Yup, that’s my mistake, my mind was on the no kings protests, which aren’t possible to verify, so I didn’t verify the user before posting, sorry about that. I’ve deleted the comment.
I suspect that this shows the GOP split on foreign policy between the isolationist wing and the heavily Evangelical interventionist wing. The isolationist wing is turning on Trump.
Anyway, as for races I'm interested in -- Analilia Mejia's win in NJ-11's primary and Nida Allam's near-win in NC-04, mixed with the mostly bad results for the left in IL, have me wondering -- what is the current state of left primary candidates (open and challengers)? Of the ones who are running, who is most likely to win? Where might the left do well -- and not well?
Curious to know people's thoughts. I think Brad Lander and Donavan McKinney are at least in good shape, and since I'm including open primaries I actually think Claire Valdez may pull off an upset with Mamdani's backing. How is everyone else positioned?
-I don't think Illinois was "mostly bad" - there were worse candidates than Miller despite her big outside spending (Preston, a domestic abuser; Jackson Jr., a fraud and nepo baby), Ford is pretty liberal and Conyears-Ervin, Boykin and Friedman certainly are not, and Biss is better than Fine
-Lander and McKinney are certainly in good positions, and I would say probably Pearson (TN-9), Bush (MO-1) and Kiros (CO-1, per my comment on the digest) are as well
-I'm gunning for Howard (NH-1), Roath (MA-8), Valdez (NY-7), Schlossberg (NY-12, I know a lot of people don't like him), Blake (NY-15), Reynolds-Jackson or Hamawy (NJ-12), Rabb (PA-3), Brooks (PA-7), Dunn (MD-5), Guzman (VA-7, not declared), Clark (GA-13), Green (TX-18), Cavanaugh (NE-2) and Blouin (UT-1).
-Out of the ones I mentioned, I think Valdez, Schlossberg, Reynolds-Jackson, Brooks, Dunn and Cavanaugh have the best chances
Serious question: When was the last time any member of Congress lost their primary, and then came back in the next election to win the primary, against the same person who had previously beaten them, and without the district changing in redistricting?
Can't think of any time that has ever happened, but Cynthia McKinney was primaried by Denise Majette in 2002, who retired to run for Senate in 2004, and then McKinney was again primaried by Hank Johnson in 2006.
Bush is pretty toxic, but she only lost to Bell by a little over 5 points in 2024 and also previously primaried Lacy Clay from the left in 2020. I wouldn't put it past her to do it again.
In 1950, Glen Taylor lost renomination to the U.S. Senate from Idaho to D. Worth Clark, his predecessor, whom he had beaten for the nomination in 1944.
He wasn’t an incumbent, but Dan Frisa lost a primary to David Levy in 1992, came back to beat Levy in the primary in 1994, and then lost a general election in 1996, if I remember right.
Phil Roe lost the 2006 primary to David Davis in TN-1 and came back to beat Davis in the next primary, though Roe wasn’t an incumbent in 2006.
The exact situation likely happened, if it has ever happened, in a situation where redistricting put two incumbents in the same district, and the one who won the primary lost the next primary, maybe due to a scandal or something.
To add, in 1972, Republicans who controlled NY redistricting put incumbents Bella Abzug and William Ryan together. Abzug lost the primary to Ryan, but Ryan died shortly thereafter, and Abzug replaced him on the ballot in the general election. That’s as close to the question as I can think of right now
Well, given that Congress is bicameral and thus includes the Senate, I would like to point to Senator Lisa Murkowski.
After losing the 2010 Republican primary to Tea Party candidate Joe Miller, Murkowski ran as a write-in candidate in the general election against both the Democrat Scott McAdams and the person who beat her – and won!
(Not exactly the scenario you describe, but even more impressive.)
I don't know enough about some of these candidates to have opinions of them. However, I am not reflexively opposing incumbents just because they happen to be incumbents - a primary is a choice between candidates, not a referendum on one candidate, and so the positions of the incumbent and their challenger(s) are equally important.
A few races where we differ are MO-01 (I'm supporting Bell), CO-01 (DeGette), NY-12 (Lasher or Bores) and NY-15 (Torres). Some of the others are open seats where Dems have several good candidates.
TN-09 is tough though. I like Steve Cohen, but Justin Pearson is also a pretty good guy. And TX-18 is the same way - Green and Menefee are both great. Hopefully Texas will bluen sufficiently by 2031 that Republicans will feel that they have no choice but to recreate the Democratic seats in Houston, Dallas, and San Antonio that they cut this year.
I could probably agree with you to support Lasher over Schlossberg, but I'm not entirely thrilled with Bores due to his work for Palantir. I support Green over Menefee because of Menefee's money from the AI industry.
I’ll give Bores this — some of AI hates him, and that’s a plus for me. (Incidentally, my church in NYC is in his district, and I’ve actually met him twice — once when he ran for Assembly the first time, and once at a street fair. He was a really nice guy both times.)
I watched the entire interview. Must admit that I don’t think Adam Friedland is a good interviewer – at least not on this occasion. In fact, I think Ritchie Torres came across far more positively than Friedland did.
He tries to have a certain persona that is a hard sell for some people, trying to get under his guest's skin.
Probably not a good first impression, either. Friedland comes off as emotional and out of his depth and Torres comes across as a classy career politician. Understanding both of their backgrounds is also important.
