What are everyone’s predictions for Tuesday? Here’s mine:
VA Gov – Spanberger +10
VA Lt Gov – Hashmi +7
VA AG – Miyares +1
NJ Gov – Sherrill +4
NYC Mayor – Mamdani 49, Cuomo 32, Sliwa 16
CA Prop 50 – Passes 56-44
PA Supreme Court – I think they’ll all be retained by around +10.
Maine Question 1 and 2 – I think both will fail.
GA Public Service Commission – Hard to tell since these elections usually happen in even years. Could go either way, but it seems like dems have a turnout advantage so D+2 for both seats.
Minneapolis Mayor – I think Frey will win reelection, but it will be interesting to see by how much.
VA-HoD: Dems will pick up 8 seats: 22, 41, 57, 71, 75, 82, 86, and 89. In other words, Dems will pick up 7 of the 8 Harris-won seats (all except 73), and then will also pick up 41 considering how close it was last time.
NJ-Gov: Sherrill +7
NYC Mayor: Mamdani by about 15
Prop 50: Pass 57-43
Maine Question 1: Fail
Those are the only races I've been following closely enough to make a guess on.
I am horrible at election predictions and consequently avoid it, but I do enjoy seeing predictions from everyone else!
I was going to make a joke about only being confident enough to predict Wu at +100 in Boston, but then I checked and it appears write-ins are possible for the general election. So she might "only" get 95-99% of the vote.
So, I don't like to make predictions in numbers, as I'm not the best at gauging exact results. Hence, I'll just make some general predictions of my own:
- Virginia Gov: Spanberger is going to win, and it won't be close. Sears has run an appallingly awful campaign focused only on culture war issues and apparently Jay Jones, this campaign has gone over so badly the VA police union endorsed Spanberger (they usually only endorse Republicans), and the donors have all fled to what they hope are greener pastures. No threat here in my mind.
- Virginia Lt. Gov: Hashmi is going to win, but I fear it may be close. While Reid is a horrible candidate with issues of his own, I have a bad feeling Islamophobia (Hashmi is Muslim) and possibly ideology (Hashmi is relatively progressive) may tip the scales negatively here. Although the heavily blue environment we're looking at may negate the second of those and possibly the first, so who knows.
- Virginia AG: Miyares or Jones will win, in either case by very little. The big question here is whether Jones can overcome his scandals. I'm leaning towards Miyares based on polling showing the answer to that being no, but Jones may still have a shot based solely on the blue environment we're seeing.
- Virginia HoD: Dems are going to pick up seats, that's for sure. Supermajority, I don't know, but it's a possibility given the large amount of pissed-off federal workers and other government employees in Virginia.
- NJ Gov: If Sherrill wins, it will be by very little. I have a bad feeling Ciattarelli may win this. Sherrill has run an atrocious campaign, there have been numerous Dem defections to Ciattarelli (including Nick Sacco) and although we're in a very blue environment, I worry it won't be enough to overcome Sherrill's flaws.
- NJ Assembly: If Sherrill's problems are anything to go by, and if what NJ resident and Primary School author Nick Tagliaferro has been saying on Bluesky is any indication, we're going to lose seats in the State Assembly. How many, I don't know. But something to watch out for.
- NYC Mayor: Mamdani is definitely going to win, and I don't think it will be close. Polling has had him comfortably ahead, he outperformed polling last time, I can say as a Westchester (NYC-adjacent) resident that I'm not hearing a whole ton from those I know in NYC that indicates Mamdani is in any real danger, so I'm going to go out and say he may win by quite a bit. (To say nothing of Sliwa siphoning Cuomo votes.)
- NYC Council District 47: I have a bad feeling Kayla Santosuosso is going to lose this one. She's to the left of her predecessor Justin Brannan in historically conservative Staten Island, and from what I can gather Brannan seems to have an appeal that Santosuosso may not be able to replicate. To say nothing of Mamdani potentially scaring conservative voters in Staten Island against Santosuosso. That being said, there was an ugly GOP primary fight here, so I can imagine some GOP voters may also sit this one out.
- Nassau County, NY races: This area has become quite red, so I think the GOP may still have an advantage. Nevertheless, I've heard County Executive Bruce Blakeman has been awful and isn't well liked, so we may have a(n admittedly small) shot at that one. We'll see.
- CA Prop 50: This will pass, and if what I'm hearing about turnout is any indication, it will pass by a lot. CA is extremely blue, and the messaging pairing this Prop with Trump's fascism is perfect for this state. There may be some voters who idiotically vote in favor of "fairness", but in this anti-Trump environment, I doubt it will be that many.
- PA Supreme Court: The PA Dems have new leadership, with the incompetent Sharif Street now being gone, and I feel like I've heard that there's been more energy here among PA Dems. By how much I don't know, but I think the Court justices are going to be retained. (At least I hope.) (Will not comment on the multiple county executive races as I don't know enough about them -- but fundraising is on our side from what I have heard.)
- Maine Question 1 and 2 - I do not know enough about this state and these races to comment. Ditto for the NY special election for NY-AD-115.
- GA Public Service Commission - Georgia is very red, but I think in this environment (and given that I've heard of discontent with how Georgia's utilities are run) the Dems have a shot. Maybe a small win.
- Minneapolis Mayor: I think Frey is slightly favored, but I wouldn't count Fateh out. Remember that Mamdani was underestimated by every poll, and he won. Ditto for Katie Wilson in Seattle. Fateh may have a genuine path to victory here -- notably, progressives did well in the City Council race here two years ago. It will be close I think -- we'll see. (Can't comment on the City Council as I don't know enough about it to say.) Speaking of Seattle:
- Seattle Mayor, City Attorney, City Council: Given how shockingly well progressives did in round 1 of these races, I think they are favored in all of them -- that means Wilson, Evans, Foster, etc. Polling seems to be indicating as such as well -- though I could be wrong. We'll see. (Can't comment on King County Executive as I don't know enough about it.)
- Miami Mayor: I just can't see the GOP losing this. Miami has been a GOP stronghold for a very, very long time. That being said, the ICE raids have not endeared them one bit to Latinos, who now despise Trump based on polling. We'll see.
- Boston Mayor: Even if Kraft hadn't dropped out, he wouldn't have stood a chance. Wu is popular enough and has done a good enough job that she was always going to be a shoe-in.
- TX-18 special: I agree with Julius Zinn that this will be a Menefee-Edwards runoff. I think Menefee's institutional support/status as a progressive in a progressive-friendly environment will give him a slight advantage in a subsequent runoff, but who knows.
- BONUS: Westchester County, NY Executive: This is my county. I have seen close to zero signs for the Republican. I've gotten numerous mailers from Democrat Ken Jenkins. People are fired up in my area against Trump. I don't think Jenkins is in danger.
Just my thoughts. I'm quite poor at predicting things though so take my takes with a substantial amount of salt.
You must be young, Techno. Nassau County hasn't become red recently, it's reverted to being red, as it was for decades. It produced huge statewide margins for Republicans until the early aughts that somewhat countered what Dems got in NYC.
Someone posted here a while back saying a number of people who worked for him were unhappy with his management, and that he apparently is more interested in gunning for a Trump admin position. Not sure how true that is but who knows.
Correction: District 47 where Santosuosso is running to replace Brannan is entirely in Brooklyn (Bay Ridge, Coney Island, Gravesend) and while it does have shades of purple and red in varying election years, it still voted for Hochul in 2022 with nearly 52%, which is impressive given how horrible she did that year.
I’m not doing predictions because I’ve been burned too many times, but I’m hoping/expecting a very good night for us across the board. If people think that’s a cop out, it definitely is lol. We’ll see what the voters have to say about Trump and the king’s party dictatorship rule after they stupidly chose to elect them again. Can’t wait!
- The F&D label for Cuomo represents Cuomo's Fight and Deliver party line.
- For Minneapolis mayor, my prediction assumes a final ranked-choice vote count between Fateh and Frey, with all other candidates eliminated in earlier rounds.
I'm not sure why the Democrats would lose seats in the New Jersey Assembly in a good Democratic year. I'm presuming that none of the dynamics affecting gubernatorial elections (seemingly relatively weak Democratic candidate vs. fairly strong Republican candidate, history of parties losing the 3rd election after winning 2 in a row) apply to the Assembly, so please explain.
while disagreeing that we definitely lose seats in the assembly I think we lose two and pick up two or three so any change would be minor. Not many competitive republican seats left aside from Ld-21 where i think we have to be slight favorites thus far, and republicans best pickup is the very trumpy ld-3. figure we pick up district 21 and lose district 3 and that nets out to even. only other super close one to watch if race is actually a two point race would be ld 8 where there is a split delegation.
NYC Mayor – Mamdani wins with 52%-55% of the vote. I think people are exaggerating Cuomo and Silwa's appeal and Mamdani easily gets a majority of the vote.
Like Techno, I'll mostly decline to do specific numbers, although I loved reading everyone else's. Even those with which I disagree. Still, even those were pretty rosy; it's nice to see some optimism in these parts, for sure.
All Democrats on the executive line in VA will win, Spanberger overwhelmingly. Democrats will take a HoD supermajority.
Sherrill will win easily in New Jersey.
The PA Supreme Court justices will all be retained.
Mamdani will cruise to a win by more than most analysts expect.
CA Prop 50 will pass overwhelmingly, by something like 58-42.
They included a random Spanberger supporter whose name is not on the ballot as an "independent candidate" to make the race look closer than it appears.
