Depending on where in Hampton Roads and Richmond (for instance, parts of Virginia Beach and Chesterfield County are much redder than the likes of Norfolk and Petersburg), he should easily be able to make 6.5
Probably the VA Tech based precincts. Meanwhile, while Liberty University doesn't dominate Lynchburg as Tech does Blacksburg or UVA Charlottesville, it's large enough to make it one of the few places where higher college student and faculty turnout usually helps Republicans--though it's worth noting that Del. Josh Cole (D-Fredericksburg) attended and worked there.
So I started a long discussion yesterday about my fears of nominating risky candidates. I want to be positive today and qualify that saying despite the risk of Platner and AES looming, Republican recruiting is undeniably far worse, with many particularly bad candidates that I can see totally flopping.
-Vivek? Seriously? I wouldn’t be surprised if he doesn’t land well with the electorate at all. I’d be shocked if he did, to be honest.
-Mike Collins running as the male MTG in a state we just won by 26 points has to make Ossoff feel giddy. Or Burt Jones in the gubernatorial race who behaves like you would expect a Republican in AL-04 to act.
-for whatever reason, the best they could find in NC was the RNC chair. Yes, let’s vote for the chair of the party that destroyed our economy, pardoned domestic terrorists, and is terrorizing brown people over a popular former Governor.
-the “experts” having AZ-Gov as a tossup when Katie Hobbs’ approval is generally good and Andy Biggs is her likely opponent should frankly be fired
-I don’t think Florida is competitive, but after last Tuesday I might have second thoughts about that, particularly with Byron Donalds as the likely nominee
-they are running a retread in Michigan who underperformed Donald Trump by 2 points last year. Why exactly would that change for the better for them next year?
I am also convinced that had Ernst not retired that she would have been an underdog. Her gaffes would have been particularly brutal for her to overcome given how the environment is shaping up.
I had the same question earlier! The guy in Michigan running for senate, Abdul El-Sayed…can we just nominate McMorrow and put this race away? He should try and get elected to something lower before trying statewide again.
Abdul El-Sayed. He made some dumb posts about defunding the police and abolishing ICE back in 2020. That said, I suspect even he might eke it out next year were he to be nominated.
Defunding the police is so dumb, we already have a progressive not beholden to special interests without such baggage in the primary i.e Mallory McMorrow. AES seems to be a decent guy but we don't need to take risks in Michigan. The stupid slogan sucked the energy out of the police reform movement.
Defunding the police was a atrocious statement (politically - taking some public safety budget from police towards mental health emergency responders and non-violence advocates makes sense, but policing will always be necessary).
Abolish ICE - that should be a 2029 goal. Frankly it’s hard to imagine that the Homeland Security Department can be reformed. Too many horrible hires. Too many people who joined or stayed for the wrong reasons. The anti-MAGA coalition needs to imagine how we can solve the challenges of border security, useful and efficient immigration, collaboration on anti-terrorism, and disaster response within other Cabinet Departments and agencies.
ICE needs a massive overhaul for sure. But the slogan “Abolish ICE” is idiotic nonetheless since it feeds into perceptions that Democrats are not serious at all about border security.
Fair. Democrats need to figure out believable short-term and long-term solutions to border security and undocumented immigration. Otherwise we’ll be in this cycle again and again.
And I think it says a lot about who works for ICE (and CBP) that so few resigned and so few have been whistleblowers. Maybe the Democratic Socialists were right that ICE was full of people who hate immigrants and are fine with abusing power.
The only viable solution IMV is to retain Trump’s border security measures while reversing the rest of his immigration-related policies. At the same time, the administration should pursue a path toward mass amnesty, comprehensive immigration reform, and a points-based immigration system.
To achieve this, Democrats must be willing to eliminate the filibuster and expand representation by admitting Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C. as states, adding four new Democratic senators.
Under a stronger, more assertive executive branch—an imperial presidency—agencies like ICE should be restructured like USAID. Such reform could proceed without requiring separate congressional authorization.
It's encouraging that many leading left-leaning candidates this cycle—including Platner, McMorrow, Flanagan, Talarico, and Wahls—have endorsed a pragmatic approach that balances border security with progressive reform.
ICE does need to be abolished because it's functioning as the president's private army. The only question is whether to make that a centerpiece of campaigning, and that's a matter of strategy.
I suspect the 2028 Democratic nominee will take the equivalent of the 2008 Democratic consensus position on opposing gay marriage. They're gonna have to accept the broad contours of Trump's immigration policy to be taken seriously and will dare not publicly speak of ICE reform. It's unfortunate because you're right that they're operating as Trump's Praetorian Guard, but it's the direct consequence of the Dems getting burned by a delusional border policy five years ago that very people are gonna be willing to go back to.
I don't think so. It's the direct consequence of GW Bush being allowed to use his determined negligence in refusing to heed warnings that likely would have prevented the terrorist atrocities on 9/11/01 to create the totally unnecessary Department of Homeland Security.
They can tell voters that there is something better than ICE and create that department with responsible security and immigration enforcement (on par with routine police officer traffic stops). Then once that is gone, ICE gets eliminated.
Democrats need to be owning the issue of national security and not being weak on it.
The departments that existed before the Department of Homeland Security were sufficient. Your idea may be better on strategy, but I think the point has to be made that private armies owing allegiance to a president must never exist in the U.S.
Sure, I acknowledge what I am suggesting is more strategy based. The main goal though should be to ensure that essential functions of security work the same way as how the police are supposed to carry out their jobs. We do not need DHS period, not just ICE, in order for national security.