Regarding Illinois, the only high-profile primary that totally got away from the left was IL-8, even if most of the Illinois Democratic primaries involved progressive favorites (Peters, Abughazaleh, Villa, etc.), moderate favorites (Raja, Fine, MCE, Kim, etc.), and badly flawed candidates (JJ2, Preston) alike losing primaries. There were a couple of state legislative primaries in the Chicago area were progressive favorites won (HD-13 and HD-40).
It's important to note that, unlike general elections between Democrats and Republicans, there isn't extremely strong polarization between moderate and progressive candidates in contested Democratic primaries, and some candidates actively seek out, and get, both progressive and moderate support in primaries.
Your second paragraph is an extremely important point. And it's true of voters as well as candidates - I'm sure there were plenty of voters in Illinois who voted for the more moderate congressional candidate and more progressive state legislative candidate, or vice versa. Perceived ideology on a spectrum is not the only determining factor in most people's primary votes.
I'd even say that most of the time people just vote based on name recognition rather than ideology in a primary and sometimes a general. And, unfortunately, a lot of general elections come down to straight-ticket voting rather than ideology.
That is a good point. Micah Lasher is kind of doing that in NY-12, as a relative moderate who backed Mamdani early after the primary. And in addition, some candidates can also legislate differently than they campaigned — Maxine Dexter and Yassamin Ansari, for instance, were considered the moderates in their races, yet are strong progressives today. (Sarah Elfreth surprised me too, she hasn’t been too bad in office either.)
Is Wesley Bell or Cori Bush actually better at helping improve the quality of life for their constituents? I know Bell has a more conservative history and Bush is more outspoken, but is one better at actually helping people?
-Bush secured additional funds for the FTA by working with Republican Sen. Roy Blunt in 2022. She secured $13 million in earmarks for her district in 2024. She secured $750,000 for the National Urban League in 2022. She was also a triage nurse and civil rights activist.
-Bell extensively visited the district after a tornado hit St. Louis last May. As county prosecutor in suburban St. Louis County, he eased penalties for marijuana users and campaigned on reducing death penalty cases.
That's not counting the numerous scandals they both have - Bush was accused of misappropriating federal funds and was attacked for her harsh stance on "defund the police", while Bell was also accused of misappropriating government funds, accused of discrimination by one of his employees based on her gender when he was a prosecutor, and didn't investigate the death of Michael Brown.
I just wanted to clarify one thing - suburban St. Louis County is more than 60% of MO-01. The city of St. Louis itself now has fewer than 300,000 people. It's quite sad for a city that used to have 850,000 people at its peak in 1950.
Wasn’t she unpopular though? I remember something controversial happened with her.
Cara Spencer also wasn’t too bad as a candidate for what it’s worth. She was to Jones’ right but I remember reading her platform and being alright with it.
Usually if the 2nd primary challenge fails the incumbent is seen as pretty entrenched and you won’t see strong challenges run after. If Bell defeats Bush again I think he’s keeping that seat for awhile.
Thank you for the report. I know it sounds silly because the media tries to start these food fights over hot button issues, but I still look for the person that might be better at the entire job. Giving advocacy speeches is an important component of the job, but certainly not rhe whole thing. It can be hard to pick up the show hores from the work horses.
I'll always have love for Cori Bush for her protest on the Capitol steps to extend the eviction moratorium back in 2021, which saved thousands of renters nationwide from becoming homeless during the height of Covid
PA-3: Democratic state Rep. Morgan Cephas is out, leaving state Rep. Chris Rabb, state Sen. Sharif Street, and physician Ala Stanford as the major candidates to succeed Dwight Evans.
In non-political news (but hey, that's OK since this is the open thread), the UConn women's basketball team just reached the Elite Eight after defeating North Carolina by a close-by-their-standards 21 points. This is the UConn women's 18th Elite Eight in the past 19 national tournaments, and their 29th in the past 32 tournaments.
Next up is their old foe Notre Dame, once one of the best teams in the country but, like so many of UConn's onetime rivals, has gone somewhat downhill lately. Hopefully the UConn women will be able to go all the way!
I'm currently third in my friend groups bracket contest for the men's, but I have Florida winning it all so I think my fortunes are unlikely to improve.
The voices of dissension are getting louder from incumbents who should be safe in their districts, but clearly aren’t. Even party-line, Trump supporting MAGA wing GOP’ers are freaking out.
NEW — A growing group of House Republicans are warning of devastating political backlash if Trump puts US troops on the ground in Iran war
“We lose 60 to 70 seats,” one House Republican said
GOP Rep. Eli Crane and more House Rs are now *publicly* warning against American servicemembers on the ground as tensions rise and thousands are being deployed
“My biggest concern this whole time is that this would turn into another long Middle Eastern war,” Crane told
@politico
“Though I don’t want to try and take away any of the president’s ability to carry out this operation, I know a lot of our supporters and a lot of members of Congress are very concerned,” he added.
Someone said when this came up last something along the lines of "caucuses are a progressive fever dream and don't necessarily impact the actual election" and mentioned the examples of the 2020 Senate race and DeGette's own 2018 primary, and I tend to agree with that sentiment.
News from the North: the NDP has their leadership convention this weekend. The voting itself was one member, one vote across the country, but they are having a convention in Winnipeg because where else would you want to be in late March.
