I dunno if I agree with that...they're both strong candidates. I think it likely has more to do with 1) R candidate quality as mentioned above and 2) while NJ might be more "blue", it is arguably more "Trumpy" and the impact of Gov't worker cuts will be felt very acutely in VA.
Sherrill is a will win and but everything I've seen out of her campaign is clear she was really focused on federal affairs and has a very light grasp of state affairs. Spanberger has a bit of this too, but seems to have a better handle. I could ruminate this might be because she was in a tougher district, and had to be more in touch with her constituents and hear/understand their concerns. Sherrill pretty much coasted in all her campaigns.
Roy Cooper is going to have the last laugh on NC Republicans if he wins the open Senate seat next year, especially when they gleefully overrode his vetoes his last two years in office. Because he could be the pivotal vote in a future federal trifecta to carve out a filibuster exemption for a stronger voting rights law, which will trump the state law.
Nickel is instead considering a run for Wake County (Raleigh and many suburbs) DA, a high profile position that would keep him a viable future candidate.
Running for DA looks like an obvious set up to succeed Jackson as AG. There'll likely be an open senate seat again in the next decade plus the governorship in 32 as others have noted. Whether he defers to LG Hunt is probably just a function of who is raising the most money between 2029 and 31.
On the GOP side, who do you think will be the most notable candidates that will emerge?
So far, the field is light and consists mostly of some dude campaigns. Being that the primary is next June, the GOP will need to think about ths soon. Otherwise, it may be a possibility the CA-GOV race with the top-two could emerge with two Democratic gubernatorial candidates in the general campaign.
I think that Riverside Sheriff Chad Bianco will be the top GOP candidate for CA-Gov. I had never heard of the guy in yesterday's digest and will probably never hear of him again.
If there are several Repub candidates with resources then their party may be shut out of the runoff by splitting the GOP base. Then you would have the top two Dems in it. Otherwise Bianco will get the second spot in the runoff and lose to whichever Democrat comes in first.
I believe the CA primary will be in June next year, not March. The March primaries are for presidential years; otherwise we go back to the traditional June CA primary (first Tuesday of that month.)
I just reedited my comment to reflect the correction you made. Sharing the link below as I just found it.
As far as the GOP candidates are concerned, they have an opening for activism considering the following factor in:
1) Kamala Harris won CA by 20% points, more than 8% points lower than President Biden and Hillary Clinton who won the state in 2020 by 29.16% points and 30.11% points in 2016 respectively.
2) More residents are moving out of CA due to cost of living.
3) More businesses, namely tech companies, are moving out of San Francisco and elsewhere.
On the other hand, the immigration and ICE raid issues are going to be a major liability fo the GOP in CA.
How do you even solve the housing crisis even after deregulation since the construction workers are being deported while the interest rates won't come down due to tariffs, along with declining state subsidies due to tariffs causing drop in tax revenues.
That is a good question and a big problem to address. Once Trump is out of office, CA Democrats will have an easier chance at managing this.
President Biden had ample opportunity to eliminate the tariffs that came from Trump’s first term and he didn’t do it. And he was under intense pressure to stop inflation.
I am not certain if Biden got rid of the tariffs progressively (if not all immediately) would this do enough to stop inflation. It would have been a start though.
China was going to dump steel and other stuff at a loss here without those Biden era tariffs. A 100 people may get a bit cheaper goods but small towns with 100 poeple would be destroyed without those tariffs.
Right but progressively phasing out tariffs doesn’t mean the U.S. under the next Democratic POTUS would start immediately happening. This happening progressively means over time, not all at once. Fed Rate cuts also can’t happen too quickly either.
It’s a matter of weighing factors affecting trade and how the tariffs apply to a given sector.
Once a protective tariff is in place, removing it will cause blue collar workers in that industry to lose their jobs in the near future while the positive economic effects are larger but more subtle and spread out among the economy. This is why it is hard to get rid of a tariff once it is in place, especially when rust belt Midwestern states like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are at stake.
Right but tariffs in the 1920’s also contributed to the Great Depression.
We’ve had discussion here on TDB about President Biden making a mistake keeping the tariffs in under his watch. I don’t think he would have all of a sudden ended tariffs just like that. He would have put that in a larger part of the focus with his agenda to ensuring the U.S. propers at all levels of the economy.
That’s because of the demand and work opportunities. But this hasn’t stopped residents from moving out of the state. Population increase by default doesn’t reduce cost of living.
Besides, cost of living is a major problem. It isn’t something you can avoid in CA. This particularly applies to the film industry, where actors and filmmakers are having a hard time. Industry too has been hit with business as well.
If Harris won CA by just 20% points, then Democrats need to not be complacent and address all three key factors I am talking about. Otherwise, it will continue to be a problem.
Actually film biz has been hit everywhere, in Georgia too. Hollywood films are being shot in developed European nations with low COI like Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia etc.
Hollywood has been facing problems decades in the making, including not enough film production in San Francisco. This was the case back when Gavin Newsom was Mayor from 2004-2011.
What residents are moving out of the state? Not sure the people leaving would be a cause for hope for CA repubs. The articles about Rogan and his buddies regretting the move to Austin were just in my newsfeed today. Lots of buyers remorse in those articles (especially when they realize the net tax burden is the same and the poor quality of service in Texas compared to California).
There's some Nazi in the Republican side of the primary who's gone viral for visiting Auschwitz and calling it as a solution to homelessness and unemployment. Just horrific.
Ryan Walters, who was caught looking at porn during a state board of education meeting, is the superintendent of education who decreed that a Bible be placed in every classroom in Oklahoma. He asked the legislature to fund the purchase of thousands of copies of the Trump Bible, but it balked.
I believe folks made this point with some of the book bans passed in the red states. Not sure if any Bibles were actually removed from school libraries though.
"And 2 people involved in Michigan politics said (DSCC Chair) Gillibrand has privately encouraged donors to support Stevens"
party approval is at its lowest point in decades and its and they think uncharismatic candidates bankrolled by insurance companies is gonna fix it
clearly they're panicking she only brought in $1.4 million (13% under $200) in the second quarter *despite* all the insurance/corporate and leadership PACs
Abdul El-Sayed $1.7 million (26% under $200)
Mallory McMorrow $2.1 million (46% under $200)
I need answer why this being on $10 million of NRSC ads isn't gonna make her look absolutely unhinged among independent voters
Several of the Democratic sources CNN spoke to said Schumer and his team have privately signaled they believe Stevens is the strongest general election candidate. In another nod to Stevens’ Democratic establishment support, she earned an endorsement from former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi earlier this summer. And two people involved in Michigan politics said Gillibrand has privately encouraged donors to support Stevens.
