Is there any good reason to be concerned about Peltola firing her campaign staff, or can we chalk it up to the Harris fundraising email snafu or something? At least we should get a good idea where we stand in the jungle primary tomorrow.
No one is going vote based on that, but it could be a sign of either poor hiring and management skill or that campaign is failing either on thier key benchmarks or in their internal polls, either can be signs of more significant problems under the hood.
Some suggested the Harris no-endorsement story was coordinated to help Peltola, and maybe it was, but something tells me it set off alarm bells in DC either way, I guess.
If I had to guess, the Kamala thing wasn't run by Peltola herself beforehand (staff maybe assumed, ran with it independently) and she got pissed and fired the folks involved.
It’s not that I think this will matter among any voters. I’m moreso wondering if there might be money issues or bad internals that might have caused it.
There clearly are not money issues; Peltola has outraised Sullivan significantly.
Considering most public, nonpartisan polling has Peltola slightly ahead, I doubt it is due to bad internals, either, unless something changed dramatically in the last week.
If the staff change up is due to something that went wrong, it no doubt relates to the Harris endorsement snafu. But I do think Peltola has recovered from that, so I'm skeptical she would fire anyone over something like that. And also, most voters were already associating any Democrat with Harris anyway.
It could be a blip in the radar or it could be a harbinger of systemic issues with her campaign. We'll have to wait a few weeks to find out. If nothing big comes up, if political operation still seems to be running well, if she isn't acting strapped for cash, then we can assume it wasn't a cause for concern. If something does come up then we need to assess that thing in the context and determine from there.
I don't have a problem with age. Health is another matter. Markey has been a bright light in congress since the 1970s. He's still in there fighting the good fight. There was no reason to replace him 6 years ago and there's no reason now.
In that unlikely circumstance, Scott Brown (or equivalent Repub) serves a few months and is then replaced in a special election or in the 2032 regular election, depending on the timing of the vacancy.
Scott Brown is a funny reference to pull, since he won a special in Massachusetts. Warren barely defeated when the seat came up in the regular cycle.
Markey is about ~60% to survive to the end of his term, and obviously his chance of both surviving and maintaining good cognitive health the whole time is lower. I think folks on this board are underestimating how bad it is to elect an 80-year-old to a six-year term, presumably because the alternative of Moulton is unpalatable and people want to wish away the age issue.
The best case scenario is Markey advances and ends up being fine for his term, but I worry his age is a problem we'll have to reckon with before his term is up.
But couldn’t the Dem legislature pass a law stating that the governor needs to choose a replacement from a list supplied by the majority leaders of the state legislative chambers (something like Kentucky did)?
In 2004, the legislature stripped the governor of the power to make an interim appointment due to the possibility of John Kerry being elected to the Presidency and giving Mitt Romney the chance to choose a new Senator. In 2009, when Edward Kennedy passed, they restored the power so Dem Gov Deval Patrick could make an appointment. In 2020, there was a proposal to strip the power again because of the possibility of Warren joining the Biden admin, but it was tabled. Charlie Baker threatened to veto it, but we could have overridden the veto if most of the caucus was on board.
If we did change it again I suppose the GOP would try to challenge in court. The MA Supreme Court is mostly Baker appointees, but those needed to be approved by an elected, left-leaning Governor's Council, so in practice I think they're largely moderates. My guess is the court challenge would fail.
If Dems win the WH in 2028, it wouldn't take a fluke to get a GOP governor. Going back to 1991, 5 of 7 Governors of MA have been Republicans, even though MA has never voted for a Republican for President in that time span (Reagen '84 was the most recent). MA is very open to GOP Govs. Charlie Baker was re-elected during the 2018 blue wave.
I don't understand this comment. Larson was considered the progressive candidate in the primary against Luke Bronin. Larson may have been backed by the establishment but a litany of progressive groups had endorsed him, including labor. The result was almost entirely based on a desire for generational change. And Larson's big issue was his championship of social security for which he had achieved nothing in 14 terms.
Social Security is in the same dire predicament as it was when John Larson first took office. He failed to win approval of his bill even with a Democratic president and Democrats in control of Congress. It was his one big issue and he's failed miserably.
It’s not in a dire predicament. I’m not sure what his bill was, but if it was to lift the cap, I don’t see how he can be blamed for cowardly Democratic White House leadership and Republicans who refuse to vote to raise taxes on the upper income.
