Weighted to 2024. Chaz Nuttycombe says "If you believe the VA electorate will be as red as 2021, or even 2024, I have a forever home to sell you on Tangier." (That is a picturesque but remote island in the Chesapeake Bay whose landmass is declining due to sea level rise, with many expecting it to be abandoned in the next 50 years.)
The sad part is that Tangier votes heavily Republican despite being directly at risk of disappearing due to climate change. Some people just can't put two and two together.
The same is true for Smith Island, located in Maryland not far north of Tangier, though they have been building coastal defenses against the rising sea. After Hurricane Sandy the state offered buyouts to landowners but got few takers.
Smith Island was profiled on 60 Minutes recently. Its population peaked at about 800 and now is down to about 200. Accessible only by boat (like Tangier), it is the home of the official state dessert, a cake which consists of at least eight pancake-like layers each alternating with chocolate frosting.
Maybe not 13, but it could be quite a significant gap, given the relative weaknesses of Earle-Sears and Jones. Approaching double digits is very possible.
It's also worth noting that the RCP polling average in 2017 showed Northam leading by only 3%, and he actually won by 9%. RCP now shows Spanberger up by 6%. Do the math.
And that was without a government shutdown during the campaign that has direct negative effects on many Virginians.
I’m actually just shocked that Platner has that much name recognition. He only announced his campaign in August and already 85% of poll respondents have an opinion on him, that’s absurdly quick for someone who was completely unknown 2 months ago.
It's because we love to fall in love with candidates. Hence, everyone gravitating to the populist oyster-farmer who says what he thinks and isn't too PC (sound familiar, other than the oyster farmer part?) over the experienced, proven sitting Governor. If we punt this election away over that kind of stupidity, we deserve what we get.
She's won a bunch of times with serious opponents. Whether those elections or this one are or were winnable is debatable. We have to hope things are different next year.
we forced biden out of the race for being old and are now pushing a candidate that is of a similar age. Platner (massive issues aside) was blue collar and spoke like a real person. Janet has been in elected office almost as twice as long as I've been alive. She's been a great governor, but the age issue is salient
They won re-election, though, although I don't think anyone could have overcome the American electorate's pathological obsession with the American expression of worldwide inflation and won for the Democrats last year.
Or seemed too confused at times, etc., yes. I think that he was still quite qualified to govern and continued to do a bunch of great things for the rest of his term, and that it was mostly a problem of perception, communication problems and image. Before someone says that's central to the job: practically, it is, but there's a difference between that and the nuts and bolts of governing.
I don't know how much I buy into the poll. Looks like about half of it was done before the "tattoo" controversies. But it does show the desire for a non-traditional candidate. I think the Golden numbers are more revealing. Maybe he can win again because of RCV, but his unpopularity with Democrats is pretty damning.
I believe the only poll of the general that I have seen had Mills up 5 on Collins and Platner tied. But this is early in the primary (I think the poll was before Mills jumped in maybe).
I don't support him and never really have. Only that I think people are underrating the fact that Maine's Democratic lean and a potential blue wave could offset his real flaws as a candidate.
Trump has the gift that Bill Clinton had - nothing sticks to him. As the joke at the time went "Bill Clinton could go through the car wash in a convertible, and Al Gore would get wet."
This is generally not a replicable or predictable trait.
The numbers for the initiative to restrict absentee voting are pretty frightening, too, but I guess we'll know in a week and a half if this poll was on the mark or not.
I wonder if they'll release general election numbers or anything on the governor's race.
That's really what makes me question it. Maine has voted down smaller restrictions on voting rights by landslide margins in previous referendums. Sure, things are more polarized now, but I highly doubt that the voting restrictions referendum is that close in the end.
Are we 100% that restricting absentee voting doesn't help us? Don't get me wrong, I'm against such a restriction on the grounds of it being anti-democratic, but are we sure the horse-race implications are that clear?
So this poll was taken before the Nazi tattoo story came out. Plus, no H2H to see who would be stronger against Collins and you have 14% undecided Dem voters and some of the lesser known candidates like Jordan Wood will most likely drop out closer to the Primary giving Mills her chance to consolidate her base of support if Planter has any more skeletons in his closet and acts erratically, which is very possible. Also, LePage has a higher disapproval number than Golden while Golden has a 40% Neutral Approval. My guess is a chunk of Democrats may not love him but know he’s the best fit for the district. Interesting they did H2H with golden and LePage but not for Collins. We have a long way to go any anything can happen between now and next year.
I'm hoping this is mostly from Dems right now saying thet won't pull the lever.
Really I get Golden being our most conservative House rep, but he's poked the Dem base bear and engaged in numerous instances of Trump apologia the past 8 months when IMO it wasn't necessary at all.
I wonder if he was trying to do a Fetterman and have better favorability among republicans than dems. Doesn’t seem to have pulled it off, at least not yet. All he’s done is make everyone dislike him.
I hope State Navigate has the VA electorate right.
I still feel it’s a shame that CA is redistricting. Those millions invested in TX legislative races would have gone a lot further to broaden Democratic support than TV ads in CA. And some of the targeted districts would have been flipped by Democrats in ‘26 without redistricting.
No, I think it’s a shame that Democrats are making short-term moves instead of looking at the longterm future.
And that Democrats are focused on the House (which they will probably win anyway) instead of winning both the Senate and the House.
If someone gave me $30-40M to spend on politics, I would use it to support Democratic Party offices & long shot state legislative races in rural North Carolina, Texas, Iowa, Ohio, Alaska, Montana, South Carolina, Nebraska, Kansas, and Florida. The local candidates, staff, and volunteers are the ones building relationships in communities and pushing the Democratic brand from toxic towards acceptable. They also know which local radio stations farmers listen to on their tractors and which local papers will run op-eds or cheap advertisements. Winning NC, TX, IA, OH, and one of the others would begin to create the conditions to squash the MAGA movement.
