California is likely to have two competing ballot measures on taxes.
First is the billionaires tax that would call for a one time 5% tax on assets in excess of a billion as of 1/1/2026. Real estate and pensions are excluded. It would be used for health care and other social services. SEIU supports the proposal, and Newsom is working against it.
Second is a proposition that would ban new taxes on financial assets and personal property, and would ban retroactive taxes (like ones retroactive to 1/1/2026). Most California individual personal property isn't taxed, exceptions include vehicles, trailers and boats. Businesses do pay personal property taxes.
A group endorsed by Kiley is direct mailing proposition signature forms which I got this week. This is the first time I recall getting direct mail of proposition signature forms.
Question to posters here — is what Politico is saying a legit concern, or is this just typical “X in disarray” type content? I’m still somewhat new to really in-the-woods politics — when a poll says “voters are receptive to X”, is that legit or no?
This early in the process I'm skeptical of any poll, since most people have no idea about either proposition, plus they need to get on the ballot.
I was approached by a group of 6 neighbors at the pool because they figured I'd know about the mailer that came out. When I explained it to them, all were no on that prop and only one supported the billionaires tax.
I got that mailer as well. I didn't give them a signature but wrote some choice words on it and sent it back to them so they could pay the postage.
I have seen that tactic used by other very well-funded campaigns in California before. It is an extremely expensive way to collect signatures but they do get a high percentage of valid sigs because they only send out to registered voters. The most recent one I can recall (slight pun) was a few years ago when some folks were trying to recall L.A. District Attorney George Gascon. They didn't get enough sigs to make the ballot but he lost in the next regularly scheduled election about a year later. I know I have gotten them for ballot propositions before but my overworked, tax season addled brain can't come up with a date or prop. Maybe something from Howard Jarvis' rotting corpse (the HJ Taxpayers Assn).
Life begins again on April 16. That day I will be at the most beautiful beach in Los Angeles County, El Matador State Beach... Meanwhile, back to work.
Having lived in California through multiple election cycles with ballot initiative insanity and gazillions spent on TV ads, I would give *some* credence to voters being receptive to counter arguments. Sadly, the ads have worked in the past and caused some terrible props to pass and good ones to fail.
Given the stakes for billionaires and the sense of precedence it would set, I can only imagine how unhinged this prop campaign will be. I'm not looking forward to it.
Getting rid of Orban is important on its own merits to kneecap one of the darlings of the global nationalist-populist movement. That said in practical terms even if he’s gone, Fidesz is so embedded into every organ of the state, and Peter Magyar is pretty conservative himself, that a lot won’t change in Hungary thereafter
The fact that most of the democratic parties have withdrawn and are supporting his slate is a good sign they have reason to believe he is much better than Orban (even though he was a member of Orban's party up until a couple of years ago when he left as part of a very nasty divorce from one of Orban's top lieutenants who he destroyed her career by secretly recording he confessing to a scandal).
What are the most trustworthy pollsters in Hungary? The pro-Orban linked pollsters have him up, the opposition linked pollsters have him down. Betting markets give Orban @ 35% chance of winning .
Orban act like someone who thinks he might lose. Thats all I can tell
This week, as the Blue Wave starts to build, I'm interested in a key question:
What House seat that currently isn't on any pronosticators' radar is most likely to flip from Republican to Democrat?
I'm thinking about this cycle's OK-05 in 2018. There were signs of GOP vulnerability in OKC, but no one took them seriously until right before the election. And even then, Kendra Horn's win was a shock to many.
Going through Cook Political Report's list of "Solid R" seats, a few that jump out at me include the following:
* FL-04: Jacksonville elected a Dem mayor recently, and it's only around Trump +12--less than the average special election swing.
* KY-06: It's a Trump +15 seat, but it voted for Beshear.
* MN-01: There has been some press speculating about the vulnerability of this seat with Klobuchar running at the top of the ticket, but pundits haven't bitten this bait yet.
* MO-02: Always has seemed vulnerable for a flip, and this might be the year.
* Basically any of the NC seats currently rated Safe R: gerrymandering has put all of them under Trump +20, and with Cooper at the top of the ticket, there could be increased Dem enthusiasm overall.
That's not even half of the options, but I'm curious to know: what do others think is the most likely seat to pull an OK-05?
After 2018, someone on Twitter speculated that Dems had been able to win OK-05 because the Democratic gubernatorial candidate in Oklahoma massively outperformed the normal Democratic baseline there (while still coming up short), and they won OK-05.
So I'd say we should look at states where Democratic governors or gubernatorial candidates are looking like they will drastically outperform the normal Democratic baseline in their state. The first state that comes to mind is Pennsylvania, where Shapiro is looking like he will win in a massive landslide. I already expect Dems to pick up the 7th, 8th, and 10th, but if Shapiro wins by a big enough margin he might be able to help Dems defeat Brian Fitzpatrick in PA-01.
I also think the new TX-35 could be a sleeper race - it's Trump +10, but majority-Hispanic, and if the Hispanic snapback to the Dems is big enough, I really think we could win this one.
Good picks, but both TX-35 and PA-01 are already on the board. Cook Political Report has them at Likely R, and I suspect they'll shift again before October. Sabato has TX-35 at Likely R and PA-01 and Leans R.
TX-35 depends entirely on the Hispanic vote. And a lot of that depends on the Democratic runoff. It is between a very progressive non-hispanic sex therapist verses a fairly conservative Hispanic sheriff deputy. It's one if those "do we vote with our hearts or our heads" situation.
NC-3: This is towards the top of the list for me - Greenville, Wilson, Goldsboro and Kinston are all very populous, blue communities, but I'm not sure if it will be enough to offset the Republican vote in Jacksonville and rural areas.
NC-9: Richard Ojeda is a good candidate for any of these seats, and he almost made WV-1 competitive in 2018.
NC-11: Like the 3rd district, this is a prime upset pickup. Edwards is toxic as an incumbent, but not as much as Madison Cawthorn, so I'd still rate it as likely Republican.
SC-1: This one was also a shock flip in 2018, and despite a gerrymander in 2022, it could still remain competitive.
FL-7 and TN-5: Amidst their scandals, Cory Mills and Andy Ogles could be vulnerable.
FL-15: National Democrats are targeting here, and much of this seat is coextensive with the state Senate seat near Tampa that just flipped.
FL-21 and FL-28: These seats used to be swing seats that shifted dramatically to the right, but with good candidates (Pia Dandiya and Hector Mujica), it could be competitive.
FL-27: It's probably an unpopular opinion, but I think Maria Elvira Salazar is the most likely Florida Republican to go down this year.
OH-7, OH-10 and OH-15: All of these seats are marginal, and if Marcy Kaptur achieves the overperformance necessary to win re-election in the 9th, then these could possibly flip too.
IN-5: The northern Indianapolis suburbs in Hamilton County are experiencing an explosion of growth and also a large shift to the left. State Sen. J.D. Ford could be formidable.
MO-4 or MO-5: With the splitting of Kansas City, Emmanuel Cleaver could only lose by a few points, or Hartzell Gray could hold down Mark Alford.
A number of gerrymandered Texas seats: It's unclear whether the rightward shift with Hispanics will hold. Texas will be the ultimate test to that theory - like Kildere mentioned, the Hispanic-majority 35th is a prime opportunity.
CO-3 and CO-5: With CO-3 already being marginal and CO-5 already shifting left, Colorado could end up with only 1 Republican in the delegation come 2027, that being the noxious Lauren Boebert.
AZ-2: Native American turnout boosted by former Navajo leader Jonathan Nez is crucial here.
AZ-5 and AZ-8: These suburban Phoenix seats are shifting left, but I don't think this year will be enough to flip them.
WA-5: A target in 2018, this seat was made competitive, and now Michael Baumgartner, a freshman, represents it.
AK-AL: The ranked-choice voting between Matt Schultz and Bill Hill may overwhelm Nick Begich III.
I doubt it. Unlike CO-5, there's not really a specific area in CO-4 that has areas that regularly vote Democratic. The best we could do there is Douglas County flipping, where Trump won 52-45.
You'd have to win Douglas by around 15 to be in the ballpark after it voted for Bobert in 24. The sliver of Larimer and Arapahoe are just not that populated.
WA-5 is an area I’m familiar with (I lived in Spokane for about four years and my wife is from Sandpoint ID). It’s gettable in a big wave, though Baumgartner is somewhat more likable than CMR was and is actually from Spokane itself, which she was not. Spokane isn’t quite blue enough to offset Militialand around it, but maybe we can squeeze it out. Maybe.
This is a good list of races to watch! Thank you for writing it up.
Some of them are already on prognosticators' radar, and I suspect the even-more-gerrymandered Missouri districts won't be used in the 2026 election (legal cases are still pending).
Of the Texas districts, TX-35 seems to already be on peoples' radar, but TX-09 isn't, and we might have a solid nominee there in Leticia Gutierrez. More Dems showed up for the primary there than Republicans, and Republicans are currently fighting it out in a runoff.
Great insights. I'd also check out some of the downballot results in NC 7 (Wilmington to Fayetteville) and NC 14 (Charlotte suburbs and Appalachian foothills). They both voted for Trump by >12%, but both LG Rachel Hunt and AG Jeff Jackson came within single digits. Superintendent Mo Green and SoS Elaine Marshall also outperformed Harris significantly.
SC01 could flip. There are some compelling candidates for the Ds and it's only R+6. Plus the electorate will be somewhat different because coastal SC is among the fastest growing areas in the US.
But to really answer the question, I'll out forth SC-02. It's R+7. 61% White. Joe YouLie Wilson is 80ish and has held the seat since 2001. Not my media zone, so unsure about the D candidates except to give a list: the guy who lost to Wilson last time held him under 60% with no money (David Robinson--not the guy from the NBA). Three other D candidates. A recently retired Gen Z Air Force vet, Zyon Khalifa, who is pushing generational change and new leadership. A lawyer, Roger Pruitt, who's raised $18,000 so far. And a perennial candidate named Schrief who's lost lots of elections. This is the non-Clyburn area of Columbia, Aiken, and the SC.suburbs of Athens GA. Not growing as fast as coast, but still growing.
