129 Comments
User's avatar
DM's avatar

Given how wildly public sentiment has switch in California from pro independent commission to anti, after the election, it may be time to tee up a second proposition to permanently remove the commission until it's done nationally. I think we have a chance of getting that through which we haven't in the past.

Expand full comment
MPC's avatar

I think if an independent commission was implemented in all 50 states for state and Congressional lines, there would be 80 swing Congressional seats and all those ruby red states like Ohio, Arkansas and Mississippi wouldn't have ridiculously gerrymandered 60-79% GOP majorities in their legislatures.

Expand full comment
Kildere53's avatar

Yes!

And while we're at it, let's do the same in Washington, Colorado, and (pending election results) New Jersey as well. Time for 9 safely Democratic districts in Washington and 7-1 in Colorado - if Prop 50 actually passes by 15% or more as the polls suggest, then repealing the commissions should easily pass in Washington and Colorado as well.

Expand full comment
Guy Cohen's avatar

We’ve talked about 8-0 CO tons of times but is 10-0 Washington not possible either?

Expand full comment
Hudson Democrat's avatar

it's possible, but you run the risk of republicans picking up 3 seats in a wave, better to go with the ceiling of one republican seat, imo as I also believe is the conventional wisdom

Expand full comment
Guy Cohen's avatar

True. Is it possible the ninth seat is a Spokane to Yakima snake?

Expand full comment
Kildere53's avatar

Not Spokane to Yakima - Spokane to Bellingham instead.

Yakima is added to the Vancouver district. That's MGP's Harris+9 district on my map.

Expand full comment
Kildere53's avatar

I've drawn a 9D-1R map of Washington, where MGP's district is Harris +9 (it's currently Trump +3), and all other Democratic districts are at least Harris +11.

I can't post it right now since I'm on my phone, but I'll post it in the weekend thread.

Expand full comment
AnthonySF's avatar

They should’ve done it this time!

Expand full comment
DM's avatar

Given we had to have the win, we really couldn't afford to take the risk. We can come back for a second bite at the apple, but if trying for too much would have caused us to lose, we would have been fucked.

The commission has always polled as being very popular, and the only reason we're likely to win is Republican overreach, particularly in Texas.

Expand full comment
stevk's avatar

Agreed...no clue why that was the language of the bill in the first place. Voters will either vote to overturn the commission or they won't. Unclear that the hedging makes any difference in public attitudes at all.

Expand full comment
Zero Cool's avatar

Sounds like similar polling sentiment as what had happened heading to the 2021 CA Gubernatorial Recall Election.

Expand full comment
MPC's avatar

I love how Virginia Dems are taking a leaf from NC Rs and going full speed ahead, a mere two days after Rs forced through ANOTHER rigged map.

Expand full comment
anonymouse's avatar

It’s much needed. Time to take the kid gloves off.

Expand full comment
brendan fka HoosierD42's avatar

The only thing I'm worried about is Democratic defections, considering we need unanimity to get this done (assuming 100% attendance)

Expand full comment
Paleo's avatar

I would assume that they wouldn't have advanced the proposal without being assured that it would pass.

Expand full comment
brendan fka HoosierD42's avatar

You'd think, but shit happens

Expand full comment
Amon Greycastle's avatar

To be fair, it is only the Congressional map, not the state HoD or Senate seats, and it needs to be approved twice. Additionally, the optics of a D voting against it right before the November election where the HoD is on the ballot might persuade some reluctant Ds to support it now, and vote against it later when there are more Ds in the HoD.

Expand full comment
stevk's avatar

Definitely. If we get a nice majority in the next session, we can let some D's in purple seats take strategic votes against it.

Expand full comment
MPC's avatar

I hope Virginia Dems, should they succeed in revamping the Congressional maps, draw Rob Witman and Jen Kiggans out of their seats.

Expand full comment
Kildere53's avatar

I'm sure they will - that would be quite easy.

Expand full comment
MPC's avatar

Rs deserve payback after drawing Rep Davis out of his seat.