Winning some additional CA House seats does nothing for the Democratic Party brand or its legitimacy. It may even make it worse.
I think this is an example of the zero-sum fallacy; assuming that if this money wasn't spent on California redistricting it would definitely be spent elsewhere and/or that less money will be available for those other things as a result of California redistricting spending. I don't think that's true.
I don’t know how these donor conversations work. I suspect though that Newsom made this a priority and so CA & NY donors ponied up. If Newsom (or Schumer or Jeffries) were pressing for money to go towards state legislative races and rural Democratic Parties I expect it would be there.
Unless it is about gratification and bragging rights in which case investing in a likely win in 2025 is better than uncertainty in ‘26 & ‘28 and beyond.
I do think that too many Democrats assumed the longterm future would turn out because of demographic and cultural changes and didn’t build a foundation that looked decades into the future as say the Pro-Life movement did.
Right now, all we have is the short term, and we have to be as aggressive as possible in the narrowing window we have to save democracy. We need to press every single advantage to the fullest.
Money is not always like pie, in that a piece taken by one person makes it unavailable to another. People donate to causes that they care about. Just because someone donated to the redistricting effort does not mean they were about to give it to a rando in South Carolina or Kansas.
I think the danger to democracy is more than right now though. If we don’t broaden our current coalition pretty dramatically we will be at an electoral disadvantage and a massive strategic disadvantage (in the sense that lawbreaking and destruction is faster than law enforcement and building).
So I’m generally against spending political focus and money on short term advantages. And given that gerrymandering is bad and is also unpopular I think CA gerrymandering is likely to have negative impacts outside of CA.
Given that the yes position is running ads and the no position isn't, I hope Newsom changes his twice or thrice daily emails and texts to support for the proposition and gotv instead of continued dire fundraising ads.
In district 11, it's being speculated that Pelosi may endorse Connie Chan, SF district 1 supervisor who was the only local pol with her at a yes on 50 rally and was at no kings. There's also the ongoing speculation that Nancy Pelosi will endorse her daughter Christine Pelosi.
Does Christine Pelosi (who will be 60 next year) really want to serve in Congress, though? If she were truly determined to do that maybe her mother might have "cleared the path" for her and retired by now?
I have no idea. I think the more pertinent question is if the voters of CA 11 after having Nancy so long would want another Pelosi, especially one who is not as talented with a very different personality.
So, after NC Rs rammed through the even more rigged Constitutional maps, they adjourned for the rest of the year. No budget, no teacher raises... even they control the legislature and can override Gov Stein's veto by peeling off 1 or 2 Dems. They just can't decide which pet projects to vote on -- and the state budget is low on their list of priorities.
This is going to bite them in the ass next year and in 2028. Ask Devin LeMahieu and Robin Vos in Wisconsin when they gleefully pulled the same kind of shit Berger and Hall are doing now. And when their state Supreme Court flipped hands and forced to redraw their state legislative maps to be fairer, they lost their supermajority last year.
And if the state legislature flips control in 2030, I want the Dem majority to do the same kind of pettiness Berger did. Give Berger the basement seat, strip GOP legislators of staff funding, and ram through bills without consulting the GOP minority. I'm feeling VERY petty.
I know little about NH primary voters but a Sununu-type Republican would not have a prayer in many GOP primaries. I know NH has a somewhat distinct political culture, though.
NH has recently enough been able to prefer less MAGA republicans, but the biggest advantage Sununu will have going for him is his last name. It's the reason his brother won the gubernatorial primary in 2016, and it will give him a leg up this time around.
It also doesn't hurt him that, so far, his intraparty opponents are jokes. Scott Brown has never won a general election in NH and his claim to fame will be old enough to get a driver's license by the time the election comes around (both primary and general). Everyone else is another tier below in candidate quality. Plus he'll have all his various connections with the wealthy, I assume.
It's not so much that his less MAGA profile isn't harming him in the republican primary so much as the fact that there is nobody strong who can make the case against him for it, while his name gives him enough of a cushion to be a "serious" candidate. If there was a recent republican house rep or governor he'd get crushed, I think.
Schumer and DC f_cked this race. We might lose the Senate long-term and democracy due to Maine. Mills should never have been recruited. The progressive Speaker Ryan Fecteau would have easily beaten the slopulist as well as Susan Collins.
The dip is almost entirely from Platner supporters, as the graphs show. It does worry me whether they will abstain or vote Collins out of spite if Mills wins the primary.
And that "Teflon Don" energy was largely given to him by the news media, which won't do the same for Platner or probably anyone else (certainly not any Democrat.)
Yeah, and I referred to Platner as a slopulist (slop + populist). Doesn't mean that Mills is a good candidate too. He should have let other candidates who would have jumped in, like Fecteau and Frey, jump in.
I remember seeing the Prop 50 spending data you posted the other day and thinking 'Yes up only 9.9 to 9 million? That doesn't seem right, I'm seeing only yes ads now...oh, that's 9,000.'
I left the state for three weeks to look at fall foliage and desert landscapes in the Southwest and things have changed drastically in California. Early on there were at least as many No on 50 ads as ones supporting the proposition. I guess there has been polling since then putting it in a better position. Charlie Munger closed his wallet and other opponents followed him.
If 50 passes the June primary will be very interesting with lots of people scrambling for runoff spots in the newly competitive districts. I will especially enjoy seeing some longtime GOP congress critters lose their jobs, especially Ken Calvert and Darrell Issa (though Issa might be able to hang on, with his endless supply of self-funding.)
The Graham Platner situation really highlights the predicament the Democrats have gotten themselves into based on their recent consensus that candidates' entire lives should be judged based on their silliest mistakes. That's not to say I favor Platner or believe his indiscretions shouldn't be disqualifying, but if the party works overtime to squash him, it will have a chilling effect on candidate recruitment moving forward....particularly the kinds of candidates so many of us say we want.