Democrats there have also been surprised by the strong fundraising power of El-Sayed — backed by independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders — who has been urging his party to take a more aggressive stance on Trump.
Democrats in the state are still hoping they can unite behind a candidate before next August’s primary. But there have been some hurdles, including interpersonal disputes between Slotkin and other major players in the state, including Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.
They also fear that the state’s race for governor won’t help either: Mike Duggan, the popular Detroit mayor, has decided to run as an independent, potentially splintering the Democratic base and raising questions about what that could mean for Michigan’s Senate and House races.
“I don’t think people understand how dysfunctional the Senate race is,” one Michigan Democrat told CNN of the bruising three-way primary. “If we don’t pull people together, we are screwed.”
Even with half a million from AIPAC, Stevens cannot fill the gap, the Democratic leadership team is horrendous. Firing Schumer needs to be the minimum.
McMorrow and El Sayed are running good campaigns according to observers, let's see. Even centrist pundits of Split Ticket have praised Sayed's candidacy.
How much can candidates transfer from the fundraising accounts to another's? Asking this since Bernie and AOC are the biggest fundraisers of this cycle other than those facing reelection.
Not sure. But all this infighting could have been avoided had Peters run again. And as long as Stevens is facing 2 major opponents, it's hard for me to see her not winning.
Probably but imho McMorrow is the best candidate in November. I have know Haley since her first campaign for the 11th CD when i was active in Western Wayne Dem Clubs and politics - I was surprised she won that first primary. Not really sure why the DC types think she’s the best statewide candidate. Mallory checks a lot more boxes than Haley. Stevens is just sort of weird, especially in person.
They are limited to the same limit as a PAC ($5000) in direct contribution. They can give more to a SuperPAC supporting the candidate but that has much less bang for the buck.
They can be easily bundled from various members and this limit can be bypassed. It's how your see Elissa Slotkin for eg, recieving a contribution of 60k from J Street on her Open Secrets page.
I wonder if she's concerned about a primary challenge in 2030. The left despise her, and I can imagine some centrists have lost patience with her as well given her crappy running of the DSCC (though I'm not a centrist so I could be wrong.)
I wonder if Letitia James would be interested. I'd kill to see her in the Senate -- she's been an excellent AG for the most part.
She's a top AIPAC aligned and funded candidate (Andy Levin), isn't gaining much traction from small and medium dollar dollars, viral videos of her outbursts in the House and generally seen as unlikable and corporate friendly.
Not necessarily. A major reason AIPAC is so despised (especially among the left) is that their candidates (barring some exceptions, like Dexter and Ansari) tend to also be very centrist Dems, who oppose key progressive priorities in the process. (I believe I read somewhere that that's a requirement by AIPAC -- though that wouldn't explain Dexter or Ansari.)
In this case, there's also resentment because Stevens defeated Andy Levin in 2022, who (IMO) was a far superior Dem to Stevens, with AIPAC help. I think Stevens would be a lousy Senator, if she wins at all.
As far as my thoughts on other candidates, McMorrow, if she can get more name recognition and attention, seems like someone who could excite people and turn them out. She's really active, smart, and dedicated -- she'd make a great Senator and a great candidate IMO. Depending on how powerful the Arab vote in MI has become, Sayed might even work out OK -- he'd certainly juice that demographic's turnout. I'm biased because I'm a progressive, but I don't think Sayed wouldn't be too bad as a Senator either. (He might be able to help our image with Arab voters nationwide too -- imagine the contrast of the sole Arab Senator being a Democrat, against the GOP's blatantly racist rhetoric towards Arabs.) At any rate, I definitely do not want Stevens.
Yassamin Ansari wasn't funded by AIPAC and Dexter dumped AIPAC once in office, voting against most AIPAC legislative priorities. Dexter knows her district and played AIPAC well.
Huh. I thought I remembered AIPAC running ads for Ansari or at least against Teran -- maybe I misremembered.
I agree that Dexter played AIPAC very well. I remember when she won and there were calls on left Twitter/Bluesky for her to be primaried by State Rep. Travis Nelson. Fast forward to today and someone on the same platform was suggesting running Dexter for Senate in 2028 if Ron Wyden decides to call it quits. (An idea I approve of.)
Haven't seen the videos but generally the hysterical female sounds like a trope (Klobuchar and so many others accused of this). Have you seen them? Is that a legit line of attack?
NC Rs are crapping their pants right now. I think Cooper's coattails will not only help incumbent SCONC justice Anita Earls, but will definitely break the GOP majority further in the state House plus the supermajority in the state Senate next year.
If there's any indication that NC Rs won't listen, they just overrode 8 out of 14 bills current Governor Josh Stein vetoed earlier. And they still can't decide on the state budget.
I recognize that I'm naive for this in this day and age but I *do* think legislating is the point. Pushing Mills is only necessary if you think she's the only one who can beat Collins and I think that's a big ol' case of "assuming facts not in evidence"
Mills reportedly is warming up to the idea. But I wouldn't put all the Maine Senate blueberries in her basket just yet. Some decent Plan B's, including Speaker Ryan Fecteau, are also considering.
The NY10 oversample in the DFP poll finds Goldman with -4 favorability in his district. Ritchie, on the other hand, has a +44 favorability in his district. The only people with higher favorability in NY15 are AOC and Lander barely. Ritchie's actually higher than Bernie.
If Lander doesn't run, I really hope Yuh-Line Niou tries again. On top of her being a staunch progressive with an excellent record in the NY State Assembly from what I've heard (which appeals to me), she'd be the first openly autistic member of Congress in history -- which I, an autistic person, would be thrilled to see.
North Carolina has historically been very hard at the federal level for Dems since the end of the Solid South remnant counties in late 2000s and with Obama. But it shifted left relatively each presidential election since 2016 with the research triangle's suburbs swinging to the left notably in 2024.
It shifted left even with the "attraction" of trump..since it won't be on the ballot this time I say R turnout will crater thus the larger than normal margin...also, is the likely R candidate considered a strong candidate?
Michael Whatley is unproven at best as a candidate. He's obviously got insider connections and can presumably raise lots of $$, but he's never run for anything with an electorate beyond party committee members. (Though that doesn't mean he can't win now; before winning their NC-Sen races, neither John Edwards nor Elizabeth Dole had ever won a popular election--not counting Dole's presidential campaign which ended before the actual voting began.)
Which makes me somewhat nervous that we might underestimate him. But this is about as good a matchup as we can hope for, and Whatley's main credential of "I did so much to help elect Trump" may not be a great selling point for 2026.
Anything is possible with a 2006-style collapse of Republican turnout. I sometimes underestimate midterm turnout differentials. Still, I'm not yet impressed with where the anti-Trump urgency is compared to this time in 2017, the kind of scenario needed to drive a lopsided midterm turnout split and help Cooper win by more than the skin of his teeth.