I know most of the people on this site, whether Canadian or American, have sympathies for the NDP being a social democratic to socialist outfit. I do support many of the things they stand for at an ideological level, and appreciate when they are the social conscience of the House of Commons. However, the electoral calculus generally means a stronger NDP is at the expense of the Liberal Party, and that in turn leads to a Conservative government. It happened in the 1980s, it happened in the Layton era of 2004-11, and it has happened in Ontario over the last three elections here. I wish there was a way for them to regain their position as a force in federal politics, but in the moment, I do not see that happening.
In Florida's special Election for HD51, which saw Democrat Edwin Perez run on a shoe-string budge of under $20,000 - the district still swung 5 points to the left
In the district's Hispanic-heavy east end, the swing was well over 20%!
Yeah, the FL GOP is losing their supermajority status in the legislature after Nov. (Only one more seat needs to flip and I think they’ll get several more than needed.)
Does anyone have any reliable polling for Jolly and Vindman’s standing with Latino voters?
New independent polling shows that among likely Democratic primary voters we have a 22 point lead! When this poll was conducted, we had been in this race for less than 50 days. In a short time, our message of serving your community, looking out for your neighbors, and fighting for everyday Mainers has hit home with people across the district.
Just last week another poll showed us in a statistical dead heat with Paul LePage. I hit the ground running when I entered this race, and I’ll be ready to send him back to Florida for good in November.
The thought of once again seeing Paul LePage in any elected office is nauseating. While driving in Maine, I would often hear his statements or the interviews with him on NPR. Not once did I hear LePage utter three consecutive sentences without saying something utterly deranged, totally bizarre or completely vile.
Joe Baldacci does have a famous name - his older brother John represented this district from 1995-2003 (and in rural Maine, people have long memories about who represented them). John was also Governor from 2003-2011, and did very well in ME-02 in his elections.
Baldacci is definitely one of the Dems' top candidates who could've run here (along with Troy Jackson).
Two choices: they might undoubtedly feel like they are damned if they do (stick with Cornyn) and damned if they don't, either they face the wrath of their leader and his cult, or get rejected by the public at large. The other view is that they still think Texas is the unbreakable rock of their coalition and they can withstand this.
I suspect it's a refusal to throw good money after bad. Cornyn benefited from a massive spending advantage in the first round and it didn't help him much. Polling shows him consistently down. They don't want to spend $50m-100m propping Cornyn up only for him to lose anyway.
They might see their choices as: (1) Spend $50m, end up with Paxton, (2) Don't spend $50m, end up with Paxton. In which case (2) is the obviously superior choice because it leaves them more money to go elsewhere.
I think Skip means all the polls had Paxton leading on the first ballot. Cornyn "winning" was a surprise, but if you ask me, 42% is probably his ceiling.
There's been a lot of drama and commentary about Seth Bodnar is trying a very energetic campaign as an independent with Tester's support, while the state party still wants to support their likely nominee, state rep Reilly Neill. But if he and she both run, it's really unlikely for either to beat Kurt Alme.
Trojan Independents are the way to go in places like KS, NE, MT, UT, etc.. but its always going to be difficult to get the State Parties to accept them, for a host of obvious reasons, but it is a strategic choice we should try to make. Anything for 60 votes.
I most certainly am interested in that race, which could be consequential.
Jon Tester has spoken very clearly about how the Democratic brand is toxic in Montana and thus a huge obstacle, being a key factor in his 2024 defeat against Tim Sheehy. For this reason, Tester has encouraged Democrats to support the Independent candidate, Seth Bodnar. In light of this, Reilly Neill’s candidacy would be a strategic mistake.
Montana, Nebraska and Utah are three states where we’re better off considering supporting Independent candidates. I’d say Dan Osborn in Nebraska holds some promise.
Not opposed to the run-an-Independent-who's-not-a-Democrat-but-will-caucus-with-Democrats-if-they-get-elected strategy, but how stupid is the electorate that doesn't see through this? I mean, what's their thinking? "Oh, I can't stand those woke Democrats, so I'm going to vote for a candidate who isn't one, but will give them their support over 90% of the time."
Am I missing some subtlety that the average voter in Generic Red State is seeing in their vote?
You would be shocked by how much power a label has for some people. My dad is extremely intelligent and very progressive on most issues, but refuses to register as a Democrat, even though the (closed) Democratic primary is the general election for virtually all elections where he lives. It's not about the policies for him, because he aligns with Democrats on most everything nowadays, it's that the label means something to him.
What does that have to do with liberals running as independents? It speaks to how even people who agree with Dems don't want to associate with them because of the associations they have with the "Democrat" label. Think of all the people who support things like minimum wage increases, tax increases on the wealthy, clean energy, etc. but routinely vote Republican. It's not just that in many cases, other issues win out, it's that politics has become so tribal that a vote represents who you are and lots of people can't stand to think of themselves as a Democrat. To them, a Democrat isn't a person who supports certain policies, it's a whole bunch of other things that might have nothing to do with policy.
So, you run as an independent, and suddenly there's a whole host of people that are open to listening to you. It's not the die-hard Trump supporters who'll never abandon him, it's the group of people who've been won by Republicans on culture war issues but may not be that conservative. That squishy middle ground is how we win progressive referendums in deep-red states and it's the target audience here. Lastly, it's worth remembering that people love (and I mean love) to think of themselves as independent and not bound by partisanship. Voting for an independent reaffirms that sense of self for those people.