Kansas’ 2nd Congressional District. Derek Schmidt’s seat. The Democratic challenger, large-animal (think livestock) veterinarian Dr. Ron Coover. The 2nd District is the Kansas District with the stablest history of electing Democrats. In its current highly—astonishingly highly— gerrymandered shape it still has much of uber-urban Kansas City, Kansas. The part of KCK that Charlie Parker hailed from. And the part of Topeka that Coleman Hawkins hailed from. (Surely you didn’t surmise a couple of racial dog-whistles there.). When I was Political Director of the Kansas Democratic Party, the staff would grumble and gnash our teeth about the gerrymandering-of-the-day. Then someone would crack wise that the Republicans were gonna put people who plant in the same district as our Ford Motor Manufacturing Plant (the Fairfax Plant in KCK), and we’d have a laugh and then go back to work. Now farmer-stockman large animal veterinarian Dr. Ron Coover is running in a district that encompasses his own home stomping grounds and the Fairfax Plant. As a certified geezer, I am free to associate with whomever I want. I have disparate dinners with small groups once a month. My most-frequent bridge partner is a MAGA. But one of the fellows I dine with spent his working life as Republican legislative staff. I believe he was Revisor of Statutes when he retired. So we have known dozens and dozens of the same people in the last 5 1/2 decades. But in different ways. The other day he asked me about Coover. I joked that he is the only white man I’ve contributed to this cycle. I wasn’t joking. He hinted that he might have sent him a few bucks himself. His wife interjected “he doesn’t ever do that.” I feel she was impressed.
People have listed a lot of good long shot options, but my top pick is CO-05. People have talked for years about how Colorado Springs is moving left, but I think 2026 is the perfect storm for it to flip and if/when it does, it's going to shock a lot of people. We have a strong candidate, our top of the ticket faces almost zero opposition, it's an area that moved slightly to the left in 2024 of all years, I think Trump's shenanigans are going to really hit military communities, and the Republican is an untested sophomore. I also bet there won't be much polling, since all the attention will be focused on CO-08 (and to lesser extent CO-03,) so people will underestimate our chances here until it's too late.
Shouldn't OK-01 also be a potential target too? It's only marginally more conservative leaning than OK-05 including with Trump's last performance there. At the very least, if Oklahoma Democrats were serious they would at least try to contest both seats in probably the most favorable year for Democrats and expand their grassroots and brand.
My totally off the wall pick is KS-2. It contains the very Democratic Lawrence (University of Kansas), fairly Democratic Topeka, the quickly trending Democratic Manhattan (Kansas State) and a bunch of deep red rural counties in Eastern and Central Kansas. If Democratic turnout is high and Republican turnout is low (which the Iowa and Georgia specials indicate) it could be pushed to a flip.
I try to stay out of discussions regarding California politics because there is so much to keep up with. I know Katie Porter has made some questionable statements about rigged elections and was worried about her appearance on a media outlet where she yelled at a staffer. Is she really less progressive or electable than Eric Swalwell? I don't dislike either candidate. I also know that we are dealing with the Trump DOJ, but some of this stuff about Swalwell has to be true...I guess? Are Porter's mistakes worse than his? Is there a wide enough difference between the two on policy to overlook Swalwell's scandals? I apologize if I sound ignorant on this matter.
For being "progressive", Porter has many more progressive bonafides than Swalwell. Swalwell unseated a liberal Democrat from the right in 2012, and has constantly towed the line of the establishment. Porter supports M4A and the Green New Deal and is pro-union, and ran to the left of now-Sen. Adam Schiff in 2024. I'd say that if true, Swalwell's controversies are much more detrimental than Porter's. Most of her problems have to do with things she has said, while Swalwell's actions speak louder than his words.
Honestly, I just wish Kamala Harris would have pivoted to state politics again instead of continuing her ill-fated national run so this would be a sleeper race, ending the toxicity and chances of a far-right win.
Porter didn't just "say things," she was verbally abusive to a staffer on camera. There are a number of other stories from people who've worked for her-I saw a few firsthand ones. It's enough to sour me on her, I'm afraid. Positions matter, but so does character. (I'm not aware of Swalwell's controversies at the moment)
and, same wish about Harris.
Who has also been rumored to be shitty to staff, to be fair. My thing with Porter: if she's willing to do what she did right there on camera, what does she do when it's off?
Also, she did not inspire a lot of confidence in her Senate run or more specifically how she behaved about it.
Still, I think potential sexual harassment and mortgage fraud outweigh being verbally abusive, and agree that other politicians than Porter have been as bad if not worse with the people around them.
Swalwell was accused of sexual harassment? Oy. Sigh...
I'm just at this point inclined to follow the herd because of the faint but real possibility of two Republicans topping out. I wish Steyer would drop. I wish progressive/non GOP billionaires with zero political experience would find literally anything supportive of that supposed goal to do with their money other than a vanity campaign straight to the top.
I had interest in Becerra, but it doesn't look likely he'll break out into the top contenders now.
Not to revisit this, but funny how the allegations against Al Franken evaporated like dew on a sunny day once he resigned from the Senate. GOP politicians raised a lot of celebratory drinks on that occasion.
Women officials are constantly dinged for being shitty to staff; there's a consistent pattern of sexist expectations on this. There were similar reports for Klobuchar and Mikulski that I remember too.
I expect the difference in treatment isn't that different than the average official at her level. Not to excuse Porter's behavior there, as it is bad, but I cannot bring myself to care about it as an issue unless it's far worse than what was reported.
To me, it sounds like people may be gambling with Swalwell when they could have a more reliable governor in Porter. Again, I'm from Iowa and don't have a preference even though they both have small Iowa connections.
Given that I suspect the next governor is going to deal at the state level with a global Trump induced recession, I suspect whomever wins is going to be unpopular at the end of 4 years. There's no way to balance the state budget in a recession without pissing off virtually everyone.
I suspect this is the reason that top tier candidates had little interest.
Why would something coming out of Trump's DOJ have to be true? I personally don't trust anything they do or say.
I am not a fan of Swalwell and likely won't vote for him in the primary, but it's not because of Republican smears. If he's our guy in the general, I would wholeheartedly support him.
Swalwell also supported a Republican sheriff against a Democrat endorsed by the Democratic Party. And he publicly supported the recall of a progressive DA (who was recalled). Personally. I think he should have stayed out of it as most Democratic officeholders did.
BTW, in 2012, Swalwell's opponent (incumbent Democrat Pete Stark) accused Swalwell of accepting bribes while on the city council. Swalwell always voted for the developer but nothing ever showed a bribe. Years later, however, it was determined that the developer illegally funneled $38,000 in campaign contributions to Swalwell’s campaigns through so-called “straw donors.” The amount far exceeded legal limits.
I agree about Swalwell staying out making remarks about the DA race but from my standpoint, Pamela Price was toxic as DA. She exhibited a bias of unusually reduced sentencing towards black defendents even while the sentencing in the DA's office in this case would likely have merited a harsher sentence. Plenty of attorneys in the DA's office also complained about the environment Price created, which was less about objective, fair-minded assessments and more about Price wanting to push a social justice agenda.
If we really want a true progressive DA, someone like Price is not the answer.
I don't really disagree. Price was a terrible person to be the face of progressive law enforcement. And I completely agree with your last point. I saw Swalwell jumping on the bandwagon to polish his moderate and "tough on crime" image. IIRC, he stood alone as the only prominent Democratic officeholder (other than a DA) to publicly take that side.
Porter apologized to the staffer afterwards and the staffer continued to work on Porter's staff for four more years. It's a real nothing burger to me.
Porter is by far more progressive as well.
One way to distinguish them is fundraising. Porter does not accept corporate money. Her average donation is $58. Swalwell's last report was filled with five figure contributions ($10,000-$39,200) including dozens of large contributions from corporations and corporate executives.
I heard her explain her reason at a candidate forum. IIRC, in her math teacher/law professor way, she criticized the one-time only aspect and the requirement of how the money had to be spent.
Those reasons actually make sense. Didn’t do a lot of reading admittedly on this — that one’s on me — and I agree that a one-time only payment in particular is ludicrous. Thanks.
California has a lot of bad tax policy. We're too heavily dependent on income tax which is highly cyclical based on the stock market (California taxes capital gains as ordinary income). We also eliminated estate taxes over 20 years ago, and we need to close prop 13 loopholes on commercial property.
Problem is, it’s silly to even think we need a propositIon to increase taxes on billionaires when Democrats should be pushed to introduce legislation in the state legislature.
My personal feeling is Porter is the least worst candidate.
And not to give too hot of a take...but given who the President is, it's hard to not feel a bit like she's being held to a bit of a double standard if her worst offense is yelling at staffers.
“ Here’s a crazy stat: In the first two months of the quarter alone, Talarico’s campaign had already raised more money online — $14.3 million, according to filings from the Democratic payment processor ActBlue — than any Senate candidate in the country raised in an entire quarter in 2025.
He’s on pace, in other words, to lap the rest of field, and is almost certain to post the first $20 million-plus quarter of the cycle (it could be closer to $30 million). “
I was a very small part of this. I gave right before this quarter ended to Talarico; show support and replenish campaign funds while the Republicans spend money, cause we know how crazy expensive Texas is to run a statewide race. If he's as flush with cash as they think, I'll likely shift any future donations to other candidates downballot like for the state lege. Federally I would probably give to Flanagan or McMorrow (again) before the primary.
Whoa, that's not someone I expected to raise that kind of money. It'll help raise her profile and that of her race, since I feel like that district gets overlooked when people talk about this year's top swing districts.
I think that’s partly because we have a clear field for the primary, which isn’t the case for most other swing districts, so there’s not much to talk about yet. As well as it being one of those (never say never, elections are weird sometimes) thought to be auto flips in this current political environment. If Democrats don’t win this seat, they might barely have a majority and the Senate would stay safely Republican so they’d have 2 more years of packing the judiciary and the government with their unqualified cronies.
So veteran Latino Democrat = beating incumbent Latino Republican in an heavily Hispanic/Latino district in almost every election scenario when Latino voters disapprove of Trump by 30-50 points. That’s probably why it’s not talked about all that much. Mendoza won’t win by much because of partisanship, but she’ll win that race in the current environment.
Ciscomani however is fairly popular with the electorate as he is laser focused on water issues, which is a major issue with renegotiate of the Colorado River distribution which is likely to favor the upper basin states. Southern Arizona is more water vulnerable than Phoenix.
