I would have expected Harvie to be polling better than a -4 deficit though, I think that's what's shocking. Wtf are we doing here? We had amazing results in the State Navigate polls in Bucks County like a week or two ago with Shapiro leading by 30 points. Fitzpatrick shouldn't even be ahead if that's true. It shouldn’t be much harder than saying “a vote for Fitzpatrick is a vote for Mike Johnson and MAGA.”
It's endlessly frustrating watching people who vote for Democrats for president also vote for people like Fitzpatrick because they are allegedly moderate and cooperative, without taking into account how they enable a caucus that exclusively spends its time advancing an extreme, combative, divisive right-wing agenda. They're given passes to vote against things, but only when it won't be consequential. Fitzpatrick, Valadao, Susan Collins...all team players for extremism when truly needed.
Democratic voters seem far more willing to entertain Republican moderates than vice versa. Maybe that's because Republicans are mostly far-right now, while Democrats are a mix of liberals and moderates. Maybe it's because liberals tend to have hope in cooperation. I wish they would wake the F up and look at what people like Fitzpatrick are actually enabling.
Hey man - you need to stop with this non-stop drumbeat of rage at the "far left". I am a moderate through and through and have expressed my skepticism of far left candidates repeatedly here, but you are overstating the case dramatically. We are all Democrats here and not all "far left" candidates are the same (or even far left). As a general rule, defeated leftist candidates have gotten on board with the winning Democratic candidate (and vice versa, as with Stevens in MI).
This. Which is why, except at the county level, I quit voting for moderate Rs under GWB. Dead, drunk democrats are better candidates at the federal level, and in the states I've lived in. County level where I live often doesn't have a D candidate.
Endorsing Fitzpatrick or any Republican amounts to endorsing a Republican majority and Mike Johnson for Speaker, since that will be the first vote they cast. And since the Republican party does not allow any bipartisanship or any discussion on gun safety, she will get nothing from endorsing Fitzpatrick except the perception of being bipartisan.
Key question for people like Giffords: Why is it a priority to be bipartisan when one party is 100% opposed to your issue?
EMILY's List gets it. They endorse people who support their issue AND who are members of the party that supports their issue.
There is also the reverse dynamic where there are virtually no Republican Senators in Biden/Harris states, but there a number of Dem Senators in Trump seats, which is the only reason they have a shot at a majority now and anytime soon. Part of it is certainly candidate quality (GA, AZ), but the rest I think is Republicans voting for Democrats they like, plus the under vote of Trump voters not picking a Senate candidate
It's probably more independents voting for Democrats they like in some races and Republicans they like in others. Ossoff will probably win a good number of Trump voters but I doubt he wins many registered Republicans. I think the last Dem to put up legit numbers amongst registered Republicans was probably Tester or Kelly.
True, registered is a loaded term. I guess identify as during polling would be more accurate. Then the are states where you don't register but can pull either party's primary ballot and then stick with it. I guess I was saying folks who voted GOP vs Dem presidential
Exactly. Full tribalization of voting would thus hurt our side more than the other guys and makes it impossible to have a functioning two-party system. So I sympathize with the kind of voter who leans Democrat but wants to keep a Brian Fitzpatrick around in the same way I sympathize with the kind of voter who leans Republican but wanted to keep Jon Tester around. The ability to ever again not be the minority party requires voters in the latter category to continue existing.
Napolitano won re-elect 62-35 in 2006 despite setting records for vetoes, and the GOP winning Prez by 8-10 points in 2004, 2008, and 2012. There were a lot more ticket splitters in 2022 in AZ than most people realize, and we should do significantly better on both relative turnout and defections.
I dunno...I'm usually pretty sanguine about our chances but in this environment, against a full MAGA republican in a purple state like AZ, with a potential snapback of Latino voters, I could see her getting into (low) double digits.
Yes, Darlene Graham showed she is too ignorant of defense policy to be a senator. However, Ralph Norman, when given a chance to comment on Taiwan in a follow-up showed that while he is not ignorant of Taiwan's importance, he is too much of a Trump toady to be a senator--although for Republicans, toady and senator go together.
I'd say her brother was also too ignorant of defense policy too, but they elected him four times to the Senate. His M.O. was basically bomb brown people.
I mean, I can squint and see a scenario where she narrowly makes it out of the runoff, and Annie Andrews hits her relentlessly with this clip on not being remotely qualified to be a U.S. senator.
I feel a lot of sympathy for Darline Graham (boo me if you want!) but she clearly shouldn't be a Senator. That being said, I'm getting a big kick out of the reaction to this comment when I'd put my entire net worth on Tommy Tuberville not being able to place Taiwan on a map. It's not like being an idiot has been some barrier to entry to Congress recently. We've outsourced basically all fp decisions to the White House and a very small group of HASC and SASC folks who get to write checks. Darline's lack of knowledge on this stuff just means she'd be a freshman with a lot to learn, which is how a lot of freshmen are. Not to mention she wouldn't have any influence anyway.
What has surprised me is how everyone has overlooked Ralph Norman twisting in the wind when he is asked if he wants a follow-up on what Darlene Graham said. He clearly knows Taiwan is important. He likely knows that the U.S. no longer has a battleship group in the area, since the USS Washington is replacing the USS Abraham Lincoln off the coast of Iran. He knows that Taiwan is vital for computer chips. However, if he comes out strongly in support of Taiwan, he will have Trump gunning for him. At the same time, he wants to assert his foreign policy credentials, and he knows that it is vital to praise Trump and demean Democrats. Thus, he twists in the wind. Since many of the clips cut off with the end of Darlene's comments, he is getting a free pass he does not deserve.
The problem with Darline Graham's response is much easier to package as a soundbite, and it's easier for the average person to understand that it's a bad response.
Today is the day the GOP-controlled NC Board of Elections make plans to consider the early voting plans for the 20 counties that did not have unanimous votes (including Guilford). As expected, the Democrats are clashing with the GOP majority and election denier board head Francis de Luca on the plans to eliminate weekend voting and college campus sites in several of these counties.
That bill for the NC GOP is coming due. Voters are pissed off. And the GOP won't get it until they lose the second U.S. Senate seat, the majority on the state Supreme Court, and the state auditor's office.
As expected, the GOP-controlled NCBSE has sided with the GOP-party line voting plans for almost all of these counties. Only county that got a provision to add additional voting hours on Sunday was Rowan (which was the only unanimous decision by the board).
It's a good issue for winning people over on populist measures. The "the parties are equally worthless" crowd is the type that can actually be won over by opposing flock or data centers.
Flock cameras feel similar to Data centers to me. An issue that's not directly tied to Trump but is still ripe for exploiting because not many people are on board with them, including moderates and conservatives.