I agree with a lot of this, but if someone supports clean energy and routinely votes Republican, we're never going to reach them, not even with a progressive Independent, because they're voting on other things like race.
Never is a long time. It's true that a majority of white voters has voted Republican for President since 1968, but Obama did win for economic reasons, and some racists did vote for him.
I didn't register as a Democrat for my first 16 years as a voter. I was decline to state from the libertarian far left until I was mid-30's. It's still an uncomfortable fit some days. I finally pulled the trigger 14 years ago so I could vote in ADEM elections. I know a ton of folks who can't stand to wear the same label as some of our coalition leaders but would never vote GOP and are pragmatic enough to vote strategically for Dems.
I'm not currently registered as a Democrat, but independents can vote in the Democratic primary in WV - Republicans just recently barred independents from voting in their primaries.
Interesting article on how MAGA nonsense gets exported overseas by a web of vaguely interconnected grift groups, though considering that Korea is on the bleeding edge of politicized incelism, it may really be the other way around:
What is the likelihood that Gov. Whitmer endorses in the Michigan Senate race? I know the primary is still months away but I have to imagine she wouldn’t want to sit on the sidelines. I think she is the only person who could decide this race and influence it like Pritzker did with Stratton.
Maybe I'm crazy but I feel like she'd be more likely to endorse McMorrow? Governors don't often have cause to interact with members of Congress, but state legislators they deal with all the time. Assuming they have a good working relationship at least.
Whitmer will likely endorse whomever she thinks would be better for her. Seems like Stevens occupies the same lane as her, so limited upside there. However, if McMorrow is still polling behind Stevens by a significant amount, Whitmer probably doesn't want to be on the losing side of this race going into 2028.
lol wait did they actually brand it Pro Kings
I don’t think this is real? I can’t find anything else about this on Google.
It reads like The Onion.
Are you sure this isn’t Andy Borowitz? And in fact it is! Here’s the link.
https://www.borowitzreport.com/p/trump-furious-after-pro-kings-rally
The fact that it sounded real only further proves that satire and reality have become difficult to distinguish in the Trump era.
Yup, that’s my mistake, my mind was on the no kings protests, which aren’t possible to verify, so I didn’t verify the user before posting, sorry about that. I’ve deleted the comment.
I totally get it! But I didn’t even look at the tweet. The wording just felt like Borowitz, so I went to his site – and lo and behold.
That article mentions a really great sign at one of the No Kings rallies:
"Iran can't block the flow of solar energy"
Someone in Santa Fe, New Mexico came up with that one.
https://newrepublic.com/post/208293/cpac-attendees-confused-cheer-trump-impeachment
...Yeah, the GOP is cooked this year.
Which is a good thing because we want this to happen.
And all the time!
This is what happens when the GOP decides to corner the market on morons.
Honestly I think this more speaks to the crowd being idiots than anti-Trump.
That was what people on Reddit were saying.
If it makes you feel any better, Dragonfire noted further down in the comments that CPAC's crowd was very small this year.
Good!
Hope CPAC dies with Trump’s reputation.
I suspect that this shows the GOP split on foreign policy between the isolationist wing and the heavily Evangelical interventionist wing. The isolationist wing is turning on Trump.
The Iran War has caused the most serious schism within MAGA of its entire existence, and it has spilled into the the broader party.
Anyway, as for races I'm interested in -- Analilia Mejia's win in NJ-11's primary and Nida Allam's near-win in NC-04, mixed with the mostly bad results for the left in IL, have me wondering -- what is the current state of left primary candidates (open and challengers)? Of the ones who are running, who is most likely to win? Where might the left do well -- and not well?
Curious to know people's thoughts. I think Brad Lander and Donavan McKinney are at least in good shape, and since I'm including open primaries I actually think Claire Valdez may pull off an upset with Mamdani's backing. How is everyone else positioned?
-I don't think Illinois was "mostly bad" - there were worse candidates than Miller despite her big outside spending (Preston, a domestic abuser; Jackson Jr., a fraud and nepo baby), Ford is pretty liberal and Conyears-Ervin, Boykin and Friedman certainly are not, and Biss is better than Fine
-Lander and McKinney are certainly in good positions, and I would say probably Pearson (TN-9), Bush (MO-1) and Kiros (CO-1, per my comment on the digest) are as well
-I'm gunning for Howard (NH-1), Roath (MA-8), Valdez (NY-7), Schlossberg (NY-12, I know a lot of people don't like him), Blake (NY-15), Reynolds-Jackson or Hamawy (NJ-12), Rabb (PA-3), Brooks (PA-7), Dunn (MD-5), Guzman (VA-7, not declared), Clark (GA-13), Green (TX-18), Cavanaugh (NE-2) and Blouin (UT-1).
-Out of the ones I mentioned, I think Valdez, Schlossberg, Reynolds-Jackson, Brooks, Dunn and Cavanaugh have the best chances
Serious question: When was the last time any member of Congress lost their primary, and then came back in the next election to win the primary, against the same person who had previously beaten them, and without the district changing in redistricting?
Can't think of any time that has ever happened, but Cynthia McKinney was primaried by Denise Majette in 2002, who retired to run for Senate in 2004, and then McKinney was again primaried by Hank Johnson in 2006.
