The median state senate seat in 2026 for a supermajority is Trump +11, so fairly difficult. The easiest way to get a supermajority there is to flip the one purple R-held seat in 2026 and flip two of the decent number of light blue/purple R-held seats up in 2028.
As for the state house, there are 13 R-held seats in Harris-won districts.
I don't know, I feel like past elections have shown that not debating your opponent doesn't have many downsides. Not many voters actually watch them, but gaffes go viral, so it's a high risk low reward situation. For example, people said Katie Hobbs was stupid for not debating Kari Lake and that it would piss off voters, but now agree it was the right move.
Outside of the GA Sup court races, which stung bad, the rest was neutral at worst. I don’t think Massie going down is bad for Dems, it helps make the case that the GOP is an authoritarian cult all the more clearer.
I don’t think the idea of bringing in a white out of state person from up North to lead a party that’s mostly black and brown people who have been doing the work for years is a good idea and also out of touch.
Exactly, consulting and suggestions is a very good idea. I grew up in Georgia as a transplant, and they are a reason why the state is changing, but no one likes an outsider telling you what to do, so that’s why I wrote my comment.
Err. Not going to do the regional and racial/ethnic compartmentization here.
Yeah, the majority of D base is the Black voters here. But you might be surprised how many of them are not born in the state, or even in the South. Not to mention the suburban non Black voters, which majority are not born in state, as a matter of fact many not even born in this country.
The jokes go like we soon will have more Wolverines and Sparties living here than in Michigan. So why not give a Midwesterner a try. Half joking.
Literally the only reason GA is competitive is out of state transplants over the past decade+ (of all races and demographics). I'm firmly against any geographic fence building/goal keeping in politics. Particularly in the South it's legacy is that of inefficiency, nepotism, and lack of progress.
Yes but GA black population to my understanding has always been quite large. Granted there can be transplants who happen to be black. Black population has traditionally been the real difference in the margins between Democrats and Republicans in their respective races.
Of course, transplants in general white and non-white (not just black) certainly have helped Democrats win in GA at the Senate level. This is partially why Jon Ossoff will likely cruise to win re-election.
The joke in 1980-90's Arizona was that the immigrants from Michoacan and Chihuahua were alright, it was the ones from Michigan and Chicago ruining the state.
People said this exact thing about Wikler coming back to Wisconsin (which has a large black voting population in Milwaukee) from DC to run for state party chair. As a Wisco (and Milwaukee) native, I, Wisconsin, and much of the country are quite happy he did.
Yeah, there's certainly a lot of smart people in GA. I think Williams was chair for too long and should have resigned at most a few months after her first term in the House rather than four years later. Bailey had very little runway to prepare for this election, but the midterms will be good proving ground to test his mettle for the presidential cycle.
I think Substack sometimes causes people to just see the headline and they comment on that, without necessarily reading the headline article, the other items in the post, or comments in the comment section.
TX-35 - This is some of the most disgusting rhetoric I've ever heard from a Democratic congressional candidate:
"Controversy-tarred congressional candidate Maureen Galindo this week pledged to transform a site south of San Antonio now used by the Trump administration to detain migrants into an internment camp for “American Zionists.”
“She’ll turn Karnes ICE Detention Center into a prison for American Zionists and former ICE officers for human trafficking,” Galindo wrote in an Instagram post over the weekend, referring to herself in the third person. “It will also be a castration processing center for pedophiles, which will probably be most of the Zionists.”"
Galindo is not prepared to serve in political office. She could have just talked about ending ICE and accountability towards ICE officers but ended up being batshit crazy.
Luckily, there’s another Democratic candidate running ahead of the runoff, Johnny Garcia, and he might end up benefitting from this. He’s already come out against Galindo’s rhetoric. Garcia also has the most high profile endorsements.
Track AIPAC is just two 20somethings who make scare graphics with some of the thinnest (and frankly often antisemitic) methodology of who does/doesn't get a pass. Significantly better to look at an org run by grown ups like PAL PAC.