My thoughts about Trafalgar's stunt are the same as Joe Buck's thoughts when Randy Moss fake-mooned Green Bay Packers fans.
When running for the House in 1946, John F. Kennedy's campaign convinced a janitor named Joe Russo to appear on the Democratic ballot along with another man named Joe Russo, who was a legitimate politician. The practice of faking candidates to boost certain other candidates is not new - but it is interesting to see from a pollster
Donna Charles isn't a "random Spanberger supporter". She tried to run as an independent candidate, but never made the ballot.
But she ended all campaign activity several weeks ago and endorsed Spanberger. Trafalgar should not be including her in their polls now, and arguably shouldn't have before since she wasn't on the ballot and isn't well enough known to get many votes as a write in. As such, that pretty much negates whatever credibility the poll has--and being Trafalgar, that's not much.
NC state Representative Cecil Brockman has resigned from the legislature three weeks after being charged for sex offenses. Guilford County Democrats will meet in a week or two to vote on his replacement.
A lot less vote splitting than some of the statewide polls. Jones only running 5 points behind Spanberger, compared to other pollsters having it in the mid double digits. Hashmi only outperforming Jones by 1 point. Guess we'll see!
Vote splitting is something that can be particularly difficult to guess.
When it happens to a large extent, there's commonly a very obvious reason we can point to for it. Those obvious reasons do not always result in vote splitting, due to the steady decline of voters splitting their vote.
Will we see it happen here as a result of the Jones story? If it does it would make perfect sense. Will we see it not happen because voters are less willing to leave their established partisan preferences? If so, it would also make perfect sense.
There's a good explanation for either outcome, which makes things harder to predict!
I think VA is close enough to NC to draw some parallels to the Stein margin, which was way, way beyond any of the other even strong Dem/crazy GOP races (LG, AG, Schools Superintendent). I think Spanberger overperforms, Jones underpeforms, and Hashmi will be the bellweather for the HoD margin.
Eh, I think there won't be quite as much ticket-splitting in Virginia this year as there was for NC-Gov last year, just because Sears, despite her bad campaign, isn't quite as much of a lunatic as Robinson was. After all, she's never referred to herself as a "Black Nazi".
Thanks I was wondering that; I don't get why people always highlight the POTUS numbers and not the prior legislative results; barring some scandalized candidate apples to apples is always better than apples to oranges!
I recall around this time you started hearing about GOP internals showing them getting annihilated in the 18 midterms but I haven't heard much about internals either way this cycle. Most of the public pollsters are playing it safe and weighting to last year's electorate, which I think will prove to be considerably off.
Since the rules are looser on the weekend, here’s the feel good story of the day. Hide the ketchup bottles, Trump is bigly mad because Democrats didn’t cave, they called Trump’s bluff and instead they found their spine. He likes giving it out, but can’t stand when we give it right back in his fat face. Thoughts and prayers to the orange man baby.
Politico: The White House thought the shutdown would be quick. Now they’re frustrated.
In early October, several Trump administration officials had a friendly pool going of how long the shutdown would last. The White House, at the time, was confident Democrats would quickly fold.
No one guessed more than 10 days.
The account, relayed by a person close to the White House granted anonymity to discuss internal thinking, underscores just how much the administration miscalculated the Democrats’ will to keep the government closed even amid furloughs and imperiled social programs like food assistance.
“Trump, he’s had it with these people, because he knows they’re playing politics,” said the second person. “Nobody thought it was going to last this long.”
When the shutdown began, White House officials were certain the Trump administration was better positioned to battle the left during a funding lapse.
Trump and his top aides thought that unpaid federal workers, closed and limited federal facilities and threats of ever-more job cuts from Russ Vought, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, would be too much for Democrats to handle.
They were buoyed when two moderate Democrats — Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) and John Fetterman (D-Pa.) — and Independent Angus King voted with Republicans two days into the shutdown.
But not much has changed since, and it is almost certain that this will be the longest shutdown in history, surpassing the record set during Trump’s first term.
Interesting to look at the quoted segment there through the lens of game theory.
Senate democrats built up too strong of a reputation for folding. Fairly or not, it was the perception going in. That perception then informed the political actions of republicans in DC, who operated under the expectation of them folding easily in the future as well. Acting weak has encouraged further behavior from the opposition that takes advantage of it.
Would this shutdown have happened if Schumer had blocked the CR at the start of the year?
I'm encouraged by them standing strong right now. The party out of power has the least to lose in these cases. If the elections go well for us on Tuesday that will build a further image of strength and might provide the off-ramp with congressional republicans wanting to get things over with.
It's tough to see this lasting through next week though; with another lost paycheck teeing up; all of the public sector unions now supporting the CR, and the ACA deadline passing . . .it's tough to see Schumer not losing enough votes to pass ASSUMING Thune makes a deal to pass bipartisan approps immediately and Johnson guarantees they come to a vote. The wild card is Trump could always torpedo any deal per usual.
I do think a lot depends on Tuesday; if Dems have a big night that adds more wind to Schumer's sails (is that a good band name?)
I'm not even going to try to predict what happens going forward. I am consistently horrible at it. But I will say two things. First, promises from republicans are worth less than the paper they're printed on. And second, if the end result is folding anyway, the whole exercise has been pointless and will have only weakened our position versus doing nothing.
A performative one month shutdown doesn't help us. I strongly disagree with the decision to allow the CR through at the start of the year, but they went about it the right way if that was going to be the end result no matter what: get it done and over with, without gaining further negative headlines along the way.
I'd hope that Schumer et al are aware of the strategic calculus here in determining what to do next.
To be quite honest, there’s almost 0 chance Schumer and Democrats caved so this time they’d be in a better position. That it worked out this way, was not some long game plan. They caved because they’re good government types and thought our base and voters would want us to go along to get along, which is what they did want after 2018.
It’s just Schumer once again not realizing what’s changed since Trump won the first time and underestimating the anger in his party against him and the establishment leading us to a complete catastrophe when it mattered the most in 2024. I still don’t think Democrats in Congress truly understand the rage in our party for always folding against the GOP in every fight.
The town halls they faced were tame, most of our partisans don’t go to town halls. The palpable and incalculable anger is something I’ve never seen before and I feel it too, when I didn’t feel that way against our party’s leaders in 2010, 2014, 2016, 2021 or any of the other elections we lost. This time it’s permanent for me in a “time to throw them out” vibe. I’m sure I’m not the only one who feels the same either.
I definitely get the thinking here and I could buy it.
The thing that gets me though is that Schumer and other democratic senators should be more than capable of seeing the distinctions between 2018 and today. I'm not even thinking about the party anger or anything, it could possibly be forgiven for not realizing that so early on.
What I'm thinking about is the difference in "go along to get along" between then and now. Republicans wanted the budget to reflect their priorities in 2017. That is a reasonable and logical expectation. If a party wins an election they should gain a greater level of influence over the budget and similar processes. In 2017 they were not requiring maximalist concessions in order to keep the government open, in 2017 they were not so consistently and routinely ignoring the laws and the courts (not that it was never, but it was not an endless fact of life). In 2017 they were not insisting on policy changes that will do substantial damage to our economy, both in the immediate moment but also in the decades ahead as countries shift their supply chains away from the US and keep it that way. In 2025 all of those are the case. The CR boosted ICE's budget something like 5-10x over what it was before! They put in language allowing the executive's "emergency" used to justify tariffs last the entire year instead of only 30 days.
In 2025, republicans' starting point for the CR was effectively "give us everything we want" and Schumer went along with that. The status quo for at least 10-20 years now has been that the party in power will moderate their demands in such a scenario and in return the party out of power understands that they can get concessions; Schumer tossed all that aside and surrendered any leverage we have.
I don't care what he might have thought the base would tolerate, what the media wanted, any of that. In that light he made a fundamentally stupid move: he relegated our opposition status to one that was functionally impotent and non-existent, which begs the question of why even seek elected office in the first place? It was a political disaster and conceded any and all levers of power we have for no actual reason. There is no way he is actually stupid enough to think the base would reward senate dems for that. He might have thought we wouldn't punish them, but in that scenario it again begs a question: what did he think was the benefit?
That’s just it, he wasn’t thinking what was politically best for us, he was thinking of what was best for the country. That old school crap type of thinking is what got us into this mess in the first place and needs to be permanently removed from our leaders brains.
That’s why our base is livid about throwing them all out, Democrats who got elected into office before Trump don’t understand the game the Republicans are playing today, and if we can’t even agree what game we’re playing in politics, how on earth are we supposed to beat them at it? Completely clueless.
I guess for me the detail I cannot square is: where did he see the national benefit, when the historical rules of the game had been so blatantly upended?
I don’t think he realized the rules of the game changed, that sums up the entirety of the problem Democrats have right now as a party. He saw a benefit to keeping the government open and not putting Americans in harms way.
That’s an admirable goal, but it only works in practice if both parties try to do that and the GOP hasn’t since the 2010 tea party wave I’d argue. With 1 side being willing to do whatever it takes to advance their autocracy, consequences be damned, old school good government thinking is like fighting blindfolded with both hands tied behind our backs.
What a terrible politician! Atleast her smarter ideological contemporaries like Angie Craig know the "I will not disarm but will work to ban corporate money" line.
Her state’s own junior Senator, Elissa Slotkin, argued for Citizens United to be ended only months after she was sworn in office. She won election to the Senate by .38% points and in each of her House elections from 2018-2022 (exception being 2020) won by less than Haley Stevens.
