Primaries, primaries, primaries. Question for posters here: who is most likely to lose their primary? Who is less likely to lose, but still may pull off an upset?
Senate: Ed Markey and John Hickenlooper (less likely)
House:
More likely: John Larson, Dan Goldman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Shri Thanedar
Less likely: Adriano Espaillat, April McClain-Delaney, Wesley Bell, Diana DeGette, Celeste Maloy
Bonus category: Incumbents with credible primary challengers that will have big wins (Maggie Goodlander, Grace Meng, Randy Fine, Cory Mills, Andy Ogles, Ilhan Omar, Greg Stanton, Blake Moore)
Yes, I think Hickenlooper is less likely to lose. The bonus category is for people with primary challengers that I don't think are likely to lose at all.
I think it's very possible for Markey to lose, but I'd say it's less likely than not. Moulton isn't running a great campaign, and he lacks the advantages that JPK3 had.
Something between Lean and Likely for Markey, IMO. The kind of scenario where you expect him to win but it isn't reality shaking if he doesn't.
Besides that, what real energy is there to even unseat Ed Markey in the first place? It’s not as if he’s doing anything to piss constituents off besides happening to be of the older generation.
Moulton's never been a "wait your turn" sort of dude. Sometimes this has worked out well for him. He won his House seat challenging an incumbent. Other times it's gone less well, like when he challenged Pelosi for leadership.
yeah generally "me, my turn" isn't super impressive to voters.
I still remember my very first election. I volunteered a bit for a local woman running for state Rep. Her campaign seemed to boil down to, "It's the Year of the Woman, and I'm a woman. ...So..."
She lost by double digits iirc. It was a super red district then anyway, but it was an underwhelming introduction to electoral politics.
The argument for Moulton is "Markey is too old." Which, honestly, isn't a bad argument. He'll be 80 next month. Serving six more years at that age isn't great. Anecdotally I've noticed a lot of people unsure about voting for Markey due to his age, but also unwilling to vote for Moulton.
The problem is that Moulton is possibly the worst person to make that argument, as he's insufferable due to his ego, and he loves to pick fights with his own party. His ego and his willingness to fight his own party being the reasons he's willing to make the jump in anyway.
Also, strategically, Moulton would have an even worse chance at an open seat. Other ambitious democrats would be running in that scenario and he would have a harder mountain to climb to come out ahead of them. If Moulton wants to be senator, this is very likely the best shot he'll ever have.
I will personally never forgive Moulton for his anti-trans comments, which I blame for starting this whole anti-trans nonsense in the Democratic Party. It’s not even close to one of the most important issues for voters according to polling and yet you have certain people in the party going on about how “trans athletes” are supposedly costing us votes. I noticed Moulton’s comments were when it started and I resent him deeply for it.
I hate him for it too. I don't think he started that trend, but he jumped on it as fast as he could because he thought it would help him look good. The exact kind of person that does not deserve a political promotion: someone willing to throw vulnerable communities under the bus for their own benefit -- and not smart enough to realize they're not even getting any personal benefit out of it either!
Thanks for the reminder, I knew he was ugh for at least one reason. And Markey, unless I am confusing him with someone else, recently showed up at a rally draped in Trans Pride colors.
What Moulton didn’t do was elevate discourse so that he was arguing for trans rights. He knows better because he had a good pro LGBTQ record for some time. Now he’s squandered it with this.
Well Moulton’s going to get a large Moulton lava going after his Senate campaign.
Markey is, in fact, too old. Actuarially he's a bit less than 60% to survive his term, at least based on age and gender, not any specific health information.
That's to say that if Markey doesn't survive his term, or even falls ill and is unable to vote, it could dilute our power in a key moment. We had three safe blue seats vacant in the house due to deaths when OBBB passed. I don't want a safe blue Senate seat to be temporarily red or vacant the next time there's an SC vacancy.
There's not much good to say about Moulton except that he'll probably oppose Trump's agenda and is very likely to survive his term. That may be enough for some voters.
Markey has been a great senator, but I'm sad he's running again. As you note, if he'd stepped down, we'd likely have a better slate of candidates to choose from. Or the field would be cleared by a very strong candidate, e.g. Pressley.
I don't disagree about the risks with Markey at all.
For me, though, Moulton is just that bad that I will happily vote for Markey in the primary. Moulton is not a team player: put him in the senate and he will find a way to jam up our legislative priorities in order to make himself feel more important. He's too moderate for a state as blue as MA, and he's just insufferable as a person. He is in it for himself first, second, and third. He's shown he's willing to discard vulnerable communities for perceived political expediency -- and he's also shown he doesn't even have a good internal evaluation for self-beneficial political expediency.
If I had to summarize it into a single point: Moulton is not temperamentally suited for power.
Realistically, if Moulton does win the primary he'll be around for several decades because people hate voting out incumbents in primaries. When incumbents don't have glaring issues, they fail to attract strong opponents. When they do have glaring issues, they attract a clown car of opponents and often win with a plurality.
On the flipside, if Markey wins the primary he'll be gone in the future regardless. It's a bit morbid, but his "too old" problem is one that, by definition, we will not have to put up with for too long.
It's a real advantage, which is why I think there's absolutely a chance that Markey loses.
I think I worded it really poorly there. I was trying to convey that Moulton didn't have any real advantages to build on top of that age difference advantage. He isn't a great political talent, he isn't a better ideological fit, he doesn't have a strong base of support with part of the state, he isn't favored by either the establishment or the outsider wings, etc. It really is just age and nothing else.
Is anyone else following the colossal failure of Trump's "improvements" to the DC reflecting pool? First we had the algae blooms and now the paint in the reflecting pool is coming up in sheets. It also has come out that the contractor who was paid $14 million for this no bid contract is a convicted felon and Trump donor. What a perfect representation of the failure of the Trump administration.