Some progressive groups, like the WFP, endorsed him, but polling showed that most self-described progressives and liberals backed his challenger because he was younger and further to Larson's left on issues like ICE and AIPAC. Larson had also experienced several health episodes, unlike Markey.
Moreover, Larson had never identified as a progressive, and his record didn’t particularly support that label, so his attempt to rebrand himself as one came across as especially cynical.
ed markey is a fantastic senator, i would have voted for kennedy last time because reasons, but markey is objectively a better choice than "most dangerous place is between him and a camera" Seth moulton's fringe centrism
yea let's toss out an actual principled politican, for one that flip flops on almost every major issue, and has run unsuccessful campaings for president and speaker of the house. Moulton also punches down on trans rights. Yawn as to any argument in favor of that terrible congressman
Moulton is seemingly stuck with the delusion that any second Massachusetts will revert to the Massachusetts of 1976 and not 2026. He has even tempered down his prior more con-leaning stances, so I'm not sure what constituency he believes would prop him to a victory here in arguably the most liberal state in the country.
1976 is incidentally the year when Markey first was elected to Congress.
I don't think age alone is a reason to turn people out of office unless they've been showing serious health or ability issues, which Markey doesn't seem to have been, but it may be Moulton's only legit issue. I'm also a bit put off by the double standards that some apply, as alluded to above (such as those who think Biden was an invalid but Bernie Sanders is somehow immortal.)
Some polling has shown that voters wish they had an option that was younger than Markey, but more progressive and less self-promotional than Moulton. Well, as Mick Jagger (83 and going strong) said, "You can't always get what you want."
Have you seen Bernie's interviews? He can still deliver sharp jokes and make fun of himself, unlike Biden two years ago. When it's time for Bernie to seek reelection, I'll be the first to support him passing the torch to Becca Balint or whoever is best positioned to succeed him.
Age by itself isn’t the issue—it's whether someone is still capable of doing the job effectively and remains in touch with the needs and priorities of their constituents. Bernie clearly still is.
Markey is in no way fringe, while Moulton is uniquely disliked by both progressives and the establishment. The only significant support he's getting is from veterans and veteran groups, which feels more out of obligation that deep support for Moulton. If just about no one you know likes you, you're probably the problem.
Come on, establishment and age are not the same thing. Bernie has consistently challenged his colleagues and party leadership throughout his tenure in Congress; that is the definition of anti-establishment.
Was anyone on the left actually sad when Larson, an AIPAC- and corporate-funded centrist, went down? Moulton has been one of the biggest proponents of increased defense spending, foreign wars, political moderation, and corporate-friendly policies in the House. That is not challenging the dominant political consensus in America; it is reinforcing it.
Calling someone “establishment” based on their age or longevity while ignoring their ideology and relationship to the political status quo is just intellectually incoherent.
I absolutely have a problem with too old politicians.
But I want them to be replaced by younger candidates that are at least broadly acceptable for their constituency. Moulton fails that test. Moulton is garbage. Him being younger ceases to be a positive because it means we'd be stuck with him for longer.
Should Markey have retired? Absolutely yes, 100%. Is the choice between Markey and Moulton a difficult one? Absolutely not; I will be voting for Markey with complete confidence.
Republicans are super desperate in NC. Their latest PAC attack ad on Roy Cooper has a Black man recalling his sibling being shot and blames the former governor for the high crime rate.
Wait until after Labor Day, GOP. That's when Cooper's campaign will hit Whatley on enabling pedophiles.
SC-1 - Soon to be former Rep. Nancy Mace (R) got nine tattoos in quick succession and, although I am not trying to telediagnose anyone with anything, she gave the most mentally-ill rationale I've ever heard for getting inked:
Her explanation is the exact phrase people usually use to describe why they self harm. It's a sign of a serious problem, most often Borderling Personality Disorder
It will be interesting to see what happens with polling as most pollsters shift to a LV model post Labor Day as is the norm.
If there is a declared enthusiasm gap, there should be a slight shift leftward, benefitting AES, Jackson, Brown, Peltola, Talarico, and Turek in Senate hotbeds.
The MI poll with AES suddenly ahead is an internal, and should be grain of salted accordingly, but it also LV instead of RV.
