I don't think it'll matter much in the grand scheme of things. Sununu had the name advantage due to his brother's recent popularity as governor, even though he himself is 20 years out of date. Brown was never particularly relevant and only got the nomination in 2014 because no one else with a chance was willing to risk their career on Shaheen.
Both should be crushed by Pappas this fall regardless. In a neutral year Sununu could have had a fighting chance. Still an underdog but one that had a realistic chance at an upset. In what we expect to be a wave environment? For a wave their senate nominee doesn't matter much; especially since republicans will have Ayotte likely winning reelection comfortably, avoiding a collapse at the top of the ticket.
My point wasn't about Ayotte being guaranteed a win, it was that with her being the likely winner she's going to do well enough regardless that republicans are not going to see a collapse at the top of the ticket. If she was on track to get e.g. 35-40% of the vote, then republicans would have a lot of reason to care about Sununu vs Brown: Sununu might be able to lose respectably enough to avoid a top of the ticket collapse.
That said I'm not getting my hopes up on beating Ayotte. It's absolutely possible, but I think it requires the kind of environment where we're looking at 51-53 senate seats and winning the governorship of more interesting states, like Georgia or Iowa. Which is to say if it happens, it will be one of the less interesting stories of the night.
Most of Stevens' donations came from Massachusetts and California this quarter while the other two got the most from Michigan. Umichvoter made some good informative maps on it.
One TX political observer says that Remnet is the favorite to win a full term in November as well. So yes, Dems flipping one or both houses this year is possible.
Just flipping one side squelches Abbott from pushing more MAGA red meat shit. Flipping both houses makes him a lame duck.
Just looked it up for some context. In 2022 SD9 voted 60-40, R-D. That was with a decade long incumbent but that's a huge shift towards us all the same!
To be fair, special elections do tend to favor the out party more than the midterm.
That's not much silver lining for republicans. A >30 point shift in our favor is not even close to the amount that will be lost shifting into a much higher turnout general election. That senate election this November is going to be very interesting.
Platner comparable to the combined total of Mills and Collins together. Though Mills did announce part way into Q4, she only missed the first two weeks.
I'm not enthusiastic about Platner's issues, but I'm not enthusiastic about Mills' issues either. I'm more and more leaning towards thinking Platner is our better shot for the general election.
Collins will exploit all of Platner’s flaws anyway, so might as well lay them all out on the table in the primary and see what the voters think. I don’t think most people are paying attention yet this far out.
Benefit for us is that the stories already came out. It's hard to get the media to care about a story from a week ago without any new details coming out. Let alone half a year.
The stories likely came out because of Mills' entrance, so she presumably is willing to go on the attack with it. But as you say she lacked the fire to deliver the follow up knock out attacks. Now he gets months to move on from the story. Collins will be able to put a lot of money into trying to bring it up again, but I'm not sure how well that will work if the media is already bored.
Platner can always be primaried in 2032 if he ends up being a walking liability to Democrats.
But given the necessity of needing to regain control of the Senate, as long as Platner ends up winning the general election, better to worry about him more after this. Unless he becomes a liability to himself in the general election.
I see both him and Mills as having enough problems I'm not going to be particularly happy about either.
That said: I've seen too many failed times where people conclude we can primary someone out if they're a problem. When Auchincloss won his initial primary due to progressives splitting the majority of the vote, there were a lot of people thinking we could replace him next cycle. Instead, he has yet to face a challenger in a primary or the general election since winning in 2020.
It takes a lot to unseat an incumbent. Many times difficult incumbents will stay on for cycle after cycle. Even ones that eventually lose like Lipinski take a long time to replace and multiple tries in a primary. Sinema was forced out due to an all-but-certain primary loss, and that's the only example I can think of in recent memory where a "liability" incumbent was ousted easily and quickly. She generated a LOT of bad headlines for herself. If she took things down a few notches and was only as difficult as someone like Tester, she'd probably still be a senator today.
If Platner wins and becomes senator, we should assess that under the scenario of him likely staying senator for a long time, even if he is a problem. That's one of the bigger worries with him. That if he wins and becomes a problem, he stays our problem for many years. Mills' worst problem is her age; which ironically mitigates her other problems (e.g. pro-filibuster) -- she physically cannot be around for more than two terms at most, and realistically would be a one-and-done.
We've had discussion here about Platner being another Fetterman but that's to the extent where I am going here as far as looking at a primary down the road for Platner. Otherwise, I am not really arguing we should think about primary challenges by default just because we want to simply get anyone in to replace incumbent Republicans in the Senate, House, etc. That's not a winning strategy and it's lazy.