He is literally the guy who was convicted for bribing former Congressman James Traficant and is rumored to be a member of a certain Italian-American gentleman's club. Just another criminal taking advantage of our grifter-in-chief.
beyond pathetic. and perhaps even more than the rubble that was the East Wing (although that one makes me the angriest), a perfect symbol/synecdoche for the whole wretched enshittified cock-up of a so-called administration; and Trump himself, killing everything he touches.
from "American Flag Blue" to radioactive Linda Blair spew. Yes indeed.
oh and now they're arresting people for taking chunks of paint or even looking like they would, because clearly they have nothing more important to deal with
SC-Gov: Trump has endorsed both Lt. Gov. Pam Evette and AG Alan Wilson in their Republican runoff on Tuesday. If polling is accurate, Wilson will win in a landslide, so Trump is likely trying to save face.
One wonders when the GOP candidates will stop prostrating themselves trying to curry Trump's primary endorsement, since it is worth absolutely nothing. If you are ahead in the polls, you don't need the endorsement; if you are behind in the polls you run the risk of Trump endorsing your opponent since he hates to be perceived as a loser
And unless it is a ruby red district, a Trump endorsement may turn out to be toxic by alienating swing voters....
Some hard-right West Virginia members were defeated in May as well, including the abysmal Laura Faircloth who I knew personally and represented a district not too far from my residence.
News from the North: Parliament has adjourned for the summer, and there are now six by-elections coming down the pipe. A Conservative MP, Cathy Wagantall, has announced she will resign on August 31st. She had announced last year that she would not run for re-election, but with the Liberal majority pushing a potential election farther out, I guess she decided to cut bait now. She represents Yorkton-Melville, part of the rural blue wall in the Prairie provinces that would vote for a mannequin wearing a CPC button. Case in point: she won last year with a 77-14 decision over the Liberal candidate.
Again, the timing for these elections is going to be interesting, with various municipal and provincial elections scheduled for the fall, along with the Alberta referenda.
Six years, which she is well past having served since 2015. That also means she served her entire career in opposition, and being 70 she probably figures it ain't worth it to wait another two or three years only to end up there again.
MI-Sen: Great ad from Abdul El-Sayed - he water skis and then makes a metaphor comparing the uncertainty of the waves to that of economic conditions for Michiganders, with lines like "the people driving the boat don't slow down".
I thought he was windsurfing. Waterskiing is 'mas macho' than windsurfing because it involves a powerboat. Windsurfing uses renewable energy, the wind...
Literally one of the most creative ads I've seen in years. I've had my reservations about Abdul but given he looks poised to be the nominee, if he has people making ads like this around him it makes me sleep better at night.
TX 15th CD...according to a story I saw the other night on MS Now, Tejano super star Bobby Pulido (D) can win this "red" district. Monica de la Cruz, the repub. incumbent, apparently released a poll (? internal) that showed her up by 1% and she commented "oh, that's not good". District is just east of San Antonio.
Small quibble: the east San Antonio district is the 35th. This one goes from rural areas far east of the city down to the border with Mexico in populous Hidalgo County.
Yeah, there's options to see the map each year. The 2023-2027 map has a sliver that almost touched San Antonio, but most of the district is still near the border.
I saw part of that interview briefly. I’ve been impressed with MS NOW post-Comcast split — I’ve seen a lot more downballot coverage (including candidate interviews) than I used to.
Wife and I went to a watch party a few blocks from the USMNT’s match with Australia. Raucous group at that bar, and the loudest moment was not the two goals but everybody including dudebros booing at the TV when RFK Jr snowing up.
This is the energy democrats need to channel. Mamdani is good at it
Very much looking forward to the fall of the Starmer government here in the UK. I was actually genuinely optimistic when he came to power and could not be more disappointed. (I do have a bit of a soft spot for Keir in that I was sat at the table next to his at a pub when he was leader of the opposition, but that only cuts so far.) Not convinced Andy Burnham will be hugely better, but it's hard to imagine him being worse.
I keep seeing people talk about the rise of Reform UK and One Nation in Australia, and then I see the polling and they are both in the mid-20s. Australia at least has the ranked ballot to blunt the potential damage, but the UK (and Canada) really need to move away from FPTP. The problem being that whilst everyone can agree electoral reform is needed, there is no consensus on what it should look like.
"I keep seeing people talk about the rise of Reform UK and One Nation in Australia, and then I see the polling and they are both in the mid-20s."
I get the same feeling when I read electoral coverage of Germany, where all the media seems to talk about is AfD this and AfD that, but the polling is similar. Germany does have the two-step electoral system which is intended to maintain proportionality, so that far right (or left) parties can't surge to power with far less than a majority because the opposition is split (if there's any country that should know the potential hazards of that, it's Germany.)
France does the two-step thing too, but the general is two candidates/parties, I think? They've managed to cobble together coalitions to keep whatever the fuck Front National is called now out so far, but I'd worry about next year.
Yeah, you'd think Trump might pull the rest of the neofascists down in flames, and it might help, but plain old "throw the bums out, let's get someone new in who shares my anger" unfortunately always seems to play well after long enough
Dates for a Maryland special session regarding redistricting and constitutional changes have been proposed, but not yet finalised. These would allow for voters to approve a constitutional amendment in November which would change or remove some of the provisions that were cited in 2022 when an earlier, more partisan map was voided. If passed, then a new map could be in effect for 2028-30 that would be more likely to survive court challenge.
Yeah, in think the original poster intended the dash to be inclusive of the 2030 election but to your point specials between the 2030 and 2032 elections would still use the mid-cycle maps.
