than just replacing him to revive Labour.
Can any of the opposition parties bring up a no-confidence vote outside of supply and confidence situations? A no confidence vote would be extremely embarrassing for Starmer since dozens of Labour MPs would likely abstain on said motion which is effectively voting no-confidence in the government.
If he does, I think this is just a convenient reason to save face over the fact that everything else about his tenure has been a complete shambles.
Evidence? I strongly doubt he’s going to fall on the sword for Mando
It was just my thought after seeing super gloomy news about his government like this:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/feb/04/labour-mps-say-starmer-days-as-pm-are-numbered-amid-fury-over-mandelson
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/starmer-resign-labour-mandelson-epstein-b2914365.html
Yeah, I’m going to need some evidence before I believe that. Posting rumours like this without specifying that it’s your opinion or linking anything anyone can verify is very bad practice.
It was just my thought after seeing super gloomy news about his government like this:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/feb/04/labour-mps-say-starmer-days-as-pm-are-numbered-amid-fury-over-mandelson
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/starmer-resign-labour-mandelson-epstein-b2914365.html
I never understood why Republicans hate McConnell? I despise him but IMV, he has been one of the most successful party leaders for his side.
He's evil but not cartoon evil. Not evil enough for them.
I'd actually argue he is sort of cartoonishly evil. It's just, the cartoon we're all living in had been getting even more broad.
Same reason some on the left dislike Pelosi. Effective legislative leaders have to cut deals, and occasionally box out the extremist elements of their own party. That rubs said extremist elements the wrong way.
MAGA is the majority now, not the extreme in the GOP.
Yeah. One difference is that the militant right is much bigger than the militant left, so Pelosi is still fairly popular among Dems overall while McConnell is usually underwater among Rs.
MAGA differs from old prior conservatives in a lot of ways. If I had to oversimplify it to an extreme for this question I'd say the distinction is that McConnell is a conservative focused on the long term view for his party. MAGA is focused entirely on the here and now. There's little interest in sacrificing now in order to get payoff later: they need instant gratification at all times.
McConnell's success for conservatives is what makes him so easy for them to hate. He successfully represents the "wrong" approach to conservatism for them, in a way that makes him an unlikely convert.
This is a very smart way of phrasing it, honestly
One of the most astute, succinct observations and explanation of the difference between the two sides I’ve ever seen from anyone. Pure brilliance.
They should worship the ground he walks on, he got them two Supreme Court seats they otherwise wouldn't have.
I'd say this is true, but not for all of conservatism - there is a long through line from Goldwater/Birchers to Paleo-Cons like Pat Buchanan to MAGA. MAGA is just the first time this wing of conservatism ended up in the driver's seat.
MAGA and Republican primary voters have shown again and again that they don't give a fuck about electoral strategy, procedural ruthlessness, or electability. They care about "pwning the libs," worshipping Trump, and rage clickbait. McConnell fails on those.
A lot of it could be his refusal to go along with the 1/6 attempted coup. He actually made a good speech that day.
GA-14: The GOP faithful are worried about a monumental upset in deep red territory.
https://archive.ph/wS8iX
https://www.ajc.com/politics/2026/02/blood-in-the-water-why-republicans-fear-an-upset-in-mtgs-backyard/
Mickey Tuck, a local activist, embodies the unease. He’s torn between three or four of the leading GOP contenders and no fan of Greene, who he said did a “big disservice” to the district by abruptly resigning after feuding with Trump.
But he’s also convinced Democrats see an opening. In a free-for-all with so many names on the ballot, he said, they have a real shot at grabbing one of the runoff spots — and, however remote — an outside chance at landing both or even winning outright.
“Democrats smell blood in the water,” Tuck said. “And you know they’re going to come out and vote. We could very easily see a Democrat slip in there.”
Back in December, the 14th District GOP issued a warning about the “danger” of complacency even in Greene’s backyard. Local Republicans say that risk is only growing.
Pam Peters, the Floyd County GOP chair, pointed to last year’s Public Service Commission races, when some MAGA voters, angry over rising energy prices, cast protest ballots for Democrats — while others simply stayed home.
“Republicans didn’t show up,” she said of the party’s blowout losses, urging activists to keep the election in mind even on their morning walks. “We need to be engaged.”
If they’re willing to admit this publicly…
... then they're unwilling to admit how much trouble their state legislative majorities are in purple (GA, NC) to light red states (IA, FL).
Really wish Shawn Harris wasn't running, I think he'll hoover up too much Democratic support for any chance of two Dems advancing
"Big state polling is showing a huge rebound for Dems in NY & CA (where there are plenty of GOP House seats) from 2024.
Meanwhile, in TX, House polling shows a double-digit gain for Dems from the 2024 baseline.
Overall: chance of a Dem landslide in 2026 is increasing."
https://x.com/ForecasterEnten/status/2019110998943363526
Since primary season is upon us (only a month away. Crazy!), I wanted to open up discussion of some downballot races that will have a huge impact on our party:
The veto override caucus, or in other words, the list of Democrats in NC that continue to betray their party and vote with Republicans to override Governor Josh Stein’s vetoes.
I don’t specifically know which reps have, how many times they did, what their districts look like partisanship wise or how many reps there are, but for anyone who does know, how are the primary challenges looking in these races?
And if so inclined, links to donate/support the actual Democrats running would be great to help everyone here get involved to get rid of the GOP enablers in our party.
Josh Stein has endorsed the primary challenger against problematic Democratic incumbent Karla Cunningham who has voted with Republicans on a lot of things.
Thanks for the info. Is that his only endorsement against an incumbent?
I think so.
What office does she hold?
What race is this?
NC House. NC Republicans have a supermajority in the state Senate but need the veto override caucus in the state House.
There was Cecil Brockman from Guilford (reliably blue district), but he resigned last year after statutory sex offense charges. His replacement is a reliably Democratic woman Amanda Cook.
Stein endorsed Rev. Sadler to run against traitor Carla Cunningham. Nasif Majeed, another veto override caucus member, is facing a primary against Veleria Levy and Tucker Neal. Both Cunningham and Majeed are in Mecklenburg, so they need to go along with Traitor Tricia.
Thanks! Which of the 2 Democrats running against Nasif Majeed is the frontrunner? From either fundraising or elected office?
Levy probably does, she's very active on IG and TikTok. No polling otherwise.