The social media era is gonna amplify the risk of candidate derailment, either through self-selection of would-be candidates who opt out or actual candidates humiliated off the national stage when they make a good-faith attempt at public service and discover they'll never be seen as anything more than something they said or did 20 years ago.
What's gonna happen if we keep signaling to would-be candidates that their lives will never be allowed to be worth more than their worst social media moment? What's gonna happen if we keep signaling to would-be candidates that their lives will never be allowed to be worth more than their worst display of drunken behavior at a bar? What's gonna happen if we keep signaling to would-be candidates that their lives will never be allowed to be worth more than the politically incorrect Halloween costume they wore in the 80s that hasn't aged well?
Well, you're gonna get insider candidates....people who's entire lives were groomed and fast-tracked for positions of power. You're not gonna get "the next generation" taking on the "hangers-on" in any meaningful way. If Graham Platner's obliteration plays out on the national stage as appears poised to happen, the multiplier effect of recruitment failure as a consequence seems likely to be profound. Which is great news if you're Steny Hoyer or someone of his vintage....but bad news for a party and electorate that wants to move past octogenarians.
The worst part of all of this is that it'll be just another example of unilateral disarmament. The MAGA guys sure as hell won't be playing by the same puritanical playbook, and they'll continue to get away with it in general elections among voters who don't discriminate about personal indiscretions nearly to the degree we think they do.
To an extent. But he is running for a Senate seat. Not just any seat either—arguably one of only two real flip opportunities next year. If this came out in October 2026, Collins wins in a landslide.
Had he gone the traditional route of state legislator or mayor first, he would’ve alleviated some concerns about how untested he was. But this is the first race he’s ever ran. People are naturally going to be suspicious of someone like that as a first time candidate. And we see why that suspicion has proved legitimate. Also, Mills didn’t leak the Nazi tattoo thing. Platner was the one who thought it would be big brained to go disclose it on a podcast BEFORE actually covering it up. And now we have multiple indicia that he knew full well it was a Totenkopf, from his reddit history to the Jewish Insider story.
Right. I'm not defending Platner so much as warning the Dems against putting their thumb on the scale too heavily to grease the skids for Mills. This polling sample we just saw today is a big red flag that it could be coming.
So you're saying that we should allow Democratic primary voters to decide how they feel about a candidate's imperfections rather than throw the entire party machinery in support of another candidate.
There's definitely some merit to that argument, although that has backfired for Republicans several times.
Yeah, I've no idea why they would do shenanigans to keep McMorrow (who seems to have real juice) from the nomination.
There is no "McMorrow Lane" in the Maine contest, which is too bad for me (not that I live in Maine, but I am cold to both Platner and Mills as candidates).
Nearly every Republican seat will be vulnerable by November 2026. Republican “vulnerability” doesn’t mean that Democrats will win. It means that they can win. There are very few "safe" Republican seats. It will be interesting to see how they try to distance themselves from Trump. They are going to have an huge uphill battle in front of them.
"The Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) has released a comprehensive new national poll that is well worth reviewing. It has Trump clocking in at 40% approve, 58% disapprove.
This new poll is full of interesting data but this bit stood out - 56% of voters believe Trump is a dangerous dictator. Only 41% view him as a “strong” leader. It’s 65% dangerous dictator, 31% strong leader with independents."
I've seen multiple people on here say something similar to "Nearly every Republican seat will be vulnerable by November 2026" and it's still not going to be true. Trump clearly has a hard support floor in the 35-40% range, and even with a 10 point swing to the left, most Republicans will still win with relative ease.
Except you've left out the Independents who have moved away from him in huge numbers. No candidate can win without substantial support from Independents. The most recent Gallup poll shows that Trump’s support among Independents has plummeted to 33% (from 46% during the 2024 election).
Republicans for Congress have nothing to run on. People are waking up as polls are showing. Trump's base will not be enough. Perhaps that base you're talking about will just stay home. In politics, you never know when the next crack will open.
Those numbers are bad for Republicans in swing districts, but in red districts, where independents are generally conservative leaning, they aren't going to shift the margin so dramatically that a 25 point win in 2024 can be overturned. 10 points? Maybe. 15 points? Probably not. 20+ points? Barring a scandal, no.
Voters only believe Democratic warnings on Trump’s dictatorship until after he starts his next term as president. Would be nice if for once they actually fucking learned that obvious lesson before they voted him into power. Play stupid games, aka the majority of American voters, idiots.
We’ll see whether the 56% of voters who believe he’s a dictator will actually cast the only ballot they can in 2026 if they believe that to be true: to actually vote in the midterms and for the Democrat. If that happens, definitely some surprising election results upcoming. If it doesn’t as I think is more likely, we may have enough to flip the Senate, but it’ll be close like 1-2% of the vote in 1-2 states close.
Rep. Eric Swalwell is considering a bid for Governor. Can’t say I’m too fond of him, but we’ll see how this goes. Question for those in the know: who might run for Swalwell’s seat if he does run?
Former Rep. Cori Bush is now the fourth Justice Dem endorsee of this cycle who is not an incumbent. While I agree with posters here in the past that Bush has numerous problems, I admire the housing protest she did during the Biden admin, and quite frankly I despise Wesley Bell so whatever.
Hashmi 51-44, a small gain for her from last month. Spanberger maintains the same 12 point margin as before. Jones' support dropped five points, but Miyares didn't gain much. (5% say they don't support either AG candidate or will just skip that race.)
No generic ballot poll here. Regarding Jay Jones, by a 51-41 margin respondents said that he should drop out of the race, but by a 54-41 margin they approve of Spanberger's handling of that controversy in which she didn't call on him to do so. People were also less likely to blame Jones or Democrats for inciting political violence than to blame Trump or the way people talk about politics on social media in general.
I’m going to make a bold prediction: there will be just as many if not more “shy Jones” voters than there were for Trump in any election. Miyares as an incumbent is only at 46%. That’s the part we should be paying attention to.
I'm not surprised, given the shenanigans Rs are pulling nationwide to try to keep the House after 2026.