Expand full comment
anonymouse's avatar

You can make an 8-3 D map with minimal county splitting. It’s a 9-2 map that takes more creativity.

Expand full comment
Guy Cohen's avatar

8-2-1 is also a possibility.

Expand full comment
AWildLibAppeared's avatar

It doesn't take that much creativity--just a willingness to have two districts split Arlington and then go out to take in some conservative areas.

Expand full comment
Kildere53's avatar

I must say that I am very impressed with Virginia Democrats for being bold enough to do this. Now they just need to make sure that the vote in the legislature in the upcoming days is relatively under the radar, and that the news is still dominated by Trump. The more that voters are thinking about Trump (and the less about this gerrymandering scheme), the better for Democrats.

To that end, I was gratified to see that the headline article in the NYT Morning Digest this morning was about Trump tearing down the East Wing of the White House, while the brief mention of VA Dems' redistricting plan was buried in the middle of the Digest.

Expand full comment
AnthonySF's avatar

What I hope Dems are finally seeing is that there has never been an election in American history where gerrymandering was the deciding factor in someone’s vote. There are literally no political repercussions other than hand-wringing and a few bad opeds.

Expand full comment
Kildere53's avatar

On the subject of Virginia, yesterday was the first day where all of the early voting locations in Fairfax County were open. Do we have any information about how big the turnout was yesterday?

Expand full comment
Mike Boland's avatar

It looks like the Virginia Dems are going to be really great. I say that after being disappointed when several years ago they rejected the proposal by the Democratic governor to combine the local elections with the even year midterm elections. Hopefully this new bunch will do that once in power. It will boost voter turnout, save multi-millions of tax dollars which could be used for education or healthcare, and very importantly it would result in more women and more minorities being elected to local government. Up until now I have not donated to Virginia Dems but will now that they are proving to be real leaders.

Expand full comment
Jay's avatar

I'm not sure if the timing will work, but the gerrymandering special election in Virginia should be scheduled to come after the supreme court issues a ruling on the VRA. The odds of it passing would increase if dems take advantage of the backlash gutting the VRA will create.

Expand full comment
Diogenes's avatar

According to the Alabama constitution, is football experience obligatory for all candidates for public office? Is CTE?

Expand full comment
bpfish's avatar

Not a lot going on in Alabama besides football and racism.

Expand full comment
Burt Kloner's avatar

CTE is optional but the preferred choice of far too many alabamans

Expand full comment
Kildere53's avatar

I've occasionally wondered when the Democratic trend in Henrico County would spill over into the neighboring counties to the north and west.

Well, I just discovered this morning that it already has. Goochland County, directly west of Henrico, created a new precinct for the 2024 election called West Creek. The precinct comprises several apartment complexes and a senior living facility just west of the border with Henrico. These complexes are quite new - one of the apartment complexes opened between 2018 and 2020, another was built between 2012 and 2017, and the senior living facility was only built a few years ago (I know all this from looking at historical imagery in Google Earth). And this precinct voted 57-41 for Harris last year, making it the first solidly Democratic precinct in Goochland in quite a while. DRA doesn't show this precinct yet because they still use 2020 precincts for Virginia, but if you split the precincts along the border with Henrico, you'll see the blue if you color by election results.

Hopefully these new apartment complexes, and resulting Democratic precincts, are just the first of many!

Expand full comment
Mike Johnson's avatar

"Morrison echoed Walsh by tweeting, “He DEFEATED our Wall Street-backed opponent Melissa Bean in 2010, and knows she is not the fighter we need to meet this moment.”"

Very refreshing to see some Dem primary candidates leaning into this message.

Expand full comment
brendan fka HoosierD42's avatar

Listen I welcome Joe Walsh into the party, he has probably undergone the most extreme (in a positive direction) political evolution of anybody in the Trump era, but I think it's a little yikes to celebrate a Tea Party Republican beating a Dem in 2010.