I think this is the right neighborhood...my prediction (barring massive surprises/changes between now and the election, which are almost certain) would be Cooper by 2-3...
I think Cooper could eke out a 3-point win like Budd did in 2022. Anything over that margin or comparable to his 2016 squeaker would not be surprising.
And if the former governor wins, we're gunning for that election denier in 2028. As well as flipping those three state Supreme Court seats.
Barring an implosion by either, I could see anything from +5 to -3 for Cooper--which averages out to about a +1. This factors in that this is a midterm with a (probably) unpopular GOP administration; in a perfectly neutral year I don't think Cooper could win by more than 2, maybe 3 if I'm being generous. And I don't think Whatley would win by more than 3 or 4 without a red wave.
Best case scenario of a +5 or thereabouts is a big Dem wave, aided by a collapse in GOP turnout and major backlash among Indys. -3 would be not even a blue ripple, with Whatley being a surprisingly good candidate and Cooper a surprisingly poor one--or at least lackadaisical due to overconfidence.
Depends on where the hurricanes end up, ultimately. It could be NYC's problem if we get another Sandy. Florida is the most likely state to suffer from this but it could be anywhere on that coast, from Texas to Maine, depending on circumstances.
I'd see anything in the +/- 4 point range being reasonable. It all depends on how the election shapes out and how the candidates do on the campaign. Which isn't exactly insightful as a breakdown, but I guess my point is I don't think NC is stuck in a 49-51 or 51-49 stalemate if things go right or wrong enough in a way that is reasonably possible and not exceptional circumstances.
Keep in mind the last "good dem year" with a federal statewide election (presidency or senate) in NC was either 2012 or 2008, depending on how we define 2012. That doesn't change that the state is a slightly redder shade of purple, but that history does make things look worse than they are there for federal elections.
Less than 5% margin, but very confident Gov. Cooper will win (I'd almost put it as "Likely Dem" on my personal board). Being a D-favourable midterm should suffice, and Cooper won't screw up the campaign. He's tried and tested.
Voters truly do care a lot about major party labels in elections. They don't want to admit it, but they do. It takes a big well known candidate that's very popular to break out of that, and usually then it also requires a weak candidate from both parties. Which is obviously what Cuomo is hoping for, but while he has the name recognition he does not have the popularity.
Add on top that the election is boiling down to Mamdani vs not-Mamdani, and "not-Mamdani" is multiple candidates.
As much as this Tennessee alum believes the world revolves around Knoxville, that GOP operative needs to watch more ball if he thinks we’re Georgia’s #1 rival.
I don't think a "civil war" is needed for us to have a "new vision". We will need to sort out a vision from several candidates with differing platforms and approaches, the winner of which should (hopefully) be an effective standard bearer for that vision.
We won't have that for 2026 simply because the nature of off year elections is such that we likely won't be able to identify a clear leader before then, and it would probably be a mistake to over-fixate on one person before the presidential campaign starts. However, Trump, the GOP, and most of its policies are all sufficiently unpopular that in the midterms Dems may not really need a unifying message beyond "We didn't do that."
Carville is actually right on this; there are very different and competing approaches which Democratic factions want to take. Those on the left like me want a economic populist and progressive approach, and a foreign policy rethinking while deemphasizing social wedge issues while those on the center want market friendly economic moderation and concessions on social issues like trans rights and don't say gay while maintaining the Obama-Biden consensus foreign policy. Unity can only be found after an extremely contested primary.
Agree with your overall point, but I'm not sure I agree with your characterizations. Allowing me to represent the moderates here, I wouldn't say we want "concessions" on social issues. In fact, I think your description of the left's approach to social wedge issues (de-emphasizing them) is more applicable to moderates than to the left. Just my opinion...
I've read left wing intellectuals and pols like Khanna, Murphy who propose abandoning woke and run 2016 style Sanders class based campaigns while Yglesias, NYT, Politico and co. push for LGBTQ moderation (bathrooms, don't say gay etc). Just my observation.....:)
I’ve said it before: the way to deal with this is to make ever Democratically-controlled city and state an exhibition window of Democratic polices and accomplishments. Why should voters vote for us if we cannot show them a successful alternative?
FFS, that’s what Democrats should be doing everywhere they are elected, and certainly immediately after we have a majority and are put in control! If not, what the hell is the point in running for office in the first place?
Okay, I read your advice as "Elected Dems need to deliver amazing results everywhere" and I just think that is a bit of a tall order. And an expedition for Dem policies doesn't necessarily lead to popularity.
You’re both right. That’s the ideal goal to strive for, but I think everyone here knows it’s not actually ever going to happen because bad leaders do get elected as Democrats. We must at least try to do that everywhere though.
We literally have masked fascists disappearing people in the streets but some edgelord types would rather get into ideological battles with the party rather than attack Trump. It's hard to get positive numbers when a third of the party has been crapping all over the rest of the party ever since the 2016 primary and THAT forbidden issue has added rocket fuel to that fight.
Both sides have Twitter edgelords. The party is being attacked from the left as well as the centre. James Carville has proposed to delay this until 2028 but unfortunately that forbidden issue is becoming more serious day by day.
A 2024 presidential primary would have hashed a lot of things out. Unfortunately we were deprived of one. The powers that be dread open primaries. Despite the lessons of 1992, 2008 and 2020.
Which party was the incumbent party in those years? You cannot run the same way as the incumbent party as you can as the challenging party and get away with it. If you could, William Jennings Bryan wins the 1896 Presidential Election and John McCain wins the 2008 Presidential Election.
Has anyone actually ran the numbers on how many seats the GOP is going to end up netting from mid-decade redistricting? It'd be useful to know what the worst case scenario is.
Worst case scenario from what I’ve seen: Rs gain 5 seats in Texas, 4 seats in Florida, 1 seat in Missouri, 3 seats in Ohio. Maybe they make an R leaning seat in New Hampshire too. Dems gain no seats anywhere.
Not too likely imo. A lot would have to go right for Rs and wrong for Dems. I personally think Texas won’t go for more than 4 seats and Ohio won’t try to gerrymander Landsman out since that’s pretty tricky with their rules. Missouri would also be a headache for republicans since Dems would probably try to filibuster.
I also think if repubs move forward in Texas that California and possibly New York could respond in a similar fashion that at minimum nullifes the gop gains or actually increases Dem seats to a net gain for Dems.
What states are being considered? Off the top of my head they've pushed for Texas, Florida, and Missouri. The oft-mentioned number for Texas is 5. I haven't seen any number for Florida. We hold five seats there that are D+5 or worse, so worst case scenario there I think is another 5. Missouri could eliminate both of our seats easily enough but if they did bother I think they'd go for 1; more likely I suspect that Missouri will not.