Not if they unpack MD-04 and MD-07 the most. Those districts don’t need to be like 80% Harris. They could easily be brought down to 70% Harris and still be super safe for Dems.
4, 7, and 8 can and should be unpacked a bit. 1 should be flipped and 6 strengthened.
I was a little concerned about the MD-03 (which bore little resemblance to the currently same-numbered one) in the map that Moore's redistricting commission proposed and the House but not Senate passed this year being potentially vulnerable.
Those changes to the state constitution are assuming that the GOP Supreme Court judges appointed by Larry Hogan would act in good faith rather than as partisan hacks and as we see time and time again, you can't ever count on ANY Republican operating in good faith.
MN-02 for myself because its where I live now; Looks like Matt Little will win the primary but I will go with Kaela Berg because of union endorsements. Matt Kleins stupid decision to use a political gambling site on himself really reflects poorly, too.
Luckily I don’t think Klein stands a chance due to his betting scandal. What a moron, betting on his own race. Did he really think he wouldn’t be caught?
OK-Gov: In reassuring his endorsement of Mike Mazzei, Trump went on an absolute tirade against Republican runoff opponent Gentner Drummond, saying he was a "radical left Dumocrat".
There's this Shirley Jackson story called "The Renegade," where a woman with a dog who got into her neighbors' chickens is appalled and distraught because the neighbors just cheerfully assume she's going to go ahead and kill the dog now. If she really doesn't want to, though, one suggests, she could tie a dead chicken around her neck tight enough so that she can't shake it off. Just leave it there til it gets so ripe it falls off by itself. She'll never go near one again.
I'm starting to think that collectively, we are that dog, and Trump is that chicken.
I mean in that case it's just rotting chickens all the way down.
yeah, I don't love our prospects given the two party system and thermostatic backlash, and the fact that the GOP is a pathology not a party at this point.
Question for posters here: during which election season do you remember seeing the most political ads? I feel like Alex Bores and Cait Conley are going to be eternally burned in my brain from the number of ads I’ve seen, and I’m sure there’s been worse years. Is there any election season you remember where the ads just got exhausting?
In 2024 in Ohio you couldn't go on any electronic device without being bombarded with obnoxious and mean spirited anti-transgender ads against Sherrod Brown. The crypto bros carpet bombed the state with these ads for months.
I think the prohibition is against openly supporting a non-Democratic candidate, though exceptions are made for independents who caucus with the Democrats or are running in very red states. I could be wrong, but I don't think there's an explicit prohibition against posts saying "I no longer support (name of Democratic candidate)." But of course you're right that in the U.S.'s 2-party system, not supporting a Democrat usually means helping a Republican to win.
I think it also applies to telling people not to vote at all. Basically advocating that people not vote for the Democrat (whether it's for a Republican, independent/third party candidate, or no one) is and should be verboten here.
The only exception is probably when the de facto Democrat (as in generally endorsed or recognized as such, or the only potentially electable non-Republican) is not running under that label.
In general, Talarico's been busting his ass off in building as diverse of a coalition of white, non-white and religious supporters in his general election campaign.
If he's already been pissing off the GOP by reversing what he said about gender affirming care, that means Talarico's destroyed their chance at defining him in the general election on this one singular issue. With Paxton as the GOP Senate Nominee, this means it's going to be hard for the GOP to try to throw anything at him.
This type of absurd gatekeeping is frankly the worst of left politics. The issue is political poison, has shoddy scientific backing and the numbers of minors who actually go through surgery is miniscule.
I don't wish to get into another whole debate on this, but for clarity sake I was referring to the utility/necessity of surgical interventions for trans minors. U.S. based pediatric orgs are on an island when it comes to this issue.
I also don’t want another debate so that’s fine. Actually I think I understand your position better with the context posted above.
I just wanted to make sure this didn’t turn into denying trans people have a distinct identity. Believe it or not, a certain Rahm Emanuel-shaped Dem has been trying to do that, in what I assume is a pathetic attempt to continue his diminished relevancy in politics.
I fail to see how it is on the left agenda, certainly not historically. I think it is used by the same people who use it to scapegoat a distinct minority to tar the left.
I will just say it- the left is on the verge of getting more political power that they have ever had since the election of Ronald Reagan but if they want to reach the level where they can make real change they will need to improve their political skills. I mean no more flawed unvetted candidates for high political office (Andrew Gilliam and Graham Platner, for example) no more letting obnoxious asshole streamers and YouTubers being some of your primary spokespeople on social media (I'm looking at at Hassan Piker, Vaush, and almost everyone ever affiliated with the Young Turks) - and for gods sake- no more purity tests, especially in tough races. Winning is everything in being able to not only make positive changes, but in stopping people like Trump from making things worse.
The problem for a certain (and I’d say it’s a loud minority) of the left flank of American liberal-progressivism is that a lot of those people got into politics BECAUSE or VIA obnoxious internet cultural gatekeeping or being YouTube demagogues. It’s their raison detre in politics, and all their instincts are informed by that being their entry into it. I can think of five or six issues these people treat purity politics as absolute catnip and it’s going to cost us election after election unless they’re told to fuck off
What’s frustrating is that this is not an anti-left position at all. Mamdani, who I have a mixed opinion of on a policy level, has proven that you can construct an inspiring left-wing message without indulging in any of that bullshit and that it is actually fairly effective (at least in the context of NYC Democratic politics). so we don’t actually have to pretend that Vaush, Piker or the YT gang are serious people any more than we should pretend Tim Pool is
I would say that Mamdani would be an example of a very successful leader if he just stopped taking such a strong and divisive position on that one issue which can and will cost him politically. I think most of us would agree that everyone needs to turn the rhetoric down a few notches on this issue and some on the left refuse to do so and I agree this will cost us politically. I will admit that I find Vaush to be entertaining sometimes but I am also aware that using the type of rhetoric that he uses would be toxic if a candidate behaved like him in a swing district, for example. Swing voters tend to hate these more abrasive spokespeople and the left needs to get more James Talaricos on the air and fewer Cenk Uygars if they want real political power.