I think there was big blowup on social media when they selectively started tracking individuals rather than PACs and they stopped doing that now IG. It's not a very reliable source though.
They also count J St money only when they want to, and make it indistinguishable from when the track money from something like AIPAC/UDP/DMFI, despite a disclaimer in their own FAQ saying it should be caveated differently. And implied Dan Biss was basically Ritchie Torres when he's virtually indistinguishable from Brad Lander. The website and "endorsements" have gained undeserved traction solely from making easily copy+pastable graphics from some slackivists. Just extremely bad faith people that make all associated movements look bad in comparison.
Should Peltola win the Senate race this year, I hope that Murkowski will be on the menu in 2028. She voted for the Big Awful Bill, and she shouldn't be given slack for her occasional 'independent' votes against her party.
She also voted for Amy Comey Barrett after first saying she would not because "fair is fair," with the Republicans citing an upcoming election for not filling Scalia's seat in an election year, even though it was nine months before the 2016 election.
I don’t disagree, I just think “The Republican Party is the Trump Party” is a concept the man down the street recognizes better than every member of the mainstream DC press.
The only question is whether or not the man down the street thinks that’s a good thing.
Re: GA Supreme Court races, I can assure you this was voters simply being unaware of the importance and partisan nature of these races. It was also a long ballot; while waiting in line to vote I had to look over a sheet with all of the folks in primaries I was going to vote for, and I'm someone who posts on the Downballot for crying out loud.
As for why Miracle outperformed Jordan by so much (they ran on a joint ticket and Jordan had the longer more high profile political history), the only explanation I can think of is folks name-code voting, just like when candidates with Hispanic last names do better in Latino-heavy districts in otherwise low-salience races. Something to consider when fielding candidates for non-partisan races like this.
I'm disappointed in Bottoms' easy victory but do think it's best we avoid a drawn out runoff if she was destined to win anyway. I hope her team develops strong responses to the many attacks that will commence over her time as Mayor.
Seems like a case of Georgia’s Democratic Party neglecting to communicate effectively with voters. Four million dollars is a paltry sum considering that $ 115 million was spent on Wisconsin’s supreme court races! And we can add to that the utter failure to recruit candidates for all three races.
Sad. Just sad, unnecessary – and profoundly tragic!
Yes given the importance of the state Supreme Court and the political environment this was a really, really bad fumble/own goal. We're likely the tipping point state in 2028 and asleep at the wheel!
Dems in Wisconsin didn't start taking state court elections super serious until 2011 and it took several years after that until they got the hang of it.
I legit think many voters believe when they pull a Democratic primary ballot, that they are just choosing between Democratic candidates in ALL races on their ballots.
Very disappointed with the SCOGA races. Part of the blame lies on the "nonpartisan" label and GOP meddling with ballot placement while the rest lies squarely on the Georgia Democratic Party for not organizing months ago to tell voters to vote for Rankin/Jordan.
Wisconsin's state Supreme Court elections are "nonpartisan" in name only as well, but their state Democratic party chair thoroughly backs the liberal candidate and educates the base on which judge shares their values.
No. The non partisan judicial races are on the very last page. Just before a bunch of silly party questions.
Unless you choose a non party ballot, not voting on either party’s primary. In that case the non partisan judicial races would be the only ones, ranked from Supreme Court down to the district trial courts.
Statewide, it depends on the year. Every fourth year there is also the state School Superintendent (which is also nonpartisan) and most years there are local elections in part of the state (again, nonpartisan)
Andres-Beck and Belsito are also both progressives (or at least the former), so this could be interesting. I’d be alright with Koh anyway though - he attempted to primary Moulton after his awful trans comments, so that’s a point in his favor.
Obituaries: Barney Frank, a prolific Democratic congressman from Massachusetts that served 32 years, is dead at 86. The seat is now held by fellow Democrat Jake Auchincloss.