And, like, there's about a 0.1% chance Trump comes out *against* Flock cameras.
That only really applies to Dems and more politically-engaged indies and moderate Rs though. You still have to get out the vote for the less politically-engaged who frankly don't care what Trump is doing and don't know what a Strait of Hormuz is, but do know they hate the Flock camera on their street or the data center in their backyard.
I was having lunch with a 77-yr old friend the other day and he was all worked up about the number of flock cameras along our local US Rte. Apparently his 22 yr old grandson was pointing them out. I know about them because we voted them down in our HOA 5 years ago, but I hadn't heard anyone talk about them since. So maybe this is an issue that's finding some penetration.
This pollster has a mixed track record. They've had their moments over the years. On the other hand, just last month they had Angie Craig beating Peggy Flanagan by 2 points.
With that said, I've been cautioning about Minnesota not being what people think this year, or at least potentially not being so, because of the fraud scandal. A position like "Auditor" with a familiar name like "Scott Jensen" is exactly the kind of pairing that would compel some people to split their ticket. And it's doubtful any low-info voter who voted against Scott Jensen four years ago has any memory of why they voted against him then.
Did CA decide to just take a lengthy mental health break and stop counting ballots in CA-14? Both NYT and SoS show the exact same numbers as election night (62% votes in).
Maybe work less on your inner chakra and actually count a ballot or two, dudes.
Under California law they will count ballots postmarked by election day and received within a week after. We have a fair knowledge of the result: Wahab is leading by 1350 votes, 51% to 49%. It is not over, but it is probably over...
Even then, the early votes received before Election Day and the Election Day vote should be counted within the first several hours after the polls close.
Illinois allows for two weeks for late-arriving mail ballots to be counted, yet the vast majority of the vote here is counted by sunrise the day after Election Day.
The vast majority of votes has already been counted here as well. There are already 65K votes reported. This is a mid-summer special election. How many more votes do you expect?
Of the votes that have already been cast: "Most spending was late. The early mail in ballots were at 95k as of Friday and totals so far are only 62k…. So prob more than half [of the counted ballots] was since Wednesday or maybe even last Tuesday."
I suspect that we will see a lot of ballots reported on Friday, and that the race will still be too close to call at that time. I know the AP and New York Times currently say 62% of ballots are counted, but I wouldn't be shocked if we saw 120K ballots cast total.
(Edited this comment to add my source and more info.)
I think there is an argument that the late votes could go either way.
Normally, I'd assume the late vote in Alameda County would skew toward the more progressive candidate, as well as the Democratic Party-endorsed candidate. However, the outside spending that boosted Hernandez came late, and so late voters might have been more influenced by it.
We will just have to be patient with this race. We probably won't know the result with certainty until next week.
FYI, Aisha Wahab is both the Democratic Party-endorsed candidate and progressive candidate. She has the largest base of endorsements from the CA State Democratic Party establishment and multiple organizations.
On the other hand, Melissa Hernandez has more local support from local Mayors and city councilmembers in or near CA-14. She also has lots of support from police unions but far less of the notable grassroots organizations supporting her compared to Wahab.
If anything, outside spending would be more likely to persuade the more moderate-minded voters in CA-14. That's what I suspect it will boil down to in the end. Hernandez has more appeal to those who voted for Eric Swalwell in the past than Wahab does as Swalwell has a background as a prosecutor.
"FYI, Aisha Wahab is both the Democratic Party-endorsed candidate and progressive candidate."
I think you misread my comment--that was my point, that I would normally expect her to win for both those reasons. I just was not sure how the influx of spending by AIPAC would influence the race--if the late voters might get tricked by mailers.
However, it looks like Alameda County updated today, and the additional 30K votes skewed decisively in Wahab's favor. I'm relieved she won!
Florida's vote counting and vote by mail system is very efficient and bipartisan. For all the bragging Rs do about VBM in Florida, why would they not implement that same system in other states they control like Ohio, Texas, Arkansas, and West Virginia?
Imagine if we ended up moving to a popular vote system for President. California would probably give the population a heart attack in every close election
You're absolutely right, ClimateHawk. What's disenfranchising 750,000 people gonna hurt? We don't know who's going to win, so the new Rep can't hire staff. They can't vote once Congress comes back, b/c certification isn't until September 25th. There's a big difference b/w the candidates in terms of where they get their donations and therefore how they will vote, but so what?
In fact, why have elections at all since it doesn't matter who wins?
The registrars’ office plans an initial update on Friday then a final one next Wednesday. The registrar argues that it is more efficient to process all of the mail-in ballots this way. Think of it as two steps. First, open ballots and confirm voter eligibility and signature. That takes time. Second, count the ballots. Particularly as new ballots continue to arrive each day, he argues that doing step two each day slows the overall process. He has drawn criticism for this but that is his argument.
Don’t give up. In June, they released an update before Friday and they may do one today. It seems they should as the volume should be pretty small with only one item on the ballot and only a small part of the county voting.
I'd love to see a decent poll with the R Senate candidates against Andrews. I'm beginning to think Darline Graham Nordone would be easier to defeat than Norman.
Normally I'd agree with you that SC-Sen is out of reach for us, but if there's ever going to be a year to contest it, it's this one. A poorly known non-incumbent running for R's in a deep blue year when AA turnout could well be super-charged. I still think it's out of reach for us but if there's ever a year to try, this is it.
Thinking about this more from the D point of view, who would be the better opponent? Graham Nordone with her inexperience but with Trump's endorsement or Norman who is not Trump endorsed, male, and old. If you assume Andrews can't overcome the state's lean, then it seems Norman might be better because he's less likely to be reelected or survive the term. Graham might be leas conservative, but enough to buck the party? I doubt it. If you think SC is winnable for Andrews, is it harder for her to beat another woman, or easier because of the misogyny of the state Rs?
I'm not sure if the Trump endorsement factor will play much of a role. Trump's pissed about Norman endorsing Nikki Haley, yes, but it's not like Norman's trying to forge a path ahead as an anti-Trump crusader. He's actually trying everything he can to get father Trump's forgiveness. If he won the nomination I think Trump would eventually relent and endorse him, especially if the race starts to look close.
I think Graham would be the better opponent for Andrews to beat. She's clearly out of her element and the nepotism charges are definitely going to drag her down a bit, and all of the accusations of Lindsay not being "conservative enough" will probably follow Darline too, especially if her runoff win isn't convincing.
Norman's age plays an interesting role here because he might not run for re-election or survive such a tenure, but I'm also curious about how Graham would approach a post-Trump Republican party following 2028. I think she could be among the most likely to try and revert back to a "mainstream" Republican if Vance/Rubio lose, especially if it's a devastating loss. Norman, on the other hand, is a true believer.