I'm going to pretend I don't know what you're talking about and just say that whatever it is, Mamdani didn't have to do anything different from what he did to be elected. Otherwise, don't refer to banned subjects.
To be fair, most of the left base and the American public in general probably don't even know who Vaush and maybe Piker even are. I certainly hadn't heard the name Vaush in quite a while (and feel unpleasant remembering his existence), even being incredibly invested in this stuff.
Can the current UK government hope to survive past the current term anyway?
That cost sounds a lot higher than it probably is in practice. What are the odds Labour gets a majority in 2029? I'm not an expert but I expect it's some variation of "very low."
I agree that another referendum would be needed and would probably pass. However this issue is so difficult for both the Tories and Labour in that their base is strongly split on this issue and it causes massive internal fights every time it comes up which keeps both of those parties from wanting to touch this issue. I would also suggest that Burnham add runoff elections for future Parliamentary elections to prevent Reform from getting in power with 30-35% of the vote.
That I don’t know. Unfortunately for Keir a lot of the problems were beyond his immediate control (at least quickly). Burnham’s “nuts and bolts” style lends itself well to municipal politics and hopefully to PM as well
Electorally, switching Starmer out for Burnham sort of resembles going from Biden to Harris--with the caveats that Burnham has three years instead of three months until the next election, and isn't as directly tied to his predecessor.
Primaries, primaries, primaries. Question for posters here: who is most likely to lose their primary? Who is less likely to lose, but still may pull off an upset?
Senate: Ed Markey and John Hickenlooper (less likely)
House:
More likely: John Larson, Dan Goldman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Shri Thanedar
Less likely: Adriano Espaillat, April McClain-Delaney, Wesley Bell, Diana DeGette, Celeste Maloy
Bonus category: Incumbents with credible primary challengers that will have big wins (Maggie Goodlander, Grace Meng, Randy Fine, Cory Mills, Andy Ogles, Ilhan Omar, Greg Stanton, Blake Moore)
So are you saying that hickenlooper is less likely to lose?
Also for the bonus category are those people the ones likely to win or lose?
Yes, I think Hickenlooper is less likely to lose. The bonus category is for people with primary challengers that I don't think are likely to lose at all.
ugh, Ogling. And Fine, ugh ugh.
yeah Goldman's toast.
Wasserman-Schultz obv better than any Repub, but definitely on the lower end of the "she'll be sorely missed" list
I think it's very possible for Markey to lose, but I'd say it's less likely than not. Moulton isn't running a great campaign, and he lacks the advantages that JPK3 had.
Something between Lean and Likely for Markey, IMO. The kind of scenario where you expect him to win but it isn't reality shaking if he doesn't.
Besides that, what real energy is there to even unseat Ed Markey in the first place? It’s not as if he’s doing anything to piss constituents off besides happening to be of the older generation.
Moulton's never been a "wait your turn" sort of dude. Sometimes this has worked out well for him. He won his House seat challenging an incumbent. Other times it's gone less well, like when he challenged Pelosi for leadership.
Or when he ran for President for a hot sec. Forgot about that one.
yeah generally "me, my turn" isn't super impressive to voters.
I still remember my very first election. I volunteered a bit for a local woman running for state Rep. Her campaign seemed to boil down to, "It's the Year of the Woman, and I'm a woman. ...So..."
She lost by double digits iirc. It was a super red district then anyway, but it was an underwhelming introduction to electoral politics.
The argument for Moulton is "Markey is too old." Which, honestly, isn't a bad argument. He'll be 80 next month. Serving six more years at that age isn't great. Anecdotally I've noticed a lot of people unsure about voting for Markey due to his age, but also unwilling to vote for Moulton.
The problem is that Moulton is possibly the worst person to make that argument, as he's insufferable due to his ego, and he loves to pick fights with his own party. His ego and his willingness to fight his own party being the reasons he's willing to make the jump in anyway.
Also, strategically, Moulton would have an even worse chance at an open seat. Other ambitious democrats would be running in that scenario and he would have a harder mountain to climb to come out ahead of them. If Moulton wants to be senator, this is very likely the best shot he'll ever have.
I will personally never forgive Moulton for his anti-trans comments, which I blame for starting this whole anti-trans nonsense in the Democratic Party. It’s not even close to one of the most important issues for voters according to polling and yet you have certain people in the party going on about how “trans athletes” are supposedly costing us votes. I noticed Moulton’s comments were when it started and I resent him deeply for it.
I hate him for it too. I don't think he started that trend, but he jumped on it as fast as he could because he thought it would help him look good. The exact kind of person that does not deserve a political promotion: someone willing to throw vulnerable communities under the bus for their own benefit -- and not smart enough to realize they're not even getting any personal benefit out of it either!
Thanks for the reminder, I knew he was ugh for at least one reason. And Markey, unless I am confusing him with someone else, recently showed up at a rally draped in Trans Pride colors.
What Moulton didn’t do was elevate discourse so that he was arguing for trans rights. He knows better because he had a good pro LGBTQ record for some time. Now he’s squandered it with this.
Well Moulton’s going to get a large Moulton lava going after his Senate campaign.
Markey is, in fact, too old. Actuarially he's a bit less than 60% to survive his term, at least based on age and gender, not any specific health information.