The Democratic Party in Maine is poised to allow 2/3 elections in the state to turn into complete shitshows.
The Senate primary has completely exploded with frontrunner Platners campaign imploding. It turns out he's basically a social Republican based on his own language on diverse people, most recently gay people. And Janet Mills seems to be Joe Biden 2.0 where the attitude from voters in her own party is basically "Thank you, but next."
The enthusiasm gap for Mills is giving an ominous vibe that we have all seen before... and I have SERIOUS doubts that she has the fangs for a statewide FEDERAL election.
Then there is the complete mess going on in ME-2 where Matt Dunlop is giving us a campaign no one asked for and we certainly don't need VS. Jared Golden. Like him or not, he can win. Now is not the time to perpetuate a self-fulfulling prophesy about him being unpopular with Democrats. We need total unity to keep winning as this district is only getting redder. If he limps out of the primary or loses we will probably lose this seat.
There is a civil war going on in Maine in the Democratic Party between establishment Democrats and populists at the worst possible moment. 10/10 concerned that the state party has no control over it.
I suspect the primary for Governor will turn ugly considering the slate of candidates there already is - Pingree and King are already children of some of Maine's most powerful Democratic politicians, while Jackson and Bellows are attempting to run from progressive angles
I understand what you are getting at with Platner but in interviews, he has emphasized being an anti-fascist, which would not make him in any way like a Republican in today’s GOP.
That said, his Reddit comments make him look bad and his apology doesn’t give any of us assurances he would be able to avoid this kind of rhetoric if he was under pressure or even using social media in appropriately as an elected politician.
The guy has had to explicitly state "I am not a secret Nazi". If this weren't about a major, needed Senate seat it would be absolutely hilarious. Instead it is tragic.
I'm not getting your point. Being a Nazi doesn't cost a politician an appreciable number of Republican votes or prevent a Republican from winning, which is all you need to know about what's drastically wrong with this country and its voters. The same is not true of Democrats!
Yes but is he a fascist? To date, I have not seen Platner exhibit anything that supports this.
Platner wearing a Nazi tattoo is on par with a random person deciding to wear a Nazi symbol on their sleeve out of the blue with no agenda. It’s still constitutionally protected free speech.
I am more concerned about Platner’s agenda than I am about his tattoo. However, because he has been running a Senate campaign, I question his judgment at this point.
I don't think you're old enough to remember that Mondale got huge and increasing attendance at his campaign events in the leadup to his loss of 49 states in 1984. Attendance at events proves nothing about voting.
In full transparency, years ago back in 2013 I had gone through a lengthy effort to get my Google Search Results cleaned up. I didn’t have incriminating evidence, am not a celebrity and have no desire to run for political office. I did however find there were old Live Journal posts about me and they weren’t exactly flattering.
However, I reconnected with the poster later on and turns out he and I were old friends and co-workers back in the day. The Live Journal posts were removed soon after I reconnected with him. And I never even requested this or brought up anything with my friend about it. Nothing about me since then has been known to the public.
I am sharing this because without having been in the public limelight, I was able to clean everything up. I just don’t understand how Platner didn’t think everything through before he entered the Senate race.
I'd like to see if Wood can gain some traction and survive the scrutiny from that. As a former congressional chief of staff he passes some basic credibility tests but has not been able to get substantial attention.
Alternatively, the current AG (Mills' job prior to governor) Frey is listed as a maybe on wiki.
Outside of those potentials, I am not at all impressed with the current slate. Mills could have been a good candidate if she was going to be 74 instead of 79. Unfortunately, that's not the case and she has not shown the requisite ability to annihilate Collins' credibility with persuadable voters. Platner was doing well but I have no interests in the apologists for him: even if people personally think the issues are minor, the damage has been done and I do not think he can win any longer.
Unfortunately what I think is more likely is that Platner will stay in as a "zombie" campaign that maintains enough attention and anti-establishment support to avoid anyone else gaining the traction to be the not-Mills candidate. Mills then wins the primary and she plays the general election too safe and too kindly. Consequently she suffers a respectfully close defeat but still a defeat.
Though as I keep saying I'm horrible at predictions. Hopefully that applies to this prediction in particular!
The problem is that all 3 candidates have serious liabilities and Democrats have to choose, which is the least bad candidate.
Wood worked for a SCAM Grift PAC that raised tens of millions of dollars and didn’t spend any of it on any actual races (that money would’ve been nice in Pennsylvania Senate in 2024, right?)
Mills is old and no longer a popular governor like she was in 2022 while also refusing to run the bare knuckle campaign it would take to win against Collins and bonus is refusing to eliminate the filibuster. That quote she gave Collins publicly is going to be in every single ad of her re-election campaign and plastered on every tv screen. How can you credibly argue she’s not good, when you just said in your own words that she is?
Then you have the complete implosion of a candidate who matches the base’s raw emotions right now, who came out of nowhere to raise a ton of money and get a ton of volunteers that has scandals that are so bad any average person is likely to be turned off from. His campaign staff are continuing to abandon ship indicating where they think this is headed.
Now you’ve got a worst case scenario for Democrats. You have 1 guy who steals Democratic donors money, you have 1 guy with a Nazi tattoo and you have 1 woman who’s an unpopular governor and a very old candidate who doesn’t realize what it takes to win today and what we need as a blue Senator from Maine. Catastrophic is the only way I can put it.
Especially with Platner now running a revenge campaign instead of dropping out. We need a statewide elected or state majority leader in the legislature as a 4th candidate, because right now anyone we nominate in the primary probably won’t beat Collins and the least bad of them, Mills, is unwilling to do what it takes to finally even the Senate playing field for us by ending the filibuster.
We either don’t win or win without the power we need to have. Disaster.
There is a long time before the primary. Even longer until the general election so panicking about it seems premature. From what I’ve noticed from the reporting of newspaper reporters on the ground and some comments from Maine voters on Bluesky and Reddit, it seems to be a different world from all of the discourse coming from non-Mainers. I’m a non-Mainer so I'm also including my own opinion in the “doesn’t matter”category. There likely will be polls soon of primary and general match ups — hopefully decent quality ones—but polls now still are very early
This is why I am not going to make any assumptions on how the Senate race is going to unfold. It’s the primary process that is going to be unpredictable.
Platner could have a shot at unseating Susan Collins if he’s able to get this much traction locally. When Cenk Uygur interviewed him, he mentioned he had seen some rural Mainers to be racist and was critical of this. Platner really wasn’t beating around the bush with his answers on what he knows about rural Maine.
On the other hand, if Platner ends up being the general election candidate or if he’s elected, he can’t be ruled out as a liability to Democrats if he has to do more damage control over his image.
What are the odds Peltola jumps in to the harder Senate race if Democrats have an unambiguously really good night on Tuesday?
I know she’s from Alaska and I know Governor is looking like an easy layup for her, but that result may effect her decision and be the tipping point on what to run for in 2026.
In the House seat we need a strong crossover vote winning state senator to run to have a chance, for Alaskans, they don’t usually toss their incumbents regardless of how bad they are. So it’ll be a tough battle regardless, but I don’t think Schultz has the right stuff to win as a Democrat in Alaska even if we get a blue wave behind him.
It’s not just about a good night — the Senate can make or break democracy. If Thomas, Alito, and possibly even Roberts retire between 2025 and 2029, it could spell the end of liberal democracy as we know it. The Voting Rights Act, remaining campaign finance limits, and countless other safeguards will all be eviscerated one by one.
We can flip the Senate if we win Michigan, NC, Maine and two of Texas, Ohio and Alaska.
No argument here, Peltola running for Senate is what the country and our party desperately needs. Me mentioning a good night is only in reference to the 2025 elections that may affect her decision on what race to run for in 2026.
My sense is she's taking time to declare simply because she wants a break. I wouldn't be shocked if she holds off on announcing until January.
Alaska's filing deadline is in June, and the primary election is in August. And it's not as if she needs to increase her name ID--if she runs, she'll make the top 4.
Even with the conservative lean of Alaska, I am willing to bet the Nick Begich's lead over Matt Schultz boils down far more to his status as the incumbent. Also it's only been since last Monday that Schultz declared his candidacy for the race and Begich's lead matches what Data for Progress found back in July. It's best to wait several months to see how this race materializes and hopefully Schultz gains more name recognition, assuming another candidate doesn't emerge. Also, numbers remain strong for Peltola in a hypothetical senate race and probably will only get stronger the closer to election day. This is just the second pollster to show her in a lead and you can also toss in the fact that the other, Alaska Survey Research, is an established, local and nonpartisan pollster.
Why not? Alaska's not some ruby or solid red state. It's proven in recent history to be quite capable of electing Democrats or Independents to statewide seats. Sure at the presidential level it's still more solidly Republican, but even then in good years, a 10 point gap like what we saw in 2020 is far from insurmountable. Also, don't forget that Peltola has won at the statewide level twice already, albeit in the House. Trump's an increasingly unpopular president, and Republicans control both the House and Senate. The incumbent ruling party almost always loses, often by a lot, in midterm years, and this trend has applied even to red leaning states. Sure, this remains an uphill climb for any Democrat, including Peltola, but given her strong track record and the national environment, things should only improve for the minority opposition party, and in turn also for Peltola with her proven track record to win.