That said, the main argument I'm making is that Collins is an entrenched incumbent so on that basis, we really don't have a choice. It's either Mills or Platner unless another Democratic Senate Candidate jumps in the race. At some point, we're going to have to come to terms with the fact that we have to end in the end coalesce around one Democratic Senate Candidate here. What choice to we have?
Besides, Platner came out and campaigned with Democratic gubernatorial candidate Troy Jackson. It's not as if he's being distant from ME Democrats and may very well be a loyal Democrat in the end.
I doubt he's going to be another Fetterman, and I 100% agree that the eyes on the prize focus is beating Collins.
What I'm saying is that if -- emphasis if -- he becomes a problem, I am not encouraged at all with the solution of "we can primary him." For the aforementioned reasons that this is an extremely difficult solution to implement. This applies to any candidate, not just Platner.
"A federal grand jury in October returned a two-count indictment. According to the plea agreement, Roberts admits he knowingly and intentionally made a 'false attestation' that he was a U.S. citizen on the Employment Eligibility Verification form, known as an I-9, that he submitted in Des Moines. Roberts answered: 'Yes, your honor' when asked by the federal judge if that statement on the I-9 was, in fact, false.
That carries a punishment of up to five years in prison and a fine.
Roberts also faces a federal weapons charge, punishable by up to 15 years in prison and a fine. In addition to the one in his vehicle when he was arrested, a second pistol, a rifle and a shotgun were found during a search of Roberts’ home, authorities said."
Do you think if the shoe were on the other foot, a Democrat wouldn't be using photos of the Republican candidate with Roberts?
I don’t think most people would care about it either way? Definitely not people open to changing their minds, unless the photo was taken after all the bad stuff had come out.
I am interested in numerous races, as usual, including some from 2028 and 2030. Here are some specific ones on my mind:
- NJ-11: Who do posters here think is favored? Tom Malinowski? Brendan Gill? Tahesha Way? Analilia Mejia? Someone else?
- MN-Sen: Flanagan is leading in this race's polls. Does this mean she has a good shot, or could Craig potentially gain later?
- MI-Sen: While Abdul El-Sayed is unlikely to win this race, I have a hypothetical to pose -- if he were to somehow win, would this race be shot, or would we still have a possible path to victory?
- MI-SD-35: A special election is to occur here, and it's come out that the GOP is running disguised ratfucking ads intending to give progressive Pamela Pugh the edge in the primary. Does this mean she's weaker in the general? If so, by how much?
- NY state legislative races: With Mamdani's win and his so far pretty good work as mayor, which seats might the DSA or other progressives pull off primary wins in? Are any state reps or state senators particularly vulnerable to such a challenge? And where might they fall short?
- SC-Sen: Annie Andrews, the Dem, raised an eye-popping amount of money in spite of her relative obscurity and the lack of Dem attention here. Is an upset brewing?
- MA-08: Might Pat Roath be able to pull off an upset primary win against Lynch?
- SC-06: Is Jim Clyburn going to actually retire? If so, will he pull a Chuy Garcia-style last-second filing, or retire in time to allow a fair primary to occur?
- LA Mayor: How is Karen Bass doing as far as re-election goes? I'd heard she wasn't popular due to the fires. If she does lose, who might defeat her? Rick Caruso isn't running, as he recently said.
- LA City Controller: How is Kenneth Mejia doing? I know he quit the Democrats recently, and two Dems are running to unseat him from the center. Who is favored?
- 2028 retirement watch: Which Reps or Senators might retire in 2028? Any people being watched closely in particular?
- OR-Sen (2028): While Ron Wyden has filed paperwork for another run, I believe, there's been speculation he may retire. If he does, who are some possible candidates who may be interested here? Someone on Bluesky floated Rep. Maxine Dexter. May she try? If she does, might State Rep. Travis Nelson try for her House seat?
- VT-AL (2030): Sen. Bernie Sanders has said this term will be his last, and Rep. Becca Balint is a shoe-in for the seat he'd leave behind. Who might be interested, then, in Balint's now-open seat?
- MA-Sen (2030): If/when Warren retires, who might run to succeed her? Who'd be her likeliest successor?
- NY-Sen (2030): Who might try to primary Kirsten Gillibrand, given her low popularity with the left? If AOC wins Schumer's seat, who else might be interested?
Why would Dems be leaving a bunch of purple districts for higher office in 2030 when the year is likely to be a tough one for Dems? They’d be unlikely to win higher office in a swing state in such a year.
Yeah I’m seeing that now. Hopefully the DCCC can try and limit the number of swing seat Dems that try to run for higher office for each race. If they are trailing in the primary polls they can show the those and try and convince them not to run for that race.
An example of this is when Tom Suozzi left his House seat open to run against Kathy Hochul for governor in the Dem primary and he was polling at less than 20%. Did anyone at the DCCC say to him “hey you can’t win that race, just look at the polling. Run for re-election to the house where you can actually win”?