I expect Virginia Ds to craft their constitutional amendment similarly to California's Prop 50. They only need a bare majority to pass it twice, with an election between. It makes sense they would fast track it and pass it before the gubernatorial election this year and pass it again early next year.
Well, that would explain the timing. But they don't have many (any?) votes to lose, at least prior to this year's election; if only one or two dopey goo-goo Dems votes no (not that I know of any such person) then that's probably it for new districts at least until 2028.
And does that also apply to state legislative districts, or just the congressional ones? I should note that in recent decades both Democrats and Republicans have taken the opportunity to gerrymander the General Assembly and neither worked out entirely as planned.
There's no automatic ballot qualification in Colorado. Would have to get least 2% of registered voters in each of Colorado's 35 state Senate districts to sign a petition to get it on the ballot, and 55% of the vote to pass. Plus, the timing of the referendum is unclear.
This has to pass the legislature twice, with an election between, before it can go to voters. They're doing it now so that they can pass it and the other three amendments again next year for the November 2026 ballot.
They must have unanimous support from Senate Democrats, because that’s the only way it passes the state Senate now, with Sears being the LG/tiebreaker in the Senate.
For those who are wondering, here is an example of a 9-2 Democratic gerrymander. It is very doable, and will be even more doable if the VRA gets struck down.
Jeffries' has played this whole endorsement saga pretty disastrously. It may not matter for his political future in the long term, but when every reporter's been spending months asking him who he'd vote for as mayor you'd think his team would have nipped that in the bud a while ago so it wouldn't become a punch line against him.
Right. The easy line would have been that he accepted the choice of Democratic primary voters and that he looked forward to building a relationship with Mamdani so that he could continue to discuss policy areas where they disagreed, or what have you...
Adams is probably just playing CYA so nobody can directly blame Cuomo's loss on him. Sliwa, meanwhile, is proudly playing DGAF on the matter, rebuffing any and all suggestions to withdraw, which probably wouldn't change the result by now anyway (he'd still be on the ballot in any event.)
I think this particular discussion is edging a little too close to violating the I-P topic ban.
Ah, I didn't realize that we had that. I'll delete.
VA Suffolk poll:
Spanberger 52-43
Miyares 46-42.
Hashimi-Reid 45-45
Trump approval 39/54
Younkin approval 51/37
https://www.suffolk.edu/-/media/suffolk/documents/academics/research-at-suffolk/suprc/polls/other-states/2025/10_22_2025_virginia_statewide_marginals.pdf?la=en&hash=151508E05025492875040BD1F23D8D5CC60782F6
LOL, there's not going to be a 13-point gap between Governor and AG.
Does the poll weight by recalled 2021 vote? If it does, it's almost certainly too conservative.
Weighted to 2024. Chaz Nuttycombe says "If you believe the VA electorate will be as red as 2021, or even 2024, I have a forever home to sell you on Tangier." (That is a picturesque but remote island in the Chesapeake Bay whose landmass is declining due to sea level rise, with many expecting it to be abandoned in the next 50 years.)
The sad part is that Tangier votes heavily Republican despite being directly at risk of disappearing due to climate change. Some people just can't put two and two together.
The same is true for Smith Island, located in Maryland not far north of Tangier, though they have been building coastal defenses against the rising sea. After Hurricane Sandy the state offered buyouts to landowners but got few takers.
Smith Island was profiled on 60 Minutes recently. Its population peaked at about 800 and now is down to about 200. Accessible only by boat (like Tangier), it is the home of the official state dessert, a cake which consists of at least eight pancake-like layers each alternating with chocolate frosting.
Very conservative place inhabited by the descendents of poor British fishermen settlers.
Their whiteness is more important to them.
Ditto for the entire Gulf Coast . . it's depressing and shows how tangible impacts on people's lives don't move the political needle like many assume.
I could easily see there being a 13-point gap between governor and AG.
Maybe not 13, but it could be quite a significant gap, given the relative weaknesses of Earle-Sears and Jones. Approaching double digits is very possible.
It's also worth noting that the RCP polling average in 2017 showed Northam leading by only 3%, and he actually won by 9%. RCP now shows Spanberger up by 6%. Do the math.
And that was without a government shutdown during the campaign that has direct negative effects on many Virginians.
I don’t see Hashmi underperforming Spanberger by 9 points.
ME Senate Dem primary poll. UNH 10/16-10/21.
Platner 58
Mills 24.
And
LePage 49 Golden 44 in ME 2
Favorability: LePage -10. Golden -25, including -11 among Democrats.
https://scholars.unh.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1896&context=survey_center_polls
This is gonna be a rough ride no matter what happens.
I’m actually just shocked that Platner has that much name recognition. He only announced his campaign in August and already 85% of poll respondents have an opinion on him, that’s absurdly quick for someone who was completely unknown 2 months ago.
It's because we love to fall in love with candidates. Hence, everyone gravitating to the populist oyster-farmer who says what he thinks and isn't too PC (sound familiar, other than the oyster farmer part?) over the experienced, proven sitting Governor. If we punt this election away over that kind of stupidity, we deserve what we get.
I unfortunately feel like one way or another, a winnable races is going to get away from us.
She's won a bunch of times with serious opponents. Whether those elections or this one are or were winnable is debatable. We have to hope things are different next year.
Mills starts in a surprisingly large hole. What do you make of that?
we forced biden out of the race for being old and are now pushing a candidate that is of a similar age. Platner (massive issues aside) was blue collar and spoke like a real person. Janet has been in elected office almost as twice as long as I've been alive. She's been a great governor, but the age issue is salient
Pushed him out because he wasn't with it, not because of age.
agree to disagree, but if biden wasn't with it id still take him over "with it" bill or obama.
They won re-election, though, although I don't think anyone could have overcome the American electorate's pathological obsession with the American expression of worldwide inflation and won for the Democrats last year.