Au contraire. There's plenty of reason to assume so, given the current environment and Peltola's background and track record. I never said this would be an easy or even likely win for Peltola if she ran for senate, only that the numbers are strong and will "probably" improve. This isn't Alabama, Idaho or even Nebraska we're talking about. Alaska as I've said before has had a more favorable history for Democrats and left leaning Independents, including in recent history.
It's obvious that she would be a strong candidate for any state-wide office. She already won once and barely lost reelection. But I don't assume that Democrats will do increasingly better in clearly red-of-median states as the election approaches. All things being equal, it would be more likely for undecided Republicans and Republican-leaning independents to "come home." That might not happen this year if there's a Democratic wave (they may break unusually Democratic and/or not vote), but I'm not ready to say a Democrat in Alaska will probably have an increasing lead as Election Day draws closer. If she wins by the smallest possible unstolen margin, I'd be very happy!
Chaz's polls have been the biggest influences for my view of the races. As I mentioned in my predictions above, I think this poll is 1-2 points too rosy for Gov and LG, but not quite rosy enough for AG (just because I firmly believe there won't be very much ticket-splitting).
And if this poll is correct and Dems actually win the HoD generic ballot by 11 percent, then my prediction of Dems gaining 8 seats might actually be lowballing it. I am admittedly predicting several seats being very narrowly held by Republicans, so even a slightly better generic ballot than expected could result in Dems winning 3 or 4 additional seats.
Interesting fact I learned: the Dem nominee for Orange County, NY executive, civil rights lawyer Michael Sussman, was the Green nominee for AG in 2018.
To be fair, some Greens have eventually been elected to office as Dems. For example, Dem NY State Sen. Jabari Brisport originally ran for NYC Council as a Green in 2017. Likewise, Dem LA City Controller Kenneth Mejia was originally a Green candidate for Congress in 2018, and Dem former Rhode Island State Rep. David Segal was originally a Green City Councilmember from Providence, RI.
Some Greens have even won as Greens. Segal was one, but so was Gayle McLaughlin, former mayor of Richmond, CA, and Jason West, former mayor of New Paltz, NY. Former San Francisco City Council President Matt Gonzalez even narrowly lost the 2003 mayors' race to future Governor Gavin Newsom.
That being said, 9.99 times out of 10 Greens are little more than spoiler candidates with often questionable platforms or parts of platforms, so the Greens remain an eternal election problem.
The most famous Green to be elected as a Dem was Sinema. When they aren't Republican plants, Greens are usually just maladjusted weirdos who can't form partnerships with others.
It’s going to be interesting to see if Katie Wilson succeeds in ousting Harrell on Tuesday. My instinct is that he can’t make up the margin from the primary but she has suffered some… not great press about her living and job arrangements (apparently neither her nor her husband work and her wealthy parents pay their rent) and her dropping out of expensive private university late for unexplained reasons. Harrell’s campaign has zeroed in on making her seem like an out-of-touch rich white girl cosplaying as an activist but we’ll see if it sticks. He’s been a solid mayor but is not exactly an inspiring candidate
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Harrell also at war with the City Council over housing? I'd heard the City Council President Sara Nelson (not to be confused with the awesome head of the flight attendants' union) was apparently a NIMBY, and did not help one bit (and is about to lose her primary runoff), so I wonder what role housing is playing, if any, in the mayors' race.
Harrell isn’t exactly Captain YIMBY but, yes, Nelson has been a huge problem. The council swung from utopian but delusional lefty types to grumpy NIMBys in one swoop in ‘23 and Nelson is the poster child of that tendency
On the heels of this announcement, I wonder what other members of Congress will begin to make late midterm bids - Harriet Hageman for Wyoming governor? Alex Padilla for California governor?
I see there are currently 51 Democrats and 49 Republicans in the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_House_of_Delegates House of Delegates]. So 60 seats would be exactly 60% of the House. If 60% of the voting representatives in the U.S. House were Democrats, there would be 261 Democrats and 174 Republicans!
The last time the house was nearly that lopsided was after 2008, at 257D to 178R. The second most recent time was 1992, at 258D-176R-1I, effectively 259D (the I was Sanders). Although 1992 was the last of a trend, as the house had been in that ballpark since the 70s, outside of 1972 and 1982, and even those years were more lopsided than we see now.
The seat that "flipped" is HD-30 (western Loudoun County + northern Fauquier County). Republican Delegate Geary Higgins is now projected to lose narrowly to his Democratic challenger, John McAuliff (not a typo and no relation to Terry McAuliffe).
What are everyone’s predictions for Tuesday? Here’s mine:
VA Gov – Spanberger +10
VA Lt Gov – Hashmi +7
VA AG – Miyares +1
NJ Gov – Sherrill +4
NYC Mayor – Mamdani 49, Cuomo 32, Sliwa 16
CA Prop 50 – Passes 56-44
PA Supreme Court – I think they’ll all be retained by around +10.
Maine Question 1 and 2 – I think both will fail.
GA Public Service Commission – Hard to tell since these elections usually happen in even years. Could go either way, but it seems like dems have a turnout advantage so D+2 for both seats.
Minneapolis Mayor – I think Frey will win reelection, but it will be interesting to see by how much.
My predictions:
VA-Gov: Spanberger +12
VA-LG: Hashmi +10
VA-AG: Jones +7
VA-HoD: Dems will pick up 8 seats: 22, 41, 57, 71, 75, 82, 86, and 89. In other words, Dems will pick up 7 of the 8 Harris-won seats (all except 73), and then will also pick up 41 considering how close it was last time.
NJ-Gov: Sherrill +7
NYC Mayor: Mamdani by about 15
Prop 50: Pass 57-43
Maine Question 1: Fail
Those are the only races I've been following closely enough to make a guess on.
VA Gov - Spanberger +9 (double digits is possible but for some reason I wouldn't say it is likely)
VA Lt Gov - Hashmi +7
VA AG - Miyares +2 (I wouldn't underestimate Miyares considering Jones' controversy)
NJ Gov - Sherill +4
NYC Mayor - Mamdani 48, Cuomo 36, Silwa 16
CA Prop 50 - 58-42 pass
PA Supreme Court - Retained by double digits, maybe higher than +10
Maine 1 and 2 - fail
GA PSC - Would argue that the Republican incumbents have advantages, apart from the racist one
Minneapolis Mayor - Frey +8
Boston Mayor - Wu +100 (duh)
Miami Mayor - Gonzalez +2
TX-18 - Menefee and Edwards runoff
I am horrible at election predictions and consequently avoid it, but I do enjoy seeing predictions from everyone else!
I was going to make a joke about only being confident enough to predict Wu at +100 in Boston, but then I checked and it appears write-ins are possible for the general election. So she might "only" get 95-99% of the vote.
So, I don't like to make predictions in numbers, as I'm not the best at gauging exact results. Hence, I'll just make some general predictions of my own:
- Virginia Gov: Spanberger is going to win, and it won't be close. Sears has run an appallingly awful campaign focused only on culture war issues and apparently Jay Jones, this campaign has gone over so badly the VA police union endorsed Spanberger (they usually only endorse Republicans), and the donors have all fled to what they hope are greener pastures. No threat here in my mind.
- Virginia Lt. Gov: Hashmi is going to win, but I fear it may be close. While Reid is a horrible candidate with issues of his own, I have a bad feeling Islamophobia (Hashmi is Muslim) and possibly ideology (Hashmi is relatively progressive) may tip the scales negatively here. Although the heavily blue environment we're looking at may negate the second of those and possibly the first, so who knows.
- Virginia AG: Miyares or Jones will win, in either case by very little. The big question here is whether Jones can overcome his scandals. I'm leaning towards Miyares based on polling showing the answer to that being no, but Jones may still have a shot based solely on the blue environment we're seeing.
- Virginia HoD: Dems are going to pick up seats, that's for sure. Supermajority, I don't know, but it's a possibility given the large amount of pissed-off federal workers and other government employees in Virginia.
- NJ Gov: If Sherrill wins, it will be by very little. I have a bad feeling Ciattarelli may win this. Sherrill has run an atrocious campaign, there have been numerous Dem defections to Ciattarelli (including Nick Sacco) and although we're in a very blue environment, I worry it won't be enough to overcome Sherrill's flaws.
- NJ Assembly: If Sherrill's problems are anything to go by, and if what NJ resident and Primary School author Nick Tagliaferro has been saying on Bluesky is any indication, we're going to lose seats in the State Assembly. How many, I don't know. But something to watch out for.
- NYC Mayor: Mamdani is definitely going to win, and I don't think it will be close. Polling has had him comfortably ahead, he outperformed polling last time, I can say as a Westchester (NYC-adjacent) resident that I'm not hearing a whole ton from those I know in NYC that indicates Mamdani is in any real danger, so I'm going to go out and say he may win by quite a bit. (To say nothing of Sliwa siphoning Cuomo votes.)
- NYC Council District 47: I have a bad feeling Kayla Santosuosso is going to lose this one. She's to the left of her predecessor Justin Brannan in historically conservative Staten Island, and from what I can gather Brannan seems to have an appeal that Santosuosso may not be able to replicate. To say nothing of Mamdani potentially scaring conservative voters in Staten Island against Santosuosso. That being said, there was an ugly GOP primary fight here, so I can imagine some GOP voters may also sit this one out.
- Nassau County, NY races: This area has become quite red, so I think the GOP may still have an advantage. Nevertheless, I've heard County Executive Bruce Blakeman has been awful and isn't well liked, so we may have a(n admittedly small) shot at that one. We'll see.