I believe we are going to win this seat, finally, along with CD 1, but both will be closer than most people are predicting. If we win any of 2, 5 or 8, I would be surprised, but please, surprise me.
I agree with you on both counts, he’s not going to lose by much and he’s a decent incumbent for Republicans, but he also only outperformed Trump by 1 point in 2024, so I don’t think he has a brand separate enough from his party like say Brian Fitzpatrick in PA-01 to survive in even a D+5 year, which is already a huge 7 points shift left from the 2024 vote for Congress. His career was toast the moment Trump won the presidency and the GOP won control again in 2024.
I think all the other districts you mentioned we’ll lose also. The win won’t be big like I said above, but you can’t out swim even the mildest of election results because their party has control when voters are unhappy about literally everything. No one can win in that environment and if even the quality level of GOP incumbents like Fitzpatrick could lose, that means those lesser talented politicians are all DOA in swing and/or slim Trump won seats.
I’m watching lots of races. WI-SC is the big one, followed by the VA referendum, but I’m curious about some others as well.
-PA-03: Who might win here? Are we in danger of Sharif Street winning? Does Rabb have a shot?
- CA-Gov: Of course, the inevitable question of a top-two lockout we’ve discussed ad nauseam. How likely do posters here think it currently is?
- NY State Senate and Assembly: Numerous progressives are targeting seats here - also some vice versa situations where centrists are targeting progressives. Which candidates might have the best shot of winning on either side?
- NY-03 and NY-04: I’m worried about these two. The GOP did really well in Nassau County last year and the NY Dems’ handling of it was a joke. Might Suozzi or Gillen be in danger of losing to a Republican?
-Indiana-SoS: Might Diego Morales lose his primary? If not, is he vulnerable in the general?
- WI-Gov: Who might win the Dem primary here? If Mandela Barnes wins, is he in danger of losing to a Republican like in 2022?
- LA in general: Even besides the mayors’ race. Lots of primaries going around. City Council progressives Eunisses Hernandez and Hugo Soto-Martinez face centrist challengers, and Controller Kenneth Mejia does too. On the flip side, City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto is being challenged from the left, as is City Councillor Tracy Park. Who might win or lose?
- San Francisco Board of Supervisors: Will SF’s rightward shift continue, following the mayors’ race and DA/school board recalls?
- DC mayors’ race: Who is favored? I’m hoping for Janeese Lewis George - does she have a shot?
- DC-AL: Who is favored? Robert White’s my pick — does he have a shot?
PA-3: I constantly see sources that tout Street as the frontrunner, but I think it's a close three-way race between Street, Rabb, and Ala Stanford as of now, with Street being a moderate, Stanford being establishment liberal, and Rabb being progressive.
CA-Gov: I wouldn't say it's likely but I wouldn't say it's *unlikely*. It might be close, but one of the Democrats has a pretty clear shot to one of the top 2 spots.
NY Senate wishlist:
-Toby Stavisky, who is 87 and a 28 year incumbent, loses to one of her progressive challengers
-I want Aber Kavas to defeat Steven Raga for the seat Michael Gianaris is leaving behind. Gianaris himself is pretty progressive, so maybe Kavas has a shot.
-Jessica Gonzalez-Rojas ousts Senator Jessica Ramos
-Yuh-Line Niou (a favorite politician of yours) defeats Grace Lee in the Brian Kavanagh seat
NY Assembly wishlist:
-Mahtab Khan ousts Assemblyman David Weprin
-LaToya LeGrand beats Gregory Meek's deputy CoS Nathaniel Hezekiah
-Brian Romero succeeds Gonzalez-Rojas
-David Orkin ousts Assemblywoman Jenifer Rajkumar
-Christian Tate ousts Assemblyman Erik Dillan
-Eon Huntley ousts Assemblywoman Stefani Zinerman
-Assemblywoman Phara Forrest holds on against Samatha Johnson
-Ryder Kessler beats Jeannine Kiely
NY-3 and NY 4 should be fine, especially in a wave.
IN-SoS: Morales will probably win his primary and re-election, but I imagine a close race between him and Bayh in the general.
WI-Gov: Hong, my pick, is favored in polling, but I think any of them can win against Tiffany.
DC mayor and AL: I'd say Lewis George and White, also my favored picks, will win.
How likely do you think those NYS Senate and Assembly primary flips are? I'm doubting Weprin being ousted, for example. I'm guessing few of those seats flip to challengers. Incumbents are hard to beat in New York (and, to be fair, in general).
In 2020 a number of seats flipped left. Ditto for the NYC Council in 2021 (albeit mostly in open races). With Mamdani in office, I’ll be curious to see if incumbency is as powerful as it once was.
Los Angeles notes: The one thing that is clear is that the Mayor's race will go to a runoff. Karen Bass is leading now, but way under 50%. In CA nonpartisan races you can avoid a runoff if you get 50%+1 in the primary. That ain't happening this year. I have seen both Mayor Bass and Councilmember Nithya Raman at my local Democratic club recently (Valley Grassroots for Democracy vgfd.net). I like them both and either could do a good job in this very difficult city to run. Both are better than the stereotypes about them. I think Bass makes the runoff for sure; the question is who she faces. If it is Raman the runoff could go either way. If it is GOP reality show dude Spencer Pratt then Bass wins. There are others including centrist tech guy Adam Miller and DSA lefty Rae Huang. I don't expect either of the latter two to make it, although Miller has enough money to raise his name recognition. If Miller makes the runoff he might be formidable, but he isn't there yet. I am undecided between Bass and Raman at this point.
I also saw both main candidates for City Attorney, incumbent Hydee Feldstein Soto and challenger Marissa Roy. Hydee had some scandalette; she may be vulnerable. Roy has experience on the state but not local government level. I think the race leans toward the incumbent, but she is not safe. The LACDP (county party org) has endorsed the challenger, who is somewhat to the left of HFS.
City Controller probably leans toward the incumbent, Kenneth Mejia, who is a lefty and more independent from the local power structure. His centrist Democratic challenger, Zach Sokoloff, has family wealth and connections but it remains to be seen what kind of campaign he will put together. I am leaning towards Mejia because it is maybe useful to have more of an outsider in this kind of position. I see no reason to fire him. Zach S. was emphasizing that he is a Democrat, but he was speaking to a Democratic club at the time.
I would guess that the incumbent councilmembers all win but I don't know enough about the individual races to know if they will go to runoffs. There is also a race in CD-03 in the southwest SFV where incumbent Bob Blumenfield is termed out. I have met one of the candidates, Tim Gaspar, but don't have a sense of the shape of that race.
CA Gov: Eventually the voters will start noticing this race, probably when the ballots arrive in early May. Damn if I know what happens, but I don't think it will be Bianco vs Hilton (two Repubs). My best guess is the runoff will be Swalwell (D) vs Hilton (R) with Swalwell winning the runoff, of course. I'll probably vote for Katie Porter, but will wait until just before the deadline to vote. I will do my best to avoid the lockout. I am not going to vote for my first choice candidate, Betty Yee, because her chances of the making the runoff are minuscule. I have as much chance as Betty, or Antonio V. or Tony Thurmond of being the next CA-Gov, and I am not running. Fun fact: Election Day is a numerical palindrome, 6-2-26.
IfTrump/his pet DOJ still insist on trying to target Swalwell, it's likelier than anything to push him to the front of the line. I'd really feel better if any of the Dems broke into a solid lead here.
I think a top 2 lockout at this stage has about a 1 in 6 chance of occurring. Which is still too damn high and speaks to how people need to drop out of the race.
Regarding the SF Board of Supervisors and SF elections after 2026:
The only time there was a real rightward shift was back in the mid-90’s when Willie Brown was elected Mayor. From his time as Mayor, he not only gave Gavin Newsom his start in politics (by appointing him as District 2 Supervisor) but also became corporate developer’s best friend. This lend to a significant rise in gentrification and years afterwards Mayors have never really done a lot to counter these problems and keeping diversity in the city.
All the Mayors since Brown have been either moderate or moderate liberal at best or apolitical. Ed Lee and Daniel Lurie are the two Mayors in recent memory who project more of this mentality and never tried to make headlines nationally for Democrats. Lurie though as Mayor while defeating London Breed by more than a narrow margin has cleaned up her mess on crime and city management, which she failed to do. Breed and Lurie though are more aligned with YIMBYs so not exactly a rightward shift by Lurie being elected in 2024.
Board of Supervisors races are tricky because any moderates or progressives being elected really depends on the district and demographics. District 2 is the wealthiest in the city and has a history electing moderates.
District 9, which Jackie Fielder represents, is the most progressive in the city and is in no danger of seeing any ideological change. Fielder is taking time away because she’s got a significant mental health challenge right now but if she were to resign, there would not be ideological change at all. The Mission District, which is most of District 9, is very anti-development but mainly from a gentrification and displacement standpoint. Other districts vary in sentiment from time to time.
For the school board members and Chesa Boudin being recalled, it was a matter of competence and batshit craziness. Boudin was all over the place on his prosecution tactics and divided up attorneys working in his office.
The school board members that were recalled, were just simply batshit crazy and were more focused on cancelling Abraham Lincoln’s name than they were at doing their job in keeping kids in public schools. This has nothing to with being left.
I think because of the election of NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani there is certainly an appetite brewing for a similar mayor in San Francisco. However, Lurie is likely to easily win re-election. After that, because the mayoral races are now being held in presidential election years, it’s going to be a different ballgame.
For the race in Congress, it’s a different affair. I do not see how Scott Weiner, Connie Chan, etc. will win by double digits.
I'm sorry to bring this up, but I find your posts interesting, and I have a hard time reading them.
"Lurie thought as Mayor while defeating London Breed by more than a narrow margin has cleaned up her mess on crime and city management, which she failed to do." Can't tell what you're trying to say here.
"After that, because the mayoral races are now being held in presidential election years"--is there supposed to be more to this sentence?
It doesn't take long to review and revise posts before hitting Submit, and I just don't see why folks don't take the time.
Got it. Good analysis. I do remember an attempt by the school board to paint over a mural they claimed was racist due to depictions of slaves and George Washington. The problem was, the mural was painted by a literal communist and the portrayals were meant to (as I understand it) essentially subversively portray Washington (sadly probably correctly, to some degree -- Washington had initially opposed enlisting black soldiers in the Revolutionary War, in addition to being a slave owner) as a racist colonizer. So the school board didn't even do their research!