Or seemed too confused at times, etc., yes. I think that he was still quite qualified to govern and continued to do a bunch of great things for the rest of his term, and that it was mostly a problem of perception, communication problems and image. Before someone says that's central to the job: practically, it is, but there's a difference between that and the nuts and bolts of governing.
UNH poll being UNH, also before the full impact landed.
Agree but, man, that is a massive gap...
I don't know how much I buy into the poll. Looks like about half of it was done before the "tattoo" controversies. But it does show the desire for a non-traditional candidate. I think the Golden numbers are more revealing. Maybe he can win again because of RCV, but his unpopularity with Democrats is pretty damning.
Drug her feet too long and left the window open for someone else to steal her thunder.
100%
Susan Collins is the luckiest person.
Let's not draw sweeping conclusions about an election more than a year before it happens.
I think Collins can very much lose, but not against the Dem equivalent with Mark Robinson’s online history.
I’m more worried about the toll his supporters are taking on Mills’ approval in this poll and worry if they’ll be sore losers if he loses the primary.
That said, I don’t think he can win the primary after all this, but this poll is having me second guess that. God help us if he does.
Primary isn't for 8 months, lot can happen between then and now.
A lot of bad blood can build up in 8 months.
I’d like to see some GE polling before writing him off against Collins. Maybe the polls will show he can still win, or even be more viable than Mills.
Be skeptical of polls showing Democrats can beat Collins.
We know from previous cycles that they are not conclusive. And who's to say there won't be more coming out about Platner?
I believe the only poll of the general that I have seen had Mills up 5 on Collins and Platner tied. But this is early in the primary (I think the poll was before Mills jumped in maybe).
Why do you continue to beat the drum so heavily for him? Honestly, I just don't get it.
I don't support him and never really have. Only that I think people are underrating the fact that Maine's Democratic lean and a potential blue wave could offset his real flaws as a candidate.
To say his Reddit posts are akin to Mark Robinson is literally insane . . .
I think it's reasonable to say they are "akin" to Robinson's. Not nearly as extreme but they do rhyme....
Nope. Still Trump!
Trump has the gift that Bill Clinton had - nothing sticks to him. As the joke at the time went "Bill Clinton could go through the car wash in a convertible, and Al Gore would get wet."
This is generally not a replicable or predictable trait.
The numbers for the initiative to restrict absentee voting are pretty frightening, too, but I guess we'll know in a week and a half if this poll was on the mark or not.
I wonder if they'll release general election numbers or anything on the governor's race.
That's really what makes me question it. Maine has voted down smaller restrictions on voting rights by landslide margins in previous referendums. Sure, things are more polarized now, but I highly doubt that the voting restrictions referendum is that close in the end.
I guess we'll see soon enough.
Are we 100% that restricting absentee voting doesn't help us? Don't get me wrong, I'm against such a restriction on the grounds of it being anti-democratic, but are we sure the horse-race implications are that clear?
So this poll was taken before the Nazi tattoo story came out. Plus, no H2H to see who would be stronger against Collins and you have 14% undecided Dem voters and some of the lesser known candidates like Jordan Wood will most likely drop out closer to the Primary giving Mills her chance to consolidate her base of support if Planter has any more skeletons in his closet and acts erratically, which is very possible. Also, LePage has a higher disapproval number than Golden while Golden has a 40% Neutral Approval. My guess is a chunk of Democrats may not love him but know he’s the best fit for the district. Interesting they did H2H with golden and LePage but not for Collins. We have a long way to go any anything can happen between now and next year.
I'm hoping this is mostly from Dems right now saying thet won't pull the lever.
Really I get Golden being our most conservative House rep, but he's poked the Dem base bear and engaged in numerous instances of Trump apologia the past 8 months when IMO it wasn't necessary at all.
I wonder if he was trying to do a Fetterman and have better favorability among republicans than dems. Doesn’t seem to have pulled it off, at least not yet. All he’s done is make everyone dislike him.
Relative favorables don't matter, it's not like many of the Republicans giving Fetterman positive approvals would vote for him over a GOP candidate.
Yes he can't be Mr. Progressive in a heavy Trump district but you're not going to out-Trump Paul LePage.
Good lord, no. That would be worst case scenario....
I hope State Navigate has the VA electorate right.
I still feel it’s a shame that CA is redistricting. Those millions invested in TX legislative races would have gone a lot further to broaden Democratic support than TV ads in CA. And some of the targeted districts would have been flipped by Democrats in ‘26 without redistricting.
You think it's a shame the Democrats have a better chance to flip the House?
No, I think it’s a shame that Democrats are making short-term moves instead of looking at the longterm future.
And that Democrats are focused on the House (which they will probably win anyway) instead of winning both the Senate and the House.
If someone gave me $30-40M to spend on politics, I would use it to support Democratic Party offices & long shot state legislative races in rural North Carolina, Texas, Iowa, Ohio, Alaska, Montana, South Carolina, Nebraska, Kansas, and Florida. The local candidates, staff, and volunteers are the ones building relationships in communities and pushing the Democratic brand from toxic towards acceptable. They also know which local radio stations farmers listen to on their tractors and which local papers will run op-eds or cheap advertisements. Winning NC, TX, IA, OH, and one of the others would begin to create the conditions to squash the MAGA movement.
Winning some additional CA House seats does nothing for the Democratic Party brand or its legitimacy. It may even make it worse.
I think this is an example of the zero-sum fallacy; assuming that if this money wasn't spent on California redistricting it would definitely be spent elsewhere and/or that less money will be available for those other things as a result of California redistricting spending. I don't think that's true.
Maybe.
I don’t know how these donor conversations work. I suspect though that Newsom made this a priority and so CA & NY donors ponied up. If Newsom (or Schumer or Jeffries) were pressing for money to go towards state legislative races and rural Democratic Parties I expect it would be there.
Unless it is about gratification and bragging rights in which case investing in a likely win in 2025 is better than uncertainty in ‘26 & ‘28 and beyond.