- CA Prop 50: This will pass, and if what I'm hearing about turnout is any indication, it will pass by a lot. CA is extremely blue, and the messaging pairing this Prop with Trump's fascism is perfect for this state. There may be some voters who idiotically vote in favor of "fairness", but in this anti-Trump environment, I doubt it will be that many.
- PA Supreme Court: The PA Dems have new leadership, with the incompetent Sharif Street now being gone, and I feel like I've heard that there's been more energy here among PA Dems. By how much I don't know, but I think the Court justices are going to be retained. (At least I hope.) (Will not comment on the multiple county executive races as I don't know enough about them -- but fundraising is on our side from what I have heard.)
- Maine Question 1 and 2 - I do not know enough about this state and these races to comment. Ditto for the NY special election for NY-AD-115.
- GA Public Service Commission - Georgia is very red, but I think in this environment (and given that I've heard of discontent with how Georgia's utilities are run) the Dems have a shot. Maybe a small win.
- Minneapolis Mayor: I think Frey is slightly favored, but I wouldn't count Fateh out. Remember that Mamdani was underestimated by every poll, and he won. Ditto for Katie Wilson in Seattle. Fateh may have a genuine path to victory here -- notably, progressives did well in the City Council race here two years ago. It will be close I think -- we'll see. (Can't comment on the City Council as I don't know enough about it to say.) Speaking of Seattle:
- Seattle Mayor, City Attorney, City Council: Given how shockingly well progressives did in round 1 of these races, I think they are favored in all of them -- that means Wilson, Evans, Foster, etc. Polling seems to be indicating as such as well -- though I could be wrong. We'll see. (Can't comment on King County Executive as I don't know enough about it.)
- Miami Mayor: I just can't see the GOP losing this. Miami has been a GOP stronghold for a very, very long time. That being said, the ICE raids have not endeared them one bit to Latinos, who now despise Trump based on polling. We'll see.
- Boston Mayor: Even if Kraft hadn't dropped out, he wouldn't have stood a chance. Wu is popular enough and has done a good enough job that she was always going to be a shoe-in.
- TX-18 special: I agree with Julius Zinn that this will be a Menefee-Edwards runoff. I think Menefee's institutional support/status as a progressive in a progressive-friendly environment will give him a slight advantage in a subsequent runoff, but who knows.
- BONUS: Westchester County, NY Executive: This is my county. I have seen close to zero signs for the Republican. I've gotten numerous mailers from Democrat Ken Jenkins. People are fired up in my area against Trump. I don't think Jenkins is in danger.
Just my thoughts. I'm quite poor at predicting things though so take my takes with a substantial amount of salt.
You must be young, Techno. Nassau County hasn't become red recently, it's reverted to being red, as it was for decades. It produced huge statewide margins for Republicans until the early aughts that somewhat countered what Dems got in NYC.
Also, I haven't heard Blakeman is unpopular. Is there any evidence he is?
Someone posted here a while back saying a number of people who worked for him were unhappy with his management, and that he apparently is more interested in gunning for a Trump admin position. Not sure how true that is but who knows.
So that would indicate some unpopularity with people who work for him but not voters.
Perhaps. I feel like the commenter hinted there was popular discontent with him too but it was a while ago so I don’t remember.
Well you're right about me being young, I'm Gen Z. I still remain skeptical we're going to win this one.
Correction: District 47 where Santosuosso is running to replace Brannan is entirely in Brooklyn (Bay Ridge, Coney Island, Gravesend) and while it does have shades of purple and red in varying election years, it still voted for Hochul in 2022 with nearly 52%, which is impressive given how horrible she did that year.
Huh. Got my district boundaries wrong. Apologies.
I’m not doing predictions because I’ve been burned too many times, but I’m hoping/expecting a very good night for us across the board. If people think that’s a cop out, it definitely is lol. We’ll see what the voters have to say about Trump and the king’s party dictatorship rule after they stupidly chose to elect them again. Can’t wait!
Here's my predictions:
VA-Gov - Spanberger (D) +16
VA-LG - Hashmi (D) +12
VA-AG - Jones (D) +2
NJ-Gov - Sherill (D) +11
NYC Mayor - Mamdani +31 (Mamdani (D) 55, Cuomo (F&D) 24, Sliwa (R) 19)
CA-Ref (Proposition 50) - Passes 57-43
ME-Ref (Question 1) - Fails 52-48
GA-PSC-2 - Johnson (D) +6
GA-PSC-3 - Hubbard (D) +6
MPLS Mayor - Fateh (D) +4 over Frey (D)
A couple of notes regarding my predictions:
- The F&D label for Cuomo represents Cuomo's Fight and Deliver party line.
- For Minneapolis mayor, my prediction assumes a final ranked-choice vote count between Fateh and Frey, with all other candidates eliminated in earlier rounds.
Here we go...
VA-Gov: Spanberger +13
VA-LG: Hashmi +7
VA-AG: Miyares +1
VA-HoD: Dems pick up 6 seats
NJ-Gov: Sherrill +2 (I'm getting more and more pessimistic about this one)
We lose seats in the NJ Assembly
NYC Mayor: Mamdani by about 18
Prop 50: Pass 59-41
Maine Question 1: Fail very narrowly
PA: all 3 judges are retained 55-45ish
GA PSC: Gut tells me we win them narrowly
I'm not sure why the Democrats would lose seats in the New Jersey Assembly in a good Democratic year. I'm presuming that none of the dynamics affecting gubernatorial elections (seemingly relatively weak Democratic candidate vs. fairly strong Republican candidate, history of parties losing the 3rd election after winning 2 in a row) apply to the Assembly, so please explain.
while disagreeing that we definitely lose seats in the assembly I think we lose two and pick up two or three so any change would be minor. Not many competitive republican seats left aside from Ld-21 where i think we have to be slight favorites thus far, and republicans best pickup is the very trumpy ld-3. figure we pick up district 21 and lose district 3 and that nets out to even. only other super close one to watch if race is actually a two point race would be ld 8 where there is a split delegation.
VA Gov – Spanberger +11
VA Lt Gov – Hashmi +6
VA AG – Miyares +4
NJ Gov – Sherrill +5
NYC Mayor – Mamdani 45, Cuomo 34, Sliwa 18
CA Prop 50 – Passes 59-41
PA Supreme Court – I think they’ll all be retained by around +7
Maine Question 1 and 2 – No forking clue
I'll stick with my priors, Spanberger +12, Sherrill +8, prop 50 passes 57-43, I haven't been following anything else closely enough.
VA Gov – Spanberger +15
VA Lt Gov – Hashmi +8
VA AG – Jones +1
NJ Gov – Sherrill +7
NYC Mayor – Mamdani wins with 52%-55% of the vote. I think people are exaggerating Cuomo and Silwa's appeal and Mamdani easily gets a majority of the vote.
Like Techno, I'll mostly decline to do specific numbers, although I loved reading everyone else's. Even those with which I disagree. Still, even those were pretty rosy; it's nice to see some optimism in these parts, for sure.
All Democrats on the executive line in VA will win, Spanberger overwhelmingly. Democrats will take a HoD supermajority.
Sherrill will win easily in New Jersey.
The PA Supreme Court justices will all be retained.
Mamdani will cruise to a win by more than most analysts expect.
CA Prop 50 will pass overwhelmingly, by something like 58-42.
Go good guys!!
VA-Gov - Trafalgar pulls one of the dirtiest stunts I've ever seen by a political pollster:
https://www.threads.com/@amandasmildtakes/post/DQeVcAsjslZ?xmt=AQF0hjb8QERhY-miw-3mhfx-CMgch76vO9sW6hhEpcxbU7oRkEhHpJTUkX6rqHLqmqdpHRY8&slof=1
They included a random Spanberger supporter whose name is not on the ballot as an "independent candidate" to make the race look closer than it appears.
My thoughts about Trafalgar's stunt are the same as Joe Buck's thoughts when Randy Moss fake-mooned Green Bay Packers fans.
What do you expect. They were a national embarrassment in 2022. Only when Trump is on the ballot are they even in the ballpark.
When running for the House in 1946, John F. Kennedy's campaign convinced a janitor named Joe Russo to appear on the Democratic ballot along with another man named Joe Russo, who was a legitimate politician. The practice of faking candidates to boost certain other candidates is not new - but it is interesting to see from a pollster
Donna Charles isn't a "random Spanberger supporter". She tried to run as an independent candidate, but never made the ballot.
But she ended all campaign activity several weeks ago and endorsed Spanberger. Trafalgar should not be including her in their polls now, and arguably shouldn't have before since she wasn't on the ballot and isn't well enough known to get many votes as a write in. As such, that pretty much negates whatever credibility the poll has--and being Trafalgar, that's not much.
Noted pedo and conservadem Cecil Brockman has resigned from his blue NC state house seat:
https://x.com/BryanRAnderson/status/1984369374770446591
Thank god that male Tricia Cotham resigned. Hoping the Guilford County Democrats nominate the guy who almost beat him in the primary.
NC state Representative Cecil Brockman has resigned from the legislature three weeks after being charged for sex offenses. Guilford County Democrats will meet in a week or two to vote on his replacement.
https://www.wral.com/story/north-carolina-lawmaker-brockman-resigns-amid-pressure-from-party-over-charges-of-child-sex-offenses/22224639/
VA HoD poll for the 64th (Trump+1.9, Kaine by 0.3%) has all the races tight: https://statenavigate.org/virginia-republicans-maintain-slight-edge-in-swing-district-in-stafford-county/
Considering that Trump won this district by 2% while Harris was winning by 6% overall, Miyares +4 isn't going to cut it for him.