Ardently pro-Israel and pro-LGBTQ (apart from the T), Frank had an interesting record in Congress, ushering in economic reform with Dodd-Frank. Just days ago, he came out against the Democratic Party's current leftward shift while admitting he wouldn't live long enough to enact change he saw fit.
I don’t think that’s what Barney Frank was referring to.
Frank primarily was criticizing the leftward shift in the Democratic Party that was moving it away from common sense and not focusing on the signature issues that makes Democrats who they are in the first place.
Issues such as Defund the Police for example are specifically what Frank was criticizing. Otherwise, he was in fact was otherwise supportive of liberals/progressives.
Right but I am referring to the “leftward shift in the Democratic Party that was moving it away from common sense” with what Barney Frank was arguing. I was not referring to the “leftward shift in the Democratic Party” all together.
If you think Frank was saying the contrary, fine. However, that’s not what I interpreted from his statement.
Anytime those who attack “the left” and are Democrats (especially current and former office holders) may have a frame of reference by which they are criticizing. Unless this is real pettiness, I don’t think anyone here by default should assume because a Democrat criticizes “the left” that it means the obvious. There may be valid reasons to criticize the Democratic Party but it doesn’t mean the person wants to be more GOP lite.
He had left office more than a decade ago and was apparently on his deathbed, I simply don't understand why he thought his perspective was so indispensable. Barbara Boxer gets on my nerves for the same reason.
"Unless this is real pettiness, I don’t think anyone here by default should assume because a Democrat criticizes “the left” that it means the obvious."
You’ve made valid points. However, I’ve observed Frank was referring specifically to litmus tests that the left makes.
He was in fact referring to Defund the Police, open borders, etc. I don’t see this to be as obvious as you are making it but perhaps I am missing something.
I won't copy the whole article but here are some relevant parts, quoting Frank:
"The key to liberal democracy being able to come back is to get rid of the perception, that we have allowed to grow, that the entire Democratic Party is committed to a series of very drastic social reconstructions that go beyond the politically acceptable....
I am not arguing that people shouldn’t advocate for things that are currently unpopular. I know there are some issues that I support that are currently unpopular. And the first thing to do is to try and increase the degree to which they have public support.
The problem with my friends on the left today is that they want these things to be litmus tests, immediately. They don’t want to spend any time. So what happens is they demand that more mainstream liberals sign on to these things, and then they lose because of it."
He then suggests that trans women in sports is an issue that should wait until other (more broadly politically palatable) trans policies are achieved. So he wasn't being anti trans either.
It may sound insensitive of me, but I'd rather not listen to someone whose hayday in politics was decades ago lecture me on social issues weeks before his death as an octogenarian.
Fair. Barney Frank was also critical of the Green New Deal although quite honestly, because the actual agenda neither has been implemented nor even a has Democratic POTUS been introducing it as part of an agenda, I doubt Frank really knows everything that’s actually in it.
I mean, he left Congress back in 2013. He left before Trump even announced his presidential campaign back in 2015.
Well, Frank was pretty instrumental in moving thr LGBTQ agenda forward. And understanding the strategy that succeeded vs what appears the strategy for some of the left now is worth considering. Just because he was old and nearly dead doesn't mean he had nothing to contribute. Just as waving off Gen Z as too naive or inexperienced overlooks what they can contribute.
Yes, but no one is gonna put a Gen Zer in the NYT and CNN to badmouth older liberals, and even if they did, they would be waved away as being naive and inexperienced.
I mean this in all respect to certain liberals (and I myself am a gen x Berkeley liberal):
Sometimes they have their heads up their asses and do not preach tolerance and acceptance to fellow liberals like myself who didn’t come out “so perfect” when we were younger. Most liberal and liberal-minded friends I have are not this way but it depends on how people evolve. We generally have healthy discussions and don’t get into heated debates over purity.