Depends on the screening for LV. Enthusiastic voters still only get 1 vote each. The turnout model relative to previous elections is what is going to ne tricky. Its extraordinarily rare for a bunch of new voters who never voted before to show up for a midterm after skipping previous presidential / midterm elections, and one thing we know with 100% certainty is that midterm elections ALWAYS have lower vote totals than the previous presidential election. So it's a combination of which 2024 voters turn out and which stay home, and what portion of the ones in the middle change the party they are voting for. Guessing that model correctly is going to be the trick for pollsters.
I looked at both, and the Trump disapproval was virtually the same in both (~40% pos, 59% neg). But one poll had AES winning indies, and one losing them.
In reading about Wyoming, I find myself worried about what is happening in Indiana, where the far-right Republicans are making additional headway that will likely result in redistricting next legislative session. Remember the three Bs: Braun, Banks, and Beckworth. Our Attorney General, while not someone with a name beginning with B, is right there with them.
Rokita was part of the early 2010's Tea Party wave. I think people like Beckworth tap into something different, modern MAGA Christian nationalist Neo-Nazi types.
True, but this group of four certainly is working together, and if they get Banks's former aid in as Secretary of State, it will be a group of five all pushing right-wing views, even if those views have ideological differences.
I find it ironic they're working together now after Rokita and Braun ran against each other for Senate back in 2018. What's next, are they going to add Luke Messer and Marlin Stutzman into their club?
Setting aside any project specifics (that said this is a great ambitious project and I’m glad Quebec didn’t try to fuck it up again) I think there’s a great optimism to be had about a future where cheap clean energy deployment, especially solar, can drastically drive down electric prices and that kind of abundant future is something Democrats should harness
If you look at the county map of early votes so far, it looks like virtually like every close FL election going back a couple decades (light blue Tampa area, dark blue South Florida, the correct blue hues of the 3 big Orlando-area counties). Problem is the GOP is gonna swamp the in-person vote tomorrow and it'll look like the red maps we've seen in 2022-24.
I'm interested in how the early vote patterns were of the recent FL special elections. This year the ones were SD14(D flip), HD51(R hold), and HD87(flip). Last year there were nine (including Congressional ones in FL-01 and FL-06. Every FL special election has been an overperformance since 2024, some by large measures. So they'd be worth looking at for early voting patterns.
CA-34: The latest congressman to be accused of sexual misconduct is Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D), now subject of an Ethics investigation. He faces community advocate Angela Gonzales-Torres, a fellow Democrat, in November, after only winning 53-47 in 2024.
Gomez was chair of the ill-fated gubernatorial campaign of Eric Swalwell, a former House colleague accused of rape. He was quick to denounce Swalwell after his allegations.
WI-Gov/Los Angeles, CA Mayor - Polls that showed Francesca Hong leading the Democratic primary in the Wisconsin gubernatorial race by double digits (she lost the primary by less than 1% to David Crowley) and have Karen Bass leading Nithya Raman by nearly 12% in the Los Angeles mayoral runoff that were released by Median Strategies were completely fake.
This may surprise many considering I’m one of the board’s self-described moderates but I hope Raman annihilates Bass. Idk if Raman is the answer for LA, but Bass sure as shit isn’t
Damning with faint praise. I've never seen any reason to conclude Henrik has ever operated in bad faith, and many moderates are reasonable people who believe in practical policies and solutions.
I'm sorry! I didn't mean to come across like I was being insincere. I like when people from different factions make practical decisions when it will clearly benefit us in the long run (i.e. supporting someone else over Bass), and was not trying to insinuate Henrik or anyone here *has* acted in bad faith. But there is some people who do, and I'm glad that that isn't an issue here.
Is there any good reason to be concerned about Peltola firing her campaign staff, or can we chalk it up to the Harris fundraising email snafu or something? At least we should get a good idea where we stand in the jungle primary tomorrow.
I'm sure voters won't care, it's more that it raises the question of how effective the campaign is going to be down the stretch.
Nobody cares, everyone is overreacting. Did the campaign even announce this or did the news come from gossip
No one is going vote based on that, but it could be a sign of either poor hiring and management skill or that campaign is failing either on thier key benchmarks or in their internal polls, either can be signs of more significant problems under the hood.
It's weird how Politico wasn't all over this, but Townhall (another RW rag) was.
Anytime there's a shakeup in a campaign there's a reason to be concerned. Not necessarily greatly concerned, but something to keep an eye on.