I do think that too many Democrats assumed the longterm future would turn out because of demographic and cultural changes and didn’t build a foundation that looked decades into the future as say the Pro-Life movement did.
Right now, all we have is the short term, and we have to be as aggressive as possible in the narrowing window we have to save democracy. We need to press every single advantage to the fullest.
Money is not always like pie, in that a piece taken by one person makes it unavailable to another. People donate to causes that they care about. Just because someone donated to the redistricting effort does not mean they were about to give it to a rando in South Carolina or Kansas.
Maybe.
I’m sympathetic to that position.
I think the danger to democracy is more than right now though. If we don’t broaden our current coalition pretty dramatically we will be at an electoral disadvantage and a massive strategic disadvantage (in the sense that lawbreaking and destruction is faster than law enforcement and building).
So I’m generally against spending political focus and money on short term advantages. And given that gerrymandering is bad and is also unpopular I think CA gerrymandering is likely to have negative impacts outside of CA.
Given that the yes position is running ads and the no position isn't, I hope Newsom changes his twice or thrice daily emails and texts to support for the proposition and gotv instead of continued dire fundraising ads.
https://sfist.com/2025/10/22/now-theres-speculation-that-supervisor-connie-chan-might-run-for-nancy-pelosis-seat/
In district 11, it's being speculated that Pelosi may endorse Connie Chan, SF district 1 supervisor who was the only local pol with her at a yes on 50 rally and was at no kings. There's also the ongoing speculation that Nancy Pelosi will endorse her daughter Christine Pelosi.
I am all for Members in their 70s and 80s retiring.
Does Christine Pelosi (who will be 60 next year) really want to serve in Congress, though? If she were truly determined to do that maybe her mother might have "cleared the path" for her and retired by now?
I have no idea. I think the more pertinent question is if the voters of CA 11 after having Nancy so long would want another Pelosi, especially one who is not as talented with a very different personality.
So, after NC Rs rammed through the even more rigged Constitutional maps, they adjourned for the rest of the year. No budget, no teacher raises... even they control the legislature and can override Gov Stein's veto by peeling off 1 or 2 Dems. They just can't decide which pet projects to vote on -- and the state budget is low on their list of priorities.
This is going to bite them in the ass next year and in 2028. Ask Devin LeMahieu and Robin Vos in Wisconsin when they gleefully pulled the same kind of shit Berger and Hall are doing now. And when their state Supreme Court flipped hands and forced to redraw their state legislative maps to be fairer, they lost their supermajority last year.
And if the state legislature flips control in 2030, I want the Dem majority to do the same kind of pettiness Berger did. Give Berger the basement seat, strip GOP legislators of staff funding, and ram through bills without consulting the GOP minority. I'm feeling VERY petty.
That's fine - we learned last year that voters don't punish pettiness in their politicians.
I know little about NH primary voters but a Sununu-type Republican would not have a prayer in many GOP primaries. I know NH has a somewhat distinct political culture, though.
NH has recently enough been able to prefer less MAGA republicans, but the biggest advantage Sununu will have going for him is his last name. It's the reason his brother won the gubernatorial primary in 2016, and it will give him a leg up this time around.
It also doesn't hurt him that, so far, his intraparty opponents are jokes. Scott Brown has never won a general election in NH and his claim to fame will be old enough to get a driver's license by the time the election comes around (both primary and general). Everyone else is another tier below in candidate quality. Plus he'll have all his various connections with the wealthy, I assume.
It's not so much that his less MAGA profile isn't harming him in the republican primary so much as the fact that there is nobody strong who can make the case against him for it, while his name gives him enough of a cushion to be a "serious" candidate. If there was a recent republican house rep or governor he'd get crushed, I think.
UNH poll | 10/16-10/21
Governor Janet Mills approval
Disapprove 55%
Approve 43%
https://x.com/PollTracker2024/status/1981339855352164403
Schumer and DC f_cked this race. We might lose the Senate long-term and democracy due to Maine. Mills should never have been recruited. The progressive Speaker Ryan Fecteau would have easily beaten the slopulist as well as Susan Collins.
The dip is almost entirely from Platner supporters, as the graphs show. It does worry me whether they will abstain or vote Collins out of spite if Mills wins the primary.
Mills has a mediocre approval from self described moderates too.
Schumer fucked this race? Platner is probably a fucking disaster who will only be able to win if he has Teflon Don energy, which is hard to come by.
And that "Teflon Don" energy was largely given to him by the news media, which won't do the same for Platner or probably anyone else (certainly not any Democrat.)
Yeah, and I referred to Platner as a slopulist (slop + populist). Doesn't mean that Mills is a good candidate too. He should have let other candidates who would have jumped in, like Fecteau and Frey, jump in.
Stop that. It's a little over a year away and again, that poll was conducted before the Nazi tattoo story came out.
I remember seeing the Prop 50 spending data you posted the other day and thinking 'Yes up only 9.9 to 9 million? That doesn't seem right, I'm seeing only yes ads now...oh, that's 9,000.'
I left the state for three weeks to look at fall foliage and desert landscapes in the Southwest and things have changed drastically in California. Early on there were at least as many No on 50 ads as ones supporting the proposition. I guess there has been polling since then putting it in a better position. Charlie Munger closed his wallet and other opponents followed him.
If 50 passes the June primary will be very interesting with lots of people scrambling for runoff spots in the newly competitive districts. I will especially enjoy seeing some longtime GOP congress critters lose their jobs, especially Ken Calvert and Darrell Issa (though Issa might be able to hang on, with his endless supply of self-funding.)
The Graham Platner situation really highlights the predicament the Democrats have gotten themselves into based on their recent consensus that candidates' entire lives should be judged based on their silliest mistakes. That's not to say I favor Platner or believe his indiscretions shouldn't be disqualifying, but if the party works overtime to squash him, it will have a chilling effect on candidate recruitment moving forward....particularly the kinds of candidates so many of us say we want.