What baffles me is that from a counter terrorism standpoint, the 9/11 hijackers could have been prevented from entering the planes and this wasn’t that complicated (at least to my understanding). It was the vulnerability in airport security that made it a problem.
Of course, negligence on the Bush Administration to address this problem and counterterrorism efforts early on from the warnings of Osama Bin Laden is what happened as well.
Top tier candidates aren't likely to run for the GOP when they know that the midterms are likely to be a blue wave and even if they do win, they will have to spend the next couple years kissing Trump's ass, so I can see why they are having recruiting troubles.
The smart ones like Brian Kemp and Chris Sununu likely saw that, yes. But a lot of these candidates are people Trump actively encouraged to get in the race. It’s basically like a repeat of the clown cast of 2022 that saved us the Senate and lots of governors mansions that we would have otherwise lost. Instead this time, you’re taking trash candidates and running them in a D+10 year and not a R+3 year. I think a lot of people have no idea what is coming next year, particularly Republicans.
re:AZ-Gov, I’m ok with the raters having it as a toss up, Hobbs has had a couple notable fumbles (ex: tamale carts) and this is a state where Trump did 2-2.5 points better than he did in 2016 and she’s had to quell significant primary opposition.
Hobbs’s approval in credible polls is usually at least +10 or more. She is not going down in a blue year with numbers like that. Especially against someone as odious as Andy Biggs.
Andy Biggs got his start in politics by self funding his races to the state legislature with money he won from the Publisher's Clearinghouse sweepstakes.
I just participated in this scandalous activity this afternoon.
The AZ legislature passed a bill to exempt home kitchens from food safety laws. Hobbs vetoed it based on food safety.
A lot of Mexican American families prepare Mexican food that they sell out of their kitchen and now on Nextdoor.
This afternoon, I got 6 tamales and a pint of beef red chili from a place I've been going to since the 1970s in the barrio of Glendale. The granddaughter is now making the tamales and taking Christmas orders.
Generally, the inspectors just look the other way. Roach coaches do have licensing and inspection.
We generally have public health and safety laws for a reason, so i would hope that even if exempt, these folks get some sort of notification about how important food safety is.
Are they exempt from legal liability in the case of say, lethal food poisoning?
GOP candidate recruitment has consistently not been good for some time. Remember 2022, when they let Trump pick the candidates and we got "winners" like Dr. Oz, Doug Mastriano, Herschel Walker, Blake Masters, Kari Lake, etc.? I would argue that poor candidate quality played an important role in making that year closer than the GOP would have liked -- along with Dobbs.
2024 had a few too, like Mark Robinson and Michele Morrow. And Kari Lake again.
Oh 100%. The disastrous candidates were the only reason we not only defied all odds by holding the Senate and governorships but gained in both that year. That's why I don't want to squander the promise next year holds by nominating people like Platner or AES.
But, the GOP is only going to make the landslide worse by sticking with the candidates Trump is backing in the races above.
Wrong - it never ceases to amaze me how even with the data and history male election/campaign junkies (including most if not all of “ET” - if that still exists) devalue and downplay Dobbs as the crucial factor in ‘22. Sure the repubs had bad candidates but decent/normal ones would have lost too due to Dobbs.
Although we disagreed somewhat yesterday, you certainly are not off base in your worries.
I worry about both things. Squishy conservadems make it almost impossible to change anything meaningful even if they win, and they often underperform be ausecthey excite no one.
And certainly the candidates with no track record, and who are more progressive, can have electability concerns, and Fetterman concerns.
But IF we are in wave territory, (big IF) I worry less about election results and more about governance.
I heard in a volunteer meeting last night that the veto referendum on gerrymandering in Missouri has over 200k signatures. And they still have a couple weeks to gather. So even if the SoS's completely illegal move to prevent signatures gathered earlier from being counted is upheld, there will still be enough signatures to block the new map. I'm sure statewide republicans will still try other maneuvers to keep the gerrymandered map, so we'll see.
assuming that they get sufficient sigs, what happens next? what's the timing? is the gerrymandering law stayed til the referendum gets a vote? I would love to have a clean, up or down vote on gerrymandering somewhere in the US. (California was awesome but it wasn't a clean vote)
From what I understand, if they gather enough signatures, the gerrymander is stayed until the whole state gets to vote on it. That referendum would likely happen in 2026. So the old map would be used for the midterms.
Mike Michaud, the last Democrat to represent that district before Golden won it back, was gay. He ran for Governor in 2014 but Michaud was also conservative in some areas too.
Thank you for that reminder. Also, isn't Troy Jackson eyeing switching races too? Maybe he should switch to the Senate race to give voters a good alternative between Mills and Planter. I see no issues with Sheena Bellows being the gubernatorial nominee.
R+4 District is what I believe ME-02 is, which is Lean Red turf.
However, unlike districts like the CA-49 congressional district that Darrell Issa represented from 2011-2019, ME-02 doesn’t seem to be moving away from having more red. That’s why it’s complicated.
Epstein Alleged in Emails That Trump Knew of His Conduct
In a message obtained by Congress, the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein wrote that Donald J. Trump spent hours at his house with one of Mr. Epstein’s victims.
And considering Marjorie Taylor Greene is starting to become “more reasonable” than she used to be, all the Epstein problems for Trump will start pissing off more of the MAGA and QaNon base more.
The 1 and only good thing about Democrats caving AGAIN is that now the press has nothing to do, but go back to reporting about Epstein. This is going to be weeks or months or longer of Epstein coverage replacing the government shutdown pieces.