Some suggested the Harris no-endorsement story was coordinated to help Peltola, and maybe it was, but something tells me it set off alarm bells in DC either way, I guess.
If I had to guess, the Kamala thing wasn't run by Peltola herself beforehand (staff maybe assumed, ran with it independently) and she got pissed and fired the folks involved.
Unless there is actual reporting of misconduct by these senior staff members, no one will care.
Most likely, Peltola is getting ready for the general election and wanted to change her approach, and that's all there is to the story.
It’s not that I think this will matter among any voters. I’m moreso wondering if there might be money issues or bad internals that might have caused it.
I think we are all nervous after what happened to the once leading candidate in the Democratic primary for governor in Wisconsin.
Primary electorates are notably harder to model compared to GE ones.
Well, having an inept campaign manager who is not truthful about raising money did not help Sara Rodriguiez.
There clearly are not money issues; Peltola has outraised Sullivan significantly.
Considering most public, nonpartisan polling has Peltola slightly ahead, I doubt it is due to bad internals, either, unless something changed dramatically in the last week.
If the staff change up is due to something that went wrong, it no doubt relates to the Harris endorsement snafu. But I do think Peltola has recovered from that, so I'm skeptical she would fire anyone over something like that. And also, most voters were already associating any Democrat with Harris anyway.
It could be a blip in the radar or it could be a harbinger of systemic issues with her campaign. We'll have to wait a few weeks to find out. If nothing big comes up, if political operation still seems to be running well, if she isn't acting strapped for cash, then we can assume it wasn't a cause for concern. If something does come up then we need to assess that thing in the context and determine from there.
Wait and see, basically.
MA Senate:
A new UMass Amherst/WCVB poll shows Markey with a commanding lead over Moulton.
By the numbers: The YouGov survey of 445 likely Democratic primary voters, conducted Aug. 5-12, found Markey ahead 60% to 32%, with 7% undecided.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/markey-dominates-moulton-in-new-senate-primary-poll/ar-AA2ahLBE?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=6a82f3e455034f399f83ff6d73ee2887&ei=19
Good.
I don't have a problem with age. Health is another matter. Markey has been a bright light in congress since the 1970s. He's still in there fighting the good fight. There was no reason to replace him 6 years ago and there's no reason now.
He dies in office because he's old, a GOP governor is elected in a fluke during a bad 2030 Dem midterm, GOP Senator sneaks in
All very much hypothetical, of course.
He’s like 85 years old in a state where the Republican governor seems to have no desire to leave. It was a selfish risk in 2024.
In that unlikely circumstance, Scott Brown (or equivalent Repub) serves a few months and is then replaced in a special election or in the 2032 regular election, depending on the timing of the vacancy.
Scott Brown is a funny reference to pull, since he won a special in Massachusetts. Warren barely defeated when the seat came up in the regular cycle.
Markey is about ~60% to survive to the end of his term, and obviously his chance of both surviving and maintaining good cognitive health the whole time is lower. I think folks on this board are underestimating how bad it is to elect an 80-year-old to a six-year term, presumably because the alternative of Moulton is unpalatable and people want to wish away the age issue.
The best case scenario is Markey advances and ends up being fine for his term, but I worry his age is a problem we'll have to reckon with before his term is up.
But couldn’t the Dem legislature pass a law stating that the governor needs to choose a replacement from a list supplied by the majority leaders of the state legislative chambers (something like Kentucky did)?
In 2004, the legislature stripped the governor of the power to make an interim appointment due to the possibility of John Kerry being elected to the Presidency and giving Mitt Romney the chance to choose a new Senator. In 2009, when Edward Kennedy passed, they restored the power so Dem Gov Deval Patrick could make an appointment. In 2020, there was a proposal to strip the power again because of the possibility of Warren joining the Biden admin, but it was tabled. Charlie Baker threatened to veto it, but we could have overridden the veto if most of the caucus was on board.
If we did change it again I suppose the GOP would try to challenge in court. The MA Supreme Court is mostly Baker appointees, but those needed to be approved by an elected, left-leaning Governor's Council, so in practice I think they're largely moderates. My guess is the court challenge would fail.