In MA, Senate vacancies are filled by gubernatorial appointment, with a special required in 145-160 days (https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF11907). MA has a history of electing Republican governors, even in years the state has been very blue overall. We've also managed to lose a special Senate election in a red wave year: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_Senate_special_election_in_Massachusetts.
That's to say that if Markey doesn't survive his term, or even falls ill and is unable to vote, it could dilute our power in a key moment. We had three safe blue seats vacant in the house due to deaths when OBBB passed. I don't want a safe blue Senate seat to be temporarily red or vacant the next time there's an SC vacancy.
There's not much good to say about Moulton except that he'll probably oppose Trump's agenda and is very likely to survive his term. That may be enough for some voters.
Markey has been a great senator, but I'm sad he's running again. As you note, if he'd stepped down, we'd likely have a better slate of candidates to choose from. Or the field would be cleared by a very strong candidate, e.g. Pressley.
I don't disagree about the risks with Markey at all.
For me, though, Moulton is just that bad that I will happily vote for Markey in the primary. Moulton is not a team player: put him in the senate and he will find a way to jam up our legislative priorities in order to make himself feel more important. He's too moderate for a state as blue as MA, and he's just insufferable as a person. He is in it for himself first, second, and third. He's shown he's willing to discard vulnerable communities for perceived political expediency -- and he's also shown he doesn't even have a good internal evaluation for self-beneficial political expediency.
If I had to summarize it into a single point: Moulton is not temperamentally suited for power.
Realistically, if Moulton does win the primary he'll be around for several decades because people hate voting out incumbents in primaries. When incumbents don't have glaring issues, they fail to attract strong opponents. When they do have glaring issues, they attract a clown car of opponents and often win with a plurality.
On the flipside, if Markey wins the primary he'll be gone in the future regardless. It's a bit morbid, but his "too old" problem is one that, by definition, we will not have to put up with for too long.
yeah. And honestly, not everyone who's old should be turfed out. Notice how no one's telling Sanders to step down (don't ask me, but also, meh)
I'd certainly have hoped no one tried to make John Lewis leave early. Maxine Waters still kicks ass. It really depends.
Moulton's been righteously angry at Trump but iirc underwhelming on the issues.
I still appreciate Markey for draping himself in a trans pride (scarf? something).
People were calling for both and particular Sanders to retire on these boards.
But he has the one advantage that seems to matter most these days: being about half as old as the incumbent
It's a real advantage, which is why I think there's absolutely a chance that Markey loses.
I think I worded it really poorly there. I was trying to convey that Moulton didn't have any real advantages to build on top of that age difference advantage. He isn't a great political talent, he isn't a better ideological fit, he doesn't have a strong base of support with part of the state, he isn't favored by either the establishment or the outsider wings, etc. It really is just age and nothing else.
Is anyone else following the colossal failure of Trump's "improvements" to the DC reflecting pool? First we had the algae blooms and now the paint in the reflecting pool is coming up in sheets. It also has come out that the contractor who was paid $14 million for this no bid contract is a convicted felon and Trump donor. What a perfect representation of the failure of the Trump administration.
You mean you wouldn’t trust this guy?
https://x.com/hunterbiden/status/2068016151439843391?s=46&t=sbdQQeYBqp0h_Zql717iTw
He is literally the guy who was convicted for bribing former Congressman James Traficant and is rumored to be a member of a certain Italian-American gentleman's club. Just another criminal taking advantage of our grifter-in-chief.
Beam him up...
presume you mean Mobster Mario in the pic there.
ngl starting to really appreciate Hunter.
beyond pathetic. and perhaps even more than the rubble that was the East Wing (although that one makes me the angriest), a perfect symbol/synecdoche for the whole wretched enshittified cock-up of a so-called administration; and Trump himself, killing everything he touches.
from "American Flag Blue" to radioactive Linda Blair spew. Yes indeed.
oh and now they're arresting people for taking chunks of paint or even looking like they would, because clearly they have nothing more important to deal with
Apparently now the Trump administration is arresting people who were picking at the paint and is blaming their "vandalism" for the problems.
https://scdailygazette.com/2026/06/19/trump-backs-alan-wilson-too-in-sc-governors-race-you-cant-go-wrong/
SC-Gov: Trump has endorsed both Lt. Gov. Pam Evette and AG Alan Wilson in their Republican runoff on Tuesday. If polling is accurate, Wilson will win in a landslide, so Trump is likely trying to save face.
If I endorse both candidates, I am sure to win.
One wonders when the GOP candidates will stop prostrating themselves trying to curry Trump's primary endorsement, since it is worth absolutely nothing. If you are ahead in the polls, you don't need the endorsement; if you are behind in the polls you run the risk of Trump endorsing your opponent since he hates to be perceived as a loser
And unless it is a ruby red district, a Trump endorsement may turn out to be toxic by alienating swing voters....
https://nondoc.com/2026/06/17/voters-dust-deevers-rebuff-freedom-caucus-candidates/
Where are they now? - Oklahoma state Sen. Dusty Deevers, who considered a run for U.S. Senate this cycle, lost his Republican primary on Tuesday.
Wow. Oklahoma voting against members of its Freedom Caucus.
Hopefully this is the seeds being sown for Oklahomans finally, slowly waking up to the insanity of the far right.
Some hard-right West Virginia members were defeated in May as well, including the abysmal Laura Faircloth who I knew personally and represented a district not too far from my residence.
News from the North: Parliament has adjourned for the summer, and there are now six by-elections coming down the pipe. A Conservative MP, Cathy Wagantall, has announced she will resign on August 31st. She had announced last year that she would not run for re-election, but with the Liberal majority pushing a potential election farther out, I guess she decided to cut bait now. She represents Yorkton-Melville, part of the rural blue wall in the Prairie provinces that would vote for a mannequin wearing a CPC button. Case in point: she won last year with a 77-14 decision over the Liberal candidate.