I follow him on social media. His personality is odd - he doesn't feel manufactured like a large majority of candidates, and does really weird things like recite poetry on skateboards and post about catching crabs in the Hudson. He shitposts all of the time while also being serious about the state of affairs politically. He rarely flaunts his Kennedy heritage- that is shown with his chosen surname. I think he has potential to do good work while being genuine - and sarcastic all the while.
"If you agree with me on 9 out of 12 issues, vote for me. If you agree with me on 12 out of 12 issues, see a psychiatrist." - Ed Koch, and, more recently, Zohran Mamdani (who was Schlossberg endorsed)
Re: that statement: depends on the issue though. There are some issues like abortion rights (not applicable here) that should be disqualifying for any Dem. See the upheaval over Ben McAdams being anti-abortion.
DC statehood is a big issue for me, although I'm iffy on how important. (Democracy is my #1 issue, for the record.) Don't know a whole lot about Schlossberg but I just wanted to note the importance of certain issues as far as Dem primaries go.
I think D.C. should have statehood. I just don't think the question of its statehood should be a litmus test for an entire candidate to overcome so they can win.
If he gets elected and goes to DC, he will likely change his mind about statehood. Too many people do not realize that the population of DC is larger than that of some states.
Only two states according to the 2020 Census. But even if it was less, even by half, I would support DC Statehood, and have nothing but contempt for those who oppose it.
I think your position is a little too strident. I'm pro-DC statehood, but DC not being a state has been around since the dawn of the republic and people live there knowing that fact.
I mean that's his dads name, it would be odd if he went by Kennedy. IDK i don't think he's going to go anywhere especially since he's kind of an oddball.
I dont think he stands much of a chance, either. Most support from the party has coalesced around Lasher, but I think there are good candidates other than him
Fwiw one of my friends has been in close proximity to him for extended periods of time and said he's one of the biggest assholes he's ever met in politics.
I'm usually mixed on Rachel Bitecofer, but her take on Democratic Senators "caving" is worth reading. Can't explain away higher bills and insurance premiums with RW propaganda.
That is only for leader. Their selection for MPs is very different and very opaque. The central party office must put you on a list of acceptable candidates and then a party meeting (which is often poorly attended) votes on the finalists.
No, Bitecofer advocates people like her picking the candidate not the voters. Keir Starmer dropped his neoliberal and LFI candidates into multiple non related seats for example. (Parachuting)
The leader of the Labor party selects a group of people including people like Bitecofer to select candidates or parachute them. Even when there is a primary, it's restricted to those candidates that the leadership and strategist team approves. We have it so good here. Canada's system is somewhere between America and Britain.
There was some upset over Pou regarding the issue we aren’t supposed to talk about, but that blew over fast, and Pou is semi-vulnerable in the general anyway, so I can see why Sayegh did this.
sherill won her district by 20 points, trump won the district because of collapsed turnout amongst everyone of our core groups there. Anyone is safe in this seat in 26 as a D
This seat isn’t remotely winnable, but I think this candidate has an interesting background so I’ll share. (Forgive the paywall.)
Journalist and author Beth Macy is running as a Dem against Rep. Ben Cline. She apparently wrote several books, including one about the opioid epidemic. Thought I’d share because her background piqued my interest.
A 10-1 gerrymander could very easily turn into a dummymader in an even moderately Republican year (which one of the next three elections will likely be).
At the end of the day, the only thing the shutdown could do is highlight how the Trump Big Beautiful Bill will cause healthcare prices to soar for people on Obamacare. The GOP showed no signs that they were open to giving in on Obamacare subsidies, so we now get them on the record for voting against the subsidies and make it a centerpiece of the Democrats 2026 Congressional campaign.
Sacks was my original pick, as the more progressive option, but I'm voting Conley (I'm in NY-17) as a strategic move. I know my area well, and progressives aren't exactly popular where I am. Plus, Conley has a lot of energy, and seems like a great candidate in general -- I saw her at the Ossining NY No Kings protest and she was great.
Oh God I hope not. SPM was atrocious. He ran a horrible campaign where he didn't show up (a couple people I know who campaigned for him said he was in fucking Europe instead of campaigning), didn't take the race seriously and acted like he'd just win, and apparently tried and failed to pay Mondaire Jones to run in the seat at one point because he knew he was cooked. He would be a car accident if he ran again and there's bad blood against him in NY-17 for his crappy run in 2022. I think it's telling he lost his own race despite being the literal DCCC chairman. Dear God no.
Similarly, DCCC chair Beryl Anthony lost in 1992 despite it being Arkansas, the home state of Bill Clinton, who was elected the same year. Shows you how great a campaigner Anthony was.
Anthony wasn't the DCCC chair in 1992 when he lost his primary. Vic Fazio of California was.
The last sitting DCCC chair to lose a general reelection was Jim Corman of California in 1980, when he was drowned in a red wave. The same thing almost happened to Fazio in 1994.
And Maloney's predecessor, Cherie Bustos, only narrowly held on as DCCC chair in 2020--and neither could ultimately blame a national GOP wave. At least current chair Suzan DelBene holds a safe blue seat.
Interesting (?) fact: the DCCC chair in the late 1960s, Michael Kirwan, had a policy of giving exactly $1,000.00 to every incumbent running for reelection, regardless of the district. I recall reading this in a book Ralph Nader wrote about Congress in the mid 1970s.
I had been planning to go to a meet and greet with Conley but got waylaid by work. My mother in law, who does a lot of work with Putnam county Dems, likes Davidson but local elected officials that I know like Conley.
