68 Comments
User's avatar
Noah's avatar

Have we got any good or relevant candidates in FL-27? It seems they have similar demographics there than in FL-28 where Mujica is now running at a prominent polling level.

Julius Zinn's avatar

Eliott Rodriguez and Robin Peguero. Former Giuliani aide Lev Parnas is also running.

Noah's avatar

How could they do in the general election? As good as Mujica?

Julius Zinn's avatar

Better. The seat is bluer than the 28th and Rodriguez is a known local journalist.

Noah's avatar

Could we be looking at a flip?

Julius Zinn's avatar

I'm pretty sure its portion of Miami (about half of the district) went blue in last year's mayoral race, and there's other blue leaning sections, so maybe. It was a big Democratic performance in 2018.

Noah's avatar

How about 26th the GOP won that by 40 points in 24 but it’s 70% hispanic.

Julius Zinn's avatar

That one is uniquely conservative. The last time it was within 10 points was 2008, and it was targeted in 2018. Diaz-Balart is entrenched, as was his late brother.

AWildLibAppeared's avatar

FL-26 has a lot of historically Cuban-American Republican communities that are extremely averse to anything that sounds like "socialism," so it is a much heavier lift than FL-27 and FL-28 (which have many Cuban-American voters but also have more diversity among voters in political leanings and Hispanic ethnic groups).

However, it's worth noting that according to Dave's Redistricting App, FL-26 as currently drawn did vote for Hillary Clinton for President in 2016 by a slim 50.5-46.6 margin. The only other time it came close to voting Dem in the races they list is Obama 2012 (49.4-50.6 Romney). I wonder about the accuracy of their 2012 data, though.

Basically, if there is an extreme crashout against Trump with Cuban-Americans, it's conceivable a Dem could be carried across on a blue wave. However, Dems currently lack a strong Hispanic candidate for the district, and I expect that would be needed to beat Diaz-Balart (who has already distanced himself from Trump a bit on some of the most unpopular issues right now).

Noah's avatar

What strong Hispanic candidate could run there?

Marcus Graly's avatar

That NE-02 line of attack is bizarre. Unless I'm missing something, Cavanaugh is vacating his seat, win or lose, and another Dem is running to hold the district? So you're essentially arguing that he is the only one capable of holding that seat and that there's no chance of a pickup anywhere in the State. Both of which seem rather unlikely given how the year is shaping up. Also unless you successfully convince him to drop out and seek reelection instead, it won't make a difference. So it's not a coherent reason to vote against him.

Edit: This is largely wrong. I mistakenly thought it was a two year term. He is half way through a four year term.

Alex Hupp's avatar

It doesn't look like his legislative seat is up for election this year, but even then there are 4 Trump < 10 seats up that could flip given the currently environment (including one R-held seat that Kamala won in 2024)

brendan fka HoosierD42's avatar

Like the item points out, Cavanaugh's seat is not up this November, and apparently Gov. Pillen would able to appoint his replacement for two years, without restrictions, which is insane.

Marcus Graly's avatar

Thanks.

I got misled by looking at the Wikipedia article "Nebraska Senate" which is about the old bicameral body that had a two year term. Should have been more careful before posting.

MPC's avatar

The Politico writeup of how Ms Frazzled and other influencers broke the Swalwell story is worth the read.

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/04/13/influencers-allegations-eric-swalwell-00869517

Marliss Desens's avatar

Thank you for posting this link.

ArcticStones's avatar

I wonder whether the resignations by Gonzales and Swalwell are coordinated? Whether perhaps the party leaderships in the House had a hand in this? Seems to me this avoids significant headaches for both parties, and also avoids ugly gamesmanship in the House.

My next question is this: who is likely to have a voting replacement first, Swalwell or Gonzales?

anonymouse's avatar

100%. That timing was not coincidental. A paired expulsion vote was probably relayed to them beforehand.

alienalias's avatar

I think it's less coordinated and more that Swalwell jumped first and Gonzales was told by leadership that he needed to go too. I think they don't want a precedent of holding expulsion votes before the Ethics process has gone thru they way it has with SCM, and so want to avoid them.

brendan fka HoosierD42's avatar

Obviously it's better to have an investigation before you expel someone willy-nilly, but it's a little lawyerbrained to call this "without due process" (aimed at Swalwell, not you), because the House rules allow the chamber to expel anyone for any reason as long as 2/3 agree.

alienalias's avatar

Totally, but that's how the House as an institution and much of leadership (and rank and file members) want it. Some to prevent slippery slope expulsions, some out of self-interest...