Exactly. Being a slightly old Republican will not be a turnoff for center-right voters. Being ludicrously unqualified might mgiht might just do it this year considering the political environment and (what I assume are) Andrews' strengths as a candidate. But in the end I can see it being a 4-point loss w/Graham instead of 10-point loss w/Norman.
Yeah I haven’t seen enough good polling to suggest the race is flippable, but it’d definitely be easier to pull off with Graham over Norman (although I think he’d probably perform around one or two points lower than Lindsay did in 2020)
Personally, I think it'll be easier to make people believe Norman is a right-wing extremist partisan, but a Graham nomination could cause some voters in South Carolina to not bother to show up, as they feel uninspired by her.
Even if she's out of office then she'll continue to be a major voice for young people. I think it's pretty unlikely she's not in one of the three federal offices though.
If Markey was being challenged by someone like Ayanna Pressley I'd 100% back her over Markey, and I'm sure the polls would reflect that. But fucking Seth Moulton? He's a chode.
I think Presley would have run (and probably won) if we had some sort of runoff (instant or otherwise). But she didn't want to split the progressive vote, so she held off. I suspect Warren retires and she'll run for that seat.
I think Pressley, and probably several others in MA, would have run if Markey retired, but are doing what the party expects and waiting their turn. Moulton probably knows he isn't favored by MA party insiders and that his best shot is now, with the chance to hit Markey on age and the field clear of more popular politicians who would have run if the seat were open.
Pressley isn't afraid to go against what the party expects. She got her seat by challenging a long term incumbent in a primary, and winning. Capuano was scandal free and had no real flaws, Pressley just successfully convinced voters she'd be even better.
If she thought it was worth the risk (to herself and to the outcome) I don't doubt she'd have run.
Unfortunately I think she's the only member of the current house delegation that I'd like to see elevated to senate. Auchincloss and Moulton are terrible. Neal, McGovern, Lynch, and Keating are too old for it. Clark is going to stick in house leadership. That leaves Trahan (not good, not awful) and Pressley (great).
Hopefully we get someone good to replace Moulton in MA-06 and they're ready to run in 2032 for this seat.
I'm curious if Pressley chose not to run because of potential vote splitting, or out of respect for Markey? Markey's more in line with the type of progressive she is, even if Capuano is still much further to the left of people like Moulton
A year ago I would have said no way. Ever since she was reelected, though, she's backed off on city-transportation measures that are popular with residents but unpopular with suburban commuters. One logical explanation for that about-face would be that she's positioning herself for a statewide run.
Ultimately, I don't know. I did notice that shift, though.
I'm in Massachusetts and I couldn't agree more. Women in sports aside (not saying it isn't important) compare Moulton's voting record to Markey's. The farmer's whole platform appears to be age. Markey may be old but he's a plucky Bostonian showing no signs of serious decline.
Took Cook long enough to shift the ratings in the TX-SEN race. I mean, Talarico's been killing it with fundraising and has been a bit ahead in most of the polls.
It should have been Likely R over a month ago. Gov. Greg Abbott hasn't lead by double digits in the polls and Gina Hinojosa has tightened things more than Beto O'Rourke did in 2022.
Cook Political Report can be painfully conservative in how they assess races.
I think the one thing that gives me pause in Texas is that the Republican electorate is probably higher turnout than in places like the Rust Belt. Republican votes come from suburban counties like Montgomery and Tarrant. We may not get as favorable of an electorate relative to 2024 as we'll have in a place like Wisconsin.
I think it'll definitely be closer than 2022. My only point is that I think there are countervailing forces in Texas where large reversion of Hispanic voters who supported Trump in 2024 will make up a big chunk of ground in Texas is going in the opposite direction of the likely large differential turnout advantage we'll experience elsewhere.
Some reminiscences as folks start to comapre this year to 2006: We won a broad majority in the House, but there were quite a few "longshot" victories and several of the expected "should win" races didn't materialize. I think partisanship has mostly sorted that out over the past 20 years, but don't be suprised to see folks like Brian Fitzpatrick and Mike Lawler hold on in Kamala (or near-Kamala) seats while we make inroads into deeper Trump territory. Just off the top of my head, I remember being surprised that Patsy Madrid (NM-01), Darcy Burner (WA-08), Dan Seals (IL-10), Lois Murphy (PA-06), and Diane Farrell (CT-04) lost in seats that Kerry had won/come close in 2 years earlier.
In 2018, of the 25 Republican held districts that Hillary won, only three of them remained Republican. Interestingly (and unfortunately) enough, one of those three was FItzpatrick.
2006 was crazy. We damn near flipped Wyoming's at large seat, but came up short in multiple Kerry seats. Lost NV-Sen by 14 but almost took TN-Sen. Definitely less of that these days, but things aren't perfectly polarized to presidential results either. Will still be surprises in both directions.
Where are they now? - Former Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA), who is under federal investigation for rape allegations, had his electronics seized at San Francisco International Airport as well as at his home in Washington, D.C. searched.
This comes at the same time there's a special election for his seat as well as an unrelated investigation into his former colleague and campaign chair Jimmy Gomez.
West Virginia was settled by a Welshman named Morgan Morgan, who came to the Eastern Panhandle and started what is now Martinsburg. His son Zackquill established a Fort Morgan on the Monongahela River that later became Morgantown, one of the state's most populous cities.
It's a Chinese name. Naming conventions differ across cultures and what looks or sounds like an odd name to one person may be totally normal to someone else.
It's not uncommon for Chinese names to repeat a character. Examples include pianist Lang Lang (郎朗), olympic diver Guo Jingjing (郭晶晶), actresses Liu Shishi (刘诗诗) and Fan Bingbing (范冰冰), and artist Ai Weiwei (艾未未)
State Rep. Karen Whitsett is more of a conservative Democrat compared to where the party is and declined to run for re-election because of "her faith."
Of course. It also happened in NJ back in 2013 when multiple local Democratic Mayors ended up lending their support to Chris Christie when he ran for re-election as Governor. Quite the eye rolling if you ask me.
Some of these mayors are in competitive-ish towns where that may or may not work. In a place like Dover, where there's no such risk, the county party already moved to primary the councilors aligned with the mayor, successfully in all races iirc
Democrats like her and Fetterman only really appeal to Republicans anyway, because they get to go "ha, one of those creatures agrees with us!" Democrats aren't going to care about an already right-wing DINO endorsing Rogers, and independents aren't making their votes based on what one state rep says.
"David Crowley says he decided to resurrect his campaign after his wife prayed and asked for a sign in the form of a red bird if he should resume the campaign. She later saw a red bird, Crowley says."