I am too. My mother-in-law felt that Davidson was better "on the stump" (which makes sense since she is an elected official) but there is time for Conley to improve on that. Based on her website, Conley has an impressive story.
This is the district Republican Mike Lawler represents, so it indeed stands to reason that an aggressively progressive candidate is probably not the most likely one to win in a district that's voted for a Republican a couple of times.
It is also the district that voted for Mondaire Jones, a Black gay man who supports Medicare For All, the Green New Deal, and called to defund the police as he was running for the seat.
So you're suggesting it might be willing to do that again. He served for only one term, though, and then tried to run in the city because he knew he couldn't win reelection, so I don't think that's a good precedent. Someone who's not as aggressively progressive is likely to have a better chance to defeat Lawler, who for whatever reason is a strong candidate, and stay in office for a long time, like Nita Lowey did.
This is the same year that Malliotakis ousted the centrist Rose on Staten Island, Garbarino held on to a swingy Long Island district, and Tenney ousted Brindisi in the Oneida Valley. Jones managed to win a competitive district despite these other results.
No it isn't- this district has the same number after redistricting but is much redder and more suburban. Most of the territory Jones represented is in George Latimer's district.
The thinking is that Conley and Davidson are the frontrunners. No one else comes close in fundraising. Chatzky has a lot of cash-on-hand, but it is all self-funded. The rest of the contenders - Sacks, Philips-Stanley, Cappello and Sullivan - have very little fundraising/cash, comparatively. Reinmann had a decent amount between fundraising and self-funding, and she saw the writing on the wall.
Depending on where in Hampton Roads and Richmond (for instance, parts of Virginia Beach and Chesterfield County are much redder than the likes of Norfolk and Petersburg), he should easily be able to make 6.5
16 free thinking kids at Liberty. Cheers to them!
Makes sense that college students may have to vote provisionally
Would be nice if NC can flip some gerrymandered state legislative seats the way voters in Virginia did.
Would really love to see NC GOP have a REALLY bad night on 11/3/2026 -- and not just losing the open Senate race and SCONC seat up for grabs.
Any seat that voted for a statewide Democrat besides Stein is up for grabs. As are a few that non-Stein D’s barely lost.
Probably the VA Tech based precincts. Meanwhile, while Liberty University doesn't dominate Lynchburg as Tech does Blacksburg or UVA Charlottesville, it's large enough to make it one of the few places where higher college student and faculty turnout usually helps Republicans--though it's worth noting that Del. Josh Cole (D-Fredericksburg) attended and worked there.
So I started a long discussion yesterday about my fears of nominating risky candidates. I want to be positive today and qualify that saying despite the risk of Platner and AES looming, Republican recruiting is undeniably far worse, with many particularly bad candidates that I can see totally flopping.
-Vivek? Seriously? I wouldn’t be surprised if he doesn’t land well with the electorate at all. I’d be shocked if he did, to be honest.
-Mike Collins running as the male MTG in a state we just won by 26 points has to make Ossoff feel giddy. Or Burt Jones in the gubernatorial race who behaves like you would expect a Republican in AL-04 to act.
-for whatever reason, the best they could find in NC was the RNC chair. Yes, let’s vote for the chair of the party that destroyed our economy, pardoned domestic terrorists, and is terrorizing brown people over a popular former Governor.
-the “experts” having AZ-Gov as a tossup when Katie Hobbs’ approval is generally good and Andy Biggs is her likely opponent should frankly be fired
-Ken Paxton gives implosion-waiting-to-happen vibes
-I don’t think Florida is competitive, but after last Tuesday I might have second thoughts about that, particularly with Byron Donalds as the likely nominee
-they are running a retread in Michigan who underperformed Donald Trump by 2 points last year. Why exactly would that change for the better for them next year?
I am also convinced that had Ernst not retired that she would have been an underdog. Her gaffes would have been particularly brutal for her to overcome given how the environment is shaping up.
I had the same question earlier! The guy in Michigan running for senate, Abdul El-Sayed…can we just nominate McMorrow and put this race away? He should try and get elected to something lower before trying statewide again.
And I'll back the Medicare for all guy 100%.
But I get it.
MI is far different than ME, in my view.
First, it is an easier lift than unseating an incumbent.
Two, there are three good to great candidates who are all superior to Mills or Platner.
Silly question probably but I couldn’t figure this out yesterday either…who is AES?
Abdul El-Sayed. He made some dumb posts about defunding the police and abolishing ICE back in 2020. That said, I suspect even he might eke it out next year were he to be nominated.
Thank you!
Defunding the police is so dumb, we already have a progressive not beholden to special interests without such baggage in the primary i.e Mallory McMorrow. AES seems to be a decent guy but we don't need to take risks in Michigan. The stupid slogan sucked the energy out of the police reform movement.
Defunding the police was a atrocious statement (politically - taking some public safety budget from police towards mental health emergency responders and non-violence advocates makes sense, but policing will always be necessary).
Abolish ICE - that should be a 2029 goal. Frankly it’s hard to imagine that the Homeland Security Department can be reformed. Too many horrible hires. Too many people who joined or stayed for the wrong reasons. The anti-MAGA coalition needs to imagine how we can solve the challenges of border security, useful and efficient immigration, collaboration on anti-terrorism, and disaster response within other Cabinet Departments and agencies.
ICE needs a massive overhaul for sure. But the slogan “Abolish ICE” is idiotic nonetheless since it feeds into perceptions that Democrats are not serious at all about border security.
Fair. Democrats need to figure out believable short-term and long-term solutions to border security and undocumented immigration. Otherwise we’ll be in this cycle again and again.