The social media era is gonna amplify the risk of candidate derailment, either through self-selection of would-be candidates who opt out or actual candidates humiliated off the national stage when they make a good-faith attempt at public service and discover they'll never be seen as anything more than something they said or did 20 years ago.
What's gonna happen if we keep signaling to would-be candidates that their lives will never be allowed to be worth more than their worst social media moment? What's gonna happen if we keep signaling to would-be candidates that their lives will never be allowed to be worth more than their worst display of drunken behavior at a bar? What's gonna happen if we keep signaling to would-be candidates that their lives will never be allowed to be worth more than the politically incorrect Halloween costume they wore in the 80s that hasn't aged well?
Well, you're gonna get insider candidates....people who's entire lives were groomed and fast-tracked for positions of power. You're not gonna get "the next generation" taking on the "hangers-on" in any meaningful way. If Graham Platner's obliteration plays out on the national stage as appears poised to happen, the multiplier effect of recruitment failure as a consequence seems likely to be profound. Which is great news if you're Steny Hoyer or someone of his vintage....but bad news for a party and electorate that wants to move past octogenarians.
The worst part of all of this is that it'll be just another example of unilateral disarmament. The MAGA guys sure as hell won't be playing by the same puritanical playbook, and they'll continue to get away with it in general elections among voters who don't discriminate about personal indiscretions nearly to the degree we think they do.
To an extent. But he is running for a Senate seat. Not just any seat either—arguably one of only two real flip opportunities next year. If this came out in October 2026, Collins wins in a landslide.
Had he gone the traditional route of state legislator or mayor first, he would’ve alleviated some concerns about how untested he was. But this is the first race he’s ever ran. People are naturally going to be suspicious of someone like that as a first time candidate. And we see why that suspicion has proved legitimate. Also, Mills didn’t leak the Nazi tattoo thing. Platner was the one who thought it would be big brained to go disclose it on a podcast BEFORE actually covering it up. And now we have multiple indicia that he knew full well it was a Totenkopf, from his reddit history to the Jewish Insider story.
Right. I'm not defending Platner so much as warning the Dems against putting their thumb on the scale too heavily to grease the skids for Mills. This polling sample we just saw today is a big red flag that it could be coming.
So you're saying that we should allow Democratic primary voters to decide how they feel about a candidate's imperfections rather than throw the entire party machinery in support of another candidate.
There's definitely some merit to that argument, although that has backfired for Republicans several times.
I’m for giving Platner the benefit of the doubt and letting this play out naturally. I’m ok with who ever wins fair and square.
I'm not, because you're talking about winning a primary, and then if you're Platner, probably getting decisively defeated in the general election.
I think we're in a new world post-Trump and Dems don't seem to realize it yet. I wouldn't write off Platner in a general at all.
I disagree. Where they shouldn't be doing that is Michigan.
Yeah, I've no idea why they would do shenanigans to keep McMorrow (who seems to have real juice) from the nomination.
There is no "McMorrow Lane" in the Maine contest, which is too bad for me (not that I live in Maine, but I am cold to both Platner and Mills as candidates).
It's not just one problem, and come on! He had 20 years to get rid of that tattoo!
Love this comment, and I’m not a Platner stan, either, despite my generally being left of any extant candidates on most issues.
Nearly every Republican seat will be vulnerable by November 2026. Republican “vulnerability” doesn’t mean that Democrats will win. It means that they can win. There are very few "safe" Republican seats. It will be interesting to see how they try to distance themselves from Trump. They are going to have an huge uphill battle in front of them.
"The Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) has released a comprehensive new national poll that is well worth reviewing. It has Trump clocking in at 40% approve, 58% disapprove.
This new poll is full of interesting data but this bit stood out - 56% of voters believe Trump is a dangerous dictator. Only 41% view him as a “strong” leader. It’s 65% dangerous dictator, 31% strong leader with independents."
Simon Rosenberg - The Hopium Substack https://www.hopiumchronicles.com/p/senator-merkley-speaks-out-against
https://prri.org/research/trumps-unprecedented-actions-deepen-asymmetric-divides/
I've seen multiple people on here say something similar to "Nearly every Republican seat will be vulnerable by November 2026" and it's still not going to be true. Trump clearly has a hard support floor in the 35-40% range, and even with a 10 point swing to the left, most Republicans will still win with relative ease.
Except you've left out the Independents who have moved away from him in huge numbers. No candidate can win without substantial support from Independents. The most recent Gallup poll shows that Trump’s support among Independents has plummeted to 33% (from 46% during the 2024 election).
Republicans for Congress have nothing to run on. People are waking up as polls are showing. Trump's base will not be enough. Perhaps that base you're talking about will just stay home. In politics, you never know when the next crack will open.
Those numbers are bad for Republicans in swing districts, but in red districts, where independents are generally conservative leaning, they aren't going to shift the margin so dramatically that a 25 point win in 2024 can be overturned. 10 points? Maybe. 15 points? Probably not. 20+ points? Barring a scandal, no.
Voters only believe Democratic warnings on Trump’s dictatorship until after he starts his next term as president. Would be nice if for once they actually fucking learned that obvious lesson before they voted him into power. Play stupid games, aka the majority of American voters, idiots.
We’ll see whether the 56% of voters who believe he’s a dictator will actually cast the only ballot they can in 2026 if they believe that to be true: to actually vote in the midterms and for the Democrat. If that happens, definitely some surprising election results upcoming. If it doesn’t as I think is more likely, we may have enough to flip the Senate, but it’ll be close like 1-2% of the vote in 1-2 states close.
Some news.
CA-Gov, CA-14:
https://archive.ph/8hLUi
Rep. Eric Swalwell is considering a bid for Governor. Can’t say I’m too fond of him, but we’ll see how this goes. Question for those in the know: who might run for Swalwell’s seat if he does run?