The HoD result is just about what I expect though. I expect this district, along with 30, 69, and 73, to all be nail-biter Republican wins.
A lot less vote splitting than some of the statewide polls. Jones only running 5 points behind Spanberger, compared to other pollsters having it in the mid double digits. Hashmi only outperforming Jones by 1 point. Guess we'll see!
Vote splitting is something that can be particularly difficult to guess.
When it happens to a large extent, there's commonly a very obvious reason we can point to for it. Those obvious reasons do not always result in vote splitting, due to the steady decline of voters splitting their vote.
Will we see it happen here as a result of the Jones story? If it does it would make perfect sense. Will we see it not happen because voters are less willing to leave their established partisan preferences? If so, it would also make perfect sense.
There's a good explanation for either outcome, which makes things harder to predict!
I think VA is close enough to NC to draw some parallels to the Stein margin, which was way, way beyond any of the other even strong Dem/crazy GOP races (LG, AG, Schools Superintendent). I think Spanberger overperforms, Jones underpeforms, and Hashmi will be the bellweather for the HoD margin.
Eh, I think there won't be quite as much ticket-splitting in Virginia this year as there was for NC-Gov last year, just because Sears, despite her bad campaign, isn't quite as much of a lunatic as Robinson was. After all, she's never referred to herself as a "Black Nazi".
agreed, it won't be quite that dramatic - but still significant
Sears is a bad candidate, but she isn't remotely as bad as Robinson. I don't think she's even as bad as Mastriano, although she's similar to him.
The incumbent Republican Milde won this seat by 9 points in 2023 for anyone curious.
Thanks I was wondering that; I don't get why people always highlight the POTUS numbers and not the prior legislative results; barring some scandalized candidate apples to apples is always better than apples to oranges!
I recall around this time you started hearing about GOP internals showing them getting annihilated in the 18 midterms but I haven't heard much about internals either way this cycle. Most of the public pollsters are playing it safe and weighting to last year's electorate, which I think will prove to be considerably off.
It seems like a really stupid move. If the elections this year will be the same as last year, why poll at all?
For all you baseball heads the Dodgers were close to disaster - but double-play to close the 9th and go to Game 7. Shotime vs. Vladdy goes on!
Home teams are cursed in this series!!
The whole playoffs, really *cries in Mariners coming out of their homestand 1-2 after going up 2-0 on the road in Canada*
https://x.com/AdImpact_Pol/status/1984357187569783097
#VAPol: Democrats currently have a $14.9m ad spending advantage over Republicans in 2025 VA House of Delegates general elections.
Dem advertisers hold the spend advantage in each of the 34 House of Delegates generals that have seen more than $200k in spending.
For those unwilling to give Musk’s website a click, here’s how it looks like in the money race for previous elections:
2019: $8.7m-$6.2m +$2.5m D
2021: $11.9m-$5.6m +$6.3m D
2023: $18.8m-$12.7m +$6.1m D
2025: $22.8m-$7.9m +$14.9m D
Since the rules are looser on the weekend, here’s the feel good story of the day. Hide the ketchup bottles, Trump is bigly mad because Democrats didn’t cave, they called Trump’s bluff and instead they found their spine. He likes giving it out, but can’t stand when we give it right back in his fat face. Thoughts and prayers to the orange man baby.
Politico: The White House thought the shutdown would be quick. Now they’re frustrated.
https://archive.ph/M412P
In early October, several Trump administration officials had a friendly pool going of how long the shutdown would last. The White House, at the time, was confident Democrats would quickly fold.
No one guessed more than 10 days.
The account, relayed by a person close to the White House granted anonymity to discuss internal thinking, underscores just how much the administration miscalculated the Democrats’ will to keep the government closed even amid furloughs and imperiled social programs like food assistance.
“Trump, he’s had it with these people, because he knows they’re playing politics,” said the second person. “Nobody thought it was going to last this long.”
When the shutdown began, White House officials were certain the Trump administration was better positioned to battle the left during a funding lapse.
Trump and his top aides thought that unpaid federal workers, closed and limited federal facilities and threats of ever-more job cuts from Russ Vought, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, would be too much for Democrats to handle.
They were buoyed when two moderate Democrats — Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) and John Fetterman (D-Pa.) — and Independent Angus King voted with Republicans two days into the shutdown.
But not much has changed since, and it is almost certain that this will be the longest shutdown in history, surpassing the record set during Trump’s first term.
Interesting to look at the quoted segment there through the lens of game theory.
Senate democrats built up too strong of a reputation for folding. Fairly or not, it was the perception going in. That perception then informed the political actions of republicans in DC, who operated under the expectation of them folding easily in the future as well. Acting weak has encouraged further behavior from the opposition that takes advantage of it.
Would this shutdown have happened if Schumer had blocked the CR at the start of the year?
I'm encouraged by them standing strong right now. The party out of power has the least to lose in these cases. If the elections go well for us on Tuesday that will build a further image of strength and might provide the off-ramp with congressional republicans wanting to get things over with.
It's tough to see this lasting through next week though; with another lost paycheck teeing up; all of the public sector unions now supporting the CR, and the ACA deadline passing . . .it's tough to see Schumer not losing enough votes to pass ASSUMING Thune makes a deal to pass bipartisan approps immediately and Johnson guarantees they come to a vote. The wild card is Trump could always torpedo any deal per usual.
I do think a lot depends on Tuesday; if Dems have a big night that adds more wind to Schumer's sails (is that a good band name?)
I'm not even going to try to predict what happens going forward. I am consistently horrible at it. But I will say two things. First, promises from republicans are worth less than the paper they're printed on. And second, if the end result is folding anyway, the whole exercise has been pointless and will have only weakened our position versus doing nothing.
A performative one month shutdown doesn't help us. I strongly disagree with the decision to allow the CR through at the start of the year, but they went about it the right way if that was going to be the end result no matter what: get it done and over with, without gaining further negative headlines along the way.
I'd hope that Schumer et al are aware of the strategic calculus here in determining what to do next.
If Trump will refuse to allocate funds, the Democrats should -never- end the closure!
To be quite honest, there’s almost 0 chance Schumer and Democrats caved so this time they’d be in a better position. That it worked out this way, was not some long game plan. They caved because they’re good government types and thought our base and voters would want us to go along to get along, which is what they did want after 2018.
It’s just Schumer once again not realizing what’s changed since Trump won the first time and underestimating the anger in his party against him and the establishment leading us to a complete catastrophe when it mattered the most in 2024. I still don’t think Democrats in Congress truly understand the rage in our party for always folding against the GOP in every fight.
The town halls they faced were tame, most of our partisans don’t go to town halls. The palpable and incalculable anger is something I’ve never seen before and I feel it too, when I didn’t feel that way against our party’s leaders in 2010, 2014, 2016, 2021 or any of the other elections we lost. This time it’s permanent for me in a “time to throw them out” vibe. I’m sure I’m not the only one who feels the same either.
I definitely get the thinking here and I could buy it.
The thing that gets me though is that Schumer and other democratic senators should be more than capable of seeing the distinctions between 2018 and today. I'm not even thinking about the party anger or anything, it could possibly be forgiven for not realizing that so early on.
What I'm thinking about is the difference in "go along to get along" between then and now. Republicans wanted the budget to reflect their priorities in 2017. That is a reasonable and logical expectation. If a party wins an election they should gain a greater level of influence over the budget and similar processes. In 2017 they were not requiring maximalist concessions in order to keep the government open, in 2017 they were not so consistently and routinely ignoring the laws and the courts (not that it was never, but it was not an endless fact of life). In 2017 they were not insisting on policy changes that will do substantial damage to our economy, both in the immediate moment but also in the decades ahead as countries shift their supply chains away from the US and keep it that way. In 2025 all of those are the case. The CR boosted ICE's budget something like 5-10x over what it was before! They put in language allowing the executive's "emergency" used to justify tariffs last the entire year instead of only 30 days.
In 2025, republicans' starting point for the CR was effectively "give us everything we want" and Schumer went along with that. The status quo for at least 10-20 years now has been that the party in power will moderate their demands in such a scenario and in return the party out of power understands that they can get concessions; Schumer tossed all that aside and surrendered any leverage we have.
I don't care what he might have thought the base would tolerate, what the media wanted, any of that. In that light he made a fundamentally stupid move: he relegated our opposition status to one that was functionally impotent and non-existent, which begs the question of why even seek elected office in the first place? It was a political disaster and conceded any and all levers of power we have for no actual reason. There is no way he is actually stupid enough to think the base would reward senate dems for that. He might have thought we wouldn't punish them, but in that scenario it again begs a question: what did he think was the benefit?
That’s just it, he wasn’t thinking what was politically best for us, he was thinking of what was best for the country. That old school crap type of thinking is what got us into this mess in the first place and needs to be permanently removed from our leaders brains.
That’s why our base is livid about throwing them all out, Democrats who got elected into office before Trump don’t understand the game the Republicans are playing today, and if we can’t even agree what game we’re playing in politics, how on earth are we supposed to beat them at it? Completely clueless.
I guess for me the detail I cannot square is: where did he see the national benefit, when the historical rules of the game had been so blatantly upended?
I don’t think he realized the rules of the game changed, that sums up the entirety of the problem Democrats have right now as a party. He saw a benefit to keeping the government open and not putting Americans in harms way.