Worst case scenario for us in that scenario would be 12 seats then. Alternate scenario of Texas 5, Florida 3, Missouri 0 would give them netting 8 seats. I'd cautiously guess that 8 is more likely than 12, but it's hard to know these days.
Means in the worst case scenario that if nothing else changes that we would need to net +15 seats in the remaining 47 states.
The 15 closest seats won by a republican in 2024 were, in order: IA-01, CO-08, PA-07, PA-10, PA-08, NE-02, AK-AL, AZ-06, WI-03, CA-41, MI-07, AZ-01, IA-03, VA-02, and CO-03. We lost CO-03 by a hair under 5 points. Realistically with some of those seats being harder to pick up than others, this would require more likely winning seats we lost by 6-7 points last year.
The 3rd closest republican held seat in 2024 was PA-07, which we lost by 1.01 points. So in this scenario republicans are buying themselves 5-6 points of margin in the popular vote before they lose the speakership.
The Florida talk seems to be mostly talk for now. The Gov. said that he wishes there would be a "snap census" to more accurately count current population because Florida was "gypped" (his word, not mine) by the 2020 Census. Of course, the Census is only a decennial count and is the only usable data in redistricting: https://floridapolitics.com/archives/748379-ron-desantis-malapportioned-census/ Also, his relationship with the lege is apparently not as good as it used to be.
Reading more, he seems to be talking like a Census mulligan is both probable and is a necessary condition in order for re-redistricting to happen. Unless he means the next ACS estimate, but that is not usable.
If Republican voters nominate him. Would they, given his 15 point blowout loss in his first run? I don’t think it’s a guarantee at least (especially if Trump endorses Garrity, which I think is a distinct possibility), but yeah, if he’s nominated we’re definitely the closest we can be in 2026 to winning a trifecta.
Then again in 2022, the top ticket lagged, but the entire bottom ticket didn’t, only part of it did. Republicans didn’t lose any State Senate seats that year with Mastriano leading the ticket, despite GOP losing control of the State House by 1 seat that same year. In all honesty I think a trifecta is nearly impossible, even with Mastriano at the top of the ticket.
2024 was the pivotal election year that had the half of seats up where we could realistically win enough to flip control and we blew it badly. We may only be 2 seats away from a trifecta in the chamber and the state, but it looks way easier than it actually is. We need to pickup SD-24, which the GOP won in 2022 by 4% and 1 of SD-06 or SD-16 which they won that year by 8%.
Even that doesn’t give you a full picture of how hard it’s going to be because in 2022, all 3 of those seats were open. Now they have GOP freshman incumbents who will likely outperform a D vs R open seat. I’m almost certain these districts voted for Trump in 2016, 2024 and I’d guess most in 2020 too (no one does state legislative district by presidential data anymore, so I have no way to confirm my suspicions). Don’t bet on it, but definitely try for it.
Never underestimate republicans' willingness to repeat a mistake. They won't always, and truthfully I've never picked up a way to explain why some bad candidates get dropped by the base immediately and some stick around for multiple cycles despite repeat losses.
Yup, very good news. Posted this yesterday.
AK-Gov: "Attorney General Treg Taylor" what in the Palin family?
Is it an Alaska thing?
Dunno for sure but her sons are named Track and Trig.
The super odd baby names are usually a Utah thing haha
Found out today that his full name is "Tregarrick" lol
Tregarrick = Tragedeigh!
Makes me think of "Trog", the 1970 movie about a troglodyte brought back to life.
NJ Gov FDU poll:
Sherrill 45 Ciattarelli 37
https://www.fdu.edu/news/fdu-poll-finds-sherrill-leads-by-single-digits-in-governors-race/
Quite possible we see a larger margin in VA-GOV than NJ-GOV this Nov.
I would put my money on it. Sears is a lot weaker than Ciattarelli.
And same with Sherrill v Spanberger.
I dunno if I agree with that...they're both strong candidates. I think it likely has more to do with 1) R candidate quality as mentioned above and 2) while NJ might be more "blue", it is arguably more "Trumpy" and the impact of Gov't worker cuts will be felt very acutely in VA.
Sherrill is a will win and but everything I've seen out of her campaign is clear she was really focused on federal affairs and has a very light grasp of state affairs. Spanberger has a bit of this too, but seems to have a better handle. I could ruminate this might be because she was in a tougher district, and had to be more in touch with her constituents and hear/understand their concerns. Sherrill pretty much coasted in all her campaigns.
Meaning?
Answered here: https://www.the-downballot.com/p/morning-digest-trumpworld-wanted/comment/140295422
I’m good as long as the margins favor the Dem in both gubernatorial races.
Roy Cooper is going to have the last laugh on NC Republicans if he wins the open Senate seat next year, especially when they gleefully overrode his vetoes his last two years in office. Because he could be the pivotal vote in a future federal trifecta to carve out a filibuster exemption for a stronger voting rights law, which will trump the state law.
As expected, Wiley Nickel is bowing out of the Senate race and endorsing Roy Cooper for the open Senate race.
https://www.wral.com/story/nickel-suspends-campaign-backs-cooper-in-north-carolina-s-u-s-senate-race/22100904/
It’s hard to see how running against the most high profile Democratic politician in Senate Primary would be justified.
This allows Cooper to spend plenty of time building his campaign.
His launch video was pitch-perfect! Very impressive.
Nickel is instead considering a run for Wake County (Raleigh and many suburbs) DA, a high profile position that would keep him a viable future candidate.
Yeah. I could see him be the 2028 Senate candidate against Budd, or run for AG if Jackson runs for Senate that year.
I would presume he would defer to LG Rachel Hunt for Governor in 2032 - presuming she wins reelection in 2028 - should he run for and win AG in 2028.
Of course he could always run for Senate in 2032 if Cooper retires that year and Stein doesn’t seek to replace him.
Running for DA looks like an obvious set up to succeed Jackson as AG. There'll likely be an open senate seat again in the next decade plus the governorship in 32 as others have noted. Whether he defers to LG Hunt is probably just a function of who is raising the most money between 2029 and 31.
CA-GOV
On the GOP side, who do you think will be the most notable candidates that will emerge?
So far, the field is light and consists mostly of some dude campaigns. Being that the primary is next June, the GOP will need to think about ths soon. Otherwise, it may be a possibility the CA-GOV race with the top-two could emerge with two Democratic gubernatorial candidates in the general campaign.
EDIT: Primary is June 2026, not March 2026.
I think that Riverside Sheriff Chad Bianco will be the top GOP candidate for CA-Gov. I had never heard of the guy in yesterday's digest and will probably never hear of him again.