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

Indeed. I don't see how his defeating her as a Republican shows that he knows she's the wrong Democrat for the job.

Expand full comment
bpfish's avatar

This basically shows he thinks people in the district are too stupid to understand the nuance.

Expand full comment
stevk's avatar

100% percent. I was already Team Bean here, but that statement just sealed it for me...

Expand full comment
brendan fka HoosierD42's avatar

Tbh I do still support Morrison, because LGBT representation is my strong preference. But this one line is not my favorite

Expand full comment
Zero Cool's avatar

Walsh gave probably the most honest take on why the Tea Party was throwing Obama’s birth certificate against him while he was POTUS: It was a political strategy but not about racism. Of course, there were plenty in the base who are racist and have these views on birth certificates with people who have “funny” sounding names like Obama.

Expand full comment
Brad Warren's avatar

Narrator: It was 100% about racism. 100%.

Expand full comment
Zero Cool's avatar

Right but that may have been what the Tea Party originally intended even if Walsh said otherwise. I believe he was referring to what he was being told to do, not necessarily based on his own convictions.

We could also argue racism goes back to when Reagan’s rise at the national level also at the same time made him profile a typical black woman with “liabilities.”

It’s despicable no matter how you spin it. And Sarah Palin has not taken any accountability or responsibility for her actions during the 2008 presidential campaign.

Expand full comment
Paleo's avatar

Asked why he's refused to endorse Mamdani, Hakeem Jeffries replies: "I have not refused to endorse; I have refused to articulate my position"

https://bsky.app/profile/kenklippenstein.bsky.social/post/3m3xavfxigk2v

Expand full comment
Techno00's avatar

What a joke. I fear he wouldn't be a good Speaker.

Expand full comment
Hudson Democrat's avatar

especially given his struggles "speaking" or "articulating" on this particular issue

Expand full comment
Tigercourse's avatar

It would almost shock me if he turned out to be a good speaker. I'm not versed enough on the house to know who would be better but this guy is just not who we need.

Expand full comment
Zack from the SFV's avatar

He would be a better Speaker than Mike Johnson, but not as good a Speaker as Nancy Pelosi. That seems clear...

Expand full comment
Zero Cool's avatar

Pelosi as House Speaker was blunt and honest and got House Democrats to get shit done, even under high pressure.

Expand full comment
brendan fka HoosierD42's avatar

Profile in courage

Expand full comment
Kildere53's avatar

Regardless of whether you like Mamdani or not, this is an extremely cringe-worthy response. I've never been sure why Jeffries was chosen as the new Democratic leader in the first place.

Expand full comment
Mark's avatar

Always seemed like he'd make a swell neighbor. Not so much as a party leader.

Expand full comment
FeingoldFan's avatar

He was next in line in leadership, I think that’s the entire reason why.

Expand full comment
Miguel Parreno's avatar

He's dragging this out like it's "The Decision" but it makes him look bad the longer it drags on.

Expand full comment
Zero Cool's avatar

Does Jeffries need to write a damn research paper or create a PowerPoint presentation?

Dude, just go to the corporate life and live comfortably! He could get paid much more than his current job as House Speaker.

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

That's not his current job, but we get your meaning.

Expand full comment
Zero Cool's avatar

Yeah, I was just pointing out that when it comes to leaders in the Democratic Party, we need them with:

1) Balls

2) The ability to do their job

3) No beating around the bush.

4) Get shit done

There simply is no room for compromise on all four these days.

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

We agree.

Expand full comment
PollJunkie's avatar

" Asked about Zohran Mamdani, Hakeem Jeffries says he's "privately communicated some of my concerns with respect to some of the views that he's expressed in terms of foreign policy." "

https://x.com/kenklippenstein/status/1981516047615234137

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

The Mayor of New York doesn't have a foreign policy. (Yes, I know about pensions, but that's another matter.)

Expand full comment
Brad Warren's avatar

Yeah, this is as annoying as when local candidates are asked, say, about abortion.