That’s an admirable goal, but it only works in practice if both parties try to do that and the GOP hasn’t since the 2010 tea party wave I’d argue. With 1 side being willing to do whatever it takes to advance their autocracy, consequences be damned, old school good government thinking is like fighting blindfolded with both hands tied behind our backs.
I think you're right that that's what he thought, and it's absolutely stupefying - and enraging! - that he believed that.
Silly that they thought dems would fold for nothing after 10 days.
That was precedented, though.
"umichvoter
@umichvoter
Haley Stevens had three shots to seriously condemn increase influence of corporate PAC money in politics
She went 0/3.
https://x.com/umichvoter/status/1984360427430523040"
What a terrible politician! Atleast her smarter ideological contemporaries like Angie Craig know the "I will not disarm but will work to ban corporate money" line.
“I don’t necessarily view it like that”
Her state’s own junior Senator, Elissa Slotkin, argued for Citizens United to be ended only months after she was sworn in office. She won election to the Senate by .38% points and in each of her House elections from 2018-2022 (exception being 2020) won by less than Haley Stevens.
This is not difficult!
https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1179427516888794&id=100044646707555&http_ref=eyJ0cyI6MTc2MjAxMDA0OTAwMCwiciI6Imh0dHBzOlwvXC93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbVwvIn0%3D
What a joke. In this environment especially. Is she trying to lose?
Just some thoughts on Maine:
The Democratic Party in Maine is poised to allow 2/3 elections in the state to turn into complete shitshows.
The Senate primary has completely exploded with frontrunner Platners campaign imploding. It turns out he's basically a social Republican based on his own language on diverse people, most recently gay people. And Janet Mills seems to be Joe Biden 2.0 where the attitude from voters in her own party is basically "Thank you, but next."
The enthusiasm gap for Mills is giving an ominous vibe that we have all seen before... and I have SERIOUS doubts that she has the fangs for a statewide FEDERAL election.
Then there is the complete mess going on in ME-2 where Matt Dunlop is giving us a campaign no one asked for and we certainly don't need VS. Jared Golden. Like him or not, he can win. Now is not the time to perpetuate a self-fulfulling prophesy about him being unpopular with Democrats. We need total unity to keep winning as this district is only getting redder. If he limps out of the primary or loses we will probably lose this seat.
There is a civil war going on in Maine in the Democratic Party between establishment Democrats and populists at the worst possible moment. 10/10 concerned that the state party has no control over it.
I suspect the primary for Governor will turn ugly considering the slate of candidates there already is - Pingree and King are already children of some of Maine's most powerful Democratic politicians, while Jackson and Bellows are attempting to run from progressive angles
I understand what you are getting at with Platner but in interviews, he has emphasized being an anti-fascist, which would not make him in any way like a Republican in today’s GOP.
That said, his Reddit comments make him look bad and his apology doesn’t give any of us assurances he would be able to avoid this kind of rhetoric if he was under pressure or even using social media in appropriately as an elected politician.
The guy has had to explicitly state "I am not a secret Nazi". If this weren't about a major, needed Senate seat it would be absolutely hilarious. Instead it is tragic.
Given all the secret, and not so-secret Nazis among the Republicans, that’s good to know.
I'm not getting your point. Being a Nazi doesn't cost a politician an appreciable number of Republican votes or prevent a Republican from winning, which is all you need to know about what's drastically wrong with this country and its voters. The same is not true of Democrats!
I was being a bit facetious.
Got it.
Yes but is he a fascist? To date, I have not seen Platner exhibit anything that supports this.
Platner wearing a Nazi tattoo is on par with a random person deciding to wear a Nazi symbol on their sleeve out of the blue with no agenda. It’s still constitutionally protected free speech.
I am more concerned about Platner’s agenda than I am about his tattoo. However, because he has been running a Senate campaign, I question his judgment at this point.
The point is, he can't win.
You have a point there although it remains to be seen in the next 7+ months if Platner’s campaign will continue to get packed attendance.
The fact that he’s getting a lot of attention on YouTube and not for the right reasons says he’s got a real image problem.
I don't think you're old enough to remember that Mondale got huge and increasing attendance at his campaign events in the leadup to his loss of 49 states in 1984. Attendance at events proves nothing about voting.
Rather like the "I am not a witch" candidate. If you have to say it, you have a problem.
Yes, true!
In full transparency, years ago back in 2013 I had gone through a lengthy effort to get my Google Search Results cleaned up. I didn’t have incriminating evidence, am not a celebrity and have no desire to run for political office. I did however find there were old Live Journal posts about me and they weren’t exactly flattering.
However, I reconnected with the poster later on and turns out he and I were old friends and co-workers back in the day. The Live Journal posts were removed soon after I reconnected with him. And I never even requested this or brought up anything with my friend about it. Nothing about me since then has been known to the public.
I am sharing this because without having been in the public limelight, I was able to clean everything up. I just don’t understand how Platner didn’t think everything through before he entered the Senate race.
It’s called primaries. Not necessarily a bad thing. See 2024 presidential. Compare 2008 presidential
But are any of the candidates in this primary good and capable of defeating Collins? That's the key question.
I'd like to see if Wood can gain some traction and survive the scrutiny from that. As a former congressional chief of staff he passes some basic credibility tests but has not been able to get substantial attention.
Alternatively, the current AG (Mills' job prior to governor) Frey is listed as a maybe on wiki.
Outside of those potentials, I am not at all impressed with the current slate. Mills could have been a good candidate if she was going to be 74 instead of 79. Unfortunately, that's not the case and she has not shown the requisite ability to annihilate Collins' credibility with persuadable voters. Platner was doing well but I have no interests in the apologists for him: even if people personally think the issues are minor, the damage has been done and I do not think he can win any longer.
Unfortunately what I think is more likely is that Platner will stay in as a "zombie" campaign that maintains enough attention and anti-establishment support to avoid anyone else gaining the traction to be the not-Mills candidate. Mills then wins the primary and she plays the general election too safe and too kindly. Consequently she suffers a respectfully close defeat but still a defeat.
Though as I keep saying I'm horrible at predictions. Hopefully that applies to this prediction in particular!
The problem is that all 3 candidates have serious liabilities and Democrats have to choose, which is the least bad candidate.
Wood worked for a SCAM Grift PAC that raised tens of millions of dollars and didn’t spend any of it on any actual races (that money would’ve been nice in Pennsylvania Senate in 2024, right?)
Mills is old and no longer a popular governor like she was in 2022 while also refusing to run the bare knuckle campaign it would take to win against Collins and bonus is refusing to eliminate the filibuster. That quote she gave Collins publicly is going to be in every single ad of her re-election campaign and plastered on every tv screen. How can you credibly argue she’s not good, when you just said in your own words that she is?
Then you have the complete implosion of a candidate who matches the base’s raw emotions right now, who came out of nowhere to raise a ton of money and get a ton of volunteers that has scandals that are so bad any average person is likely to be turned off from. His campaign staff are continuing to abandon ship indicating where they think this is headed.
Now you’ve got a worst case scenario for Democrats. You have 1 guy who steals Democratic donors money, you have 1 guy with a Nazi tattoo and you have 1 woman who’s an unpopular governor and a very old candidate who doesn’t realize what it takes to win today and what we need as a blue Senator from Maine. Catastrophic is the only way I can put it.
Especially with Platner now running a revenge campaign instead of dropping out. We need a statewide elected or state majority leader in the legislature as a 4th candidate, because right now anyone we nominate in the primary probably won’t beat Collins and the least bad of them, Mills, is unwilling to do what it takes to finally even the Senate playing field for us by ending the filibuster.
We either don’t win or win without the power we need to have. Disaster.
Could not agree more with this comment
Primaries or general elections, I still am not sold on how a Platner is a fascist or has a personality that would be fitting in today’s GOP.
He also was interviewed by Cenk Uyger and said he would not be another Fetterman. Doesn’t mean I am immediately sold on this.
There is a long time before the primary. Even longer until the general election so panicking about it seems premature. From what I’ve noticed from the reporting of newspaper reporters on the ground and some comments from Maine voters on Bluesky and Reddit, it seems to be a different world from all of the discourse coming from non-Mainers. I’m a non-Mainer so I'm also including my own opinion in the “doesn’t matter”category. There likely will be polls soon of primary and general match ups — hopefully decent quality ones—but polls now still are very early
Agree. Even the NYT had an article that emphasized his popularity among local Mainers.
This is why I am not going to make any assumptions on how the Senate race is going to unfold. It’s the primary process that is going to be unpredictable.
Platner could have a shot at unseating Susan Collins if he’s able to get this much traction locally. When Cenk Uygur interviewed him, he mentioned he had seen some rural Mainers to be racist and was critical of this. Platner really wasn’t beating around the bush with his answers on what he knows about rural Maine.
On the other hand, if Platner ends up being the general election candidate or if he’s elected, he can’t be ruled out as a liability to Democrats if he has to do more damage control over his image.
Data for Progress poll | 10/17-10/23 LV
Alaska Senate
🟦Mary Peltola 46%
🟥Dan Sullivan 45% (incumbent)
---
Alaska Governor (Final RCV result)
🟦Mary Peltola 67%
🟥Dave Bronson 33%
---
Alaska US House at-large
🟥Nick Begich 48% (incumbent)
🟦Matt Schultz 37%
https://x.com/CloudsterWx/status/1984650102263202274
Lol at the Bronson one. I heard he was a disastrous mayor.