And I think it says a lot about who works for ICE (and CBP) that so few resigned and so few have been whistleblowers. Maybe the Democratic Socialists were right that ICE was full of people who hate immigrants and are fine with abusing power.
The only viable solution IMV is to retain Trump’s border security measures while reversing the rest of his immigration-related policies. At the same time, the administration should pursue a path toward mass amnesty, comprehensive immigration reform, and a points-based immigration system.
To achieve this, Democrats must be willing to eliminate the filibuster and expand representation by admitting Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C. as states, adding four new Democratic senators.
Under a stronger, more assertive executive branch—an imperial presidency—agencies like ICE should be restructured like USAID. Such reform could proceed without requiring separate congressional authorization.
It's encouraging that many leading left-leaning candidates this cycle—including Platner, McMorrow, Flanagan, Talarico, and Wahls—have endorsed a pragmatic approach that balances border security with progressive reform.
ICE does need to be abolished because it's functioning as the president's private army. The only question is whether to make that a centerpiece of campaigning, and that's a matter of strategy.
I suspect the 2028 Democratic nominee will take the equivalent of the 2008 Democratic consensus position on opposing gay marriage. They're gonna have to accept the broad contours of Trump's immigration policy to be taken seriously and will dare not publicly speak of ICE reform. It's unfortunate because you're right that they're operating as Trump's Praetorian Guard, but it's the direct consequence of the Dems getting burned by a delusional border policy five years ago that very people are gonna be willing to go back to.
I don't think so. It's the direct consequence of GW Bush being allowed to use his determined negligence in refusing to heed warnings that likely would have prevented the terrorist atrocities on 9/11/01 to create the totally unnecessary Department of Homeland Security.
Nah - that’s 2024 thinking. The ballgame has changed significantly since then. ICE is a political liability for the gop not for the Dems.
Perfectly put
I don't think abolishing ICE is gonna be much of a loser these days.
He is a doctor, a Biden Administration official, and wrote a book on Medicare For All.
Defunding the police was dumb.
But is not on the table for a Senator.
Probably not, but the FBI are federal police.
Defunding the police was/is good policy - it was/is dumb branding/messaging.
Democrats don’t even have to say Abolish ICE.
They can tell voters that there is something better than ICE and create that department with responsible security and immigration enforcement (on par with routine police officer traffic stops). Then once that is gone, ICE gets eliminated.
Democrats need to be owning the issue of national security and not being weak on it.
The departments that existed before the Department of Homeland Security were sufficient. Your idea may be better on strategy, but I think the point has to be made that private armies owing allegiance to a president must never exist in the U.S.
Sure, I acknowledge what I am suggesting is more strategy based. The main goal though should be to ensure that essential functions of security work the same way as how the police are supposed to carry out their jobs. We do not need DHS period, not just ICE, in order for national security.
What baffles me is that from a counter terrorism standpoint, the 9/11 hijackers could have been prevented from entering the planes and this wasn’t that complicated (at least to my understanding). It was the vulnerability in airport security that made it a problem.
Of course, negligence on the Bush Administration to address this problem and counterterrorism efforts early on from the warnings of Osama Bin Laden is what happened as well.
Top tier candidates aren't likely to run for the GOP when they know that the midterms are likely to be a blue wave and even if they do win, they will have to spend the next couple years kissing Trump's ass, so I can see why they are having recruiting troubles.
The smart ones like Brian Kemp and Chris Sununu likely saw that, yes. But a lot of these candidates are people Trump actively encouraged to get in the race. It’s basically like a repeat of the clown cast of 2022 that saved us the Senate and lots of governors mansions that we would have otherwise lost. Instead this time, you’re taking trash candidates and running them in a D+10 year and not a R+3 year. I think a lot of people have no idea what is coming next year, particularly Republicans.
re:AZ-Gov, I’m ok with the raters having it as a toss up, Hobbs has had a couple notable fumbles (ex: tamale carts) and this is a state where Trump did 2-2.5 points better than he did in 2016 and she’s had to quell significant primary opposition.
Hobbs’s approval in credible polls is usually at least +10 or more. She is not going down in a blue year with numbers like that. Especially against someone as odious as Andy Biggs.
Andy Biggs got his start in politics by self funding his races to the state legislature with money he won from the Publisher's Clearinghouse sweepstakes.
What about tamale carts?
I, too, would like to hear more about this scandal
I just participated in this scandalous activity this afternoon.
The AZ legislature passed a bill to exempt home kitchens from food safety laws. Hobbs vetoed it based on food safety.
A lot of Mexican American families prepare Mexican food that they sell out of their kitchen and now on Nextdoor.
This afternoon, I got 6 tamales and a pint of beef red chili from a place I've been going to since the 1970s in the barrio of Glendale. The granddaughter is now making the tamales and taking Christmas orders.
Generally, the inspectors just look the other way. Roach coaches do have licensing and inspection.
We generally have public health and safety laws for a reason, so i would hope that even if exempt, these folks get some sort of notification about how important food safety is.
Are they exempt from legal liability in the case of say, lethal food poisoning?
GOP candidate recruitment has consistently not been good for some time. Remember 2022, when they let Trump pick the candidates and we got "winners" like Dr. Oz, Doug Mastriano, Herschel Walker, Blake Masters, Kari Lake, etc.? I would argue that poor candidate quality played an important role in making that year closer than the GOP would have liked -- along with Dobbs.
2024 had a few too, like Mark Robinson and Michele Morrow. And Kari Lake again.