News from the North: Early voting started today in the three by-elections that will determine if the Liberal Party can assume a majority in the House of Commons. Consensus is that the two ridings in Toronto will be easy wins, with Terrebonne in the Montreal suburbs still a wild card. Recent polling shows the Liberals still with a strong lead nationally and in the province of Quebec, but that area has also been more fertile for the Bloc Quebecois.
We are also roughly six months out from municipal elections in the province of Ontario, and as a resident of Toronto, I am interested to see if Olivia Chow will commit to running for a new term, or if there will be a different candidate for the left wing. The only declared candidate so far is councillor Brad Bradford, who has staked out the right of centre position in opposition to Chow. Fun fact: in the absence of nationwide or province-wide offices, the mayor of Toronto lays claim to having the most people vote for them of any politician in Canada
Technically only two are required to get to 172, but that means the Speaker, elected as a Liberal but ostensibly neutral, would have to break ties. Ideally they win all three, as that would also allow the government to prorogue the House briefly and then gain majority control of the standing committees.
Indeed, and from what I understand, the BQ is pitching to voters that they no longer have to fear about voting against the Liberals since the anglais en Toronto will assure them of a majority, so vote your conscience.
Elle Cochran, state rep from Hawaii's 14th district, Harris +16, switched back in mid-March. Apparently she tried to rob tourists at gunpoint in 1993, so perhaps her judgement isn't the best.
According to the article, Ford primaried Atkinson in 2024 but she lost 56-44. I'm not from the area so I don't know if he was starting to get unpopular among Democratic voters, but I wonder if his party switch was also partially to avoid a primary? Switching parties indicates a potential long-time ideological shift that could've been annoying Democratic voters. His district seems swingy enough that maybe he thinks he can win with Republican votes.
Two races most important to me right now are local
Ventura County, California has a Republican majority on the board of supervisors that is in the pocket of the oil lobby, so much so that they eliminated a strong campaign finance ordinance. They are also very weak on the environment in a county that has long been pro-environment.
Republican Jeff Gorell (who lost to Julia Brownley way back in 2014) won Supervisor District 2 (Thousand Oaks, Oak Park, Camarillo) after a nasty campaign in 2022 that saw outside money flow in. He's being challenged by Democrat Ashley Orozco who serves on the Conejo Recreation and Park District Board. I know Ashley personally and can say that she's a strong Democrat who will fight for the environment and good local governance. She has organized to help local Democrats win races for years and previously worked for Julia Brownley. Ashley also organized a response to ICE raids in 2024 by rounding up volunteers to distribute information to let people know their rights. She is endorsed by Brownley as well as Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin and a host of other elected officials. https://voteorozco.com/
Republican Janice Parvin of Supervisorial District 4 (Moorpark, Simi Valley) is a hardcore conservative who along with Gorell voted down a campaign finance ordinance that limited donations to supervisorial candidates to $750 and increased the limit to $5900. She is being challenged by Democrat Ruth Luevanos who was the first Democrat in over 25 years to be elected to the Simi Valley City Council when she won an at-large race in 2018. Ruth is an educator and an advocate for immigrant communities just to name a couple of things from her resume. https://www.ruth4supervisor.com/
Ruth Luevanos ran for Congresss at one point, didn’t she? I remember seeing her name.
I also remember her being a progressive. She and the other candidate you mentioned have my support. If the Dems want to take back power, local races are a must. They also help us build up a bench for future races further down the line.
AZ-3 - Yassamin Ansari revealed in a Time magazine op-ed that she suffers from extreme pain when she is on her period and, a little over a decade ago, suffered a medical emergency caused by extreme period pain.
It's honestly a miracle that Ansari is able to carry out her duties as a Member of Congress, campaign for elected office (thankfully, she represents a Democratic stronghold and is not in any real danger of losing renomination in a primary), hold town halls and other similar events, and maintain a public presence, all while suffering from debilitating pain every four weeks or so.
I honestly came close to crying after reading Ansari's op-ed.
Around 15% or so of premenopausal women suffer from debilitating period pain (this was the figure Ansari referenced in her op-ed), although that demographic is almost certainly severely underrepresented in elected political office due to the responsibilities and demands of running for and serving in elected office.
I’m still wondering if the toxic approvals of TACO plus the upheaval in the NC GOP in the wake of Phil Berger losing his primary will give NC Dems an opening to flip the gerrymandered GOP majorities.
And the MAGA state Supreme Court throwing out the Leandro decision on a cherry picked technicality has pissed off voters more.
I know they’ll lose their supermajorities in both houses, but they only need to lose 12 state House seats and 5 state Senate seats to regain a bare majority.
I would love to hear a DownBallot podcast interview with Anderson Clayton, the amazing chair of the North Carolina Democratic Party. Really want to hear her strategies and what she and her party are working on. From North Carolina, I think we’re in for some truly wonderful surprised this November!
It made the local news. And it’s been litigated for over 30 years. It plays into the GOP majority defunding our public schools and giving handouts to wealthy parents already sending their kids to public schools.
Quite a few of our Democratic legislators and candidates challenging Republican incumbents are public educators or have a public education background.
I’d normally agree that the assessment of NC is too rosy, but unlike a lot of states NC has an insanely effective and competent Dem chair. Coupled with a likely blue tsunami nationwide, I think our chances are phenomenal in a way they haven’t been for some time.
I live in Durham County near the Orange County border. Because of the way Rs have drawn our districts, I was unable to vote in the municipal elections last year.
But I have seen a lot of energy on the ground. I’ve seen more protests here than during Trump’s first term. Something feels very different in comparison to 2018. Something closer to 2006 or 2010 in reverse.
Hey I’m also in Durham county! Just moved here recently and loving it here. I’ve also been super encouraged by the protests, I’ve been volunteering with the local indivisible helping them track their attendance and the weekly, non-big No Kings type events have been growing a ton!
Now these weekly protesters are likely people who already voted against Trump, but being motivated to go to a weekly protest for a few hours while the counter protests in the triangle have barely made a blip surely is a sign of the growing enthusiasm gap we see in the polls!
Feeling good about cooper and earls’ chances come November and fired up to work to get them there!
California is likely to have two competing ballot measures on taxes.
First is the billionaires tax that would call for a one time 5% tax on assets in excess of a billion as of 1/1/2026. Real estate and pensions are excluded. It would be used for health care and other social services. SEIU supports the proposal, and Newsom is working against it.
https://lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Initiative/2025-024
Second is a proposition that would ban new taxes on financial assets and personal property, and would ban retroactive taxes (like ones retroactive to 1/1/2026). Most California individual personal property isn't taxed, exceptions include vehicles, trailers and boats. Businesses do pay personal property taxes.
A group endorsed by Kiley is direct mailing proposition signature forms which I got this week. This is the first time I recall getting direct mail of proposition signature forms.
https://lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Initiative/2025-041
The billionaire tax leads in multiple polls, by quite a bit relative to how controversial it is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_California_billionaire_tax#Polling
If Politico is to be believed, however, there may be trouble. Polls also indicated voters were receptive to counter arguments.
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/03/10/wealth-tax-leads-in-california-poll-but-faces-major-headwinds-00819733
Question to posters here — is what Politico is saying a legit concern, or is this just typical “X in disarray” type content? I’m still somewhat new to really in-the-woods politics — when a poll says “voters are receptive to X”, is that legit or no?
This early in the process I'm skeptical of any poll, since most people have no idea about either proposition, plus they need to get on the ballot.
I was approached by a group of 6 neighbors at the pool because they figured I'd know about the mailer that came out. When I explained it to them, all were no on that prop and only one supported the billionaires tax.
I got that mailer as well. I didn't give them a signature but wrote some choice words on it and sent it back to them so they could pay the postage.
I have seen that tactic used by other very well-funded campaigns in California before. It is an extremely expensive way to collect signatures but they do get a high percentage of valid sigs because they only send out to registered voters. The most recent one I can recall (slight pun) was a few years ago when some folks were trying to recall L.A. District Attorney George Gascon. They didn't get enough sigs to make the ballot but he lost in the next regularly scheduled election about a year later. I know I have gotten them for ballot propositions before but my overworked, tax season addled brain can't come up with a date or prop. Maybe something from Howard Jarvis' rotting corpse (the HJ Taxpayers Assn).
Life begins again on April 16. That day I will be at the most beautiful beach in Los Angeles County, El Matador State Beach... Meanwhile, back to work.
Having lived in California through multiple election cycles with ballot initiative insanity and gazillions spent on TV ads, I would give *some* credence to voters being receptive to counter arguments. Sadly, the ads have worked in the past and caused some terrible props to pass and good ones to fail.
Given the stakes for billionaires and the sense of precedence it would set, I can only imagine how unhinged this prop campaign will be. I'm not looking forward to it.
Also, f*** Newsom for opposing it.
I'm following three big elections this April:
1) The Wisconsin Supreme Court election, on April 7,
2) The Hungarian general election on April 12 (really hoping Hungary finally gets rid of Viktor Orban!),
3) The Virginia redistricting referendum on April 21.
Getting rid of Orban is important on its own merits to kneecap one of the darlings of the global nationalist-populist movement. That said in practical terms even if he’s gone, Fidesz is so embedded into every organ of the state, and Peter Magyar is pretty conservative himself, that a lot won’t change in Hungary thereafter
As far as I can tell, Peter Magyar doesn't want to become a dictator. That alone would make him a huge improvement over Orban.
agreed!
The fact that most of the democratic parties have withdrawn and are supporting his slate is a good sign they have reason to believe he is much better than Orban (even though he was a member of Orban's party up until a couple of years ago when he left as part of a very nasty divorce from one of Orban's top lieutenants who he destroyed her career by secretly recording he confessing to a scandal).
Wouldn't there be a big change in their policy toward Ukraine?
What are the most trustworthy pollsters in Hungary? The pro-Orban linked pollsters have him up, the opposition linked pollsters have him down. Betting markets give Orban @ 35% chance of winning .
Orban act like someone who thinks he might lose. Thats all I can tell
This week, as the Blue Wave starts to build, I'm interested in a key question:
What House seat that currently isn't on any pronosticators' radar is most likely to flip from Republican to Democrat?