What are the odds Peltola jumps in to the harder Senate race if Democrats have an unambiguously really good night on Tuesday?
I know she’s from Alaska and I know Governor is looking like an easy layup for her, but that result may effect her decision and be the tipping point on what to run for in 2026.
In the House seat we need a strong crossover vote winning state senator to run to have a chance, for Alaskans, they don’t usually toss their incumbents regardless of how bad they are. So it’ll be a tough battle regardless, but I don’t think Schultz has the right stuff to win as a Democrat in Alaska even if we get a blue wave behind him.
It’s not just about a good night — the Senate can make or break democracy. If Thomas, Alito, and possibly even Roberts retire between 2025 and 2029, it could spell the end of liberal democracy as we know it. The Voting Rights Act, remaining campaign finance limits, and countless other safeguards will all be eviscerated one by one.
We can flip the Senate if we win Michigan, NC, Maine and two of Texas, Ohio and Alaska.
No argument here, Peltola running for Senate is what the country and our party desperately needs. Me mentioning a good night is only in reference to the 2025 elections that may affect her decision on what race to run for in 2026.
My sense is she's taking time to declare simply because she wants a break. I wouldn't be shocked if she holds off on announcing until January.
Alaska's filing deadline is in June, and the primary election is in August. And it's not as if she needs to increase her name ID--if she runs, she'll make the top 4.
The much bigger disaster is if anything happens to the more liberal justices. Replacing the others wouldn't change the need to enlarge the court.
Exactly my thought. We need to enlarge the court regardless.
Re-balance* the Court
Even with the conservative lean of Alaska, I am willing to bet the Nick Begich's lead over Matt Schultz boils down far more to his status as the incumbent. Also it's only been since last Monday that Schultz declared his candidacy for the race and Begich's lead matches what Data for Progress found back in July. It's best to wait several months to see how this race materializes and hopefully Schultz gains more name recognition, assuming another candidate doesn't emerge. Also, numbers remain strong for Peltola in a hypothetical senate race and probably will only get stronger the closer to election day. This is just the second pollster to show her in a lead and you can also toss in the fact that the other, Alaska Survey Research, is an established, local and nonpartisan pollster.
" Also, numbers remain strong for Peltola in a hypothetical senate race and probably will only get stronger the closer to election day."
Why would they get stronger in a Republican-majority state?
Why not? Alaska's not some ruby or solid red state. It's proven in recent history to be quite capable of electing Democrats or Independents to statewide seats. Sure at the presidential level it's still more solidly Republican, but even then in good years, a 10 point gap like what we saw in 2020 is far from insurmountable. Also, don't forget that Peltola has won at the statewide level twice already, albeit in the House. Trump's an increasingly unpopular president, and Republicans control both the House and Senate. The incumbent ruling party almost always loses, often by a lot, in midterm years, and this trend has applied even to red leaning states. Sure, this remains an uphill climb for any Democrat, including Peltola, but given her strong track record and the national environment, things should only improve for the minority opposition party, and in turn also for Peltola with her proven track record to win.
"Why not?" Yeah, maybe, but there's little reason to assume so.
Au contraire. There's plenty of reason to assume so, given the current environment and Peltola's background and track record. I never said this would be an easy or even likely win for Peltola if she ran for senate, only that the numbers are strong and will "probably" improve. This isn't Alabama, Idaho or even Nebraska we're talking about. Alaska as I've said before has had a more favorable history for Democrats and left leaning Independents, including in recent history.
It's obvious that she would be a strong candidate for any state-wide office. She already won once and barely lost reelection. But I don't assume that Democrats will do increasingly better in clearly red-of-median states as the election approaches. All things being equal, it would be more likely for undecided Republicans and Republican-leaning independents to "come home." That might not happen this year if there's a Democratic wave (they may break unusually Democratic and/or not vote), but I'm not ready to say a Democrat in Alaska will probably have an increasing lead as Election Day draws closer. If she wins by the smallest possible unstolen margin, I'd be very happy!
Final VA poll for Chaz Nuttycombe's group has Dems up double digits for Gov, LG, and State Lege. Up 3 for AG:
https://statenavigate.org/virginia-poll-shows-spanberger-maintaining-wide-lead-and-a-dead-heat-for-attorney-general/
Hard to believe he got his start with an impressive prediction game back in 2017 at 18 years old.
Chaz's polls have been the biggest influences for my view of the races. As I mentioned in my predictions above, I think this poll is 1-2 points too rosy for Gov and LG, but not quite rosy enough for AG (just because I firmly believe there won't be very much ticket-splitting).
And if this poll is correct and Dems actually win the HoD generic ballot by 11 percent, then my prediction of Dems gaining 8 seats might actually be lowballing it. I am admittedly predicting several seats being very narrowly held by Republicans, so even a slightly better generic ballot than expected could result in Dems winning 3 or 4 additional seats.
Interesting fact I learned: the Dem nominee for Orange County, NY executive, civil rights lawyer Michael Sussman, was the Green nominee for AG in 2018.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Orange_County,_New_York_Executive_election
Oof.
To be fair, some Greens have eventually been elected to office as Dems. For example, Dem NY State Sen. Jabari Brisport originally ran for NYC Council as a Green in 2017. Likewise, Dem LA City Controller Kenneth Mejia was originally a Green candidate for Congress in 2018, and Dem former Rhode Island State Rep. David Segal was originally a Green City Councilmember from Providence, RI.
Some Greens have even won as Greens. Segal was one, but so was Gayle McLaughlin, former mayor of Richmond, CA, and Jason West, former mayor of New Paltz, NY. Former San Francisco City Council President Matt Gonzalez even narrowly lost the 2003 mayors' race to future Governor Gavin Newsom.
That being said, 9.99 times out of 10 Greens are little more than spoiler candidates with often questionable platforms or parts of platforms, so the Greens remain an eternal election problem.
Correct. The saying is that Green stands for Getting Republicans Elected Every November.
The most famous Green to be elected as a Dem was Sinema. When they aren't Republican plants, Greens are usually just maladjusted weirdos who can't form partnerships with others.
One example is not statistically significant.
It’s going to be interesting to see if Katie Wilson succeeds in ousting Harrell on Tuesday. My instinct is that he can’t make up the margin from the primary but she has suffered some… not great press about her living and job arrangements (apparently neither her nor her husband work and her wealthy parents pay their rent) and her dropping out of expensive private university late for unexplained reasons. Harrell’s campaign has zeroed in on making her seem like an out-of-touch rich white girl cosplaying as an activist but we’ll see if it sticks. He’s been a solid mayor but is not exactly an inspiring candidate
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Harrell also at war with the City Council over housing? I'd heard the City Council President Sara Nelson (not to be confused with the awesome head of the flight attendants' union) was apparently a NIMBY, and did not help one bit (and is about to lose her primary runoff), so I wonder what role housing is playing, if any, in the mayors' race.
Harrell isn’t exactly Captain YIMBY but, yes, Nelson has been a huge problem. The council swung from utopian but delusional lefty types to grumpy NIMBys in one swoop in ‘23 and Nelson is the poster child of that tendency
Don't know if any commenter mentioned this but Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) will announce a run for Governor Tuesday night
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/10/30/politics/elise-stefanik-plans-bid-new-york-governor
On the heels of this announcement, I wonder what other members of Congress will begin to make late midterm bids - Harriet Hageman for Wyoming governor? Alex Padilla for California governor?
Hah! She might want to rethink that come Tuesday.
Looking forward to Stefanik going down even though I wish Hochul was retiring...
There is a possibility (however unlikely) that Lt. Gov Delgado generates enough support for a primary
However, Hochul faced challenges from NYC official Jumaane Williams and Rep. Tom Suozzi in 2022, so who knows
can confirm that many candidates will announce in California between Nov 5 and Nov 10.
canNOT confirm that any of them will be Padilla. Don't ask me for hints. I genuinely have no clue.
I guess this is a third-hand report?
3 final (?) anecdotes from the Virginia prediction guy for your weekend enjoyment.
https://x.com/ChazNuttycombe/status/1984660655111119200
This stadium's nearly packed to the brim. Max seatbcapacity is 7,320, I'd guess 6,900-7,100 are in the room right now.
https://x.com/ChazNuttycombe/status/1984756422635114545
I think after going to the Miyares rally and the Obama/Spanberger rally, it's safe to say this is sure as shit to be closer to 2017 than 2021.
https://x.com/ChazNuttycombe/status/1984591927426048459
For the first time ever in the
@StateNavigate
forecast, Democrats are favored to win 60 seats in the VA House
60 seat wins projected for the VA House?
Oh man, if Democrats could win this many seats in Congress, it would be a tidal wave.
I see there are currently 51 Democrats and 49 Republicans in the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_House_of_Delegates House of Delegates]. So 60 seats would be exactly 60% of the House. If 60% of the voting representatives in the U.S. House were Democrats, there would be 261 Democrats and 174 Republicans!
The last time the house was nearly that lopsided was after 2008, at 257D to 178R. The second most recent time was 1992, at 258D-176R-1I, effectively 259D (the I was Sanders). Although 1992 was the last of a trend, as the house had been in that ballpark since the 70s, outside of 1972 and 1982, and even those years were more lopsided than we see now.
The seat that "flipped" is HD-30 (western Loudoun County + northern Fauquier County). Republican Delegate Geary Higgins is now projected to lose narrowly to his Democratic challenger, John McAuliff (not a typo and no relation to Terry McAuliffe).