Again, the timing for these elections is going to be interesting, with various municipal and provincial elections scheduled for the fall, along with the Alberta referenda.
How long do Canadian MPs need to serve for their pensions to vest? Probably apropos to Waganrall resigning
Six years, which she is well past having served since 2015. That also means she served her entire career in opposition, and being 70 she probably figures it ain't worth it to wait another two or three years only to end up there again.
https://m.youtube.com/shorts/giQ6D8-tFoA
MI-Sen: Great ad from Abdul El-Sayed - he water skis and then makes a metaphor comparing the uncertainty of the waves to that of economic conditions for Michiganders, with lines like "the people driving the boat don't slow down".
That's really imaginative and well-executed, and it also shows what good shape he's in.
He's good looking too, which helps.
Wow, what an imaginative ad, can’t say I’ve seen any other waterski based political ads in my lifetime. And yeah, this dude is jacked…if he wins the nomination, what a great contrast to Mike Rogers and his pathetic AI-generated muscles https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/heres-posted-altered-photo-mike-130000599.html
Surely that's the first political ad that features water skiing correct?
I believe that there were anti John Kerry ads in 2004 that showed him waterskiing
I thought he was windsurfing. Waterskiing is 'mas macho' than windsurfing because it involves a powerboat. Windsurfing uses renewable energy, the wind...
Literally one of the most creative ads I've seen in years. I've had my reservations about Abdul but given he looks poised to be the nominee, if he has people making ads like this around him it makes me sleep better at night.
TX 15th CD...according to a story I saw the other night on MS Now, Tejano super star Bobby Pulido (D) can win this "red" district. Monica de la Cruz, the repub. incumbent, apparently released a poll (? internal) that showed her up by 1% and she commented "oh, that's not good". District is just east of San Antonio.
Small quibble: the east San Antonio district is the 35th. This one goes from rural areas far east of the city down to the border with Mexico in populous Hidalgo County.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas%27s_15th_congressional_district
I think this is from before the Gerrymander Wars.
Yeah, there's options to see the map each year. The 2023-2027 map has a sliver that almost touched San Antonio, but most of the district is still near the border.
Good lord these maps are so very stupid.
I saw part of that interview briefly. I’ve been impressed with MS NOW post-Comcast split — I’ve seen a lot more downballot coverage (including candidate interviews) than I used to.
yeah, it's nice to see a news platform buyout at least not actively making it worse. If it's better now, dayenu.
Wife and I went to a watch party a few blocks from the USMNT’s match with Australia. Raucous group at that bar, and the loudest moment was not the two goals but everybody including dudebros booing at the TV when RFK Jr snowing up.
This is the energy democrats need to channel. Mamdani is good at it
He uses/leverages sportsball* very, very effectively.
*tongue-in-cheek, I also love football and the football (except not watching this World Cup)
Very much looking forward to the fall of the Starmer government here in the UK. I was actually genuinely optimistic when he came to power and could not be more disappointed. (I do have a bit of a soft spot for Keir in that I was sat at the table next to his at a pub when he was leader of the opposition, but that only cuts so far.) Not convinced Andy Burnham will be hugely better, but it's hard to imagine him being worse.
I keep seeing people talk about the rise of Reform UK and One Nation in Australia, and then I see the polling and they are both in the mid-20s. Australia at least has the ranked ballot to blunt the potential damage, but the UK (and Canada) really need to move away from FPTP. The problem being that whilst everyone can agree electoral reform is needed, there is no consensus on what it should look like.
"I keep seeing people talk about the rise of Reform UK and One Nation in Australia, and then I see the polling and they are both in the mid-20s."
I get the same feeling when I read electoral coverage of Germany, where all the media seems to talk about is AfD this and AfD that, but the polling is similar. Germany does have the two-step electoral system which is intended to maintain proportionality, so that far right (or left) parties can't surge to power with far less than a majority because the opposition is split (if there's any country that should know the potential hazards of that, it's Germany.)
France does the two-step thing too, but the general is two candidates/parties, I think? They've managed to cobble together coalitions to keep whatever the fuck Front National is called now out so far, but I'd worry about next year.
Yeah, you'd think Trump might pull the rest of the neofascists down in flames, and it might help, but plain old "throw the bums out, let's get someone new in who shares my anger" unfortunately always seems to play well after long enough
They’ve all very loudly turned on Trump (for a reason!), though, so idk how much utility that will indeed have
That's the problem. Labour won a huge majority with just 33%. Both the UK and Canada need RCV badly.
I don't think everyone can agree that electoral reform is needed. Those who believe they benefit from the current system presumably disagree.
Yeah, he's frigging dreadful. New Labour in general, unless the backbenchers can rise up and change the direction a lot.
Dates for a Maryland special session regarding redistricting and constitutional changes have been proposed, but not yet finalised. These would allow for voters to approve a constitutional amendment in November which would change or remove some of the provisions that were cited in 2022 when an earlier, more partisan map was voided. If passed, then a new map could be in effect for 2028-30 that would be more likely to survive court challenge.
https://marylandmatters.org/2026/06/19/house-sets-target-dates-for-special-session/
by 2032, assuming all goes well in the first place, they might be at risk fo a dummymander tbh
Yeah, in think the original poster intended the dash to be inclusive of the 2030 election but to your point specials between the 2030 and 2032 elections would still use the mid-cycle maps.
got it, thanks
Not if they unpack MD-04 and MD-07 the most. Those districts don’t need to be like 80% Harris. They could easily be brought down to 70% Harris and still be super safe for Dems.