MO-01:
https://punchbowl.news/article/campaigns/bush-endorsement-justice-dems/
Former Rep. Cori Bush is now the fourth Justice Dem endorsee of this cycle who is not an incumbent. While I agree with posters here in the past that Bush has numerous problems, I admire the housing protest she did during the Biden admin, and quite frankly I despise Wesley Bell so whatever.
It is a shame we can’t do better in MO-1 than Bell or Bush
Ironically if SCOTUS destroys whatever is left of VRA as expected there won't be any winnable district for Dems in Missouri outside of wave years.
VA Washington Post poll:
Spanberger 54-42
Hashmi 51-44
Jones tied at 46.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/84f0e3af-875c-4b14-8921-a008804ab25f.pdf?itid=lk_inline_manual_1
51-44 Hashmi to be sure. Any generic ballot poll?
LOL. Right. Will correct.
Don't see any generic numbers. Trump approval 42/57.
Hashmi 51-44, a small gain for her from last month. Spanberger maintains the same 12 point margin as before. Jones' support dropped five points, but Miyares didn't gain much. (5% say they don't support either AG candidate or will just skip that race.)
No generic ballot poll here. Regarding Jay Jones, by a 51-41 margin respondents said that he should drop out of the race, but by a 54-41 margin they approve of Spanberger's handling of that controversy in which she didn't call on him to do so. People were also less likely to blame Jones or Democrats for inciting political violence than to blame Trump or the way people talk about politics on social media in general.
I’m going to make a bold prediction: there will be just as many if not more “shy Jones” voters than there were for Trump in any election. Miyares as an incumbent is only at 46%. That’s the part we should be paying attention to.
Virginia Democrats considering redistricting in early next year, possibly netting 2-3 seats.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/23/us/politics/virginia-democrats-redistrict.html
I'm not surprised, given the shenanigans Rs are pulling nationwide to try to keep the House after 2026.
I expect Virginia Ds to craft their constitutional amendment similarly to California's Prop 50. They only need a bare majority to pass it twice, with an election between. It makes sense they would fast track it and pass it before the gubernatorial election this year and pass it again early next year.
Well, that would explain the timing. But they don't have many (any?) votes to lose, at least prior to this year's election; if only one or two dopey goo-goo Dems votes no (not that I know of any such person) then that's probably it for new districts at least until 2028.
And does that also apply to state legislative districts, or just the congressional ones? I should note that in recent decades both Democrats and Republicans have taken the opportunity to gerrymander the General Assembly and neither worked out entirely as planned.
I think it's just congressional.
Voter approval will be a dicier proposition than in California.
Won't it take more time than that, similar to CO?
There's no automatic ballot qualification in Colorado. Would have to get least 2% of registered voters in each of Colorado's 35 state Senate districts to sign a petition to get it on the ballot, and 55% of the vote to pass. Plus, the timing of the referendum is unclear.
If it’s a veto referendum to repeal the commission it could pass with a simple majority.
I meant it would take until 2027 if everything goes smoothly.
Wouldn't it have been smart for them to wait until after the elections to talk about this?
I would think so. Unless they have to schedule the vote in the lame duck by a date prior to November 4.
This has to pass the legislature twice, with an election between, before it can go to voters. They're doing it now so that they can pass it and the other three amendments again next year for the November 2026 ballot.
That makes sense.
Democracy Docket said that Virginia Dems are indeed calling up a special session to put their own initiative on the 2026 ballot.
https://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/virginia-democrats-redistricting-gop-gerrymanders/
I don't think they would reconvene unless Scott Surovell and L. Louise Lucas know they had the votes to pass it.
They must have unanimous support from Senate Democrats, because that’s the only way it passes the state Senate now, with Sears being the LG/tiebreaker in the Senate.
For those who are wondering, here is an example of a 9-2 Democratic gerrymander. It is very doable, and will be even more doable if the VRA gets struck down.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/6de8e2d3-f419-428d-a128-b22c0c007a87
A 10-1 map is also doable, but it’s uglier-looking than this map.
Surprised this is occurring here before Maryland.
I’m hoping this doesn’t nudge Indiana’s holdouts into saying fuck it and drawing a 9-0 map, though
Bununu mentioned, preparing for the song to stick in my head for the rest of the month
Maybe there can be a sequel: "Acts like Tr*mp, looks like Sununu... Trununu, Trununu must go..."
Despite having called Andrew Cuomo "a snake and a liar," Eric Adams is now endorsing him for mayor of New York. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/23/nyregion/adams-endorse-cuomo-nyc-mayor.html?unlocked_article_code=1.vk8.XEKz.Dzjg0iYqsZCC&smid=url-share
Well, he's also a snake and liar, and unlike Cuomo, he was about to get convicted of corruption.
NYC Mayor - Adams endorses Cuomo, a major move in the race that will net him about 10 votes.
https://apnews.com/article/eric-adams-cuomo-mamdani-nyc-mayor-f7f8513ee54575ef82ebc339fb7dab89
Hakeem Jeffries still insists he will make an endorsement before the start of early voting in... 2 days.
I'm guessing he and Schumer put out a statement tomorrow morning where they endorse Mamdani.
and nobody cares!
Jeffries' has played this whole endorsement saga pretty disastrously. It may not matter for his political future in the long term, but when every reporter's been spending months asking him who he'd vote for as mayor you'd think his team would have nipped that in the bud a while ago so it wouldn't become a punch line against him.
Right. The easy line would have been that he accepted the choice of Democratic primary voters and that he looked forward to building a relationship with Mamdani so that he could continue to discuss policy areas where they disagreed, or what have you...
Which really speaks to his piss poor political instincts.
Adams is probably just playing CYA so nobody can directly blame Cuomo's loss on him. Sliwa, meanwhile, is proudly playing DGAF on the matter, rebuffing any and all suggestions to withdraw, which probably wouldn't change the result by now anyway (he'd still be on the ballot in any event.)
Doesn't it look likely for Mamdani to get a majority, anyway?