If there are several Repub candidates with resources then their party may be shut out of the runoff by splitting the GOP base. Then you would have the top two Dems in it. Otherwise Bianco will get the second spot in the runoff and lose to whichever Democrat comes in first.
I believe the CA primary will be in June next year, not March. The March primaries are for presidential years; otherwise we go back to the traditional June CA primary (first Tuesday of that month.)
I just reedited my comment to reflect the correction you made. Sharing the link below as I just found it.
As far as the GOP candidates are concerned, they have an opening for activism considering the following factor in:
1) Kamala Harris won CA by 20% points, more than 8% points lower than President Biden and Hillary Clinton who won the state in 2020 by 29.16% points and 30.11% points in 2016 respectively.
2) More residents are moving out of CA due to cost of living.
3) More businesses, namely tech companies, are moving out of San Francisco and elsewhere.
On the other hand, the immigration and ICE raid issues are going to be a major liability fo the GOP in CA.
https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/upcoming-elections/primary-election-june-2-2026
How do you even solve the housing crisis even after deregulation since the construction workers are being deported while the interest rates won't come down due to tariffs, along with declining state subsidies due to tariffs causing drop in tax revenues.
That is a good question and a big problem to address. Once Trump is out of office, CA Democrats will have an easier chance at managing this.
President Biden had ample opportunity to eliminate the tariffs that came from Trump’s first term and he didn’t do it. And he was under intense pressure to stop inflation.
I am not certain if Biden got rid of the tariffs progressively (if not all immediately) would this do enough to stop inflation. It would have been a start though.
China was going to dump steel and other stuff at a loss here without those Biden era tariffs. A 100 people may get a bit cheaper goods but small towns with 100 poeple would be destroyed without those tariffs.
Right but progressively phasing out tariffs doesn’t mean the U.S. under the next Democratic POTUS would start immediately happening. This happening progressively means over time, not all at once. Fed Rate cuts also can’t happen too quickly either.
It’s a matter of weighing factors affecting trade and how the tariffs apply to a given sector.
Once a protective tariff is in place, removing it will cause blue collar workers in that industry to lose their jobs in the near future while the positive economic effects are larger but more subtle and spread out among the economy. This is why it is hard to get rid of a tariff once it is in place, especially when rust belt Midwestern states like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are at stake.
Right but tariffs in the 1920’s also contributed to the Great Depression.
We’ve had discussion here on TDB about President Biden making a mistake keeping the tariffs in under his watch. I don’t think he would have all of a sudden ended tariffs just like that. He would have put that in a larger part of the focus with his agenda to ensuring the U.S. propers at all levels of the economy.
California population is growing
That’s because of the demand and work opportunities. But this hasn’t stopped residents from moving out of the state. Population increase by default doesn’t reduce cost of living.
Besides, cost of living is a major problem. It isn’t something you can avoid in CA. This particularly applies to the film industry, where actors and filmmakers are having a hard time. Industry too has been hit with business as well.
If Harris won CA by just 20% points, then Democrats need to not be complacent and address all three key factors I am talking about. Otherwise, it will continue to be a problem.
Actually film biz has been hit everywhere, in Georgia too. Hollywood films are being shot in developed European nations with low COI like Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia etc.
How much do you think media oversaturation has been a factor in that?
Not the whole story.
Hollywood has been facing problems decades in the making, including not enough film production in San Francisco. This was the case back when Gavin Newsom was Mayor from 2004-2011.
What residents are moving out of the state? Not sure the people leaving would be a cause for hope for CA repubs. The articles about Rogan and his buddies regretting the move to Austin were just in my newsfeed today. Lots of buyers remorse in those articles (especially when they realize the net tax burden is the same and the poor quality of service in Texas compared to California).
Austin is also tech friendly but even it’s become too unaffordable for those moving in these days.
When you have too much activity concentrated in specific cities like Austin, it creates too much demand and not enough supply.
Frankly, this is a problem.
Chad Bianco looks like Joe Lombardo with a mustache.
There's some Nazi in the Republican side of the primary who's gone viral for visiting Auschwitz and calling it as a solution to homelessness and unemployment. Just horrific.
Thankfully that dude is not a serious candidate.
Yeah, I just posted about this yesterday.
He’s just deranged.
Ryan Walters, who was caught looking at porn during a state board of education meeting, is the superintendent of education who decreed that a Bible be placed in every classroom in Oklahoma. He asked the legislature to fund the purchase of thousands of copies of the Trump Bible, but it balked.
There’s lots of adult, not-safe-for-work content in the Bible. Just saying.
I believe folks made this point with some of the book bans passed in the red states. Not sure if any Bibles were actually removed from school libraries though.
That dude is gross. I actually think there's a (small) chance that he has the potential to blow a statewide election.
"And 2 people involved in Michigan politics said (DSCC Chair) Gillibrand has privately encouraged donors to support Stevens"
party approval is at its lowest point in decades and its and they think uncharismatic candidates bankrolled by insurance companies is gonna fix it
clearly they're panicking she only brought in $1.4 million (13% under $200) in the second quarter *despite* all the insurance/corporate and leadership PACs
Abdul El-Sayed $1.7 million (26% under $200)
Mallory McMorrow $2.1 million (46% under $200)
I need answer why this being on $10 million of NRSC ads isn't gonna make her look absolutely unhinged among independent voters
https://x.com/umichvoter/status/1950217547015500103
Several of the Democratic sources CNN spoke to said Schumer and his team have privately signaled they believe Stevens is the strongest general election candidate. In another nod to Stevens’ Democratic establishment support, she earned an endorsement from former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi earlier this summer. And two people involved in Michigan politics said Gillibrand has privately encouraged donors to support Stevens.
Democrats there have also been surprised by the strong fundraising power of El-Sayed — backed by independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders — who has been urging his party to take a more aggressive stance on Trump.
Democrats in the state are still hoping they can unite behind a candidate before next August’s primary. But there have been some hurdles, including interpersonal disputes between Slotkin and other major players in the state, including Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.
They also fear that the state’s race for governor won’t help either: Mike Duggan, the popular Detroit mayor, has decided to run as an independent, potentially splintering the Democratic base and raising questions about what that could mean for Michigan’s Senate and House races.
“I don’t think people understand how dysfunctional the Senate race is,” one Michigan Democrat told CNN of the bruising three-way primary. “If we don’t pull people together, we are screwed.”
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/07/29/politics/senate-democrats-michigan-texas
Even with half a million from AIPAC, Stevens cannot fill the gap, the Democratic leadership team is horrendous. Firing Schumer needs to be the minimum.
It's just too bad that Peters didn't run for another term.
McMorrow and El Sayed are running good campaigns according to observers, let's see. Even centrist pundits of Split Ticket have praised Sayed's candidacy.