Oh 100%. The disastrous candidates were the only reason we not only defied all odds by holding the Senate and governorships but gained in both that year. That's why I don't want to squander the promise next year holds by nominating people like Platner or AES.
But, the GOP is only going to make the landslide worse by sticking with the candidates Trump is backing in the races above.
Wrong - it never ceases to amaze me how even with the data and history male election/campaign junkies (including most if not all of “ET” - if that still exists) devalue and downplay Dobbs as the crucial factor in ‘22. Sure the repubs had bad candidates but decent/normal ones would have lost too due to Dobbs.
Although we disagreed somewhat yesterday, you certainly are not off base in your worries.
I worry about both things. Squishy conservadems make it almost impossible to change anything meaningful even if they win, and they often underperform be ausecthey excite no one.
And certainly the candidates with no track record, and who are more progressive, can have electability concerns, and Fetterman concerns.
But IF we are in wave territory, (big IF) I worry less about election results and more about governance.
Jones won by 7 points in VA.
Luria was "part of the establishment"? She was on the January 6th committee.
Kiggans has done virtually nothing for her constituents. Virginia Dems need to draw her out of her seat post-haste.
Those aren't contradictory statements.
I heard in a volunteer meeting last night that the veto referendum on gerrymandering in Missouri has over 200k signatures. And they still have a couple weeks to gather. So even if the SoS's completely illegal move to prevent signatures gathered earlier from being counted is upheld, there will still be enough signatures to block the new map. I'm sure statewide republicans will still try other maneuvers to keep the gerrymandered map, so we'll see.
assuming that they get sufficient sigs, what happens next? what's the timing? is the gerrymandering law stayed til the referendum gets a vote? I would love to have a clean, up or down vote on gerrymandering somewhere in the US. (California was awesome but it wasn't a clean vote)
From what I understand, if they gather enough signatures, the gerrymander is stayed until the whole state gets to vote on it. That referendum would likely happen in 2026. So the old map would be used for the midterms.
ME-2, ME-Sen: Jordan Wood drops out to run for the 2nd district (like Terry Virts just did last week)
Does Jordan Wood have a Lewiston snowball’s chance in hell in this bright-Red congressional district? I don’t know enough about him.
He's a gay former Katie Porter staffer, so I don't know how good of a fit he is.
Mike Michaud, the last Democrat to represent that district before Golden won it back, was gay. He ran for Governor in 2014 but Michaud was also conservative in some areas too.
He didn't come out until he was running for Governor and vacating the seat, for the record.
Thank you for that reminder. Also, isn't Troy Jackson eyeing switching races too? Maybe he should switch to the Senate race to give voters a good alternative between Mills and Planter. I see no issues with Sheena Bellows being the gubernatorial nominee.
I think at this point Jackson is pointedly not saying anything one way or the other w/r/t switching races. But he did attack LePage when asked.
No.
It’s not “bright red.”
Is it medium-dark red? Seems semantic.
R+4 District is what I believe ME-02 is, which is Lean Red turf.
However, unlike districts like the CA-49 congressional district that Darrell Issa represented from 2011-2019, ME-02 doesn’t seem to be moving away from having more red. That’s why it’s complicated.
R+4 seems light red to me. But Trump won last year by 10 there, I thought?
I imagine he’ll similarly be an irrelevant also-ran in this race too.
Troy Jackson needs to make the drop down.
Epstein Alleged in Emails That Trump Knew of His Conduct
In a message obtained by Congress, the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein wrote that Donald J. Trump spent hours at his house with one of Mr. Epstein’s victims.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/12/us/politics/trump-epstein-emails.html?unlocked_article_code=1.0k8.lqao.Roj9aCl1agUj&smid=url-share
I predict growing Epstein problems for (Boris) Epshteyn and the rest of Donald’s legal team and PR crew.
And considering Marjorie Taylor Greene is starting to become “more reasonable” than she used to be, all the Epstein problems for Trump will start pissing off more of the MAGA and QaNon base more.
Which is fine! ;)
The 1 and only good thing about Democrats caving AGAIN is that now the press has nothing to do, but go back to reporting about Epstein. This is going to be weeks or months or longer of Epstein coverage replacing the government shutdown pieces.
NY-12: Jack Schlossberg entered last night, my favorite but an underdog against Micah Lasher
Can you tell me more about him? What's the hype?
I follow him on social media. His personality is odd - he doesn't feel manufactured like a large majority of candidates, and does really weird things like recite poetry on skateboards and post about catching crabs in the Hudson. He shitposts all of the time while also being serious about the state of affairs politically. He rarely flaunts his Kennedy heritage- that is shown with his chosen surname. I think he has potential to do good work while being genuine - and sarcastic all the while.
He tweeted December 3, 2024 opposing DC statehood, that pissed me off enough that I could never support him.
https://x.com/JBKSchlossberg/status/1864171249640820962?s=20
"If you agree with me on 9 out of 12 issues, vote for me. If you agree with me on 12 out of 12 issues, see a psychiatrist." - Ed Koch, and, more recently, Zohran Mamdani (who was Schlossberg endorsed)
Re: that statement: depends on the issue though. There are some issues like abortion rights (not applicable here) that should be disqualifying for any Dem. See the upheaval over Ben McAdams being anti-abortion.
DC statehood is a big issue for me, although I'm iffy on how important. (Democracy is my #1 issue, for the record.) Don't know a whole lot about Schlossberg but I just wanted to note the importance of certain issues as far as Dem primaries go.
I think opposing full citizenship for ~800k Americans is pretty big red flag for me, sorry it's not the same for you.