4, 7, and 8 can and should be unpacked a bit. 1 should be flipped and 6 strengthened.
I was a little concerned about the MD-03 (which bore little resemblance to the currently same-numbered one) in the map that Moore's redistricting commission proposed and the House but not Senate passed this year being potentially vulnerable.
Those changes to the state constitution are assuming that the GOP Supreme Court judges appointed by Larry Hogan would act in good faith rather than as partisan hacks and as we see time and time again, you can't ever count on ANY Republican operating in good faith.
MN-02 for myself because its where I live now; Looks like Matt Little will win the primary but I will go with Kaela Berg because of union endorsements. Matt Kleins stupid decision to use a political gambling site on himself really reflects poorly, too.
I like Berg because of her background but prefer Little because of his progressive credentials and endorsements. I agree Klein is terrible.
Luckily I don’t think Klein stands a chance due to his betting scandal. What a moron, betting on his own race. Did he really think he wouldn’t be caught?
Maine RCV distribution:
https://x.com/ME_Politics_/status/2067937486572040321?s=20
https://www.koco.com/article/president-trump-gentner-drummond-fake-republican-truth-social-mike-mazzei/71633081
OK-Gov: In reassuring his endorsement of Mike Mazzei, Trump went on an absolute tirade against Republican runoff opponent Gentner Drummond, saying he was a "radical left Dumocrat".
Sigh. The Trump presidency cannot end fast enough.
All it takes is one cheeseburger or French fry
If only...
There's this Shirley Jackson story called "The Renegade," where a woman with a dog who got into her neighbors' chickens is appalled and distraught because the neighbors just cheerfully assume she's going to go ahead and kill the dog now. If she really doesn't want to, though, one suggests, she could tie a dead chicken around her neck tight enough so that she can't shake it off. Just leave it there til it gets so ripe it falls off by itself. She'll never go near one again.
I'm starting to think that collectively, we are that dog, and Trump is that chicken.
That's a great image, but if that's Trump, it doesn't apply to the next Republican Americans will elect president, probably in 2032 or 2036...
-sob-
I mean in that case it's just rotting chickens all the way down.
yeah, I don't love our prospects given the two party system and thermostatic backlash, and the fact that the GOP is a pathology not a party at this point.
And that so many Americans are bigots, religious fanatics and just plain ignorant and stupid.
Question for posters here: during which election season do you remember seeing the most political ads? I feel like Alex Bores and Cait Conley are going to be eternally burned in my brain from the number of ads I’ve seen, and I’m sure there’s been worse years. Is there any election season you remember where the ads just got exhausting?
You live in New York, correct? Try living in a swing state. The ads are exhausting every two years and especially every four years.
I do live in a swing district (NY-17), but I can imagine a swing state is worse. Good luck during this contentious high-stakes midterm.
One more reason to get rid of the electoral college. Share the joy/misery more equitably
This has been a pretty bad one. I'm in DC and am just getting a deluge of ads for and against Adrian Boafo for MD-5. I don't even live in the state.
Basically June-November every other year.
2022 stood out to me the most, I think.
In 2024 in Ohio you couldn't go on any electronic device without being bombarded with obnoxious and mean spirited anti-transgender ads against Sherrod Brown. The crypto bros carpet bombed the state with these ads for months.
Well I no longer support talarico.
Republicans are now mad at James Talarico for opposing gender-affirming care for minors
https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2026/06/republicans-are-now-mad-at-james-talarico-for-opposing-gender-affirming-care-for-minors/
Talarico has walked back his past support for transgender rights.
I think the prohibition is against openly supporting a non-Democratic candidate, though exceptions are made for independents who caucus with the Democrats or are running in very red states. I could be wrong, but I don't think there's an explicit prohibition against posts saying "I no longer support (name of Democratic candidate)." But of course you're right that in the U.S.'s 2-party system, not supporting a Democrat usually means helping a Republican to win.
I think it also applies to telling people not to vote at all. Basically advocating that people not vote for the Democrat (whether it's for a Republican, independent/third party candidate, or no one) is and should be verboten here.
The only exception is probably when the de facto Democrat (as in generally endorsed or recognized as such, or the only potentially electable non-Republican) is not running under that label.
Telling people not to vote is a bit different from saying you no longer support someone.
Thank you for adding actual facts and statistics from a genuine trans advocacy source
(FWIW Talarico’s position seems entirely reasonable especially with those supporting figures)
Echoing Henrik's thank you for providing facts and statistics.
Incidentally, your post inspired me to give money to the HRC, which I just did.
Give it to a better source, they'll just spend your money on dinners with celebrities.
Who would you recommend?
Of course.
In general, Talarico's been busting his ass off in building as diverse of a coalition of white, non-white and religious supporters in his general election campaign.
If he's already been pissing off the GOP by reversing what he said about gender affirming care, that means Talarico's destroyed their chance at defining him in the general election on this one singular issue. With Paxton as the GOP Senate Nominee, this means it's going to be hard for the GOP to try to throw anything at him.
They'll still throw this at him and won't hesitate to make shit up.
Sure although I think Talarico is a stronger Senate candidate than the GOP was expecting.
Oh well I still support him and all democrats should.
I hope you don’t live in Texas.
This type of absurd gatekeeping is frankly the worst of left politics. The issue is political poison, has shoddy scientific backing and the numbers of minors who actually go through surgery is miniscule.
What specifically has shoddy backing? The surgery itself? Being trans period?
I just want to make sure this discussion doesn’t derail into transphobia.
(I will also note that, if the polling I remember is accurate, this particular issue is of very little importance to voters.)