I'm thinking about this cycle's OK-05 in 2018. There were signs of GOP vulnerability in OKC, but no one took them seriously until right before the election. And even then, Kendra Horn's win was a shock to many.
Going through Cook Political Report's list of "Solid R" seats, a few that jump out at me include the following:
* FL-04: Jacksonville elected a Dem mayor recently, and it's only around Trump +12--less than the average special election swing.
* KY-06: It's a Trump +15 seat, but it voted for Beshear.
* MN-01: There has been some press speculating about the vulnerability of this seat with Klobuchar running at the top of the ticket, but pundits haven't bitten this bait yet.
* MO-02: Always has seemed vulnerable for a flip, and this might be the year.
* Basically any of the NC seats currently rated Safe R: gerrymandering has put all of them under Trump +20, and with Cooper at the top of the ticket, there could be increased Dem enthusiasm overall.
That's not even half of the options, but I'm curious to know: what do others think is the most likely seat to pull an OK-05?
After 2018, someone on Twitter speculated that Dems had been able to win OK-05 because the Democratic gubernatorial candidate in Oklahoma massively outperformed the normal Democratic baseline there (while still coming up short), and they won OK-05.
So I'd say we should look at states where Democratic governors or gubernatorial candidates are looking like they will drastically outperform the normal Democratic baseline in their state. The first state that comes to mind is Pennsylvania, where Shapiro is looking like he will win in a massive landslide. I already expect Dems to pick up the 7th, 8th, and 10th, but if Shapiro wins by a big enough margin he might be able to help Dems defeat Brian Fitzpatrick in PA-01.
I also think the new TX-35 could be a sleeper race - it's Trump +10, but majority-Hispanic, and if the Hispanic snapback to the Dems is big enough, I really think we could win this one.
Good picks, but both TX-35 and PA-01 are already on the board. Cook Political Report has them at Likely R, and I suspect they'll shift again before October. Sabato has TX-35 at Likely R and PA-01 and Leans R.
Fitzpatrick has shown his talent as a candidate, but his defeat in a wave shouldn't surprise anyone.
TX-35 depends entirely on the Hispanic vote. And a lot of that depends on the Democratic runoff. It is between a very progressive non-hispanic sex therapist verses a fairly conservative Hispanic sheriff deputy. It's one if those "do we vote with our hearts or our heads" situation.
NC-3: This is towards the top of the list for me - Greenville, Wilson, Goldsboro and Kinston are all very populous, blue communities, but I'm not sure if it will be enough to offset the Republican vote in Jacksonville and rural areas.
NC-9: Richard Ojeda is a good candidate for any of these seats, and he almost made WV-1 competitive in 2018.
NC-11: Like the 3rd district, this is a prime upset pickup. Edwards is toxic as an incumbent, but not as much as Madison Cawthorn, so I'd still rate it as likely Republican.
SC-1: This one was also a shock flip in 2018, and despite a gerrymander in 2022, it could still remain competitive.
FL-7 and TN-5: Amidst their scandals, Cory Mills and Andy Ogles could be vulnerable.
FL-15: National Democrats are targeting here, and much of this seat is coextensive with the state Senate seat near Tampa that just flipped.
FL-21 and FL-28: These seats used to be swing seats that shifted dramatically to the right, but with good candidates (Pia Dandiya and Hector Mujica), it could be competitive.
FL-27: It's probably an unpopular opinion, but I think Maria Elvira Salazar is the most likely Florida Republican to go down this year.
OH-7, OH-10 and OH-15: All of these seats are marginal, and if Marcy Kaptur achieves the overperformance necessary to win re-election in the 9th, then these could possibly flip too.
IN-5: The northern Indianapolis suburbs in Hamilton County are experiencing an explosion of growth and also a large shift to the left. State Sen. J.D. Ford could be formidable.
MO-4 or MO-5: With the splitting of Kansas City, Emmanuel Cleaver could only lose by a few points, or Hartzell Gray could hold down Mark Alford.
A number of gerrymandered Texas seats: It's unclear whether the rightward shift with Hispanics will hold. Texas will be the ultimate test to that theory - like Kildere mentioned, the Hispanic-majority 35th is a prime opportunity.
CO-3 and CO-5: With CO-3 already being marginal and CO-5 already shifting left, Colorado could end up with only 1 Republican in the delegation come 2027, that being the noxious Lauren Boebert.
AZ-2: Native American turnout boosted by former Navajo leader Jonathan Nez is crucial here.
AZ-5 and AZ-8: These suburban Phoenix seats are shifting left, but I don't think this year will be enough to flip them.
WA-5: A target in 2018, this seat was made competitive, and now Michael Baumgartner, a freshman, represents it.
AK-AL: The ranked-choice voting between Matt Schultz and Bill Hill may overwhelm Nick Begich III.
What about CO-04 itself? Boebert only won by 11 points in 2024 and it was to the left of CO-05 for congress that year.
I doubt it. Unlike CO-5, there's not really a specific area in CO-4 that has areas that regularly vote Democratic. The best we could do there is Douglas County flipping, where Trump won 52-45.
Just need to run it up in Douglas and Larimer (and that tiny piece of Arapahoe).
Can you show some math to back that up. I'm skeptical even that would be enough to get you within 5 points let alone a win.
You'd have to win Douglas by around 15 to be in the ballpark after it voted for Bobert in 24. The sliver of Larimer and Arapahoe are just not that populated.
WA-5 is an area I’m familiar with (I lived in Spokane for about four years and my wife is from Sandpoint ID). It’s gettable in a big wave, though Baumgartner is somewhat more likable than CMR was and is actually from Spokane itself, which she was not. Spokane isn’t quite blue enough to offset Militialand around it, but maybe we can squeeze it out. Maybe.
She actually lived in Spokane towards the end of her congressional career, after previously living in Deer Park and Colville.
This is a good list of races to watch! Thank you for writing it up.
Some of them are already on prognosticators' radar, and I suspect the even-more-gerrymandered Missouri districts won't be used in the 2026 election (legal cases are still pending).
Of the Texas districts, TX-35 seems to already be on peoples' radar, but TX-09 isn't, and we might have a solid nominee there in Leticia Gutierrez. More Dems showed up for the primary there than Republicans, and Republicans are currently fighting it out in a runoff.
Great insights. I'd also check out some of the downballot results in NC 7 (Wilmington to Fayetteville) and NC 14 (Charlotte suburbs and Appalachian foothills). They both voted for Trump by >12%, but both LG Rachel Hunt and AG Jeff Jackson came within single digits. Superintendent Mo Green and SoS Elaine Marshall also outperformed Harris significantly.
SC01 could flip. There are some compelling candidates for the Ds and it's only R+6. Plus the electorate will be somewhat different because coastal SC is among the fastest growing areas in the US.
But to really answer the question, I'll out forth SC-02. It's R+7. 61% White. Joe YouLie Wilson is 80ish and has held the seat since 2001. Not my media zone, so unsure about the D candidates except to give a list: the guy who lost to Wilson last time held him under 60% with no money (David Robinson--not the guy from the NBA). Three other D candidates. A recently retired Gen Z Air Force vet, Zyon Khalifa, who is pushing generational change and new leadership. A lawyer, Roger Pruitt, who's raised $18,000 so far. And a perennial candidate named Schrief who's lost lots of elections. This is the non-Clyburn area of Columbia, Aiken, and the SC.suburbs of Athens GA. Not growing as fast as coast, but still growing.
Kansas’ 2nd Congressional District. Derek Schmidt’s seat. The Democratic challenger, large-animal (think livestock) veterinarian Dr. Ron Coover. The 2nd District is the Kansas District with the stablest history of electing Democrats. In its current highly—astonishingly highly— gerrymandered shape it still has much of uber-urban Kansas City, Kansas. The part of KCK that Charlie Parker hailed from. And the part of Topeka that Coleman Hawkins hailed from. (Surely you didn’t surmise a couple of racial dog-whistles there.). When I was Political Director of the Kansas Democratic Party, the staff would grumble and gnash our teeth about the gerrymandering-of-the-day. Then someone would crack wise that the Republicans were gonna put people who plant in the same district as our Ford Motor Manufacturing Plant (the Fairfax Plant in KCK), and we’d have a laugh and then go back to work. Now farmer-stockman large animal veterinarian Dr. Ron Coover is running in a district that encompasses his own home stomping grounds and the Fairfax Plant. As a certified geezer, I am free to associate with whomever I want. I have disparate dinners with small groups once a month. My most-frequent bridge partner is a MAGA. But one of the fellows I dine with spent his working life as Republican legislative staff. I believe he was Revisor of Statutes when he retired. So we have known dozens and dozens of the same people in the last 5 1/2 decades. But in different ways. The other day he asked me about Coover. I joked that he is the only white man I’ve contributed to this cycle. I wasn’t joking. He hinted that he might have sent him a few bucks himself. His wife interjected “he doesn’t ever do that.” I feel she was impressed.
“Don” Coover. Not “Ron” Coover. A typographical error.
People have listed a lot of good long shot options, but my top pick is CO-05. People have talked for years about how Colorado Springs is moving left, but I think 2026 is the perfect storm for it to flip and if/when it does, it's going to shock a lot of people. We have a strong candidate, our top of the ticket faces almost zero opposition, it's an area that moved slightly to the left in 2024 of all years, I think Trump's shenanigans are going to really hit military communities, and the Republican is an untested sophomore. I also bet there won't be much polling, since all the attention will be focused on CO-08 (and to lesser extent CO-03,) so people will underestimate our chances here until it's too late.
CO-05 definitely is a race to watch, but I'd say it's already on people's radar. Likely R at Cook and Sabato.
Shouldn't OK-01 also be a potential target too? It's only marginally more conservative leaning than OK-05 including with Trump's last performance there. At the very least, if Oklahoma Democrats were serious they would at least try to contest both seats in probably the most favorable year for Democrats and expand their grassroots and brand.
My totally off the wall pick is KS-2. It contains the very Democratic Lawrence (University of Kansas), fairly Democratic Topeka, the quickly trending Democratic Manhattan (Kansas State) and a bunch of deep red rural counties in Eastern and Central Kansas. If Democratic turnout is high and Republican turnout is low (which the Iowa and Georgia specials indicate) it could be pushed to a flip.