TX-SEN: From the Texas Tribune: Talarico floods Texas airwaves in U.S. Senate race as Paxton, GOP stay quiet. Subheading: With early voting about two months away, the Democrat has had TV nearly to himself, outspending his Republican rival more than 200-to-1 on advertising as GOP groups weigh when — or whether — to get involved.
This was a good read, especially seeing the spending disparity between Talarico and Paxton. A couple of interesting tidbits I noticed...remember that Echelon polling memo from the other day that said Democrats poll higher in the summer? From the article: "Republican strategists caution that Democrats’ polling is typically strongest in the summer, and that they expect those numbers to shift once Paxton or his allies begin attacking Talarico on television."
Another interesting bit from the article that might explain why neither side has seen much outside ad reservation for Texas: "In smaller states with fewer media markets, ad rates can rise quickly, especially when there are competitive governor and House races also competing for airtime. In those cases, early reservations can be critical. Meanwhile, Texas has 20 different media markets, placing less pressure on outside groups to commit money early and lock in rates, one national GOP strategist told the Tribune. That’s why campaigns and groups often buy ad time on a week-to-week basis here."
Overall, go read the article, especially for some positive vibes about Texas and the money race. It never mentioned it in the article, but I have to think that Republican groups are gonna have to make a decision to either spend heavily in Texas just to hold Texas or reduce and/or give up and spread their money around to other states.
Their strategists argument that democrats polling stronger in the summer is some real cope. It's a very cherry picked trend requiring an overfocus on recent bad years for us. The party doing poorly in an election cycle tends to poll better in the summer... because the polls get worse for them as it gets closer to election day. That plus the asterisk year of 2020 with Covid throwing everything for a loop.
Maybe 2026 is a dud year for us. It doesn't look like it, but maybe that happens. If so, it won't be because "democrats" poll better in the summer -- it will be because the cycle shifted away from us in the final stretch.
Well, I won't stop them if Texas republicans want to make things harder for themselves by relying on overfly fitted trends to feel good about the election rather than taking the campaign seriously.
That PA-1 internal is Not Great, Bob! Dunno why they released it.
Wanted to show they are just a few behind with Fitzpatrick under 50.
I would have expected Harvie to be polling better than a -4 deficit though, I think that's what's shocking. Wtf are we doing here? We had amazing results in the State Navigate polls in Bucks County like a week or two ago with Shapiro leading by 30 points. Fitzpatrick shouldn't even be ahead if that's true. It shouldn’t be much harder than saying “a vote for Fitzpatrick is a vote for Mike Johnson and MAGA.”
In general I agree with you but I'd tie him to Trump, not Johnson. Most people don't know who Mike Johnson is.
It’s showing a closer race than his past performances. And this is after lots of money spent attacking Harvie.
It's endlessly frustrating watching people who vote for Democrats for president also vote for people like Fitzpatrick because they are allegedly moderate and cooperative, without taking into account how they enable a caucus that exclusively spends its time advancing an extreme, combative, divisive right-wing agenda. They're given passes to vote against things, but only when it won't be consequential. Fitzpatrick, Valadao, Susan Collins...all team players for extremism when truly needed.
Democratic voters seem far more willing to entertain Republican moderates than vice versa. Maybe that's because Republicans are mostly far-right now, while Democrats are a mix of liberals and moderates. Maybe it's because liberals tend to have hope in cooperation. I wish they would wake the F up and look at what people like Fitzpatrick are actually enabling.
Hey man - you need to stop with this non-stop drumbeat of rage at the "far left". I am a moderate through and through and have expressed my skepticism of far left candidates repeatedly here, but you are overstating the case dramatically. We are all Democrats here and not all "far left" candidates are the same (or even far left). As a general rule, defeated leftist candidates have gotten on board with the winning Democratic candidate (and vice versa, as with Stevens in MI).
This. Which is why, except at the county level, I quit voting for moderate Rs under GWB. Dead, drunk democrats are better candidates at the federal level, and in the states I've lived in. County level where I live often doesn't have a D candidate.
I'm disappointed in Gabby Giffords for endorsing him this cycle, for example.
I am assuming they are friendly. DC is a small place and getting even smaller. Also gives her org a veneer of bipartisanship.
Endorsing Fitzpatrick or any Republican amounts to endorsing a Republican majority and Mike Johnson for Speaker, since that will be the first vote they cast. And since the Republican party does not allow any bipartisanship or any discussion on gun safety, she will get nothing from endorsing Fitzpatrick except the perception of being bipartisan.
Key question for people like Giffords: Why is it a priority to be bipartisan when one party is 100% opposed to your issue?
EMILY's List gets it. They endorse people who support their issue AND who are members of the party that supports their issue.
There is also the reverse dynamic where there are virtually no Republican Senators in Biden/Harris states, but there a number of Dem Senators in Trump seats, which is the only reason they have a shot at a majority now and anytime soon. Part of it is certainly candidate quality (GA, AZ), but the rest I think is Republicans voting for Democrats they like, plus the under vote of Trump voters not picking a Senate candidate
It's probably more independents voting for Democrats they like in some races and Republicans they like in others. Ossoff will probably win a good number of Trump voters but I doubt he wins many registered Republicans. I think the last Dem to put up legit numbers amongst registered Republicans was probably Tester or Kelly.
Neither Georgia nor Montana have registered Republicans--they don't have partisan registration. But your general point stands.
ah good info but yeah general point of GOPers are not voting for our swing staters.
True, registered is a loaded term. I guess identify as during polling would be more accurate. Then the are states where you don't register but can pull either party's primary ballot and then stick with it. I guess I was saying folks who voted GOP vs Dem presidential
Exactly. Full tribalization of voting would thus hurt our side more than the other guys and makes it impossible to have a functioning two-party system. So I sympathize with the kind of voter who leans Democrat but wants to keep a Brian Fitzpatrick around in the same way I sympathize with the kind of voter who leans Republican but wanted to keep Jon Tester around. The ability to ever again not be the minority party requires voters in the latter category to continue existing.
AZ GOV Hobbs by a big bunch 48-35 https://x.com/PpollingNumbers/status/2090431810521923986?s=20
I don't see a path for this kind of victory. Best I'm thinking is Hobbs +5 or 7.
Gov elections are weird. This would be similar to Laura Kelly's overperformances and less than Beshear's.
Napolitano won re-elect 62-35 in 2006 despite setting records for vetoes, and the GOP winning Prez by 8-10 points in 2004, 2008, and 2012. There were a lot more ticket splitters in 2022 in AZ than most people realize, and we should do significantly better on both relative turnout and defections.
I dunno...I'm usually pretty sanguine about our chances but in this environment, against a full MAGA republican in a purple state like AZ, with a potential snapback of Latino voters, I could see her getting into (low) double digits.
The leg is closely divided right? This kind of blowout at the top of the ballot would have to lead to Dem majorities presumably.