How much can candidates transfer from the fundraising accounts to another's? Asking this since Bernie and AOC are the biggest fundraisers of this cycle other than those facing reelection.
Not sure. But all this infighting could have been avoided had Peters run again. And as long as Stevens is facing 2 major opponents, it's hard for me to see her not winning.
Sayed can win the primary of he consolidates the Progressive and Muslim vote while McMorrow needs votes from both sides.
Probably but imho McMorrow is the best candidate in November. I have know Haley since her first campaign for the 11th CD when i was active in Western Wayne Dem Clubs and politics - I was surprised she won that first primary. Not really sure why the DC types think she’s the best statewide candidate. Mallory checks a lot more boxes than Haley. Stevens is just sort of weird, especially in person.
It would have been great if Whitmer had jumped into the primary rather than dwell on her 2028 chances.
They are limited to the same limit as a PAC ($5000) in direct contribution. They can give more to a SuperPAC supporting the candidate but that has much less bang for the buck.
They can be easily bundled from various members and this limit can be bypassed. It's how your see Elissa Slotkin for eg, recieving a contribution of 60k from J Street on her Open Secrets page.
As always Gillibrand is a massive disappointment.
I wonder if she's concerned about a primary challenge in 2030. The left despise her, and I can imagine some centrists have lost patience with her as well given her crappy running of the DSCC (though I'm not a centrist so I could be wrong.)
I wonder if Letitia James would be interested. I'd kill to see her in the Senate -- she's been an excellent AG for the most part.
What's wrong with Stevens? Insurance is a rather flimsy reason.
She's a top AIPAC aligned and funded candidate (Andy Levin), isn't gaining much traction from small and medium dollar dollars, viral videos of her outbursts in the House and generally seen as unlikable and corporate friendly.
Calling someone an AIPAC star is just a backdoor way to argue about the forbidden issue.
Not necessarily. A major reason AIPAC is so despised (especially among the left) is that their candidates (barring some exceptions, like Dexter and Ansari) tend to also be very centrist Dems, who oppose key progressive priorities in the process. (I believe I read somewhere that that's a requirement by AIPAC -- though that wouldn't explain Dexter or Ansari.)
In this case, there's also resentment because Stevens defeated Andy Levin in 2022, who (IMO) was a far superior Dem to Stevens, with AIPAC help. I think Stevens would be a lousy Senator, if she wins at all.
As far as my thoughts on other candidates, McMorrow, if she can get more name recognition and attention, seems like someone who could excite people and turn them out. She's really active, smart, and dedicated -- she'd make a great Senator and a great candidate IMO. Depending on how powerful the Arab vote in MI has become, Sayed might even work out OK -- he'd certainly juice that demographic's turnout. I'm biased because I'm a progressive, but I don't think Sayed wouldn't be too bad as a Senator either. (He might be able to help our image with Arab voters nationwide too -- imagine the contrast of the sole Arab Senator being a Democrat, against the GOP's blatantly racist rhetoric towards Arabs.) At any rate, I definitely do not want Stevens.
Yassamin Ansari wasn't funded by AIPAC and Dexter dumped AIPAC once in office, voting against most AIPAC legislative priorities. Dexter knows her district and played AIPAC well.
Huh. I thought I remembered AIPAC running ads for Ansari or at least against Teran -- maybe I misremembered.
I agree that Dexter played AIPAC very well. I remember when she won and there were calls on left Twitter/Bluesky for her to be primaried by State Rep. Travis Nelson. Fast forward to today and someone on the same platform was suggesting running Dexter for Senate in 2028 if Ron Wyden decides to call it quits. (An idea I approve of.)
Haven't seen the videos but generally the hysterical female sounds like a trope (Klobuchar and so many others accused of this). Have you seen them? Is that a legit line of attack?
Yes, these will be used in attack ads and the those are more similar to Booker's than Klobuchar’s lol.
Cooper raised $3.4m in 24 hours, a record-breaking number.
https://x.com/ec_schneider/status/1950217697767141654?s=19
NC Rs are crapping their pants right now. I think Cooper's coattails will not only help incumbent SCONC justice Anita Earls, but will definitely break the GOP majority further in the state House plus the supermajority in the state Senate next year.
If there's any indication that NC Rs won't listen, they just overrode 8 out of 14 bills current Governor Josh Stein vetoed earlier. And they still can't decide on the state budget.
Will be cathartic if/when Tricia Cotham loses in a landslide!
That witch (plus Mike Lee from New Hanover) have it coming.
Big time.
Imagine if Janet mills launched a campaign
She is 7 years older than Cooper. A young dem would immediately get a generational change boost against Collins.
Closer to 10 years older! Cooper turned 68 in June, Mills will be 78 in December.
She'd be 79 upon being sworn in if elected, idk if she'd want to commit to that as a freshman senator
She doesn’t have to even finish a senate term so long as a Democrat replaces her as Governor.
That's...not the kind of thing we should be rooting for?
I recognize that I'm naive for this in this day and age but I *do* think legislating is the point. Pushing Mills is only necessary if you think she's the only one who can beat Collins and I think that's a big ol' case of "assuming facts not in evidence"
Anything for a majority works - that’s the thinking we need
Mills reportedly is warming up to the idea. But I wouldn't put all the Maine Senate blueberries in her basket just yet. Some decent Plan B's, including Speaker Ryan Fecteau, are also considering.
https://nitter.poast.org/PollTracker2024/status/1950140180460949940#m
Liked for the reference to Maine blueberries, which are delicious (I've eaten them quite a lot).
Janet Mills is nowhere near as charismatic as Cooper. I really don't get why people keep hyping her candidacy...she seems likely to lose.
The NY10 oversample in the DFP poll finds Goldman with -4 favorability in his district. Ritchie, on the other hand, has a +44 favorability in his district. The only people with higher favorability in NY15 are AOC and Lander barely. Ritchie's actually higher than Bernie.
https://x.com/demsocsean/status/1950178804976021945
This seat is Brad Lander's if he wants it. There's not much Manhatten in NY10, it's mostly Brooklyn and Mamdani won it by 40 points.
Note: Sharing a tweet from someone is not an endorsement of their opinion, Nikolaj commented on it so I saw it in the feed.
44 percent of his constituents want to vote for another dem, compared to 21 percent who plan to vote for him.
https://x.com/ideologicalized/status/1950167455642341753
If Lander doesn't run, I really hope Yuh-Line Niou tries again. On top of her being a staunch progressive with an excellent record in the NY State Assembly from what I've heard (which appeals to me), she'd be the first openly autistic member of Congress in history -- which I, an autistic person, would be thrilled to see.
Do most folks here still think NC-Gov will be a close race? I say Cooper by more than 5%.