If Dems win the WH in 2028, it wouldn't take a fluke to get a GOP governor. Going back to 1991, 5 of 7 Governors of MA have been Republicans, even though MA has never voted for a Republican for President in that time span (Reagen '84 was the most recent). MA is very open to GOP Govs. Charlie Baker was re-elected during the 2018 blue wave.
I don't understand this comment. Larson was considered the progressive candidate in the primary against Luke Bronin. Larson may have been backed by the establishment but a litany of progressive groups had endorsed him, including labor. The result was almost entirely based on a desire for generational change. And Larson's big issue was his championship of social security for which he had achieved nothing in 14 terms.
Not sure what you mean by achieving nothing.
Social Security is in the same dire predicament as it was when John Larson first took office. He failed to win approval of his bill even with a Democratic president and Democrats in control of Congress. It was his one big issue and he's failed miserably.
It’s not in a dire predicament. I’m not sure what his bill was, but if it was to lift the cap, I don’t see how he can be blamed for cowardly Democratic White House leadership and Republicans who refuse to vote to raise taxes on the upper income.
Some progressive groups, like the WFP, endorsed him, but polling showed that most self-described progressives and liberals backed his challenger because he was younger and further to Larson's left on issues like ICE and AIPAC. Larson had also experienced several health episodes, unlike Markey.
Moreover, Larson had never identified as a progressive, and his record didn’t particularly support that label, so his attempt to rebrand himself as one came across as especially cynical.
Didn't Larson try to join "The Squad" several years ago? If I'm right, that would definitely be a signal of progressive identification.
No, that was another late lawmaker whose name I am not able to recollect. Larson isn't even a member of the CPC, let alone the Squad.
ed markey is a fantastic senator, i would have voted for kennedy last time because reasons, but markey is objectively a better choice than "most dangerous place is between him and a camera" Seth moulton's fringe centrism
There's different dynamics in those two races. It really isn't the same. Old and experienced members are not a vacuum.
And if you think Markey running "benefits the far left", I suggest getting a little more nuance with your takes, no offense.
yea let's toss out an actual principled politican, for one that flip flops on almost every major issue, and has run unsuccessful campaings for president and speaker of the house. Moulton also punches down on trans rights. Yawn as to any argument in favor of that terrible congressman
Agree, the age issue definitely not specific to the progressive or centrist wings. Both groups have some very old members.
Come on, Ed Markey is now "fringe left"?
Moulton is seemingly stuck with the delusion that any second Massachusetts will revert to the Massachusetts of 1976 and not 2026. He has even tempered down his prior more con-leaning stances, so I'm not sure what constituency he believes would prop him to a victory here in arguably the most liberal state in the country.
my parents conservadem neighbors grew up with markey in malden, they didnt vote for biden but dutifiully pulled lever for markey
1976 is incidentally the year when Markey first was elected to Congress.
I don't think age alone is a reason to turn people out of office unless they've been showing serious health or ability issues, which Markey doesn't seem to have been, but it may be Moulton's only legit issue. I'm also a bit put off by the double standards that some apply, as alluded to above (such as those who think Biden was an invalid but Bernie Sanders is somehow immortal.)
Some polling has shown that voters wish they had an option that was younger than Markey, but more progressive and less self-promotional than Moulton. Well, as Mick Jagger (83 and going strong) said, "You can't always get what you want."
Have you seen Bernie's interviews? He can still deliver sharp jokes and make fun of himself, unlike Biden two years ago. When it's time for Bernie to seek reelection, I'll be the first to support him passing the torch to Becca Balint or whoever is best positioned to succeed him.
Age by itself isn’t the issue—it's whether someone is still capable of doing the job effectively and remains in touch with the needs and priorities of their constituents. Bernie clearly still is.
Markey is in no way fringe, while Moulton is uniquely disliked by both progressives and the establishment. The only significant support he's getting is from veterans and veteran groups, which feels more out of obligation that deep support for Moulton. If just about no one you know likes you, you're probably the problem.
Come on, establishment and age are not the same thing. Bernie has consistently challenged his colleagues and party leadership throughout his tenure in Congress; that is the definition of anti-establishment.
Was anyone on the left actually sad when Larson, an AIPAC- and corporate-funded centrist, went down? Moulton has been one of the biggest proponents of increased defense spending, foreign wars, political moderation, and corporate-friendly policies in the House. That is not challenging the dominant political consensus in America; it is reinforcing it.