Eh, it's good to check your political fringe before they ruin your brand...yet again.
Barney Frank knew gay rights was a fight of many years and needing to sell it as a live-and-let-live proposition to regular people. He didn't call Clinton a genocidal monster for signing DOMA. He kept his nose to the grindstone to do the most with the situation as it existed.
PA-3 - Chris Rabb got around two-thirds of Dwight Evans's 2024 general election vote total in the 2026 primary, and there were over 30,000 more votes cast in this year's Democratic primary in PA-3 than in the 2024 general election:
FL-22: Mike Thompson (not the current California representative), an aide to former NSA Mike Flynn, will run here as a Republican.
He joins businessmen Michael Carbonara, Casey Askar and Herbie Wertheim in the Republican primary, while former Rep. Chris Collins is considering. No Democratic incumbent is running yet.
Prolific conservative activist Scott Presler unfortunately won a seat on the Pennsylvania state Republican committee last night, representing Beaver County.
i'm of the opinion we should spotlight him as much as possible, he has a very low profile except for the terminally politically online (myself) but he is a certified weirdo that (other than sharing hate) has about as much in common with a rural trump pa voter as myself.
Agreed, as someone who has familial connections to Beaver County, its working-class rural, industrial towns should not keep someone like Presler in the spotlight for too long.
Because Dems did not contest the tipping point district as it had a strong incumbent and was won by Trump.
Democrats did contest WA-4, but none made the general election.
I'm not sure how easy 2/3 majority is, but at least on bare numbers it looks plausible for Washington.
WA state senate is 49 seats, 33 for 2/3 majority. We currently hold 30 seats. Need 3 pickups.
WA state house is 98 seats, 66 for 2/3 majority. We currently hold 59 seats. Need 7 pickups.
Real world plausibility will depend on how red the next 3 and 7 seats are, of course...
Ah, I missed the only half up at a time issue. Probably not realistic then, unless we can get something on the ballot, as you said.
That’s correct. House is very doable though
The median state senate seat in 2026 for a supermajority is Trump +11, so fairly difficult. The easiest way to get a supermajority there is to flip the one purple R-held seat in 2026 and flip two of the decent number of light blue/purple R-held seats up in 2028.
As for the state house, there are 13 R-held seats in Harris-won districts.
I don't know, I feel like past elections have shown that not debating your opponent doesn't have many downsides. Not many voters actually watch them, but gaffes go viral, so it's a high risk low reward situation. For example, people said Katie Hobbs was stupid for not debating Kari Lake and that it would piss off voters, but now agree it was the right move.
Hopefully polling bears out and a non-Bibi coalition can be formed in a parallel of what we just saw in Hungary
From a progressive standpoint, the PA-03 result was nice.
But slim pickings.
Outside of the GA Sup court races, which stung bad, the rest was neutral at worst. I don’t think Massie going down is bad for Dems, it helps make the case that the GOP is an authoritarian cult all the more clearer.
Yep, the party is singularly owned by Trump and should be judged as a whole connected to him.
Spot on! And a better and far more solution-oriented comment than the one I just posted.
I don’t think the idea of bringing in a white out of state person from up North to lead a party that’s mostly black and brown people who have been doing the work for years is a good idea and also out of touch.
I think they should consult with him on the statewide judicial race strategy and take some pointers going into 2028.
Exactly, consulting and suggestions is a very good idea. I grew up in Georgia as a transplant, and they are a reason why the state is changing, but no one likes an outsider telling you what to do, so that’s why I wrote my comment.
Err. Not going to do the regional and racial/ethnic compartmentization here.
Yeah, the majority of D base is the Black voters here. But you might be surprised how many of them are not born in the state, or even in the South. Not to mention the suburban non Black voters, which majority are not born in state, as a matter of fact many not even born in this country.
The jokes go like we soon will have more Wolverines and Sparties living here than in Michigan. So why not give a Midwesterner a try. Half joking.