Unfortunately, KS-02 no longer contains either Lawrence or Manhattan. Both were moved into the heavily Republican 1st in redistricting.
I try to stay out of discussions regarding California politics because there is so much to keep up with. I know Katie Porter has made some questionable statements about rigged elections and was worried about her appearance on a media outlet where she yelled at a staffer. Is she really less progressive or electable than Eric Swalwell? I don't dislike either candidate. I also know that we are dealing with the Trump DOJ, but some of this stuff about Swalwell has to be true...I guess? Are Porter's mistakes worse than his? Is there a wide enough difference between the two on policy to overlook Swalwell's scandals? I apologize if I sound ignorant on this matter.
For being "progressive", Porter has many more progressive bonafides than Swalwell. Swalwell unseated a liberal Democrat from the right in 2012, and has constantly towed the line of the establishment. Porter supports M4A and the Green New Deal and is pro-union, and ran to the left of now-Sen. Adam Schiff in 2024. I'd say that if true, Swalwell's controversies are much more detrimental than Porter's. Most of her problems have to do with things she has said, while Swalwell's actions speak louder than his words.
Honestly, I just wish Kamala Harris would have pivoted to state politics again instead of continuing her ill-fated national run so this would be a sleeper race, ending the toxicity and chances of a far-right win.
Porter didn't just "say things," she was verbally abusive to a staffer on camera. There are a number of other stories from people who've worked for her-I saw a few firsthand ones. It's enough to sour me on her, I'm afraid. Positions matter, but so does character. (I'm not aware of Swalwell's controversies at the moment)
and, same wish about Harris.
Who has also been rumored to be shitty to staff, to be fair. My thing with Porter: if she's willing to do what she did right there on camera, what does she do when it's off?
Also, she did not inspire a lot of confidence in her Senate run or more specifically how she behaved about it.
Still, I think potential sexual harassment and mortgage fraud outweigh being verbally abusive, and agree that other politicians than Porter have been as bad if not worse with the people around them.
Swalwell was accused of sexual harassment? Oy. Sigh...
I'm just at this point inclined to follow the herd because of the faint but real possibility of two Republicans topping out. I wish Steyer would drop. I wish progressive/non GOP billionaires with zero political experience would find literally anything supportive of that supposed goal to do with their money other than a vanity campaign straight to the top.
I had interest in Becerra, but it doesn't look likely he'll break out into the top contenders now.
Like, real ones or Al Franken ones?
Not to revisit this, but funny how the allegations against Al Franken evaporated like dew on a sunny day once he resigned from the Senate. GOP politicians raised a lot of celebratory drinks on that occasion.
I take it, these aren't just allegations from the Trump Administration?
The mortgage fraud is the same BS that the Trump administration is making against several Democrats.
As far as I’m concerned, so far from reading stories, all these controversies are really made up and utter BS.
Unless there is something really incriminating here, I am going to cast my vote for Swalwell.
Women officials are constantly dinged for being shitty to staff; there's a consistent pattern of sexist expectations on this. There were similar reports for Klobuchar and Mikulski that I remember too.
I expect the difference in treatment isn't that different than the average official at her level. Not to excuse Porter's behavior there, as it is bad, but I cannot bring myself to care about it as an issue unless it's far worse than what was reported.
I was on Bluesky when it came out, and a number of other people who'd worked for her came out and said it'd been a wrenching experience. Fwiw.
To me, it sounds like people may be gambling with Swalwell when they could have a more reliable governor in Porter. Again, I'm from Iowa and don't have a preference even though they both have small Iowa connections.
Trivia: Did you know that Porter is originally from Iowa? She grew up on a family farm there.
Any of Harris, Padilla, or Bonta would have locked the race up immediately. I think they just don't want to be governor next year.
I'm skeptical Bonta would have locked the race up immediately. Most informed Dem primary voters don't know who he is.
That said, he'd likely have gotten my support.
That's probably right. I think Bonta would have had it locked up by this point, though.
Given that I suspect the next governor is going to deal at the state level with a global Trump induced recession, I suspect whomever wins is going to be unpopular at the end of 4 years. There's no way to balance the state budget in a recession without pissing off virtually everyone.
I suspect this is the reason that top tier candidates had little interest.
Why would something coming out of Trump's DOJ have to be true? I personally don't trust anything they do or say.
I am not a fan of Swalwell and likely won't vote for him in the primary, but it's not because of Republican smears. If he's our guy in the general, I would wholeheartedly support him.
I used the right? After that, seeking confirmation from people who know better than I do whether any of the allegations are true at all.
Swalwell also supported a Republican sheriff against a Democrat endorsed by the Democratic Party. And he publicly supported the recall of a progressive DA (who was recalled). Personally. I think he should have stayed out of it as most Democratic officeholders did.
BTW, in 2012, Swalwell's opponent (incumbent Democrat Pete Stark) accused Swalwell of accepting bribes while on the city council. Swalwell always voted for the developer but nothing ever showed a bribe. Years later, however, it was determined that the developer illegally funneled $38,000 in campaign contributions to Swalwell’s campaigns through so-called “straw donors.” The amount far exceeded legal limits.
District Attorney (county position) not Attorney General (statewide)
Thanks. Corrected.
yikes.
I agree about Swalwell staying out making remarks about the DA race but from my standpoint, Pamela Price was toxic as DA. She exhibited a bias of unusually reduced sentencing towards black defendents even while the sentencing in the DA's office in this case would likely have merited a harsher sentence. Plenty of attorneys in the DA's office also complained about the environment Price created, which was less about objective, fair-minded assessments and more about Price wanting to push a social justice agenda.
If we really want a true progressive DA, someone like Price is not the answer.
I don't really disagree. Price was a terrible person to be the face of progressive law enforcement. And I completely agree with your last point. I saw Swalwell jumping on the bandwagon to polish his moderate and "tough on crime" image. IIRC, he stood alone as the only prominent Democratic officeholder (other than a DA) to publicly take that side.
Porter apologized to the staffer afterwards and the staffer continued to work on Porter's staff for four more years. It's a real nothing burger to me.
Porter is by far more progressive as well.
One way to distinguish them is fundraising. Porter does not accept corporate money. Her average donation is $58. Swalwell's last report was filled with five figure contributions ($10,000-$39,200) including dozens of large contributions from corporations and corporate executives.
I agree that Porter is more progressive, although I’m pissed at her for opposing the billionaire tax. She of all people.
Not sure of Swalwell’s stance but he’s historically been more centrist so I’d be shocked if he supported it.
I heard her explain her reason at a candidate forum. IIRC, in her math teacher/law professor way, she criticized the one-time only aspect and the requirement of how the money had to be spent.
Those reasons actually make sense. Didn’t do a lot of reading admittedly on this — that one’s on me — and I agree that a one-time only payment in particular is ludicrous. Thanks.
California has a lot of bad tax policy. We're too heavily dependent on income tax which is highly cyclical based on the stock market (California taxes capital gains as ordinary income). We also eliminated estate taxes over 20 years ago, and we need to close prop 13 loopholes on commercial property.
Problem is, it’s silly to even think we need a propositIon to increase taxes on billionaires when Democrats should be pushed to introduce legislation in the state legislature.
Don’t we elect Democrats for a reason?
Interesting objection to dependence on income tax, since it is the most progressive form of taxation.
My personal feeling is Porter is the least worst candidate.
And not to give too hot of a take...but given who the President is, it's hard to not feel a bit like she's being held to a bit of a double standard if her worst offense is yelling at staffers.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/03/us/elections/georgia-voting-systems-midterm-elections.html
Georgia does not have a clear way to vote after the legislature was unable to approve a new system.
They could go to court and get an injunction maintaining the status quo for the November election if necessary.
TX-Sen: Talarico flooded with cash. Buried nugget:
https://x.com/michaelkruse/status/2040181124362572083
https://messaging-custom-newsletters.nytimes.com/dynamic/render?campaign_id=56&emc=edit_cn_20260403&instance_id=173563&isViewInBrowser=true&nl=on-politics&paid_regi=1&productCode=CN®i_id=308401991&segment_id=217717&sendId=217717&uri=nyt://newsletter/4f7e1cc6-d6e1-57fe-b7c7-81cbfc73c902&user_id=4e510c646abf39a9f1537cc7111f9dc2
“ Here’s a crazy stat: In the first two months of the quarter alone, Talarico’s campaign had already raised more money online — $14.3 million, according to filings from the Democratic payment processor ActBlue — than any Senate candidate in the country raised in an entire quarter in 2025.
He’s on pace, in other words, to lap the rest of field, and is almost certain to post the first $20 million-plus quarter of the cycle (it could be closer to $30 million). “
I was a very small part of this. I gave right before this quarter ended to Talarico; show support and replenish campaign funds while the Republicans spend money, cause we know how crazy expensive Texas is to run a statewide race. If he's as flush with cash as they think, I'll likely shift any future donations to other candidates downballot like for the state lege. Federally I would probably give to Flanagan or McMorrow (again) before the primary.
It's good news but remember that most of it was spent on the primary. (I donated before and after the primary.)
Any numbers for Talarico’s cash-on-hand? I’m not seeing that yet.
AZ-06: $2.3m Q1 for Democrat JoAnna Mendoza.
https://x.com/politico/status/2040003174082421057
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/04/03/democratic-house-challenger-joanna-mendoza-2026-fundraising-00856581
Whoa, that's not someone I expected to raise that kind of money. It'll help raise her profile and that of her race, since I feel like that district gets overlooked when people talk about this year's top swing districts.
I think that’s partly because we have a clear field for the primary, which isn’t the case for most other swing districts, so there’s not much to talk about yet. As well as it being one of those (never say never, elections are weird sometimes) thought to be auto flips in this current political environment. If Democrats don’t win this seat, they might barely have a majority and the Senate would stay safely Republican so they’d have 2 more years of packing the judiciary and the government with their unqualified cronies.
So veteran Latino Democrat = beating incumbent Latino Republican in an heavily Hispanic/Latino district in almost every election scenario when Latino voters disapprove of Trump by 30-50 points. That’s probably why it’s not talked about all that much. Mendoza won’t win by much because of partisanship, but she’ll win that race in the current environment.