Calling someone “establishment” based on their age or longevity while ignoring their ideology and relationship to the political status quo is just intellectually incoherent.
I absolutely have a problem with too old politicians.
But I want them to be replaced by younger candidates that are at least broadly acceptable for their constituency. Moulton fails that test. Moulton is garbage. Him being younger ceases to be a positive because it means we'd be stuck with him for longer.
Should Markey have retired? Absolutely yes, 100%. Is the choice between Markey and Moulton a difficult one? Absolutely not; I will be voting for Markey with complete confidence.
Amen.
Republicans are super desperate in NC. Their latest PAC attack ad on Roy Cooper has a Black man recalling his sibling being shot and blames the former governor for the high crime rate.
Wait until after Labor Day, GOP. That's when Cooper's campaign will hit Whatley on enabling pedophiles.
SC-1 - Soon to be former Rep. Nancy Mace (R) got nine tattoos in quick succession and, although I am not trying to telediagnose anyone with anything, she gave the most mentally-ill rationale I've ever heard for getting inked:
https://www.threads.com/share/_sgix6cx_/
Is she crashing out because she didn't win the primary or Donny's endorsement? Weird excuse for getting inked.
I think she might need some therapy.
She's way past due for therapy. When I first saw her with the tattoos, I thought it was Dana Loesch at first.
Don't think I've ever seen anyone more attention-crave-y.
Doing the Trump dance certainly changed Mace. And far worse than I originally thought she’d be.
No I think she’s legit mentally unwell and needs help
The more I read about her, the more I believe this is the case.
Her explanation is the exact phrase people usually use to describe why they self harm. It's a sign of a serious problem, most often Borderling Personality Disorder
While your talking about Wyoming, check out Gavin Lobmeyer, running House 7 https://www.gavinforwyoming.com
He’s Run for Something endorsed.
WY-HD-7 has a Republican incumbent and includes much of the north side of Cheyenne. The GOP incumbent got 65% of the vote in 2024.
It will be interesting to see what happens with polling as most pollsters shift to a LV model post Labor Day as is the norm.
If there is a declared enthusiasm gap, there should be a slight shift leftward, benefitting AES, Jackson, Brown, Peltola, Talarico, and Turek in Senate hotbeds.
The MI poll with AES suddenly ahead is an internal, and should be grain of salted accordingly, but it also LV instead of RV.
Depends on the screening for LV. Enthusiastic voters still only get 1 vote each. The turnout model relative to previous elections is what is going to ne tricky. Its extraordinarily rare for a bunch of new voters who never voted before to show up for a midterm after skipping previous presidential / midterm elections, and one thing we know with 100% certainty is that midterm elections ALWAYS have lower vote totals than the previous presidential election. So it's a combination of which 2024 voters turn out and which stay home, and what portion of the ones in the middle change the party they are voting for. Guessing that model correctly is going to be the trick for pollsters.
I'm hoping 2026 will be 2018 on steroids.
I looked at both, and the Trump disapproval was virtually the same in both (~40% pos, 59% neg). But one poll had AES winning indies, and one losing them.
In reading about Wyoming, I find myself worried about what is happening in Indiana, where the far-right Republicans are making additional headway that will likely result in redistricting next legislative session. Remember the three Bs: Braun, Banks, and Beckworth. Our Attorney General, while not someone with a name beginning with B, is right there with them.
Rokita was part of the early 2010's Tea Party wave. I think people like Beckworth tap into something different, modern MAGA Christian nationalist Neo-Nazi types.
True, but this group of four certainly is working together, and if they get Banks's former aid in as Secretary of State, it will be a group of five all pushing right-wing views, even if those views have ideological differences.
I find it ironic they're working together now after Rokita and Braun ran against each other for Senate back in 2018. What's next, are they going to add Luke Messer and Marlin Stutzman into their club?
News from the North: whomever the Democrats decide will be in legislative leadership and, eventually, the big cheese, would do well to focus on concrete projects that advance ideals, create jobs, and hopefully reduce cost of living. I humbly submit the following as an example: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/new-churchill-falls-deal-announced-wakeham-carney-frechette-9.7309135
Setting aside any project specifics (that said this is a great ambitious project and I’m glad Quebec didn’t try to fuck it up again) I think there’s a great optimism to be had about a future where cheap clean energy deployment, especially solar, can drastically drive down electric prices and that kind of abundant future is something Democrats should harness
Peltola-if her campaign staff is changing her polls don't look bad https://x.com/PollTracker2024/status/2089406261930401928?s=20
Florida early vote numbers:
45% Republican
42% Democratic
13% Independent
If you look at the county map of early votes so far, it looks like virtually like every close FL election going back a couple decades (light blue Tampa area, dark blue South Florida, the correct blue hues of the 3 big Orlando-area counties). Problem is the GOP is gonna swamp the in-person vote tomorrow and it'll look like the red maps we've seen in 2022-24.