Literally the only reason GA is competitive is out of state transplants over the past decade+ (of all races and demographics). I'm firmly against any geographic fence building/goal keeping in politics. Particularly in the South it's legacy is that of inefficiency, nepotism, and lack of progress.
Yes but GA black population to my understanding has always been quite large. Granted there can be transplants who happen to be black. Black population has traditionally been the real difference in the margins between Democrats and Republicans in their respective races.
Of course, transplants in general white and non-white (not just black) certainly have helped Democrats win in GA at the Senate level. This is partially why Jon Ossoff will likely cruise to win re-election.
Or perhaps the original concept of Wikler being the next DNC Chair after Ken Martin might be a better idea.
State Democratic Party Chairs though really ought to be more familiar with and acquainted in their states.
The joke in 1980-90's Arizona was that the immigrants from Michoacan and Chihuahua were alright, it was the ones from Michigan and Chicago ruining the state.
Someone more like Anderson Clayton, then!
People said this exact thing about Wikler coming back to Wisconsin (which has a large black voting population in Milwaukee) from DC to run for state party chair. As a Wisco (and Milwaukee) native, I, Wisconsin, and much of the country are quite happy he did.
But he was from Wisconsin and had strong ties to the state, that’s my bigger point.
We should find a Georgian equvalent to Wikler rather than carpetbag the man himself.
Yeah, there's certainly a lot of smart people in GA. I think Williams was chair for too long and should have resigned at most a few months after her first term in the House rather than four years later. Bailey had very little runway to prepare for this election, but the midterms will be good proving ground to test his mettle for the presidential cycle.
🤮🤮🤮
I’m curious, what is the target of your projectile vomiting?
Probably the Paxton endorsement
To be fair, Paxton is so noxious, projectile vomiting is likely an appropriate response to him.
I think Substack sometimes causes people to just see the headline and they comment on that, without necessarily reading the headline article, the other items in the post, or comments in the comment section.
TW: Antisemitism
TX-35 - This is some of the most disgusting rhetoric I've ever heard from a Democratic congressional candidate:
"Controversy-tarred congressional candidate Maureen Galindo this week pledged to transform a site south of San Antonio now used by the Trump administration to detain migrants into an internment camp for “American Zionists.”
“She’ll turn Karnes ICE Detention Center into a prison for American Zionists and former ICE officers for human trafficking,” Galindo wrote in an Instagram post over the weekend, referring to herself in the third person. “It will also be a castration processing center for pedophiles, which will probably be most of the Zionists.”"
https://www.sacurrent.com/news/politics-and-elections/house-candidate-maureen-galindo-pledges-to-send-american-zionists-to-internment-camp/
The anti-AIPAC group Track AIPAC withdrew its endorsement of Galindo over her extremely antisemitic remarks.
While I don't watch him often, he just made a video basically saying she was crazy and he wouldn't endorse her.
FWIW, I’ll add that left Bluesky thinks she’s bananas — I just saw a post attacking her not that long ago.
Galindo is not prepared to serve in political office. She could have just talked about ending ICE and accountability towards ICE officers but ended up being batshit crazy.
Luckily, there’s another Democratic candidate running ahead of the runoff, Johnny Garcia, and he might end up benefitting from this. He’s already come out against Galindo’s rhetoric. Garcia also has the most high profile endorsements.
https://www.tpr.org/government-politics/2026-05-14/democratic-runoff-in-texas-35th-congressional-district-roiled-by-comments-about-jews-and-israel?_amp=true
Track AIPAC is just two 20somethings who make scare graphics with some of the thinnest (and frankly often antisemitic) methodology of who does/doesn't get a pass. Significantly better to look at an org run by grown ups like PAL PAC.
Agreed. They are not a reputable source for disclosing campaign finance, but that's probably not because of their age.
"but that's probably not because their age."
Exactly. 😉
I think there was big blowup on social media when they selectively started tracking individuals rather than PACs and they stopped doing that now IG. It's not a very reliable source though.