Yes, Darlene Graham showed she is too ignorant of defense policy to be a senator. However, Ralph Norman, when given a chance to comment on Taiwan in a follow-up showed that while he is not ignorant of Taiwan's importance, he is too much of a Trump toady to be a senator--although for Republicans, toady and senator go together.
I'd say her brother was also too ignorant of defense policy too, but they elected him four times to the Senate. His M.O. was basically bomb brown people.
He was on the right side on Ukraine.
A broken clock is right twice a day...
Is that ignorance or malice?
I'd say malice given that his foreign policy views could've been summed up as "bomb everything that moves"
I agree with you.
I’d say he didn’t have a very sophisticated foreign policy beyond that, hence the ignorance masquerading as hawkishness.
maliciously ignorant or ignorant maliciousness
That just sounds like a normal Republican to me. Racism is part of their agenda.
Oh, but Lindsey was *really* racist. He didn't support killing brown people for money. He did it for fun.
I mean, Strom Thurmond was his immediate predecessor.
I mean, I can squint and see a scenario where she narrowly makes it out of the runoff, and Annie Andrews hits her relentlessly with this clip on not being remotely qualified to be a U.S. senator.
Nah..
I feel a lot of sympathy for Darline Graham (boo me if you want!) but she clearly shouldn't be a Senator. That being said, I'm getting a big kick out of the reaction to this comment when I'd put my entire net worth on Tommy Tuberville not being able to place Taiwan on a map. It's not like being an idiot has been some barrier to entry to Congress recently. We've outsourced basically all fp decisions to the White House and a very small group of HASC and SASC folks who get to write checks. Darline's lack of knowledge on this stuff just means she'd be a freshman with a lot to learn, which is how a lot of freshmen are. Not to mention she wouldn't have any influence anyway.
What has surprised me is how everyone has overlooked Ralph Norman twisting in the wind when he is asked if he wants a follow-up on what Darlene Graham said. He clearly knows Taiwan is important. He likely knows that the U.S. no longer has a battleship group in the area, since the USS Washington is replacing the USS Abraham Lincoln off the coast of Iran. He knows that Taiwan is vital for computer chips. However, if he comes out strongly in support of Taiwan, he will have Trump gunning for him. At the same time, he wants to assert his foreign policy credentials, and he knows that it is vital to praise Trump and demean Democrats. Thus, he twists in the wind. Since many of the clips cut off with the end of Darlene's comments, he is getting a free pass he does not deserve.
I guess lying and flip-flopping is less bad than admitting ignorance. Maybe that's why we're in this mess: Nobody can admit when they're wrong?
The problem with Darline Graham's response is much easier to package as a soundbite, and it's easier for the average person to understand that it's a bad response.
Darline. Weird spelling. To me, after "dar", it reads like "line".
Today is the day the GOP-controlled NC Board of Elections make plans to consider the early voting plans for the 20 counties that did not have unanimous votes (including Guilford). As expected, the Democrats are clashing with the GOP majority and election denier board head Francis de Luca on the plans to eliminate weekend voting and college campus sites in several of these counties.
https://www.wral.com/news/nccapitol/nc-early-voting-plan-county-2026-election-board-midterm-sunday-black-voters-august-2026/
That bill for the NC GOP is coming due. Voters are pissed off. And the GOP won't get it until they lose the second U.S. Senate seat, the majority on the state Supreme Court, and the state auditor's office.
As expected, the GOP-controlled NCBSE has sided with the GOP-party line voting plans for almost all of these counties. Only county that got a provision to add additional voting hours on Sunday was Rowan (which was the only unanimous decision by the board).
https://x.com/AbdulElSayed/status/2090093246563193113?s=46
MI-Sen: Good Abdul El-Sayed ad on Flock cameras and government surveillance that clearly states Mike Rogers' view on things.
Please make that an issue. I hate those cameras.
Good background music too.
But people aren’t voting on Flock cameras, they’re voting in opposition to Trump and his administration
Not necessarily. It's an issue that has some prominence, along with many others.
People vote for different reasons.
It's a good issue for winning people over on populist measures. The "the parties are equally worthless" crowd is the type that can actually be won over by opposing flock or data centers.
That's fair. However, it might be enough of an issue to enough people to help impel them to vote. I'm thinking particularly of Black voters.
And Hispanic voters
Well, good thing this administration is knee-deep in surveillance state rhetoric and actions then.
Flock cameras feel similar to Data centers to me. An issue that's not directly tied to Trump but is still ripe for exploiting because not many people are on board with them, including moderates and conservatives.
And, like, there's about a 0.1% chance Trump comes out *against* Flock cameras.
Even a Republican county commissioner in rural Tennessee recently said the CEO of Flock should be hanged.
https://www.knoxnews.com/story/news/local/tennessee/2026/08/18/east-tennessee-commissioner-suggests-hanging-flock-ceo/91350771007/
That only really applies to Dems and more politically-engaged indies and moderate Rs though. You still have to get out the vote for the less politically-engaged who frankly don't care what Trump is doing and don't know what a Strait of Hormuz is, but do know they hate the Flock camera on their street or the data center in their backyard.
I was having lunch with a 77-yr old friend the other day and he was all worked up about the number of flock cameras along our local US Rte. Apparently his 22 yr old grandson was pointing them out. I know about them because we voted them down in our HOA 5 years ago, but I hadn't heard anyone talk about them since. So maybe this is an issue that's finding some penetration.
Minnesota Row Offices
SOS: Simon (D) +7
AG: TIED 43-43
Aud: TIED 39-39
https://kstp.com/kstp-news/top-news/kstp-surveyusa-poll-early-frontrunner-in-secretary-of-state-race-auditor-neck-and-neck/
This pollster has a mixed track record. They've had their moments over the years. On the other hand, just last month they had Angie Craig beating Peggy Flanagan by 2 points.
With that said, I've been cautioning about Minnesota not being what people think this year, or at least potentially not being so, because of the fraud scandal. A position like "Auditor" with a familiar name like "Scott Jensen" is exactly the kind of pairing that would compel some people to split their ticket. And it's doubtful any low-info voter who voted against Scott Jensen four years ago has any memory of why they voted against him then.
Same Sample that had Klobuchar +16 and Flanagan+5 for Gov and Sen
I believe that the Republican candidates for AG and Auditor will get 43% and 39% of the vote.
Did CA decide to just take a lengthy mental health break and stop counting ballots in CA-14? Both NYT and SoS show the exact same numbers as election night (62% votes in).
Maybe work less on your inner chakra and actually count a ballot or two, dudes.