OK. I asked because that's exactly what Cori Bush is attempting to do, and I highly doubt that she will actually succeed.
Wesley Bell could, theoretically, be vulnerable in a primary. But not to Bush.
Bush is pretty toxic, but she only lost to Bell by a little over 5 points in 2024 and also previously primaried Lacy Clay from the left in 2020. I wouldn't put it past her to do it again.
Bell is also himself in the midst of an ethics scandal. Apparently, if I remember right, he used campaign money to purchase a car for someone.
In 1950, Glen Taylor lost renomination to the U.S. Senate from Idaho to D. Worth Clark, his predecessor, whom he had beaten for the nomination in 1944.
Not exactly the same, but the Glenn-Metzenbaum battles were certainly interesting.
1970--Metzenbaum beats Glenn in the primary; loses the general
1973--Metzenbaum is appointed to the Senate
1974--Glenn beats Metzenbaum in the primary; wins the general
1976--Metzenbaum wins the other Senate seat.
He wasn’t an incumbent, but Dan Frisa lost a primary to David Levy in 1992, came back to beat Levy in the primary in 1994, and then lost a general election in 1996, if I remember right.
Phil Roe lost the 2006 primary to David Davis in TN-1 and came back to beat Davis in the next primary, though Roe wasn’t an incumbent in 2006.
The exact situation likely happened, if it has ever happened, in a situation where redistricting put two incumbents in the same district, and the one who won the primary lost the next primary, maybe due to a scandal or something.
To add, in 1972, Republicans who controlled NY redistricting put incumbents Bella Abzug and William Ryan together. Abzug lost the primary to Ryan, but Ryan died shortly thereafter, and Abzug replaced him on the ballot in the general election. That’s as close to the question as I can think of right now
My first thought was Guinta and Carol Shea Porter but that's a general, of course.
If we are doing that, don't forget about the epic battle that was Baron Hill and Mike Sodrel
Well, given that Congress is bicameral and thus includes the Senate, I would like to point to Senator Lisa Murkowski.
After losing the 2010 Republican primary to Tea Party candidate Joe Miller, Murkowski ran as a write-in candidate in the general election against both the Democrat Scott McAdams and the person who beat her – and won!
(Not exactly the scenario you describe, but even more impressive.)
Miller also came second to Murkowski in a 4-way race in 2016, as a Libertarian.
Perhaps I overstated IL as a left loss then. I do agree that the center lost some too — and I’m glad Jesse Jr lost.
I don't know enough about some of these candidates to have opinions of them. However, I am not reflexively opposing incumbents just because they happen to be incumbents - a primary is a choice between candidates, not a referendum on one candidate, and so the positions of the incumbent and their challenger(s) are equally important.
A few races where we differ are MO-01 (I'm supporting Bell), CO-01 (DeGette), NY-12 (Lasher or Bores) and NY-15 (Torres). Some of the others are open seats where Dems have several good candidates.
TN-09 is tough though. I like Steve Cohen, but Justin Pearson is also a pretty good guy. And TX-18 is the same way - Green and Menefee are both great. Hopefully Texas will bluen sufficiently by 2031 that Republicans will feel that they have no choice but to recreate the Democratic seats in Houston, Dallas, and San Antonio that they cut this year.
I could probably agree with you to support Lasher over Schlossberg, but I'm not entirely thrilled with Bores due to his work for Palantir. I support Green over Menefee because of Menefee's money from the AI industry.
I’ll give Bores this — some of AI hates him, and that’s a plus for me. (Incidentally, my church in NYC is in his district, and I’ve actually met him twice — once when he ran for Assembly the first time, and once at a street fair. He was a really nice guy both times.)
I do not like Torres personally. I’m not a fan of his “anti-woke”-adjacent rhetoric.
Everything you need to know about Torres can be found by watching his full interview with Adam Friedland, a center-left podcaster who Torres made cry.
Do you have a link to that?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0Eeht171HQ
I watched the entire interview. Must admit that I don’t think Adam Friedland is a good interviewer – at least not on this occasion. In fact, I think Ritchie Torres came across far more positively than Friedland did.
He tries to have a certain persona that is a hard sell for some people, trying to get under his guest's skin.
Probably not a good first impression, either. Friedland comes off as emotional and out of his depth and Torres comes across as a classy career politician. Understanding both of their backgrounds is also important.
Regarding Illinois, the only high-profile primary that totally got away from the left was IL-8, even if most of the Illinois Democratic primaries involved progressive favorites (Peters, Abughazaleh, Villa, etc.), moderate favorites (Raja, Fine, MCE, Kim, etc.), and badly flawed candidates (JJ2, Preston) alike losing primaries. There were a couple of state legislative primaries in the Chicago area were progressive favorites won (HD-13 and HD-40).
It's important to note that, unlike general elections between Democrats and Republicans, there isn't extremely strong polarization between moderate and progressive candidates in contested Democratic primaries, and some candidates actively seek out, and get, both progressive and moderate support in primaries.
Your second paragraph is an extremely important point. And it's true of voters as well as candidates - I'm sure there were plenty of voters in Illinois who voted for the more moderate congressional candidate and more progressive state legislative candidate, or vice versa. Perceived ideology on a spectrum is not the only determining factor in most people's primary votes.