They also count J St money only when they want to, and make it indistinguishable from when the track money from something like AIPAC/UDP/DMFI, despite a disclaimer in their own FAQ saying it should be caveated differently. And implied Dan Biss was basically Ritchie Torres when he's virtually indistinguishable from Brad Lander. The website and "endorsements" have gained undeserved traction solely from making easily copy+pastable graphics from some slackivists. Just extremely bad faith people that make all associated movements look bad in comparison.
Is there any mechanism for Dems to expel her from the party? Someone like this shouldn't be on a ballot with a (D) by her name.
Did I read that right, Lisa Murkowski wants to strengthen trump’s position … good to know.
Murkowski thinks that Republicans can separate themselves from Trump. Our job is to make sure that they cannot.
After all the support they’ve given him? That is LOL funny.
Should Peltola win the Senate race this year, I hope that Murkowski will be on the menu in 2028. She voted for the Big Awful Bill, and she shouldn't be given slack for her occasional 'independent' votes against her party.
She needs to go too.
She's hated by the Trumpist base in Alaska as well. so if Dems don't save her, she'd probably lose.
Which is fine with me. Flipping the Senate seat this November and Murkowski’s seat in 2028 would be great.
Imagining two Dem senators and a working trifecta in AK is so sweet 🙏
She also voted for Amy Comey Barrett after first saying she would not because "fair is fair," with the Republicans citing an upcoming election for not filling Scalia's seat in an election year, even though it was nine months before the 2016 election.
I can see her running for Governor in 2030.
We don’t even have to try that hard. It’s the message they send themselves every day! It’s the arrangement the majority of their own people want!
Our message is for the independent voters and the less engaged voters.
I don’t disagree, I just think “The Republican Party is the Trump Party” is a concept the man down the street recognizes better than every member of the mainstream DC press.
The only question is whether or not the man down the street thinks that’s a good thing.
Re: GA Supreme Court races, I can assure you this was voters simply being unaware of the importance and partisan nature of these races. It was also a long ballot; while waiting in line to vote I had to look over a sheet with all of the folks in primaries I was going to vote for, and I'm someone who posts on the Downballot for crying out loud.
As for why Miracle outperformed Jordan by so much (they ran on a joint ticket and Jordan had the longer more high profile political history), the only explanation I can think of is folks name-code voting, just like when candidates with Hispanic last names do better in Latino-heavy districts in otherwise low-salience races. Something to consider when fielding candidates for non-partisan races like this.
I'm disappointed in Bottoms' easy victory but do think it's best we avoid a drawn out runoff if she was destined to win anyway. I hope her team develops strong responses to the many attacks that will commence over her time as Mayor.
Seems like a case of Georgia’s Democratic Party neglecting to communicate effectively with voters. Four million dollars is a paltry sum considering that $ 115 million was spent on Wisconsin’s supreme court races! And we can add to that the utter failure to recruit candidates for all three races.
Sad. Just sad, unnecessary – and profoundly tragic!
Yes given the importance of the state Supreme Court and the political environment this was a really, really bad fumble/own goal. We're likely the tipping point state in 2028 and asleep at the wheel!
Dems in Wisconsin didn't start taking state court elections super serious until 2011 and it took several years after that until they got the hang of it.
Never forgetting the uncontested 2017 race.
I assume they were shell-shocked at the time.
It's around 1% of what was spent to win critical races in Georgia 6 years ago.
I also wonder how many people were aware it wasn't a primary that they would vote on again in November.
I legit think many voters believe when they pull a Democratic primary ballot, that they are just choosing between Democratic candidates in ALL races on their ballots.
Very disappointed with the SCOGA races. Part of the blame lies on the "nonpartisan" label and GOP meddling with ballot placement while the rest lies squarely on the Georgia Democratic Party for not organizing months ago to tell voters to vote for Rankin/Jordan.