Ciscomani however is fairly popular with the electorate as he is laser focused on water issues, which is a major issue with renegotiate of the Colorado River distribution which is likely to favor the upper basin states. Southern Arizona is more water vulnerable than Phoenix.
I believe we are going to win this seat, finally, along with CD 1, but both will be closer than most people are predicting. If we win any of 2, 5 or 8, I would be surprised, but please, surprise me.
Considering Ciscomani outran Trump by just over a point, I'm not sure his work on that issue is translating to overall popularity.
I agree with you on both counts, he’s not going to lose by much and he’s a decent incumbent for Republicans, but he also only outperformed Trump by 1 point in 2024, so I don’t think he has a brand separate enough from his party like say Brian Fitzpatrick in PA-01 to survive in even a D+5 year, which is already a huge 7 points shift left from the 2024 vote for Congress. His career was toast the moment Trump won the presidency and the GOP won control again in 2024.
I think all the other districts you mentioned we’ll lose also. The win won’t be big like I said above, but you can’t out swim even the mildest of election results because their party has control when voters are unhappy about literally everything. No one can win in that environment and if even the quality level of GOP incumbents like Fitzpatrick could lose, that means those lesser talented politicians are all DOA in swing and/or slim Trump won seats.
She was raising many months before anyone thought a blue wave was in the cards; it feels like I was getting texts from her in Q1 of 2025.
I’m watching lots of races. WI-SC is the big one, followed by the VA referendum, but I’m curious about some others as well.
-PA-03: Who might win here? Are we in danger of Sharif Street winning? Does Rabb have a shot?
- CA-Gov: Of course, the inevitable question of a top-two lockout we’ve discussed ad nauseam. How likely do posters here think it currently is?
- NY State Senate and Assembly: Numerous progressives are targeting seats here - also some vice versa situations where centrists are targeting progressives. Which candidates might have the best shot of winning on either side?
- NY-03 and NY-04: I’m worried about these two. The GOP did really well in Nassau County last year and the NY Dems’ handling of it was a joke. Might Suozzi or Gillen be in danger of losing to a Republican?
-Indiana-SoS: Might Diego Morales lose his primary? If not, is he vulnerable in the general?
- WI-Gov: Who might win the Dem primary here? If Mandela Barnes wins, is he in danger of losing to a Republican like in 2022?
- LA in general: Even besides the mayors’ race. Lots of primaries going around. City Council progressives Eunisses Hernandez and Hugo Soto-Martinez face centrist challengers, and Controller Kenneth Mejia does too. On the flip side, City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto is being challenged from the left, as is City Councillor Tracy Park. Who might win or lose?
- San Francisco Board of Supervisors: Will SF’s rightward shift continue, following the mayors’ race and DA/school board recalls?
- DC mayors’ race: Who is favored? I’m hoping for Janeese Lewis George - does she have a shot?
- DC-AL: Who is favored? Robert White’s my pick — does he have a shot?
There’s many more but my hands hurt from typing.
PA-3: I constantly see sources that tout Street as the frontrunner, but I think it's a close three-way race between Street, Rabb, and Ala Stanford as of now, with Street being a moderate, Stanford being establishment liberal, and Rabb being progressive.
CA-Gov: I wouldn't say it's likely but I wouldn't say it's *unlikely*. It might be close, but one of the Democrats has a pretty clear shot to one of the top 2 spots.
NY Senate wishlist:
-Toby Stavisky, who is 87 and a 28 year incumbent, loses to one of her progressive challengers
-I want Aber Kavas to defeat Steven Raga for the seat Michael Gianaris is leaving behind. Gianaris himself is pretty progressive, so maybe Kavas has a shot.
-Jessica Gonzalez-Rojas ousts Senator Jessica Ramos
-Yuh-Line Niou (a favorite politician of yours) defeats Grace Lee in the Brian Kavanagh seat
NY Assembly wishlist:
-Mahtab Khan ousts Assemblyman David Weprin
-LaToya LeGrand beats Gregory Meek's deputy CoS Nathaniel Hezekiah
-Brian Romero succeeds Gonzalez-Rojas
-David Orkin ousts Assemblywoman Jenifer Rajkumar
-Christian Tate ousts Assemblyman Erik Dillan
-Eon Huntley ousts Assemblywoman Stefani Zinerman
-Assemblywoman Phara Forrest holds on against Samatha Johnson
-Ryder Kessler beats Jeannine Kiely
NY-3 and NY 4 should be fine, especially in a wave.
IN-SoS: Morales will probably win his primary and re-election, but I imagine a close race between him and Bayh in the general.
WI-Gov: Hong, my pick, is favored in polling, but I think any of them can win against Tiffany.
DC mayor and AL: I'd say Lewis George and White, also my favored picks, will win.
How likely do you think those NYS Senate and Assembly primary flips are? I'm doubting Weprin being ousted, for example. I'm guessing few of those seats flip to challengers. Incumbents are hard to beat in New York (and, to be fair, in general).
In 2020 a number of seats flipped left. Ditto for the NYC Council in 2021 (albeit mostly in open races). With Mamdani in office, I’ll be curious to see if incumbency is as powerful as it once was.
I'm curious, too. How many incumbents lost in primaries in 2020?
Los Angeles notes: The one thing that is clear is that the Mayor's race will go to a runoff. Karen Bass is leading now, but way under 50%. In CA nonpartisan races you can avoid a runoff if you get 50%+1 in the primary. That ain't happening this year. I have seen both Mayor Bass and Councilmember Nithya Raman at my local Democratic club recently (Valley Grassroots for Democracy vgfd.net). I like them both and either could do a good job in this very difficult city to run. Both are better than the stereotypes about them. I think Bass makes the runoff for sure; the question is who she faces. If it is Raman the runoff could go either way. If it is GOP reality show dude Spencer Pratt then Bass wins. There are others including centrist tech guy Adam Miller and DSA lefty Rae Huang. I don't expect either of the latter two to make it, although Miller has enough money to raise his name recognition. If Miller makes the runoff he might be formidable, but he isn't there yet. I am undecided between Bass and Raman at this point.
I also saw both main candidates for City Attorney, incumbent Hydee Feldstein Soto and challenger Marissa Roy. Hydee had some scandalette; she may be vulnerable. Roy has experience on the state but not local government level. I think the race leans toward the incumbent, but she is not safe. The LACDP (county party org) has endorsed the challenger, who is somewhat to the left of HFS.
City Controller probably leans toward the incumbent, Kenneth Mejia, who is a lefty and more independent from the local power structure. His centrist Democratic challenger, Zach Sokoloff, has family wealth and connections but it remains to be seen what kind of campaign he will put together. I am leaning towards Mejia because it is maybe useful to have more of an outsider in this kind of position. I see no reason to fire him. Zach S. was emphasizing that he is a Democrat, but he was speaking to a Democratic club at the time.
I would guess that the incumbent councilmembers all win but I don't know enough about the individual races to know if they will go to runoffs. There is also a race in CD-03 in the southwest SFV where incumbent Bob Blumenfield is termed out. I have met one of the candidates, Tim Gaspar, but don't have a sense of the shape of that race.
CA Gov: Eventually the voters will start noticing this race, probably when the ballots arrive in early May. Damn if I know what happens, but I don't think it will be Bianco vs Hilton (two Repubs). My best guess is the runoff will be Swalwell (D) vs Hilton (R) with Swalwell winning the runoff, of course. I'll probably vote for Katie Porter, but will wait until just before the deadline to vote. I will do my best to avoid the lockout. I am not going to vote for my first choice candidate, Betty Yee, because her chances of the making the runoff are minuscule. I have as much chance as Betty, or Antonio V. or Tony Thurmond of being the next CA-Gov, and I am not running. Fun fact: Election Day is a numerical palindrome, 6-2-26.
I wish Steyer would drop. I am really tired of billionaires* and their vanity campaigns. He could be funding so many other things to better effect.
*with no political experience. I have a soft spot for Pritzker, but he actually worked his way up and has a solid track record.
I’ve seen some sentiment online towards Steyer buying out media outlets like the GOP have been doing to give us an edge. I wish he’d do that.
IfTrump/his pet DOJ still insist on trying to target Swalwell, it's likelier than anything to push him to the front of the line. I'd really feel better if any of the Dems broke into a solid lead here.
IN SOS isn't gonna be chosen by a primary, they do an insider party convention vote to pick the nominees. So likely yes, but a bit harder to know.
I think a top 2 lockout at this stage has about a 1 in 6 chance of occurring. Which is still too damn high and speaks to how people need to drop out of the race.
Regarding the SF Board of Supervisors and SF elections after 2026:
The only time there was a real rightward shift was back in the mid-90’s when Willie Brown was elected Mayor. From his time as Mayor, he not only gave Gavin Newsom his start in politics (by appointing him as District 2 Supervisor) but also became corporate developer’s best friend. This lend to a significant rise in gentrification and years afterwards Mayors have never really done a lot to counter these problems and keeping diversity in the city.
All the Mayors since Brown have been either moderate or moderate liberal at best or apolitical. Ed Lee and Daniel Lurie are the two Mayors in recent memory who project more of this mentality and never tried to make headlines nationally for Democrats. Lurie though as Mayor while defeating London Breed by more than a narrow margin has cleaned up her mess on crime and city management, which she failed to do. Breed and Lurie though are more aligned with YIMBYs so not exactly a rightward shift by Lurie being elected in 2024.
Board of Supervisors races are tricky because any moderates or progressives being elected really depends on the district and demographics. District 2 is the wealthiest in the city and has a history electing moderates.
District 9, which Jackie Fielder represents, is the most progressive in the city and is in no danger of seeing any ideological change. Fielder is taking time away because she’s got a significant mental health challenge right now but if she were to resign, there would not be ideological change at all. The Mission District, which is most of District 9, is very anti-development but mainly from a gentrification and displacement standpoint. Other districts vary in sentiment from time to time.
For the school board members and Chesa Boudin being recalled, it was a matter of competence and batshit craziness. Boudin was all over the place on his prosecution tactics and divided up attorneys working in his office.
The school board members that were recalled, were just simply batshit crazy and were more focused on cancelling Abraham Lincoln’s name than they were at doing their job in keeping kids in public schools. This has nothing to with being left.