Expand full comment
Zero Cool's avatar

When Bernie Sanders was Mayor of Burlington, VT, I don’t recall there was any direct foreign policy he was involved in.

On the other hand, Mayors in major cities like NYC, San Francisco, etc. do have relations with leaders outside of the U.S. but as a means of bringing say business investment into the city or allowing meetings to happen in the city. Since UN’s headquarters is in NYC, the Mayor can’t influence foreign policy anyway even with the UN. The State Department, White House, and Congress can.

Expand full comment
Tigercourse's avatar

Brave words.

Expand full comment
Kevin H.'s avatar

Don't care, Mamdani didn't support Biden.

Expand full comment
JanusIanitos's avatar

I expect party caucus leaders to be willing to endorse for prominent elections in their own backyard, especially when the democratic candidate has such odious opponents. I do not expect every member of the state legislatures to endorse presidential candidates; I doubt anyone would have cared if he had officially endorsed Biden in early/mid 2024.

Expand full comment
Kevin H.'s avatar

Doesn't matter, he wants to blame games when it comes to endorsing then don't bother me when it's reversed.

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

Never?

Expand full comment
sacman701's avatar

How hard would it be to say 'I have reservations about all of them, but I'll vote for Mamdani'?

Expand full comment
Zero Cool's avatar

For a politician who represents Brooklyn, Jeffries is definitely not a straight shooter.

Why did he ever enter politics in the first place?

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

Are politicians from Brooklyn known to be straight shooters? I wouldn't tend to think that as a general point about politicians in any part of New York - city or state.

Expand full comment
Zero Cool's avatar

I would say it’s best to contrast politicians vs the residents in cities like Brooklyn.

From what I know from others I have talked to who live in Brooklyn, they have a big BS detector and can call you out on this. This is the case with Oakland as I have lived next door to the city for decades.

Of course, I also know not everyone from Brooklyn can possess the same exact personality. May vary who you talk to but since you live in NYC, you would certainly know better than me about this.

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

New York is known for corruption and influence-peddling.

Expand full comment
Zero Cool's avatar

There certainly is a history. NYC seems to have it worse than SF.

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

Definitely. New Jersey, Illinois and Louisiana have historically been our competition...

Expand full comment
John Carr's avatar

Where is New York on setting up a redraw at least for 2028? That’s a state where you could easily create two new almost safe Dem seats (Lawler’s and Maliatonokis’). For the SI seat, all you need to do is pair it with Southern Manhattan and you have a district that Harris won by high single digits. Maliatonokis (idgaf how her name is spelled) would need over 70% of the vote on SI to have a chance in such a distict.

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

For the record, it's Nicole Malliotakis, and her last name is Greek.

Expand full comment
Hudson Democrat's avatar

despite her pathetic attempts to pose as an italian american when she unseated Max Rose

Expand full comment
michaelflutist's avatar

She did that?

Expand full comment
Brad Warren's avatar

Wait, what?

Expand full comment
Brad Warren's avatar

I thought it was "MallioStockTips"...

Expand full comment
Guy Cohen's avatar

Riley and Gillen can get shored up too. Suozzi too though he doesn’t need it as much given he overperforms and shoring him up too much would come at Gillen’s expense. Ryan doesn’t really need it at all and trying to do so would hurt D chances in 17 and 19. And despite getting close at the presidential level Meng doesn’t need it at all.

Also possible to make Lean D seats in Suffolk and a Rochester to Buffalo connecter.

Expand full comment
silverknyaz's avatar

Kathy Hochul, Carl Heastie, and Andrea Stuart-Cousins are all on board

it's happening, keep an eye on it in the next session

Expand full comment
Mark's avatar

I never saw the district results but did Jon Tester beat Tim Sheehy in MT-01?

Expand full comment
axlee's avatar

Yes. He won it somewhere around 2000 votes, 50-49, less than 1pt.