I don't wish to get into another whole debate on this, but for clarity sake I was referring to the utility/necessity of surgical interventions for trans minors. U.S. based pediatric orgs are on an island when it comes to this issue.
I also don’t want another debate so that’s fine. Actually I think I understand your position better with the context posted above.
I just wanted to make sure this didn’t turn into denying trans people have a distinct identity. Believe it or not, a certain Rahm Emanuel-shaped Dem has been trying to do that, in what I assume is a pathetic attempt to continue his diminished relevancy in politics.
It's a cometic surgery, there's no necessity involved.
If it’s good enough for basically every pediatric org in Europe it’s good enough for me
(Setting aside certain issues in the UK unique to them with the Cass report etc)
I didn’t know this issue was “left.”
It is in the U.S.
I fail to see how it is on the left agenda, certainly not historically. I think it is used by the same people who use it to scapegoat a distinct minority to tar the left.
Civil liberties and civil rights weren't always a purely left-wing issues. That's certainly true. But look at the way U.S. politics are today!
I will just say it- the left is on the verge of getting more political power that they have ever had since the election of Ronald Reagan but if they want to reach the level where they can make real change they will need to improve their political skills. I mean no more flawed unvetted candidates for high political office (Andrew Gilliam and Graham Platner, for example) no more letting obnoxious asshole streamers and YouTubers being some of your primary spokespeople on social media (I'm looking at at Hassan Piker, Vaush, and almost everyone ever affiliated with the Young Turks) - and for gods sake- no more purity tests, especially in tough races. Winning is everything in being able to not only make positive changes, but in stopping people like Trump from making things worse.
The problem for a certain (and I’d say it’s a loud minority) of the left flank of American liberal-progressivism is that a lot of those people got into politics BECAUSE or VIA obnoxious internet cultural gatekeeping or being YouTube demagogues. It’s their raison detre in politics, and all their instincts are informed by that being their entry into it. I can think of five or six issues these people treat purity politics as absolute catnip and it’s going to cost us election after election unless they’re told to fuck off
What’s frustrating is that this is not an anti-left position at all. Mamdani, who I have a mixed opinion of on a policy level, has proven that you can construct an inspiring left-wing message without indulging in any of that bullshit and that it is actually fairly effective (at least in the context of NYC Democratic politics). so we don’t actually have to pretend that Vaush, Piker or the YT gang are serious people any more than we should pretend Tim Pool is
I would say that Mamdani would be an example of a very successful leader if he just stopped taking such a strong and divisive position on that one issue which can and will cost him politically. I think most of us would agree that everyone needs to turn the rhetoric down a few notches on this issue and some on the left refuse to do so and I agree this will cost us politically. I will admit that I find Vaush to be entertaining sometimes but I am also aware that using the type of rhetoric that he uses would be toxic if a candidate behaved like him in a swing district, for example. Swing voters tend to hate these more abrasive spokespeople and the left needs to get more James Talaricos on the air and fewer Cenk Uygars if they want real political power.
I mean it arguably already did in 2024, though we should steer clear of this seeing as there was just a prominent poster banned not even a week ago
I'm going to pretend I don't know what you're talking about and just say that whatever it is, Mamdani didn't have to do anything different from what he did to be elected. Otherwise, don't refer to banned subjects.
Purity tests make sense in some very left-leaning districts. Otherwise, I agree with the thrust of your post.
To be fair, most of the left base and the American public in general probably don't even know who Vaush and maybe Piker even are. I certainly hadn't heard the name Vaush in quite a while (and feel unpleasant remembering his existence), even being incredibly invested in this stuff.
Yeah, I haven't heard of Vaush and hadn't heard of Piker until recently.
https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-pm-starmer-expected-resign-monday-set-out-orderly-exit-observer-newspaper-2026-06-20/
British PM Keir Starmer will resign as early as Monday, after a potential foe, Andy Burnham, was elected to Parliament.
That was quick, and probably for the best. Better than weeks of being made to see the writing on the wall
Thankfully he's not required to call an early election anymore when the PM steps down.
How will Andy Burnham handle the problems in the UK though? It seems like they're limited in their options.
You're certainly right on the facts, but do you think a government could survive doing that without another referendum?
Can the current UK government hope to survive past the current term anyway?
That cost sounds a lot higher than it probably is in practice. What are the odds Labour gets a majority in 2029? I'm not an expert but I expect it's some variation of "very low."
Three years away. That’s an eon in political terms. Of course, if they do what was suggested above, then they’ll almost assuredly have no chance.
You're saying if they rejoin the EU?
I agree that another referendum would be needed and would probably pass. However this issue is so difficult for both the Tories and Labour in that their base is strongly split on this issue and it causes massive internal fights every time it comes up which keeps both of those parties from wanting to touch this issue. I would also suggest that Burnham add runoff elections for future Parliamentary elections to prevent Reform from getting in power with 30-35% of the vote.
I'd like to think a new referendum would pass, but I don't have confidence in that.
That I don’t know. Unfortunately for Keir a lot of the problems were beyond his immediate control (at least quickly). Burnham’s “nuts and bolts” style lends itself well to municipal politics and hopefully to PM as well
Never discount the power of vibe shift!
Dunno how much that matters. Ask President Harris.
Electorally, switching Starmer out for Burnham sort of resembles going from Biden to Harris--with the caveats that Burnham has three years instead of three months until the next election, and isn't as directly tied to his predecessor.
And Burnham and Starmer are also ideologically different, with Starmer being a neoliberal/centrist type and Burnham self-identifying as a socialist.
Many of the same people involved with the Mandelson-McSweeney “Labour Together” are getting behind Burnham. I don’t expect much of a change.
We'll see. I sure hope the next Labour leader is not anti-labor!