North Carolina has historically been very hard at the federal level for Dems since the end of the Solid South remnant counties in late 2000s and with Obama. But it shifted left relatively each presidential election since 2016 with the research triangle's suburbs swinging to the left notably in 2024.
It shifted left even with the "attraction" of trump..since it won't be on the ballot this time I say R turnout will crater thus the larger than normal margin...also, is the likely R candidate considered a strong candidate?
Michael Whatley is unproven at best as a candidate. He's obviously got insider connections and can presumably raise lots of $$, but he's never run for anything with an electorate beyond party committee members. (Though that doesn't mean he can't win now; before winning their NC-Sen races, neither John Edwards nor Elizabeth Dole had ever won a popular election--not counting Dole's presidential campaign which ended before the actual voting began.)
Which makes me somewhat nervous that we might underestimate him. But this is about as good a matchup as we can hope for, and Whatley's main credential of "I did so much to help elect Trump" may not be a great selling point for 2026.
If the "Hands Off" protests are any indication, I pray that the NC GOP will be in a world of hurt come 11/3/2026.
I'd be stunned if Cooper won by more than 1 point in a federal race in North Carolina.
I could see him winning by up to 3. But yeah, it’s not gonna be a gimme at all.
Anything is possible with a 2006-style collapse of Republican turnout. I sometimes underestimate midterm turnout differentials. Still, I'm not yet impressed with where the anti-Trump urgency is compared to this time in 2017, the kind of scenario needed to drive a lopsided midterm turnout split and help Cooper win by more than the skin of his teeth.
I think this is the right neighborhood...my prediction (barring massive surprises/changes between now and the election, which are almost certain) would be Cooper by 2-3...
I can see 1-5. I'd be more stunned if Whatley wins by more than 1.
I think Cooper could eke out a 3-point win like Budd did in 2022. Anything over that margin or comparable to his 2016 squeaker would not be surprising.
And if the former governor wins, we're gunning for that election denier in 2028. As well as flipping those three state Supreme Court seats.
Barring an implosion by either, I could see anything from +5 to -3 for Cooper--which averages out to about a +1. This factors in that this is a midterm with a (probably) unpopular GOP administration; in a perfectly neutral year I don't think Cooper could win by more than 2, maybe 3 if I'm being generous. And I don't think Whatley would win by more than 3 or 4 without a red wave.
Best case scenario of a +5 or thereabouts is a big Dem wave, aided by a collapse in GOP turnout and major backlash among Indys. -3 would be not even a blue ripple, with Whatley being a surprisingly good candidate and Cooper a surprisingly poor one--or at least lackadaisical due to overconfidence.
Hurricane season is just beginning. Let's see what happens after two Hurricane seasons without a functioning FEMA.
That’s more of Florida’s problem than NC’s.
Depends on where the hurricanes end up, ultimately. It could be NYC's problem if we get another Sandy. Florida is the most likely state to suffer from this but it could be anywhere on that coast, from Texas to Maine, depending on circumstances.
I'd see anything in the +/- 4 point range being reasonable. It all depends on how the election shapes out and how the candidates do on the campaign. Which isn't exactly insightful as a breakdown, but I guess my point is I don't think NC is stuck in a 49-51 or 51-49 stalemate if things go right or wrong enough in a way that is reasonably possible and not exceptional circumstances.
Keep in mind the last "good dem year" with a federal statewide election (presidency or senate) in NC was either 2012 or 2008, depending on how we define 2012. That doesn't change that the state is a slightly redder shade of purple, but that history does make things look worse than they are there for federal elections.
Wait, what? Don't you mean NC-Sen?
I would expect it to be close because US races are always close in NC and the GOPs are not running Mark Robinson for Senator this time.
Yes, thanks!
Less than 5% margin, but very confident Gov. Cooper will win (I'd almost put it as "Likely Dem" on my personal board). Being a D-favourable midterm should suffice, and Cooper won't screw up the campaign. He's tried and tested.
Don't know the provenance of this pollster but if valid looks very good for Mamdani https://x.com/admcrlsn/status/1950265131319054382
Hope that's the case. I want Cuomo to lose bad enough that no one even thinks about any kind of comeback for him ever again.
Looks believable to me.
Voters truly do care a lot about major party labels in elections. They don't want to admit it, but they do. It takes a big well known candidate that's very popular to break out of that, and usually then it also requires a weak candidate from both parties. Which is obviously what Cuomo is hoping for, but while he has the name recognition he does not have the popularity.
Add on top that the election is boiling down to Mamdani vs not-Mamdani, and "not-Mamdani" is multiple candidates.
Best demographic groups for each candidate:
https://x.com/admcrlsn/status/1950265203276599698
https://x.com/MichaelLangeNYC/status/1950269507311673782
https://x.com/admcrlsn/status/1950265203276599698
The most surprising is Zohran's very high support among young men, more than that among young women.
That young man support - we need to bottle whatever Zohran has there and put it in the dem caucus room.
As much as this Tennessee alum believes the world revolves around Knoxville, that GOP operative needs to watch more ball if he thinks we’re Georgia’s #1 rival.
Democrats need to take their party's poor favorability rating seriously but not literally
https://x.com/gelliottmorris/status/1950179589965131898
Major 2028 problem. Perhaps less of one for 2026.
Major 2026 problem; by 2028 there will have been a Democratic civil war (similar to 2016 Reps) and we will have a new vision.
I don't think a "civil war" is needed for us to have a "new vision". We will need to sort out a vision from several candidates with differing platforms and approaches, the winner of which should (hopefully) be an effective standard bearer for that vision.
We won't have that for 2026 simply because the nature of off year elections is such that we likely won't be able to identify a clear leader before then, and it would probably be a mistake to over-fixate on one person before the presidential campaign starts. However, Trump, the GOP, and most of its policies are all sufficiently unpopular that in the midterms Dems may not really need a unifying message beyond "We didn't do that."
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/21/opinion/carville-democrats-midterms-mamdani.html
Carville is actually right on this; there are very different and competing approaches which Democratic factions want to take. Those on the left like me want a economic populist and progressive approach, and a foreign policy rethinking while deemphasizing social wedge issues while those on the center want market friendly economic moderation and concessions on social issues like trans rights and don't say gay while maintaining the Obama-Biden consensus foreign policy. Unity can only be found after an extremely contested primary.
Agree with your overall point, but I'm not sure I agree with your characterizations. Allowing me to represent the moderates here, I wouldn't say we want "concessions" on social issues. In fact, I think your description of the left's approach to social wedge issues (de-emphasizing them) is more applicable to moderates than to the left. Just my opinion...