Kevin H.'s avatar

I'm guessing they lose their pension if expelled

alienalias's avatar

tbh, I don't know which privileges they lose on expulsion? I think it took a new vote to keep Santos from having access to the House Floor as a former member. Was trying to look into it yesterday and didn't find a good explainer.

Miguel Parreno's avatar

Rapists should lose their pensions. Taxpayers shouldn’t have to pay for that.

alienalias's avatar

More DC delegate drama. Brooke Pinto's campaign website has a "Media" page with a 67-page oppo dump on Robert White, including personal info on his family members and a photo of their house. She says it's was all gathered from open-source information, and the page is still up rn. White is calling on her to drop out.

https://www.dcnewsnow.com/news/local-news/washington-dc/robert-white-calls-for-brooke-pinto-to-withdraw-from-congressional-race/

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/politics/brooke-pinto-robert-white-opposition-research-report/65-f0ee8f6d-ccf3-4936-bf9a-8475767c41c9

Julius Zinn's avatar

The establishment would rather elect a fascist than a progressive.

Kildere53's avatar

WTF? I just read Pinto's Wikipedia page, and nothing there suggested that she is even remotely close to being a fascist.

Frankly, I'm tired of far-left people claiming that anyone to the right of Bernie is a fascist. That's simply not true, and it minimizes the impact of the term when describing actual fascists.

Julius Zinn's avatar

I meant that she was establishment. Wasn't really calling any candidate fascist, just comparing the lengths the establishment is going here to that of other races

Paleo's avatar

Cal Gov poll. 80% before Swalwell news broke:

🔵 Steyer 21%

🔴 Hilton 18%

🔵 Swalwell 9%

🔴 Bianco 8%

🔵 Porter 8%

Survey USA #A - RV - 4/10

anonymouse's avatar

As much as we don't need another billionaire pushing 70, Steyer seems to be the only real YIMBY in this race. California probably needs it.

Toiler On the Sea's avatar

Steyer would be fine; I don't get all the heartburn about him.

hilltopper's avatar

You and I posted a minute apart so I am deleting mine. You should correct your errors though. If you read what Survey USA wrote, candidate preference was only asked of 788 likely voters--not RV's. And the survey was over three days (4/8-4/10) not just one. https://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=ee26505b-573e-4077-bf28-3596b3dd8245

anonymouse's avatar

Stu Rothenberg on X says he would not be surprised by D+4-6 in the Senate. My mind changes constantly on the order in which the seats fall, but I’d guess:

1. North Carolina

2. Maine

———Gap———

3. Texas w/Paxton

4. Alaska

5. Ohio

———Gap———

6. Iowa

Kansas and Nebraska as dark horses thrown in there too. Florida is probably seat #55 or 56.

ClimateHawk's avatar

Yeah, I think that is pretty spot on. I change a lot as well.

I'd go:

1. NC

-------Gap-----

2. ME

------Gap-----

3. AK

4. OH

5. TX (vs Paxton)

----------Gap---

6. IA

------Big gap----

7. NE

8. FL

9. SC

Once we have a candidate in IA it vould jump the gap, especially with Sands a clear facorite for Gov, more so than Acton in OH or AK/TX.

hilltopper's avatar

Good ranking. I can see 3/4 being either way and would put a gap between 4 & 5.

brendan fka HoosierD42's avatar

Honestly I would flip 3 and 4 but other than that, agreed

FFFFFF's avatar

1. NC

2. ME

3. AK

4. TX

5. IA

6. OH

7. FL

8. NE

9. KS

10. SC

11. MS

12. MT

I think Florida has the potential to fluctuate wildly, depending on margin/turnout in and around Miami.

Julius Zinn's avatar

Not sure about Ohio below Iowa...Brown only lost by a point or so as Trump carried Ohio by double digits. Husted is a stronger candidate, but the year is not favorable for him.

JanusIanitos's avatar

That's pretty close to my thinking. It's hard for me to fully mentally nail down the 4 reach seats. I think Texas/Alaska as a pair and Ohio/Iowa as another pair makes sense, but really I think it's going to be hard to get the order down until the summer when we know the candidates everywhere and more polling starts to happen.

I really want to see the media sensation of a democrat winning statewide in Texas. Strategically Alaska is very promising sooner than Texas is, and I hope a strong performance from Peltola gives us a stronger bench there for future cycles.

MPC's avatar

Talarico winning the seat in TX would be a massive deal, but if Hinojosa rides his coattails to oust Abbott too— earthquake in TX politics.