Wisconsin's state Supreme Court elections are "nonpartisan" in name only as well, but their state Democratic party chair thoroughly backs the liberal candidate and educates the base on which judge shares their values.
Aren’t a lot of the Wisconsin judicial elections stand alone or top of the ballot elections? The Georgia races were buried on the ballot.
They're top of the ballot elections, as far as I know.
No. The non partisan judicial races are on the very last page. Just before a bunch of silly party questions.
Unless you choose a non party ballot, not voting on either party’s primary. In that case the non partisan judicial races would be the only ones, ranked from Supreme Court down to the district trial courts.
Are you talking about GA? MPC was talking about WI
My bad
Was talking about both.
Yes but MPC was specifically talking about WI, no?
If I'm not mistaken, in Wisconsin the Court elections are the *only* elections on the ballot when they go up.
Statewide, it depends on the year. Every fourth year there is also the state School Superintendent (which is also nonpartisan) and most years there are local elections in part of the state (again, nonpartisan)
Pretty interesting MA-6 poll. I thought Koh was for sure the frontrunner and Andres-Beck and Belsito were underdogs.
Andres-Beck and Belsito are also both progressives (or at least the former), so this could be interesting. I’d be alright with Koh anyway though - he attempted to primary Moulton after his awful trans comments, so that’s a point in his favor.
https://www.jta.org/2026/05/20/obituaries/barney-frank-longtime-jewish-congressman-from-massachusetts-dies-at-86
Obituaries: Barney Frank, a prolific Democratic congressman from Massachusetts that served 32 years, is dead at 86. The seat is now held by fellow Democrat Jake Auchincloss.
Ardently pro-Israel and pro-LGBTQ (apart from the T), Frank had an interesting record in Congress, ushering in economic reform with Dodd-Frank. Just days ago, he came out against the Democratic Party's current leftward shift while admitting he wouldn't live long enough to enact change he saw fit.
What an ignominious way to go out, hippie punching.
I don’t think that’s what Barney Frank was referring to.
Frank primarily was criticizing the leftward shift in the Democratic Party that was moving it away from common sense and not focusing on the signature issues that makes Democrats who they are in the first place.
Issues such as Defund the Police for example are specifically what Frank was criticizing. Otherwise, he was in fact was otherwise supportive of liberals/progressives.
"Frank primarily was criticizing the leftward shift in the Democratic Party" that's exactly what I said, hippie punching.
Right but I am referring to the “leftward shift in the Democratic Party that was moving it away from common sense” with what Barney Frank was arguing. I was not referring to the “leftward shift in the Democratic Party” all together.
If you think Frank was saying the contrary, fine. However, that’s not what I interpreted from his statement.
Anytime those who attack “the left” and are Democrats (especially current and former office holders) may have a frame of reference by which they are criticizing. Unless this is real pettiness, I don’t think anyone here by default should assume because a Democrat criticizes “the left” that it means the obvious. There may be valid reasons to criticize the Democratic Party but it doesn’t mean the person wants to be more GOP lite.
He had left office more than a decade ago and was apparently on his deathbed, I simply don't understand why he thought his perspective was so indispensable. Barbara Boxer gets on my nerves for the same reason.
"Unless this is real pettiness, I don’t think anyone here by default should assume because a Democrat criticizes “the left” that it means the obvious."
There's a reason it's obvious, man.
You’ve made valid points. However, I’ve observed Frank was referring specifically to litmus tests that the left makes.
He was in fact referring to Defund the Police, open borders, etc. I don’t see this to be as obvious as you are making it but perhaps I am missing something.
https://www.wbur.org/news/2026/05/14/barney-frank-hospice-congress-democrats-trump
Zero Cool. I absolutely agree with your reply.
I won't copy the whole article but here are some relevant parts, quoting Frank:
"The key to liberal democracy being able to come back is to get rid of the perception, that we have allowed to grow, that the entire Democratic Party is committed to a series of very drastic social reconstructions that go beyond the politically acceptable....