I think D.C. should have statehood. I just don't think the question of its statehood should be a litmus test for an entire candidate to overcome so they can win.
If he gets elected and goes to DC, he will likely change his mind about statehood. Too many people do not realize that the population of DC is larger than that of some states.
Only two states according to the 2020 Census. But even if it was less, even by half, I would support DC Statehood, and have nothing but contempt for those who oppose it.
I think your position is a little too strident. I'm pro-DC statehood, but DC not being a state has been around since the dawn of the republic and people live there knowing that fact.
He also asked his followers and the rest of Twitter whether his grandmother, the late, great Jackie Kennedy was hotter than Usha Vance or not. PASS.
https://x.com/JBKSchlossberg/status/1881397115051712855?lang=en
I mean that's his dads name, it would be odd if he went by Kennedy. IDK i don't think he's going to go anywhere especially since he's kind of an oddball.
I dont think he stands much of a chance, either. Most support from the party has coalesced around Lasher, but I think there are good candidates other than him
Fwiw one of my friends has been in close proximity to him for extended periods of time and said he's one of the biggest assholes he's ever met in politics.
Schlossberg just oozes "born on third base mixed with being a KENNEDY" energy.
He’s Caroline Kennedy’s son. That’s it.
KY-Sen: Horse trainer Dale Romans is in
If there’s one state to run a horse trainer, it’s KY!
I like him as an outsider to McGrath. Wish Stevenson had a chance but she doesn't
AZ-1 poll Woods by 8 https://x.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1988616308267614354?s=20
It's an informed ballot poll. (See our new note at the bottom of this Digest)
I'm usually mixed on Rachel Bitecofer, but her take on Democratic Senators "caving" is worth reading. Can't explain away higher bills and insurance premiums with RW propaganda.
https://thecycle.substack.com/p/reality-bites?r=digbq&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&triedRedirect=true
Bitecofer is about as useful and quality of a political professional as Robert Cahaly.
Bitecofer is a neoliberal hack who advocates banning all open primaries and move to a UK style system.
*Open primaries as in any primary where the party's rank and file can participate
She was right on the money when she predicted the 2018 shellacking -- she predicted House Democrats would win a 40-seat majority, they won 41 seats.
She's been harping that Dems fight as dirty as Republicans -- and they are starting to do so.
I agree that she's right sometimes - and wrong sometimes.
She what? That's disqualifying in its own right. Hell no I do not want closed primaries. That's blatantly anti-democratic.
It is not. It's not unreasonable to limit primaries to registered party members. Are you suggesting states like New York are dictatorships?
That's not what I was referring to. I understood the proposal to mean primaries where the party selects the candidate, and not the voters.
Unless that wasn't the proposal, in which case I misunderstood the original claim.
The British system requires primary voters to pay a fee to be a party member. If she supports that, I surely do disagree with her.
Ditto.
That is only for leader. Their selection for MPs is very different and very opaque. The central party office must put you on a list of acceptable candidates and then a party meeting (which is often poorly attended) votes on the finalists.
No, Bitecofer advocates people like her picking the candidate not the voters. Keir Starmer dropped his neoliberal and LFI candidates into multiple non related seats for example. (Parachuting)
How would she be in a position to pick candidates? Or do you mean she agrees with their views?
The leader of the Labor party selects a group of people including people like Bitecofer to select candidates or parachute them. Even when there is a primary, it's restricted to those candidates that the leadership and strategist team approves. We have it so good here. Canada's system is somewhere between America and Britain.
Parliamentary systems go dictator much less frequently than systems like ours do.
Less executive power.
I'd be for switching. Or at least a hybrid.
Both Germany and Italy were parliamentary democracies during the rises of Hilter and Mussolini.
Yep. Right now we have all the downsides of a parliamentary system with none of the upsides. Our system has been a ticking time bomb for 30 years now.
Whatever Bitecofer's drawbacks are, it's a well-written piece.
NJ-9, Paterson Mayor:
https://newjerseyglobe.com/local/sayegh-will-seek-third-term-in-paterson-forgoes-primary-challenge-vs-pou/
Looks like Paterson Mayor Andre Sayegh isn’t running against Pou after all. He will instead run for re election.
Good. Seems kind of pointless - Pou doesn't seem very controversial
There was some upset over Pou regarding the issue we aren’t supposed to talk about, but that blew over fast, and Pou is semi-vulnerable in the general anyway, so I can see why Sayegh did this.
sherill won her district by 20 points, trump won the district because of collapsed turnout amongst everyone of our core groups there. Anyone is safe in this seat in 26 as a D
I was thinking that, and I guess you're right about 2026.
It's a non-2026 or potential future Dem-unfavorable environment I worry about.
VA-6:
https://roanoke.com/news/local/government-politics/elections/article_f1698a16-9770-4214-a83e-07e56d8d5c13.html
This seat isn’t remotely winnable, but I think this candidate has an interesting background so I’ll share. (Forgive the paywall.)
Journalist and author Beth Macy is running as a Dem against Rep. Ben Cline. She apparently wrote several books, including one about the opioid epidemic. Thought I’d share because her background piqued my interest.
I live in WV, one the states hardest hit by the opioid epidemic. I hope she does not understate its impact in Appalachia.
This is one of the seats that will get redder if the Democrats are able to redraw the maps.
A 10-1 gerrymander could very easily turn into a dummymader in an even moderately Republican year (which one of the next three elections will likely be).