I've read left wing intellectuals and pols like Khanna, Murphy who propose abandoning woke and run 2016 style Sanders class based campaigns while Yglesias, NYT, Politico and co. push for LGBTQ moderation (bathrooms, don't say gay etc). Just my observation.....:)
Which we can afford being the out party. If we were the incumbent party, it would be a completely different story.
I’ve said it before: the way to deal with this is to make ever Democratically-controlled city and state an exhibition window of Democratic polices and accomplishments. Why should voters vote for us if we cannot show them a successful alternative?
That's a bit of a tall order, I think.
FFS, that’s what Democrats should be doing everywhere they are elected, and certainly immediately after we have a majority and are put in control! If not, what the hell is the point in running for office in the first place?
Okay, I read your advice as "Elected Dems need to deliver amazing results everywhere" and I just think that is a bit of a tall order. And an expedition for Dem policies doesn't necessarily lead to popularity.
You’re both right. That’s the ideal goal to strive for, but I think everyone here knows it’s not actually ever going to happen because bad leaders do get elected as Democrats. We must at least try to do that everywhere though.
We lost, repugs hate us, dems hate us, doesn't mean dems and independents won't vote for us.
We literally have masked fascists disappearing people in the streets but some edgelord types would rather get into ideological battles with the party rather than attack Trump. It's hard to get positive numbers when a third of the party has been crapping all over the rest of the party ever since the 2016 primary and THAT forbidden issue has added rocket fuel to that fight.
Both sides have Twitter edgelords. The party is being attacked from the left as well as the centre. James Carville has proposed to delay this until 2028 but unfortunately that forbidden issue is becoming more serious day by day.
This is true. Both sides need to spend more time attacking Trump rather than fighting among themselves.
A 2024 presidential primary would have hashed a lot of things out. Unfortunately we were deprived of one. The powers that be dread open primaries. Despite the lessons of 1992, 2008 and 2020.
Which party was the incumbent party in those years? You cannot run the same way as the incumbent party as you can as the challenging party and get away with it. If you could, William Jennings Bryan wins the 1896 Presidential Election and John McCain wins the 2008 Presidential Election.
Has anyone actually ran the numbers on how many seats the GOP is going to end up netting from mid-decade redistricting? It'd be useful to know what the worst case scenario is.
Worst case scenario from what I’ve seen: Rs gain 5 seats in Texas, 4 seats in Florida, 1 seat in Missouri, 3 seats in Ohio. Maybe they make an R leaning seat in New Hampshire too. Dems gain no seats anywhere.
How likely is this scenario?
Not too likely imo. A lot would have to go right for Rs and wrong for Dems. I personally think Texas won’t go for more than 4 seats and Ohio won’t try to gerrymander Landsman out since that’s pretty tricky with their rules. Missouri would also be a headache for republicans since Dems would probably try to filibuster.
I also think if repubs move forward in Texas that California and possibly New York could respond in a similar fashion that at minimum nullifes the gop gains or actually increases Dem seats to a net gain for Dems.
What states are being considered? Off the top of my head they've pushed for Texas, Florida, and Missouri. The oft-mentioned number for Texas is 5. I haven't seen any number for Florida. We hold five seats there that are D+5 or worse, so worst case scenario there I think is another 5. Missouri could eliminate both of our seats easily enough but if they did bother I think they'd go for 1; more likely I suspect that Missouri will not.
Worst case scenario for us in that scenario would be 12 seats then. Alternate scenario of Texas 5, Florida 3, Missouri 0 would give them netting 8 seats. I'd cautiously guess that 8 is more likely than 12, but it's hard to know these days.
Means in the worst case scenario that if nothing else changes that we would need to net +15 seats in the remaining 47 states.
The 15 closest seats won by a republican in 2024 were, in order: IA-01, CO-08, PA-07, PA-10, PA-08, NE-02, AK-AL, AZ-06, WI-03, CA-41, MI-07, AZ-01, IA-03, VA-02, and CO-03. We lost CO-03 by a hair under 5 points. Realistically with some of those seats being harder to pick up than others, this would require more likely winning seats we lost by 6-7 points last year.
The 3rd closest republican held seat in 2024 was PA-07, which we lost by 1.01 points. So in this scenario republicans are buying themselves 5-6 points of margin in the popular vote before they lose the speakership.
The Florida talk seems to be mostly talk for now. The Gov. said that he wishes there would be a "snap census" to more accurately count current population because Florida was "gypped" (his word, not mine) by the 2020 Census. Of course, the Census is only a decennial count and is the only usable data in redistricting: https://floridapolitics.com/archives/748379-ron-desantis-malapportioned-census/ Also, his relationship with the lege is apparently not as good as it used to be.
Reading more, he seems to be talking like a Census mulligan is both probable and is a necessary condition in order for re-redistricting to happen. Unless he means the next ACS estimate, but that is not usable.
More here: https://floridaphoenix.com/2025/07/24/desantis-says-its-appropriate-to-redistrict-congressional-districts-before-next-election/
Mastriano declares his run
https://x.com/dougmastriano/status/1950282654386888755
>Shapiroslide incoming
>Pennsylvania liberal trifecta in 2027
Is he sponsoring a charity walk? That looks like the poster for every one of those, minus the scripture verse.
I don’t think he’s win if he has to go 1 on 1 against Garrity, the State Treasurer
If Republican voters nominate him. Would they, given his 15 point blowout loss in his first run? I don’t think it’s a guarantee at least (especially if Trump endorses Garrity, which I think is a distinct possibility), but yeah, if he’s nominated we’re definitely the closest we can be in 2026 to winning a trifecta.
Then again in 2022, the top ticket lagged, but the entire bottom ticket didn’t, only part of it did. Republicans didn’t lose any State Senate seats that year with Mastriano leading the ticket, despite GOP losing control of the State House by 1 seat that same year. In all honesty I think a trifecta is nearly impossible, even with Mastriano at the top of the ticket.
2024 was the pivotal election year that had the half of seats up where we could realistically win enough to flip control and we blew it badly. We may only be 2 seats away from a trifecta in the chamber and the state, but it looks way easier than it actually is. We need to pickup SD-24, which the GOP won in 2022 by 4% and 1 of SD-06 or SD-16 which they won that year by 8%.
Even that doesn’t give you a full picture of how hard it’s going to be because in 2022, all 3 of those seats were open. Now they have GOP freshman incumbents who will likely outperform a D vs R open seat. I’m almost certain these districts voted for Trump in 2016, 2024 and I’d guess most in 2020 too (no one does state legislative district by presidential data anymore, so I have no way to confirm my suspicions). Don’t bet on it, but definitely try for it.
Never underestimate republicans' willingness to repeat a mistake. They won't always, and truthfully I've never picked up a way to explain why some bad candidates get dropped by the base immediately and some stick around for multiple cycles despite repeat losses.
Danny Tarkanian can help explain