I think because of the election of NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani there is certainly an appetite brewing for a similar mayor in San Francisco. However, Lurie is likely to easily win re-election. After that, because the mayoral races are now being held in presidential election years, it’s going to be a different ballgame.
For the race in Congress, it’s a different affair. I do not see how Scott Weiner, Connie Chan, etc. will win by double digits.
I'm sorry to bring this up, but I find your posts interesting, and I have a hard time reading them.
"Lurie thought as Mayor while defeating London Breed by more than a narrow margin has cleaned up her mess on crime and city management, which she failed to do." Can't tell what you're trying to say here.
"After that, because the mayoral races are now being held in presidential election years"--is there supposed to be more to this sentence?
It doesn't take long to review and revise posts before hitting Submit, and I just don't see why folks don't take the time.
If you want me to cut up paragraphs in size, happy to do that.
Otherwise, this is how I write. Don’t know what to say. I have re-edited everything with the sentence because it somehow got cut off.
Lurie cleaned up Breed’s mess. Nuff said.
Got it. Good analysis. I do remember an attempt by the school board to paint over a mural they claimed was racist due to depictions of slaves and George Washington. The problem was, the mural was painted by a literal communist and the portrayals were meant to (as I understand it) essentially subversively portray Washington (sadly probably correctly, to some degree -- Washington had initially opposed enlisting black soldiers in the Revolutionary War, in addition to being a slave owner) as a racist colonizer. So the school board didn't even do their research!
News from the North: Early voting started today in the three by-elections that will determine if the Liberal Party can assume a majority in the House of Commons. Consensus is that the two ridings in Toronto will be easy wins, with Terrebonne in the Montreal suburbs still a wild card. Recent polling shows the Liberals still with a strong lead nationally and in the province of Quebec, but that area has also been more fertile for the Bloc Quebecois.
We are also roughly six months out from municipal elections in the province of Ontario, and as a resident of Toronto, I am interested to see if Olivia Chow will commit to running for a new term, or if there will be a different candidate for the left wing. The only declared candidate so far is councillor Brad Bradford, who has staked out the right of centre position in opposition to Chow. Fun fact: in the absence of nationwide or province-wide offices, the mayor of Toronto lays claim to having the most people vote for them of any politician in Canada
Do Liberals need to win all 3 by-elections to get to a majority?
Technically only two are required to get to 172, but that means the Speaker, elected as a Liberal but ostensibly neutral, would have to break ties. Ideally they win all three, as that would also allow the government to prorogue the House briefly and then gain majority control of the standing committees.
Terrebonne was the seat that ended up in a tie after the court nullified the Liberals’ one vote margin and ordered a new election
Indeed, and from what I understand, the BQ is pitching to voters that they no longer have to fear about voting against the Liberals since the anglais en Toronto will assure them of a majority, so vote your conscience.
I missed this, but there were two recent state legislators switching parties, both from Democrat to Republican.
https://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/local-news/2026-03-16/lahaina-rep-elle-cochran-switches-party-affiliation-to-republican
Elle Cochran, state rep from Hawaii's 14th district, Harris +16, switched back in mid-March. Apparently she tried to rob tourists at gunpoint in 1993, so perhaps her judgement isn't the best.
https://wpde.com/news/local/longtime-marion-co-rep-lucas-atkinson-switches-parties-marion-co-district-57-state-house-horry-williamsburg-lucas-atkinson
Lucas Atkinson, state rep from South Carolina's 57th district, Trump +9 (although Biden +4), switched parties on April 1st.
Hopefully both lose re-election.
More Jeff Van Drew types of traitors. UGH.
Well if Atkinson switched two days after the filing deadline, does he have an opponent?
The South Carolina government candidate listing doesn't list anyone as running for that district, so no clue until it's updated
He does, Cynthia Ford, a Democrat. Atkinson is running unopposed in the R primary.
According to the article, Ford primaried Atkinson in 2024 but she lost 56-44. I'm not from the area so I don't know if he was starting to get unpopular among Democratic voters, but I wonder if his party switch was also partially to avoid a primary? Switching parties indicates a potential long-time ideological shift that could've been annoying Democratic voters. His district seems swingy enough that maybe he thinks he can win with Republican votes.
Two races most important to me right now are local
Ventura County, California has a Republican majority on the board of supervisors that is in the pocket of the oil lobby, so much so that they eliminated a strong campaign finance ordinance. They are also very weak on the environment in a county that has long been pro-environment.
Republican Jeff Gorell (who lost to Julia Brownley way back in 2014) won Supervisor District 2 (Thousand Oaks, Oak Park, Camarillo) after a nasty campaign in 2022 that saw outside money flow in. He's being challenged by Democrat Ashley Orozco who serves on the Conejo Recreation and Park District Board. I know Ashley personally and can say that she's a strong Democrat who will fight for the environment and good local governance. She has organized to help local Democrats win races for years and previously worked for Julia Brownley. Ashley also organized a response to ICE raids in 2024 by rounding up volunteers to distribute information to let people know their rights. She is endorsed by Brownley as well as Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin and a host of other elected officials. https://voteorozco.com/
Republican Janice Parvin of Supervisorial District 4 (Moorpark, Simi Valley) is a hardcore conservative who along with Gorell voted down a campaign finance ordinance that limited donations to supervisorial candidates to $750 and increased the limit to $5900. She is being challenged by Democrat Ruth Luevanos who was the first Democrat in over 25 years to be elected to the Simi Valley City Council when she won an at-large race in 2018. Ruth is an educator and an advocate for immigrant communities just to name a couple of things from her resume. https://www.ruth4supervisor.com/
Ruth Luevanos ran for Congresss at one point, didn’t she? I remember seeing her name.
I also remember her being a progressive. She and the other candidate you mentioned have my support. If the Dems want to take back power, local races are a must. They also help us build up a bench for future races further down the line.
She did run in CA-27 in 2022 and is quite progressive.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/homenews/senate/5815738-john-curtis-opposes-iran-offensive/amp/
Sen. John Curtis (R-UT) says Congress should vote to declare war against Iran before any further offensive by the Trump regime.
AZ-3 - Yassamin Ansari revealed in a Time magazine op-ed that she suffers from extreme pain when she is on her period and, a little over a decade ago, suffered a medical emergency caused by extreme period pain.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/america-needs-reproductive-health-leave/ar-AA1ZRftq?ocid=BingNewsSerp
It's honestly a miracle that Ansari is able to carry out her duties as a Member of Congress, campaign for elected office (thankfully, she represents a Democratic stronghold and is not in any real danger of losing renomination in a primary), hold town halls and other similar events, and maintain a public presence, all while suffering from debilitating pain every four weeks or so.
I honestly came close to crying after reading Ansari's op-ed.
Around 15% or so of premenopausal women suffer from debilitating period pain (this was the figure Ansari referenced in her op-ed), although that demographic is almost certainly severely underrepresented in elected political office due to the responsibilities and demands of running for and serving in elected office.
I am not original.
WI SCT. Hungary. VA redistricting.
I’m still wondering if the toxic approvals of TACO plus the upheaval in the NC GOP in the wake of Phil Berger losing his primary will give NC Dems an opening to flip the gerrymandered GOP majorities.
And the MAGA state Supreme Court throwing out the Leandro decision on a cherry picked technicality has pissed off voters more.
I know they’ll lose their supermajorities in both houses, but they only need to lose 12 state House seats and 5 state Senate seats to regain a bare majority.
I would love to hear a DownBallot podcast interview with Anderson Clayton, the amazing chair of the North Carolina Democratic Party. Really want to hear her strategies and what she and her party are working on. From North Carolina, I think we’re in for some truly wonderful surprised this November!
What percentage of North Carolinians do you figure have heard of Leandro and what percentage understand it?
It made the local news. And it’s been litigated for over 30 years. It plays into the GOP majority defunding our public schools and giving handouts to wealthy parents already sending their kids to public schools.
Quite a few of our Democratic legislators and candidates challenging Republican incumbents are public educators or have a public education background.
Which part of NC you are in? I really feel your optimism. But somehow I think it is overly rosy.
I’d normally agree that the assessment of NC is too rosy, but unlike a lot of states NC has an insanely effective and competent Dem chair. Coupled with a likely blue tsunami nationwide, I think our chances are phenomenal in a way they haven’t been for some time.
I live in Durham County near the Orange County border. Because of the way Rs have drawn our districts, I was unable to vote in the municipal elections last year.
But I have seen a lot of energy on the ground. I’ve seen more protests here than during Trump’s first term. Something feels very different in comparison to 2018. Something closer to 2006 or 2010 in reverse.
Cornwallis Rd?
Triangle, maybe. Don’t put hope up too high for the rural eastern plains, or the small towns in Piedmont.
There were protests all over the state last April, even in Moore County—a ruby red Trump County.
I was especially heartened by the turnout in Chatham County near the courthouse.
Hey I’m also in Durham county! Just moved here recently and loving it here. I’ve also been super encouraged by the protests, I’ve been volunteering with the local indivisible helping them track their attendance and the weekly, non-big No Kings type events have been growing a ton!
Now these weekly protesters are likely people who already voted against Trump, but being motivated to go to a weekly protest for a few hours while the counter protests in the triangle have barely made a blip surely is a sign of the growing enthusiasm gap we see in the polls!
Feeling good about cooper and earls’ chances come November and fired up to work to get them there!
Absolutely no one:
Chuck Grassley: Random photo of a vacuum cleaner not produced since 1983, along with a non-sequitur about women cleaning the house....
https://x.com/ChuckGrassley/status/2040444476427047096
"Beth soon hard at work to clean house for 23 Grassley’s at the farm for Easter"
Bizarre. He has to go.
The vacuum cleaner is older than some elected officials.
By the time Maxwell Frost, the youngest member of Congress, was born, Grassley had been in elected office for 38 years.
That apostrophe error in his Tweet is absolutely unforgivable.
Beth is the name of the vacuum cleaner. Grassley needs to stay solely for his Twitter account being a public treasure.
What's with those switch plates/outlet covers?
They have a "decorative" pattern on them. Also they are ceramic not plastic. Probably the wall covering has been changed since they were picked.
Do you think he has a framed copy of Joyce Kilmer's "Trees" and a repro of Blue Boy hanging somewhere at home too?
He named the vacuum cleaner Beth. He posts it regularly on holidays. It's a long running gag.