JanusIanitos's avatar

If we have the kind of night where we win Texas-Gov then we're looking at the probably the biggest wave since Watergate.

At that point the media spectacle would be insane.

MPC's avatar

I wonder if that kind of wave would make the media more receptive to covering Trump's cognitive decline. They've ignored it outright and whitewashing his TruthSocial insanity as actual policy.

rayspace's avatar

Actually no, since the wave would have been fueled by people the media ignore (middle-class and lower, POCs) and the people who own the media will ensure that reporting focuses on the wealthy and dismsses the results as unrepresentative.

I mean, come on, can you see CBS, NYT, WAPO or an Elllison-owned CNN say "gosh, the people have spoken. Maybe see what they're so upset about." Not going to happen.

anonymouse's avatar

I’m not predicting us flipping Texas Governor, but I think it will get a lot closer than expected. Things seem to be getting so bad for Republicans that they’re going to be distracted trying to plug holes in the sinking boat without enough plugs, manpower, or bandwidth.

FeingoldFan's avatar

In that case, we’d probably also be flipping at least 7-8 Senate seats, at least 45 House seats, and at least 4-5 other governorships (Iowa, Ohio, Nevada, Georgia, and maybe Florida, Alaska, or New Hampshire). It would be a massive wave.

MPC's avatar

Lakysha Jain was interviewed on The Lincoln Project yesterday or the day prior about the chances of Democrats flipping the Senate.

He said that a year ago, it would’ve been 15%. He says it’s gone up to 40-45%— and he’s optimistic about the AK-Sen seat flipping. But he’s very conservative in his estimates.

FeingoldFan's avatar

For me it’s

1. North Carolina

2. Maine

3. Alaska

4. Texas

5. Ohio

6. Iowa

7. Nebraska

8. Florida

9. Kansas

10. Montana

11. South Carolina

12. Mississippi

13. Louisiana

14. Kentucky

15. South Dakota

16. Oklahoma

17. Arkansas

18. Tennessee

19. Alabama

20. Idaho

21. Wyoming

22. West Virginia

I think we’re already ahead in the first 3, that we’ll be ahead in the first 6 by November, that we have a strong shot in everything through 9th, and that if things get bad enough for Trump everything as far down as Mississippi is in play.

Jay's avatar

I think people are underestimating Nebraska. Hot take, but I honestly think Osborn has a better shot a winning than Talarico.

MPC's avatar

Why not both? Trump's disastrous trade policies are hurting Nebraska farmers big time, especially the skyrocketing fertilizer costs.

JanusIanitos's avatar

Didn't see this mentioned here: Virginia joins the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. The total now stands at 222 EVs. Virginia is the first state to join since Maine in 2024 and Minnesota in 2023.

Other than NH and PA (depending on what region you lump PA into) the entire Northeast is now in the compact. Future growth is going to require swing states joining.

https://www.npr.org/2026/04/14/nx-s1-5742595/virginia-popular-vote-compact

AWildLibAppeared's avatar

NH isn’t joining as long as Ayotte is Governor. Hopefully she can lose in a big tsunami, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

Winning full control of the state governments of PA, WI, MI, and NV seems like the most likely way for it to move forward. AZ would be a good fallback state. All those together would finally allow the compact to take effect.

Kildere53's avatar

Except Democrats had full control of Nevada from 2018-2022 and Michigan from 2022-2024. I know Sisolak in Nevada vetoed it for some bizarre reason. Did Whitmer veto it in Michigan as well, or did it never even reach her desk?

brendan fka HoosierD42's avatar

That was in 2007-2008, not when we had a trifecta. So it didn't even make it to the floor in either chamber

JanusIanitos's avatar

I don't see NH joining anytime soon, regardless of the party in charge. The state political establishment loves the prestige of being a swing state similar to their love of the first primary. They will fight to keep it, I expect.

Maybe if NH stopped being light-blue swingy and became reliably blue that would change. I doubt that will happen any time soon.

MPC's avatar

If WI and PA gain Dem trifectas after Nov, they need to pass this.

brendan fka HoosierD42's avatar

Just 48 EVs to go! Then the legal fight begins.

alienalias's avatar

If we can get trifectas and pass it in PA (19), MI (15), AZ (11), WI (10), NV (6) and NH (4), we'll be at 287, which should keep it safe past the reapportionment by the 2032 election.

Other edge cases would be to win TX (40), FL (30), OH (17), GA (16), NC (16) and AK (3).

Marcus Graly's avatar

The gap seems unlikely to close soon. The swing states are not incentived to join and the red states have been convinced that it's a bad idea.