Expand full comment
PollJunkie's avatar

2026 Maine Senate Democratic Primary poll by

@NRSC

(R) | 10/22-23

Graham Platner: 46%

Janet Mills: 25%

Jordan Wood: 3%

Not sure: 26%

——

Fav-Unfav (Dems)

Platner: 71-21 (+50)

Mills: 69-31 (+38)

——

"After hearing Platner’s statement defending past remarks, 45% said it made them MORE likely to support him"

——

October 22-23 | Dem n=647 LV | ±3.5

https://x.com/IAPolls2022/status/1981746544891027651

We have our own tea party lol. The tea party actually cost the GOP winnable seats, one of which was lost in Delaware due to a self-described witch.

Expand full comment
brendan fka HoosierD42's avatar

I think it's going to take a while for this primary to settle

Expand full comment
Stargate77's avatar

I think Platner's numbers will only go down over time, as public knowledge of his liabilities increases.

Expand full comment
Zero Cool's avatar

And the biggest dilemma is what happens not in the primary process but if Platner would be a Democratic Senate nominee in the general election.

Collins would have plenty to work with.

Expand full comment
Samuel Sero's avatar

Yeah, I'm having a hard time believing that his statements make Democratic voters more likely to vote for him. Especially from an NRSC poll.

Expand full comment
Zero Cool's avatar

If this were CA, Platner would have already been out of the race at this point.

Apparently Maine may be different but I wouldn’t assume anything about Platner’s viability at this point, especially considering he should have known better before jumping in the Senate race.

Expand full comment
Skaje's avatar

1) Implausibly high name rec for Platner...71-21 favorable??? 2) Mills also very popular, at 69-31, but somehow only getting 25%? As the sitting governor?? 3) Come on, this is an *NRSC* poll, obviously designed to show a narrative they like, one we don't need to engage in as legitimate. There's nothing for us to learn from this other than the NRSC thinks it will make us look bad.

Expand full comment
PollJunkie's avatar

UNH also had similar findings.

Expand full comment
JanusIanitos's avatar

I broadly agree but I wonder if there is more latent vulnerability due to age than we're expecting. It's easy for us to assume it's not going to impact voter behavior as much as we'd think at first due to being in our own high-info bubble. But it could be that this is a detail that harms candidates a lot, especially for non-incumbent challengers.

Expand full comment
D S's avatar
Oct 25Edited

The good news is Maine has ranked choice voting, which means that should Platner win the primary, some Democratic running as an independent (Washington D.C style) can run without being a spoiler.

Expand full comment
ehstronghold's avatar

Also let's be honest with Trump getting away with *handwaves everything*, JD Vance saying anyone on his side of politics can do no wrong, while Dems went too overboard with policing our side to the point they shrunk the tent to less than 40% of the country it's not surprising to see Platner's tattoo not an automatic campaign ender.

(Not a Platner supporter after the events of the past two weeks BTW.)

Expand full comment
Stargate77's avatar

Here's a 10-1 map that I drew:

https://davesredistricting.org/join/95171876-858a-447a-a5f3-6fa0501ef824

Under this map, the 9th District is the only one that Youngkin won in 2021, and he won it by 58 points. McAuliffe won the 2nd and 5th Districts by less than 1%, and he won the 3rd District by 12 points. The other seven districts were McAuliffe+4 in 2021.

Expand full comment
Stargate77's avatar

Oops, this was supposed to be a reply to MPC's comment.

Expand full comment
Stargate77's avatar

Under this map, Don Beyer would likely run in the 1st or 6th District, Eugene Vindman would likely run in the 1st or 8th District, James Walkinshaw would likely run in the 8th or 11th District, and Suhas Subramanyam would likely run in the 10th District.

Expand full comment
Guy Cohen's avatar

What are those population deviations?

Expand full comment
Stargate77's avatar

I kept all of them below 5%.

Expand full comment
AWildLibAppeared's avatar

I believe congressional population deviations cannot be this big. However, it shouldn't be too hard to rebalance them in a way that keeps it at least 10D-1R-1 swing.