Aren't we usually swamped already with early voters by this point? IDK I'm not a Florida expert
It'll be interesting to see how the Election Day turnout is tomorrow, whether there'll be a late surge of Democratic voters or GOP.
Dem group-sponsored, but nonetheless:
Data For Progress poll | 7/28-8/4 LV
US Senate Alaska 2026
🟦Mary Peltola 47%
🟥Dan S. Sullivan 41% (incumbent)
⬜️Dan J. Sullivan 4%
🟥Gerald Heikes 3%
——
(Final RCV round)
🟦Mary Peltola 53%
🟥Dan S. Sullivan 47% (incumbent)
This "staffer" story is a nothingburger. If she loses, it'll be because AK is a red state and Sullivan is noncontroversial.
Why is she having issues with her staff? I wouldn't call it a nothing burger just yet.
I read a few years back that many of her staffers were registered (moderate) Republicans so maybe conflicting loyalties?
She retained a lot of Don Young's staff in her congressional office, but that's separate from campaign staff.
Yes, although sometimes people switch over for election season.
I'm interested in how the early vote patterns were of the recent FL special elections. This year the ones were SD14(D flip), HD51(R hold), and HD87(flip). Last year there were nine (including Congressional ones in FL-01 and FL-06. Every FL special election has been an overperformance since 2024, some by large measures. So they'd be worth looking at for early voting patterns.
https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2026/08/17/congress/gomez-under-investigation-01039363
CA-34: The latest congressman to be accused of sexual misconduct is Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D), now subject of an Ethics investigation. He faces community advocate Angela Gonzales-Torres, a fellow Democrat, in November, after only winning 53-47 in 2024.
Gomez was chair of the ill-fated gubernatorial campaign of Eric Swalwell, a former House colleague accused of rape. He was quick to denounce Swalwell after his allegations.
Old pals with Tony Cardenas too. It’s always the ones you most expect!
He won by 11 points in 2024, I think you were looking at the 2020 race.
Yeah. 2022 was even closer at 51-49. But 11 points still isn't super convincing
WI-Gov/Los Angeles, CA Mayor - Polls that showed Francesca Hong leading the Democratic primary in the Wisconsin gubernatorial race by double digits (she lost the primary by less than 1% to David Crowley) and have Karen Bass leading Nithya Raman by nearly 12% in the Los Angeles mayoral runoff that were released by Median Strategies were completely fake.
https://www.rawstory.com/karen-bass-2677717348/?link_source=ta_first_comment&taid=6a8378d3cf83fb00017afad4&utm_campaign=trueanthem&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwdGRjcATwZP5jbGNrBPBklHBkb2YFZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQMMzUwNjg1NTMxNzI4AAEeEkOVJ1iwXktMIK-i9b4n4E8QN3_tzQZsWX80mpkd1C4MLAFc7tBVJxNLits_aem_ajVYFFUub1SNPMOBU_8vuQ
So this is good news for Karen Bass. /s
This may surprise many considering I’m one of the board’s self-described moderates but I hope Raman annihilates Bass. Idk if Raman is the answer for LA, but Bass sure as shit isn’t
Raman reads as someone who would flourish in an executive role; hopefully, she can win over voters.
Right. Def doesn’t seem like a bomb thrower
See, unlike some self described "moderates" in the party you seem to act in good faith most of the time.
Thank you
Damning with faint praise. I've never seen any reason to conclude Henrik has ever operated in bad faith, and many moderates are reasonable people who believe in practical policies and solutions.
I'm sorry! I didn't mean to come across like I was being insincere. I like when people from different factions make practical decisions when it will clearly benefit us in the long run (i.e. supporting someone else over Bass), and was not trying to insinuate Henrik or anyone here *has* acted in bad faith. But there is some people who do, and I'm glad that that isn't an issue here.