I'd even say that most of the time people just vote based on name recognition rather than ideology in a primary and sometimes a general. And, unfortunately, a lot of general elections come down to straight-ticket voting rather than ideology.
That is a good point. Micah Lasher is kind of doing that in NY-12, as a relative moderate who backed Mamdani early after the primary. And in addition, some candidates can also legislate differently than they campaigned — Maxine Dexter and Yassamin Ansari, for instance, were considered the moderates in their races, yet are strong progressives today. (Sarah Elfreth surprised me too, she hasn’t been too bad in office either.)
Is Wesley Bell or Cori Bush actually better at helping improve the quality of life for their constituents? I know Bell has a more conservative history and Bush is more outspoken, but is one better at actually helping people?
It's mixed:
-Bush secured additional funds for the FTA by working with Republican Sen. Roy Blunt in 2022. She secured $13 million in earmarks for her district in 2024. She secured $750,000 for the National Urban League in 2022. She was also a triage nurse and civil rights activist.
-Bell extensively visited the district after a tornado hit St. Louis last May. As county prosecutor in suburban St. Louis County, he eased penalties for marijuana users and campaigned on reducing death penalty cases.
That's not counting the numerous scandals they both have - Bush was accused of misappropriating federal funds and was attacked for her harsh stance on "defund the police", while Bell was also accused of misappropriating government funds, accused of discrimination by one of his employees based on her gender when he was a prosecutor, and didn't investigate the death of Michael Brown.
I just wanted to clarify one thing - suburban St. Louis County is more than 60% of MO-01. The city of St. Louis itself now has fewer than 300,000 people. It's quite sad for a city that used to have 850,000 people at its peak in 1950.
In the top 10 largest cities in the country from 1850 to 1960. Now 82nd or so. The metro area area dropped out of the top 20 before the last census.
I kind of wish a better progressive had run. I saw similar sentiment on left Bluesky.
Actually, if Bush loses, are there any other progressives who might be good?
Perhaps former St. Louis mayor Tishaura Jones, who lost re-election to a centrist challenger in 2025, could run.
Wasn’t she unpopular though? I remember something controversial happened with her.
Cara Spencer also wasn’t too bad as a candidate for what it’s worth. She was to Jones’ right but I remember reading her platform and being alright with it.
I guess so.
https://www.city-journal.org/article/st-louis-mayor-tishaura-jones
Not sure who else could
Usually if the 2nd primary challenge fails the incumbent is seen as pretty entrenched and you won’t see strong challenges run after. If Bell defeats Bush again I think he’s keeping that seat for awhile.
Thank you for the report. I know it sounds silly because the media tries to start these food fights over hot button issues, but I still look for the person that might be better at the entire job. Giving advocacy speeches is an important component of the job, but certainly not rhe whole thing. It can be hard to pick up the show hores from the work horses.
Bush also had that whole mess where she claimed she was a faith healer and cured a woman’s cancer with her touch.
Wow! Is the patient still alive?
I'll always have love for Cori Bush for her protest on the Capitol steps to extend the eviction moratorium back in 2021, which saved thousands of renters nationwide from becoming homeless during the height of Covid
I hope Wesley Bell would join in with a similar protest if such a rent crisis arose in the future.
I don't know why you'd assume the extension had anything to do with her performative antics.
FWIW a large number of politicians participated besides Bush. I recall Schumer of all people going.
https://www.inquirer.com/politics/pennsylvania/state-rep-morgan-cephas-exits-congressional-race-20260327.html
PA-3: Democratic state Rep. Morgan Cephas is out, leaving state Rep. Chris Rabb, state Sen. Sharif Street, and physician Ala Stanford as the major candidates to succeed Dwight Evans.
In non-political news (but hey, that's OK since this is the open thread), the UConn women's basketball team just reached the Elite Eight after defeating North Carolina by a close-by-their-standards 21 points. This is the UConn women's 18th Elite Eight in the past 19 national tournaments, and their 29th in the past 32 tournaments.
Next up is their old foe Notre Dame, once one of the best teams in the country but, like so many of UConn's onetime rivals, has gone somewhat downhill lately. Hopefully the UConn women will be able to go all the way!
Not to jinx myself but I feel pretty good about picking UConn in my women’s bracket
I'm currently third in my friend groups bracket contest for the men's, but I have Florida winning it all so I think my fortunes are unlikely to improve.
You'd think someone who hangs around TDB would know better than to oin their hopes on Florida. Lol ( Aside from last year's surprise victory.)
South Carolina is winning it all
The voices of dissension are getting louder from incumbents who should be safe in their districts, but clearly aren’t. Even party-line, Trump supporting MAGA wing GOP’ers are freaking out.
https://x.com/meredithllee/status/2037616610131730700
https://archive.ph/HkcSb
NEW — A growing group of House Republicans are warning of devastating political backlash if Trump puts US troops on the ground in Iran war
“We lose 60 to 70 seats,” one House Republican said
GOP Rep. Eli Crane and more House Rs are now *publicly* warning against American servicemembers on the ground as tensions rise and thousands are being deployed
“My biggest concern this whole time is that this would turn into another long Middle Eastern war,” Crane told
@politico
“Though I don’t want to try and take away any of the president’s ability to carry out this operation, I know a lot of our supporters and a lot of members of Congress are very concerned,” he added.
https://politi.co/40ZoIpa via
@politico
Crane should go back to pitching bullshit to Kevin O'Leary
Gee, if only they had a way to stop a land invasion of Iran...Congress wouldn't happen to have any ability to limit war powers, would they? /s
DeGette survives the convention vote
https://www.axios.com/local/denver/2026/03/28/diana-degette-melat-kiros-denver-colorado-1st-congressional-district
She'll win the primary but it's kind of embarrassing for DeGette Kiros made it this far
If a more established candidate than Kiros (maybe Julie Gonzales) challenged DeGette I wonder if she would’ve made it past the convention
I think being more established would be a liability in the convention, not a bonus.