Stephen Neukam
@stephen_neukam
NEWS — A Schumer-linked group is dropping $1 million on ads targeting four Republicans on expiring Obamacare tax credits
Majority Forward, a nonprofit affiliated with Schumer’s powerful Senate Majority PAC, is releasing the ads in Maine, Iowa, Ohio and Alaska.
The ads slam Republicans running for those seats for not voting to extend expiring ACA tax credits.
Dems taking their health care message to the campaign trail after a record-breaking government shutdown over the issue.
More:
https://x.com/stephen_neukam/status/1988629703607935380
Peltola is running IG!
I hope Peltola runs. She could actually win that seat.
IG=I guess?
Yes
Some abbreviations are not great. IG is Inspector General to me
to me IG is Inspector General but ig is I guess lol
to anyone under 30, IG stands for Instagram
I am under 30. Can confirm that IG is Instagram and ig is I guess
Like it took me a while before BLM didn't mean Bureau of Land Management to me!
Same here.
BLM is something other than a federal agency?
Black Lives Matter
At the end of the day, the only thing the shutdown could do is highlight how the Trump Big Beautiful Bill will cause healthcare prices to soar for people on Obamacare. The GOP showed no signs that they were open to giving in on Obamacare subsidies, so we now get them on the record for voting against the subsidies and make it a centerpiece of the Democrats 2026 Congressional campaign.
I think even if she wasn't we just don't have the luxury of not trying to compete in Alaska if we want to win the Senate. That said I hope she is.
In NY17, Jessica Reinmann has dropped out of the crowded Democratic primary and endorsed Cait Conley.
Incidentally, someone I know is friends with Reinmann. Probably a smart move, I'm backing Conley personally.
I imagine Conley, Beth Davidson and perhaps Mike Sacks are the frontrunners for that primary
Sacks was my original pick, as the more progressive option, but I'm voting Conley (I'm in NY-17) as a strategic move. I know my area well, and progressives aren't exactly popular where I am. Plus, Conley has a lot of energy, and seems like a great candidate in general -- I saw her at the Ossining NY No Kings protest and she was great.
I am thus voting for her.
Do you get the feeling Sean Maloney will try to upend the primary?
Oh God I hope not. SPM was atrocious. He ran a horrible campaign where he didn't show up (a couple people I know who campaigned for him said he was in fucking Europe instead of campaigning), didn't take the race seriously and acted like he'd just win, and apparently tried and failed to pay Mondaire Jones to run in the seat at one point because he knew he was cooked. He would be a car accident if he ran again and there's bad blood against him in NY-17 for his crappy run in 2022. I think it's telling he lost his own race despite being the literal DCCC chairman. Dear God no.
Similarly, DCCC chair Beryl Anthony lost in 1992 despite it being Arkansas, the home state of Bill Clinton, who was elected the same year. Shows you how great a campaigner Anthony was.
Anthony wasn't the DCCC chair in 1992 when he lost his primary. Vic Fazio of California was.
The last sitting DCCC chair to lose a general reelection was Jim Corman of California in 1980, when he was drowned in a red wave. The same thing almost happened to Fazio in 1994.
And Maloney's predecessor, Cherie Bustos, only narrowly held on as DCCC chair in 2020--and neither could ultimately blame a national GOP wave. At least current chair Suzan DelBene holds a safe blue seat.
Interesting (?) fact: the DCCC chair in the late 1960s, Michael Kirwan, had a policy of giving exactly $1,000.00 to every incumbent running for reelection, regardless of the district. I recall reading this in a book Ralph Nader wrote about Congress in the mid 1970s.
I had been planning to go to a meet and greet with Conley but got waylaid by work. My mother in law, who does a lot of work with Putnam county Dems, likes Davidson but local elected officials that I know like Conley.
I'm in the Westchester half of NY-17 myself, and Conley got a good reaction at the aforementioned protest I was at in Ossining.
I am too. My mother-in-law felt that Davidson was better "on the stump" (which makes sense since she is an elected official) but there is time for Conley to improve on that. Based on her website, Conley has an impressive story.
This is the district Republican Mike Lawler represents, so it indeed stands to reason that an aggressively progressive candidate is probably not the most likely one to win in a district that's voted for a Republican a couple of times.
It is also the district that voted for Mondaire Jones, a Black gay man who supports Medicare For All, the Green New Deal, and called to defund the police as he was running for the seat.
So you're suggesting it might be willing to do that again. He served for only one term, though, and then tried to run in the city because he knew he couldn't win reelection, so I don't think that's a good precedent. Someone who's not as aggressively progressive is likely to have a better chance to defeat Lawler, who for whatever reason is a strong candidate, and stay in office for a long time, like Nita Lowey did.
This is the same year that Malliotakis ousted the centrist Rose on Staten Island, Garbarino held on to a swingy Long Island district, and Tenney ousted Brindisi in the Oneida Valley. Jones managed to win a competitive district despite these other results.
No it isn't- this district has the same number after redistricting but is much redder and more suburban. Most of the territory Jones represented is in George Latimer's district.
The thinking is that Conley and Davidson are the frontrunners. No one else comes close in fundraising. Chatzky has a lot of cash-on-hand, but it is all self-funded. The rest of the contenders - Sacks, Philips-Stanley, Cappello and Sullivan - have very little fundraising/cash, comparatively. Reinmann had a decent amount between fundraising and self-funding, and she saw the writing on the wall.
UT-1:
https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2025/11/12/sen-kathleen-riebe-is-running/
And that makes one official announcement (besides McAdams who hasn't technically announced yet.)
State Sen. Kathleen Riebe is officially in, as the first Dem to target this newly-blueified seat.