We wrote in yesterday's Digest, "Alameda County, which makes up the entire 14th District, anticipates counting more ballots on Friday." https://www.pleasantonweekly.com/regional-politics/2026/08/18/wahab-holds-slim-lead-in-congressional-district-14-special-election/
I don't think it's great how Alameda County takes days to tabulate more votes, but they do lay out their schedule in advance at least.
Still no reason why no action on Wednesday and Thursday, but whatever. Thanks.
Under California law they will count ballots postmarked by election day and received within a week after. We have a fair knowledge of the result: Wahab is leading by 1350 votes, 51% to 49%. It is not over, but it is probably over...
Even then, the early votes received before Election Day and the Election Day vote should be counted within the first several hours after the polls close.
Illinois allows for two weeks for late-arriving mail ballots to be counted, yet the vast majority of the vote here is counted by sunrise the day after Election Day.
The vast majority of votes has already been counted here as well. There are already 65K votes reported. This is a mid-summer special election. How many more votes do you expect?
On Twitter, Paul Mitchell (California's top voting expert) said that over 95K ballots had been registered as being cast by last Friday.
https://x.com/paulmitche11/status/2089933426338275651
Of the votes that have already been cast: "Most spending was late. The early mail in ballots were at 95k as of Friday and totals so far are only 62k…. So prob more than half [of the counted ballots] was since Wednesday or maybe even last Tuesday."
I suspect that we will see a lot of ballots reported on Friday, and that the race will still be too close to call at that time. I know the AP and New York Times currently say 62% of ballots are counted, but I wouldn't be shocked if we saw 120K ballots cast total.
(Edited this comment to add my source and more info.)
So why can't they update each day with the new returns? Why 4 days until next update?
I think there is an argument that the late votes could go either way.
Normally, I'd assume the late vote in Alameda County would skew toward the more progressive candidate, as well as the Democratic Party-endorsed candidate. However, the outside spending that boosted Hernandez came late, and so late voters might have been more influenced by it.
We will just have to be patient with this race. We probably won't know the result with certainty until next week.
FYI, Aisha Wahab is both the Democratic Party-endorsed candidate and progressive candidate. She has the largest base of endorsements from the CA State Democratic Party establishment and multiple organizations.
On the other hand, Melissa Hernandez has more local support from local Mayors and city councilmembers in or near CA-14. She also has lots of support from police unions but far less of the notable grassroots organizations supporting her compared to Wahab.
If anything, outside spending would be more likely to persuade the more moderate-minded voters in CA-14. That's what I suspect it will boil down to in the end. Hernandez has more appeal to those who voted for Eric Swalwell in the past than Wahab does as Swalwell has a background as a prosecutor.
"FYI, Aisha Wahab is both the Democratic Party-endorsed candidate and progressive candidate."
I think you misread my comment--that was my point, that I would normally expect her to win for both those reasons. I just was not sure how the influx of spending by AIPAC would influence the race--if the late voters might get tricked by mailers.
However, it looks like Alameda County updated today, and the additional 30K votes skewed decisively in Wahab's favor. I'm relieved she won!
Meanwhile the entire state of Florida was done in two hours. Just pathetic and does not help with the conspiracy theorists.
Florida's vote counting and vote by mail system is very efficient and bipartisan. For all the bragging Rs do about VBM in Florida, why would they not implement that same system in other states they control like Ohio, Texas, Arkansas, and West Virginia?
I don’t regard Florida as a well run state, so California should be embarrassed it runs circles around them in voting administration
Agree that FL isn't well-run (otherwise Dems would be running it), but their DMV and voting services are run very well.
I think that’s both our points - if freaking Florida can have an excellent voting/DMV system then what is everybody else’s excuse?
There isn’t a good one. It’s apathy from some of our bluest states. The ineffectiveness at governing them hurts the party at large.
Imagine if we ended up moving to a popular vote system for President. California would probably give the population a heart attack in every close election
I don't know the exact specifics but even accounting for late-arriving mail ballots, counties are given wide latitude for when they can update next.
https://x.com/umichvoter/status/2090436631371079725?s=20
This user went private after spreading what was probably disinformation (Stevens pollster saying she had no path to victory), and then getting doxxed.
Why be all Veruca Salt about it?
"I want my Oompa Loompa now Daddy!"
Just chill out. It is fine. Once all the ballots that can be processed & counted arrive, they will start going through them.
You're absolutely right, ClimateHawk. What's disenfranchising 750,000 people gonna hurt? We don't know who's going to win, so the new Rep can't hire staff. They can't vote once Congress comes back, b/c certification isn't until September 25th. There's a big difference b/w the candidates in terms of where they get their donations and therefore how they will vote, but so what?
In fact, why have elections at all since it doesn't matter who wins?
That is not even a little bit what ClimateHawk said. He just said, they'll get counted and processed. Who exactly is being "disenfranchised" here?
The registrars’ office plans an initial update on Friday then a final one next Wednesday. The registrar argues that it is more efficient to process all of the mail-in ballots this way. Think of it as two steps. First, open ballots and confirm voter eligibility and signature. That takes time. Second, count the ballots. Particularly as new ballots continue to arrive each day, he argues that doing step two each day slows the overall process. He has drawn criticism for this but that is his argument.
Don’t give up. In June, they released an update before Friday and they may do one today. It seems they should as the volume should be pretty small with only one item on the ballot and only a small part of the county voting.
California has a pathological need to help election conspiracy theorists make their case.
I'd love to see a decent poll with the R Senate candidates against Andrews. I'm beginning to think Darline Graham Nordone would be easier to defeat than Norman.
Normally I'd agree with you that SC-Sen is out of reach for us, but if there's ever going to be a year to contest it, it's this one. A poorly known non-incumbent running for R's in a deep blue year when AA turnout could well be super-charged. I still think it's out of reach for us but if there's ever a year to try, this is it.
Thinking about this more from the D point of view, who would be the better opponent? Graham Nordone with her inexperience but with Trump's endorsement or Norman who is not Trump endorsed, male, and old. If you assume Andrews can't overcome the state's lean, then it seems Norman might be better because he's less likely to be reelected or survive the term. Graham might be leas conservative, but enough to buck the party? I doubt it. If you think SC is winnable for Andrews, is it harder for her to beat another woman, or easier because of the misogyny of the state Rs?
I'm not sure if the Trump endorsement factor will play much of a role. Trump's pissed about Norman endorsing Nikki Haley, yes, but it's not like Norman's trying to forge a path ahead as an anti-Trump crusader. He's actually trying everything he can to get father Trump's forgiveness. If he won the nomination I think Trump would eventually relent and endorse him, especially if the race starts to look close.
I think Graham would be the better opponent for Andrews to beat. She's clearly out of her element and the nepotism charges are definitely going to drag her down a bit, and all of the accusations of Lindsay not being "conservative enough" will probably follow Darline too, especially if her runoff win isn't convincing.