Kiros was 7 delegate votes away from knocking DeGette out of the election.
Caucuses are dumb and should be thrown out everywhere.
Why are you so sure she'll win the primary?
Someone said when this came up last something along the lines of "caucuses are a progressive fever dream and don't necessarily impact the actual election" and mentioned the examples of the 2020 Senate race and DeGette's own 2018 primary, and I tend to agree with that sentiment.
Hopefully DeGette will go the safe route next time and collect signatures along with going to the convention.
People who were there cheered for Trump’s impeachment, but there were too few there to even do that.
https://x.com/EricSpracklen/status/2037657234461618617
If CPAC turnout is any representation of what November is going to look like, Republicans should be in full panic mode.
https://x.com/ClaytonMorris/status/2037590398630310190
Wow.
CPAC chair asks, ‘How many of you would like to see impeachment proceedings against Trump?’
The CPAC crowd applauds.
News from the North: the NDP has their leadership convention this weekend. The voting itself was one member, one vote across the country, but they are having a convention in Winnipeg because where else would you want to be in late March.
I know most of the people on this site, whether Canadian or American, have sympathies for the NDP being a social democratic to socialist outfit. I do support many of the things they stand for at an ideological level, and appreciate when they are the social conscience of the House of Commons. However, the electoral calculus generally means a stronger NDP is at the expense of the Liberal Party, and that in turn leads to a Conservative government. It happened in the 1980s, it happened in the Layton era of 2004-11, and it has happened in Ontario over the last three elections here. I wish there was a way for them to regain their position as a force in federal politics, but in the moment, I do not see that happening.
Hispanic/Latino vote is definitely de-aligned again, this time against the GOP.
https://x.com/MappingFL/status/2037710993367670987
In Florida's special Election for HD51, which saw Democrat Edwin Perez run on a shoe-string budge of under $20,000 - the district still swung 5 points to the left
In the district's Hispanic-heavy east end, the swing was well over 20%!
Compare the swing/race maps below #flapol
Yeah, the FL GOP is losing their supermajority status in the legislature after Nov. (Only one more seat needs to flip and I think they’ll get several more than needed.)
Does anyone have any reliable polling for Jolly and Vindman’s standing with Latino voters?
Don’t consider it independent polling in ME02, more like an internal, but if you have good polls, you release them. If you don’t, you don’t.
https://x.com/JoeBaldacci/status/2029365556009210077
🚨BREAKING🚨
New independent polling shows that among likely Democratic primary voters we have a 22 point lead! When this poll was conducted, we had been in this race for less than 50 days. In a short time, our message of serving your community, looking out for your neighbors, and fighting for everyday Mainers has hit home with people across the district.
Just last week another poll showed us in a statistical dead heat with Paul LePage. I hit the ground running when I entered this race, and I’ll be ready to send him back to Florida for good in November.
Baldacci 36%
Dunlap 14%
Wood 12%
The thought of once again seeing Paul LePage in any elected office is nauseating. While driving in Maine, I would often hear his statements or the interviews with him on NPR. Not once did I hear LePage utter three consecutive sentences without saying something utterly deranged, totally bizarre or completely vile.
Joe Baldacci does have a famous name - his older brother John represented this district from 1995-2003 (and in rural Maine, people have long memories about who represented them). John was also Governor from 2003-2011, and did very well in ME-02 in his elections.
Baldacci is definitely one of the Dems' top candidates who could've run here (along with Troy Jackson).
I’m still shocked the RNC establishment is leaving Cornyn behind and supporting TACO’s fellow adulterer Ken Paxton.
Are they really giving up on this seat? In a blue wave year?
Two choices: they might undoubtedly feel like they are damned if they do (stick with Cornyn) and damned if they don't, either they face the wrath of their leader and his cult, or get rejected by the public at large. The other view is that they still think Texas is the unbreakable rock of their coalition and they can withstand this.
I think that's exactly right.
I suspect it's a refusal to throw good money after bad. Cornyn benefited from a massive spending advantage in the first round and it didn't help him much. Polling shows him consistently down. They don't want to spend $50m-100m propping Cornyn up only for him to lose anyway.
They might see their choices as: (1) Spend $50m, end up with Paxton, (2) Don't spend $50m, end up with Paxton. In which case (2) is the obviously superior choice because it leaves them more money to go elsewhere.
Most polls had Paxton winning the first round and he didn't. Why is everyone so sure Cornyn is DOA?
Runoff hasn’t happened yet. It’s scheduled for 26 May.
I think Skip means all the polls had Paxton leading on the first ballot. Cornyn "winning" was a surprise, but if you ask me, 42% is probably his ceiling.