Expand full comment
Kildere53's avatar

Yup, this is the way to do it. Five districts snaking out of NoVA, a Blacksburg-Roanoke-Charlottesville-Harrisonburg district that leans Democratic but isn't quite as blue as all the others, the VA Beach/Norfolk district that draws itself, etc.

The only issue is the deviations, since unlike with legislative districts, no deviations at all are allowed for congressional districts. 5% deviations like that are way too big.

Expand full comment
Guy Cohen's avatar

Dems don’t really need 5 districts in NOVA. 4 is enough, 2 each in Richmond and Hampton Roads, and the Charlottesville swing seat.

Expand full comment
Kildere53's avatar

That's if you're going 9-2. The map above was attempting to go 10-1.

Expand full comment
AWildLibAppeared's avatar

Not going to lie: when opened this map and saw the 6th district, I literally laughed out loud.

You know what, though? Why the hell not!

Expand full comment
JanusIanitos's avatar

How does Dave's determine partisan lean? There's seven districts that are ~51.5% dem. That's not a huge margin and we could lose a seat even in a decent year for us if there is candidate quality mismatch or some other events.

It's a great job getting 10 districts that favor us, but I'd prefer a more durable 9-2 map.

Expand full comment
Stargate77's avatar

When you click the Statistics tab, it shows the results for the 2021 gubernatorial race. If you select another race or the Composite option under Data Selector, then it will show much more favorable results in the Statistics tab.

Expand full comment
Stargate77's avatar

2021 was a low water mark for Democrats in Virginia. Any district that McAuliffe won that year should be relatively safe for us in most election cycles.

Expand full comment
hilltopper's avatar

NJ Gov: Sherrill 52%; Ciattarelli 40%. (GQR polling 1,00 LVs)

Expand full comment
Paleo's avatar

The 52 is believable.

Expand full comment
Wolfpack Dem's avatar

Yeah, I am expecting 52-47, given how perpetually we get "meh" results out of NJ in this Timeline of ours.

Expand full comment
Hudson Democrat's avatar

I think, as far as anyone ever writes about this historically, the murphy admin will be seen as well-meaning but ultimately mediocrely effective because the admin passed up on big potential achievements (like wind energy) but still suffered the blow back popularity wise. There was always going to be those opposed to windmills off the shore, but it hurts the party's brand when we are seen as both advocating for the windmills and advocating ineffectively--as it's been eight years and nothing re wind has happened. It feels born out of a very weird risk aversion borne out of the first two years of his first term spent fighting south jersey dems.

Plus, the nepotistic putative senate run hurt us, to an unknown level. All my aforementioned negativity aside I think we win by 6.3%

Expand full comment
dragonfire5004's avatar

To be frank: I don’t think there’s 1 single voter in New Jersey who potentially could vote for either party that based their votes entirely on whether or not Democrats supported wind power. They swing their vote whether they like their personal/family economic situation or not. The rest are partisans who either would never support a Democrat or always supports a Democrat.

We’re educated and believe voters think like us about many different issues before they vote, but they’re uneducated, they don’t pay attention and anything beyond the economy is getting into the partisans who always vote for the same party every time they vote. If NJ is a nail biter it’ll be because of the economy from voters being tired of the current government in power. Plain and simple, this is the reality.

Expand full comment
AWildLibAppeared's avatar

The closing argument is trying to tie Ciattarelli to high costs. Noticed this ad today:

https://x.com/MediumBuying/status/1981700828194042339

Expand full comment
Paleo's avatar

That’s basically been the ad campaign. Accusing one another of wanting to raise taxes. Occasionally Sherrill has thrown the association with Trump in, but not enough for my taste. A cautious campaign.

Expand full comment
dragonfire5004's avatar

A 2018 midterm moderate national security campaign, which worked well then, not so much a fire and brimstone 2026 midterm campaign to fight Trump with everything we’ve got.

But we don’t know what the results will be obviously, that may well work in 2025 elections, maybe our opinions on Sherrill’s campaign get thwacked by her large voting coalition victory. Time will tell.

Expand full comment