Norman's age plays an interesting role here because he might not run for re-election or survive such a tenure, but I'm also curious about how Graham would approach a post-Trump Republican party following 2028. I think she could be among the most likely to try and revert back to a "mainstream" Republican if Vance/Rubio lose, especially if it's a devastating loss. Norman, on the other hand, is a true believer.
Exactly. Being a slightly old Republican will not be a turnoff for center-right voters. Being ludicrously unqualified might mgiht might just do it this year considering the political environment and (what I assume are) Andrews' strengths as a candidate. But in the end I can see it being a 4-point loss w/Graham instead of 10-point loss w/Norman.
Yeah I haven’t seen enough good polling to suggest the race is flippable, but it’d definitely be easier to pull off with Graham over Norman (although I think he’d probably perform around one or two points lower than Lindsay did in 2020)
Personally, I think it'll be easier to make people believe Norman is a right-wing extremist partisan, but a Graham nomination could cause some voters in South Carolina to not bother to show up, as they feel uninspired by her.
MI GV & SEnate polls
#MISEN
Abdul El-Sayed (D) 48
Mike Rogers (R) 47
#MIGOV
Jocelyn Benson (D) 49
John James (R) 44
https://x.com/PatrickSvitek/status/2090453862687670664?s=20
Looks realistic
Agreed. I suspect Benson wins by more like 7, but AES by 1 seems very plausible.
Lordy. We need to lock the fuck in.
MA Senate: AOC backs Ed Markey.
https://x.com/PollTracker2024/status/2090394521125232760?s=20
I imagine both him and Warren retire in 2030 and 2032. AOC will have quite the roster to choose from then, if she's still in national politics.
Even if she's out of office then she'll continue to be a major voice for young people. I think it's pretty unlikely she's not in one of the three federal offices though.
A senate seat in NY is essentially hers if she wants it, her announcing for it would surely smash any standing 24hr fundraising record.
If Markey was being challenged by someone like Ayanna Pressley I'd 100% back her over Markey, and I'm sure the polls would reflect that. But fucking Seth Moulton? He's a chode.
I think Presley would have run (and probably won) if we had some sort of runoff (instant or otherwise). But she didn't want to split the progressive vote, so she held off. I suspect Warren retires and she'll run for that seat.
I think Pressley, and probably several others in MA, would have run if Markey retired, but are doing what the party expects and waiting their turn. Moulton probably knows he isn't favored by MA party insiders and that his best shot is now, with the chance to hit Markey on age and the field clear of more popular politicians who would have run if the seat were open.
Pressley isn't afraid to go against what the party expects. She got her seat by challenging a long term incumbent in a primary, and winning. Capuano was scandal free and had no real flaws, Pressley just successfully convinced voters she'd be even better.
If she thought it was worth the risk (to herself and to the outcome) I don't doubt she'd have run.
Unfortunately I think she's the only member of the current house delegation that I'd like to see elevated to senate. Auchincloss and Moulton are terrible. Neal, McGovern, Lynch, and Keating are too old for it. Clark is going to stick in house leadership. That leaves Trahan (not good, not awful) and Pressley (great).
Hopefully we get someone good to replace Moulton in MA-06 and they're ready to run in 2032 for this seat.
I'm curious if Pressley chose not to run because of potential vote splitting, or out of respect for Markey? Markey's more in line with the type of progressive she is, even if Capuano is still much further to the left of people like Moulton
I wonder if Michelle Wu would run.
A year ago I would have said no way. Ever since she was reelected, though, she's backed off on city-transportation measures that are popular with residents but unpopular with suburban commuters. One logical explanation for that about-face would be that she's positioning herself for a statewide run.
Ultimately, I don't know. I did notice that shift, though.
I'm in Massachusetts and I couldn't agree more. Women in sports aside (not saying it isn't important) compare Moulton's voting record to Markey's. The farmer's whole platform appears to be age. Markey may be old but he's a plucky Bostonian showing no signs of serious decline.
That should read *former*.
https://siouxcityjournal.com/news/local/government-politics/article_d60e5437-cbdf-420a-8416-6e68cf9ada33.html
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) was gifted a new vacuum cleaner by a staffer after his longtime companion Beth stopped working a few weeks ago.
There's a dirty joke in this headline. I'll let you guys figure it out.
Can't see everything in the link but here's a better one that doesn't have an ad block.
https://cbs2iowa.com/news/local/sen-grassley-gifted-new-vacuum-cleaner-after-retirement-of-beth-10-goes-viral
Cook
Today we are shifting 4 key statewide race ratings:
#TXSEN: Lean R → Toss Up
#IASEN: Lean R → Toss Up
#TXGOV: Solid R → Likely R
#IAGOV: Toss Up → Lean D
Great to see.
Better late than never, I guess
Took Cook long enough to shift the ratings in the TX-SEN race. I mean, Talarico's been killing it with fundraising and has been a bit ahead in most of the polls.
I'm surprised they shifted TX-GOV to Likely R.
It should have been Likely R over a month ago. Gov. Greg Abbott hasn't lead by double digits in the polls and Gina Hinojosa has tightened things more than Beto O'Rourke did in 2022.
Cook Political Report can be painfully conservative in how they assess races.
Especially Mr. Dave "I've Seen Enough" Wasserman.
I think the one thing that gives me pause in Texas is that the Republican electorate is probably higher turnout than in places like the Rust Belt. Republican votes come from suburban counties like Montgomery and Tarrant. We may not get as favorable of an electorate relative to 2024 as we'll have in a place like Wisconsin.
Higher GOP turnout is expected in TX although that doesn't mean Abbott is ensured he's going to win by the same amount as he did in 2022.
I was never expecting Hinojosa was going to win the gubernatorial race but if turnout is stronger this time around vs. 2022, then the dynamic changes.
I think it'll definitely be closer than 2022. My only point is that I think there are countervailing forces in Texas where large reversion of Hispanic voters who supported Trump in 2024 will make up a big chunk of ground in Texas is going in the opposite direction of the likely large differential turnout advantage we'll experience elsewhere.
ME & MI to Lean Dem will be next, though that will be October most likely.
Or something else to Lean R. NE, KS, or SC.
I have a hard time viewing any statewide race in IA as anything better than a toss-up for us but the others look about right.
Some reminiscences as folks start to comapre this year to 2006: We won a broad majority in the House, but there were quite a few "longshot" victories and several of the expected "should win" races didn't materialize. I think partisanship has mostly sorted that out over the past 20 years, but don't be suprised to see folks like Brian Fitzpatrick and Mike Lawler hold on in Kamala (or near-Kamala) seats while we make inroads into deeper Trump territory. Just off the top of my head, I remember being surprised that Patsy Madrid (NM-01), Darcy Burner (WA-08), Dan Seals (IL-10), Lois Murphy (PA-06), and Diane Farrell (CT-04) lost in seats that Kerry had won/come close in 2 years earlier.