Nobody is interested in the MT Senate race?!?
There's been a lot of drama and commentary about Seth Bodnar is trying a very energetic campaign as an independent with Tester's support, while the state party still wants to support their likely nominee, state rep Reilly Neill. But if he and she both run, it's really unlikely for either to beat Kurt Alme.
Trojan Independents are the way to go in places like KS, NE, MT, UT, etc.. but its always going to be difficult to get the State Parties to accept them, for a host of obvious reasons, but it is a strategic choice we should try to make. Anything for 60 votes.
I most certainly am interested in that race, which could be consequential.
Jon Tester has spoken very clearly about how the Democratic brand is toxic in Montana and thus a huge obstacle, being a key factor in his 2024 defeat against Tim Sheehy. For this reason, Tester has encouraged Democrats to support the Independent candidate, Seth Bodnar. In light of this, Reilly Neill’s candidacy would be a strategic mistake.
Montana, Nebraska and Utah are three states where we’re better off considering supporting Independent candidates. I’d say Dan Osborn in Nebraska holds some promise.
I agree. Dems should just not run a candidate in the MT Senate race.
Not opposed to the run-an-Independent-who's-not-a-Democrat-but-will-caucus-with-Democrats-if-they-get-elected strategy, but how stupid is the electorate that doesn't see through this? I mean, what's their thinking? "Oh, I can't stand those woke Democrats, so I'm going to vote for a candidate who isn't one, but will give them their support over 90% of the time."
Am I missing some subtlety that the average voter in Generic Red State is seeing in their vote?
You would be shocked by how much power a label has for some people. My dad is extremely intelligent and very progressive on most issues, but refuses to register as a Democrat, even though the (closed) Democratic primary is the general election for virtually all elections where he lives. It's not about the policies for him, because he aligns with Democrats on most everything nowadays, it's that the label means something to him.
What does that have to do with liberals running as independents? It speaks to how even people who agree with Dems don't want to associate with them because of the associations they have with the "Democrat" label. Think of all the people who support things like minimum wage increases, tax increases on the wealthy, clean energy, etc. but routinely vote Republican. It's not just that in many cases, other issues win out, it's that politics has become so tribal that a vote represents who you are and lots of people can't stand to think of themselves as a Democrat. To them, a Democrat isn't a person who supports certain policies, it's a whole bunch of other things that might have nothing to do with policy.
So, you run as an independent, and suddenly there's a whole host of people that are open to listening to you. It's not the die-hard Trump supporters who'll never abandon him, it's the group of people who've been won by Republicans on culture war issues but may not be that conservative. That squishy middle ground is how we win progressive referendums in deep-red states and it's the target audience here. Lastly, it's worth remembering that people love (and I mean love) to think of themselves as independent and not bound by partisanship. Voting for an independent reaffirms that sense of self for those people.
What you write here is so spot-on, and so important! Wish I could give it a dozen likes.
Very well said (and imo completely accurate)
I agree with a lot of this, but if someone supports clean energy and routinely votes Republican, we're never going to reach them, not even with a progressive Independent, because they're voting on other things like race.
Never is a long time. It's true that a majority of white voters has voted Republican for President since 1968, but Obama did win for economic reasons, and some racists did vote for him.
I didn't register as a Democrat for my first 16 years as a voter. I was decline to state from the libertarian far left until I was mid-30's. It's still an uncomfortable fit some days. I finally pulled the trigger 14 years ago so I could vote in ADEM elections. I know a ton of folks who can't stand to wear the same label as some of our coalition leaders but would never vote GOP and are pragmatic enough to vote strategically for Dems.
I'm not currently registered as a Democrat, but independents can vote in the Democratic primary in WV - Republicans just recently barred independents from voting in their primaries.
Interesting article on how MAGA nonsense gets exported overseas by a web of vaguely interconnected grift groups, though considering that Korea is on the bleeding edge of politicized incelism, it may really be the other way around:
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2026/03/27/young-maga-south-korea-00844877
What is the likelihood that Gov. Whitmer endorses in the Michigan Senate race? I know the primary is still months away but I have to imagine she wouldn’t want to sit on the sidelines. I think she is the only person who could decide this race and influence it like Pritzker did with Stratton.
I hope she doesn't endorse Stevens -- although I fear if she did endorse, that's who she'd endorse.
Maybe I'm crazy but I feel like she'd be more likely to endorse McMorrow? Governors don't often have cause to interact with members of Congress, but state legislators they deal with all the time. Assuming they have a good working relationship at least.
This is my thinking as well. She was also a state senator before becoming governor so might feel like she relates more with McMorrow.
I'm thinking McMorrow, especially with her recent momentum
Whitmer will likely endorse whomever she thinks would be better for her. Seems like Stevens occupies the same lane as her, so limited upside there. However, if McMorrow is still polling behind Stevens by a significant amount, Whitmer probably doesn't want to be on the losing side of this race going into 2028.
McMorrow is running even to ahead of Stevens.
270toWin shows Stevens ahead in 3 out of 4 polls.
https://www.270towin.com/2026-senate-polls/michigan
RCP has McMorrow up 0.4%
https://www.realclearpolling.com/elections/senate/2026/michigan
And average of last 6 polls on the NY Times has her up by 0.5%
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/polls/michigan-us-senate-election-polls-2026.html