I am not arguing that people shouldn’t advocate for things that are currently unpopular. I know there are some issues that I support that are currently unpopular. And the first thing to do is to try and increase the degree to which they have public support.
The problem with my friends on the left today is that they want these things to be litmus tests, immediately. They don’t want to spend any time. So what happens is they demand that more mainstream liberals sign on to these things, and then they lose because of it."
He then suggests that trans women in sports is an issue that should wait until other (more broadly politically palatable) trans policies are achieved. So he wasn't being anti trans either.
Gift link for the whole article
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/12/us/barney-frank-congress-democrats-advice.html?unlocked_article_code=1.j1A.l6OK.v9wRvdqbsHWl&smid
It may sound insensitive of me, but I'd rather not listen to someone whose hayday in politics was decades ago lecture me on social issues weeks before his death as an octogenarian.
Fair. Barney Frank was also critical of the Green New Deal although quite honestly, because the actual agenda neither has been implemented nor even a has Democratic POTUS been introducing it as part of an agenda, I doubt Frank really knows everything that’s actually in it.
I mean, he left Congress back in 2013. He left before Trump even announced his presidential campaign back in 2015.
https://www.wbur.org/news/2026/05/14/barney-frank-hospice-congress-democrats-trump
Well, Frank was pretty instrumental in moving thr LGBTQ agenda forward. And understanding the strategy that succeeded vs what appears the strategy for some of the left now is worth considering. Just because he was old and nearly dead doesn't mean he had nothing to contribute. Just as waving off Gen Z as too naive or inexperienced overlooks what they can contribute.
Yes, but no one is gonna put a Gen Zer in the NYT and CNN to badmouth older liberals, and even if they did, they would be waved away as being naive and inexperienced.
I mean this in all respect to certain liberals (and I myself am a gen x Berkeley liberal):
Sometimes they have their heads up their asses and do not preach tolerance and acceptance to fellow liberals like myself who didn’t come out “so perfect” when we were younger. Most liberal and liberal-minded friends I have are not this way but it depends on how people evolve. We generally have healthy discussions and don’t get into heated debates over purity.
Eh, it's good to check your political fringe before they ruin your brand...yet again.
Barney Frank knew gay rights was a fight of many years and needing to sell it as a live-and-let-live proposition to regular people. He didn't call Clinton a genocidal monster for signing DOMA. He kept his nose to the grindstone to do the most with the situation as it existed.
Frank was always much less progressive than his billing. Dodd-Frank is a prime example.
I put that more on Dodd, but it's as good as we could get after healthcare reform used up a lot of stamina.
PA-3 - Chris Rabb got around two-thirds of Dwight Evans's 2024 general election vote total in the 2026 primary, and there were over 30,000 more votes cast in this year's Democratic primary in PA-3 than in the 2024 general election:
https://www.threads.com/@hereswhykevin/post/DYj2LpwFk4x
https://floridapolitics.com/archives/797440-michael-thompson-becomes-latest-gop-candidate-in-cd-22/
FL-22: Mike Thompson (not the current California representative), an aide to former NSA Mike Flynn, will run here as a Republican.
He joins businessmen Michael Carbonara, Casey Askar and Herbie Wertheim in the Republican primary, while former Rep. Chris Collins is considering. No Democratic incumbent is running yet.
criminal & philanderer backs criminal & philanderer.
Prolific conservative activist Scott Presler unfortunately won a seat on the Pennsylvania state Republican committee last night, representing Beaver County.
i'm of the opinion we should spotlight him as much as possible, he has a very low profile except for the terminally politically online (myself) but he is a certified weirdo that (other than sharing hate) has about as much in common with a rural trump pa voter as myself.
Agreed, as someone who has familial connections to Beaver County, its working-class rural, industrial towns should not keep someone like Presler in the spotlight for too long.
Prolific by volume alone lol