In 2018, of the 25 Republican held districts that Hillary won, only three of them remained Republican. Interestingly (and unfortunately) enough, one of those three was FItzpatrick.
Remind me who the others were?
John Katko and Will Hurd
fwiw i think we finally get lawler, but agreed on fitzshatrick
This is probably our best year we’ll ever get to knock him out. Hope we don’t blow it.
There was no way Gil Gutknecht was going to lose! Who is this Walz fellow?
2006 was crazy. We damn near flipped Wyoming's at large seat, but came up short in multiple Kerry seats. Lost NV-Sen by 14 but almost took TN-Sen. Definitely less of that these days, but things aren't perfectly polarized to presidential results either. Will still be surprises in both directions.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/swalwell-fbi-search-warrants-devices-sexual-misconduct-investigation/
Where are they now? - Former Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA), who is under federal investigation for rape allegations, had his electronics seized at San Francisco International Airport as well as at his home in Washington, D.C. searched.
This comes at the same time there's a special election for his seat as well as an unrelated investigation into his former colleague and campaign chair Jimmy Gomez.
So those allegations that he dallied with a Chinese spy look true.
It's not impossible. But I do not trust this FBI to handle this well at all.
If im a defense attorney i push hard on the partisanasation of the U.S government.
He seems like he would have dallied with anyone he wanted to.
From what’s been reported, the Chinese spy’s real name is Fang Fang but went by Christine Fang when she met Eric Swalwell.
Apparently Swalwell did have an intimate relationship and may very well have been used by Fang to help her agenda.
West Virginia was settled by a Welshman named Morgan Morgan, who came to the Eastern Panhandle and started what is now Martinsburg. His son Zackquill established a Fort Morgan on the Monongahela River that later became Morgantown, one of the state's most populous cities.
It's a Chinese name. Naming conventions differ across cultures and what looks or sounds like an odd name to one person may be totally normal to someone else.
It's not uncommon for Chinese names to repeat a character. Examples include pianist Lang Lang (郎朗), olympic diver Guo Jingjing (郭晶晶), actresses Liu Shishi (刘诗诗) and Fan Bingbing (范冰冰), and artist Ai Weiwei (艾未未)
Granted those repeated characters are often sequential in a personal name, not personal and family name
Fair although I took out that specific part of the parenthesis I put in as I determined it was not necessary for this discussion.
Feels like this is more of a fishing expedition for other Dems to attack, like Gallego.
If them and him are guilty of a crime, then so be it. Keep fishing.
https://x.com/newswire_us/status/2090505477297762464?s=46
Despicable
At least she won't be in the state House come January.
not just despicable but the poster child for DINOS everywhere as well
I'm not getting too worked up about this.
State Rep. Karen Whitsett is more of a conservative Democrat compared to where the party is and declined to run for re-election because of "her faith."
Sort of like Lieberman endorsing McCain in 2008
Annoying but completely expected
Of course. It also happened in NJ back in 2013 when multiple local Democratic Mayors ended up lending their support to Chris Christie when he ran for re-election as Governor. Quite the eye rolling if you ask me.
Local mayors in NJ keep doing this, a few local Democrats even endorsed Ciattarelli in 2025, to embarrassing results.
If the DSA wants to primary these DINOs, they can do it.
Some of these mayors are in competitive-ish towns where that may or may not work. In a place like Dover, where there's no such risk, the county party already moved to primary the councilors aligned with the mayor, successfully in all races iirc
Yeah, she’s just another religious dumb dumb weirdo Dem, good riddance since she is not seeking reelection this year.
Doubtful her presence/support for Rogers swings any voters his way.
Democrats like her and Fetterman only really appeal to Republicans anyway, because they get to go "ha, one of those creatures agrees with us!" Democrats aren't going to care about an already right-wing DINO endorsing Rogers, and independents aren't making their votes based on what one state rep says.
It's ironic how Fetterman became a DINO *after* brain damage. Funny that.
nothing funny about a stroke...he seems like a rather pathetic grifter to me
The joke is that Republicans lack proper education and that Fetterman's brain being damaged sent him down that path.
Crowley did as well, apparently
"David Crowley says he decided to resurrect his campaign after his wife prayed and asked for a sign in the form of a red bird if he should resume the campaign. She later saw a red bird, Crowley says."
Indeed.
She supported Trump in 20 and 24, and her refusing to attend was the main reason of the lame duck session after 24 election going nowhere.
Nothing new.
TX-SEN: From the Texas Tribune: Talarico floods Texas airwaves in U.S. Senate race as Paxton, GOP stay quiet. Subheading: With early voting about two months away, the Democrat has had TV nearly to himself, outspending his Republican rival more than 200-to-1 on advertising as GOP groups weigh when — or whether — to get involved.
https://www.texastribune.org/2026/08/20/texas-us-senate-race-donors-ken-paxton-james-talarico/
This was a good read, especially seeing the spending disparity between Talarico and Paxton. A couple of interesting tidbits I noticed...remember that Echelon polling memo from the other day that said Democrats poll higher in the summer? From the article: "Republican strategists caution that Democrats’ polling is typically strongest in the summer, and that they expect those numbers to shift once Paxton or his allies begin attacking Talarico on television."
Another interesting bit from the article that might explain why neither side has seen much outside ad reservation for Texas: "In smaller states with fewer media markets, ad rates can rise quickly, especially when there are competitive governor and House races also competing for airtime. In those cases, early reservations can be critical. Meanwhile, Texas has 20 different media markets, placing less pressure on outside groups to commit money early and lock in rates, one national GOP strategist told the Tribune. That’s why campaigns and groups often buy ad time on a week-to-week basis here."
Overall, go read the article, especially for some positive vibes about Texas and the money race. It never mentioned it in the article, but I have to think that Republican groups are gonna have to make a decision to either spend heavily in Texas just to hold Texas or reduce and/or give up and spread their money around to other states.
Their strategists argument that democrats polling stronger in the summer is some real cope. It's a very cherry picked trend requiring an overfocus on recent bad years for us. The party doing poorly in an election cycle tends to poll better in the summer... because the polls get worse for them as it gets closer to election day. That plus the asterisk year of 2020 with Covid throwing everything for a loop.
Maybe 2026 is a dud year for us. It doesn't look like it, but maybe that happens. If so, it won't be because "democrats" poll better in the summer -- it will be because the cycle shifted away from us in the final stretch.
Well, I won't stop them if Texas republicans want to make things harder for themselves by relying on overfly fitted trends to feel good about the election rather than taking the campaign seriously.