This argument about Klobuchar appointing Craig or Flanagan seems pretty dumb to me. Why would a new Governor spend her capital by causing a controversy and appointing the loser of the a divisive primary race. I think she appoints someone uncontroversial like how Newsom appointed Padilla. Either of their careers are over for good if they lose this.
I think McMorrow or Stevens would win easily and El-Sayed would underperform the blue wave baseline but still win easily. He would not be able to hold that seat in another 6 seats which is the biggest problem imo. His comments were about abolishing ICE and defunding the police, the former doesn't work now and the latter will hurt him but he's disavowed it.
Tester's not wrong about there being a potential 1932-style wave but everything has to go wrong for Republicans (more Trump induced chaos) and everything right for Democrats in order for that to happen.
It's hard for me to see a blue wave being that big, and for a full 1932 we'd need to take back the WH, so 2028 would potentially be a better time for that comparison.
One might wonder why Tester isn't running if he's so optimistic about Democratic prospects. Maybe he thinks that now would be a good time to let a new generation of state Democrats come to the fore? In any case, he can't run forever.
I can’t say this enough: If 2026 is a 1932 style wave, especially in state legislatures, Democrats need to start prepping almost immediately after that for the assumption that they win the White House in 2028 and that 2030 is going to be a defensive midterm (and a redistricting table setting midterm). This means immediately working on getting independent redistricting commissions established in swing states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania if we get trifectas there. In both those states if 2030 is a Dem President’s midterm election, our majorities (and control of the governorship in PA since Shapiro will be term limited) are likely going to vanish as they did in 2010. Redistricting commissions in both those states will take the worry of Republicans getting a trifecta for redistricting off the table. I can’t repeat this or shout it from the rooftops enough.
The only way that a 1932 style landslide will happen is if the economy tanks. If Trump keeps messing with the fed and agitating our trade partners, this could happen.
NJ-11 - I presume Malinowski is in the driver's seat but not a lock. Even if only due to name recognition + facing the most attacks. There's a small upside to being everyone's target, in that all the attention goes to that person.
MN-Sen - I'd rather be Flanagan right now, but Craig can still close the gap. Can and will are different things entirely. Flanagan should hope to win the DFL convention nod and generate positive impressions off anti-ICE rhetoric in a way that advantages her over Craig. She wants to stay in a positive spotlight for as long as possible so that even as ICE begins to lower in prominence, she maintains an advantage. Craig wants to avoid being too hurt in the interim and then do a big money-bomb blitz as the primary starts to close, while selling herself as the establishment favorite. Which pathway wins is far from certain right now.
MA-08: Lynch is an overwhelming favorite. But who knows. MA's primaries a long way off and things can change. I'd love to see Lynch replaced with a good dem.
MA-Sen: Assuming Warren retires in 2030, the two people to keep an eye on are Pressley and Auchincloss. Pressley would be Warren's preferred successor; Auchincloss will be the preference of standard dem establishment organizations. Pressley will probably have a meaningful advantage for in state official support; Auchincloss will probably have a meaningful advantage for fundraising. I don't see her going for it -- I think she wants to stay mayor -- but Wu could be a darkhorse candidate if Pressley doesn't run. Healey could also run and throw such a primary into disarray. Not sure if Healey wants to be senator; she wants to be president and has yet to show interest in non-executive roles.
NJ-11: Mallinowski should be favored. I predict Gill and Way will battle for 2nd place and then Mejia will come in a distant 4th, followed by another distance between her and the others.
MN-Sen: I still predict Flanagan to win the primary, but I don't expect her to be favored in every poll. The race should get closer.
MI-Sen: It depends on if Perry Johnson becomes the nominee for governor on the Republican side - I have a feeling he'll be as volatile as someone like Doug Mastriano, who helped John Fetterman win in 2022. Rogers has also already run statewide in a year that Trump won Michigan and Tom Barrett flipped Rogers' and Slotkin's former congressional district but still lost to Slotkin, so there may be some voter fatigue there.
MI-SD-35: Since Joe Biden and even Kamala Harris won this seat and Democrats consistently overperform in special elections, this should be another seat Democrats hold. Will be interesting to see the margins to get an idea of Michigan's statewide (and other congressional and local) races.
SC-Sen: People thought Jaime Harrison could win in 2020. He didn't even make it competitive. There's no reason to believe Andrews has a shot here. It's not that big of a wave, I don't think.
MA-8: Here's hoping Roath gives Lynch a run for his money, but the latter will probably still be in Congress come January.
SC-6: Clyburn seems like the type to pull a Garcia. Probably with his daughter, if anyone. But I recently read something that said he was leaning towards running again.
LA-Mayor: With the current candidates, Beutner probably has the best shot to take down Bass but would probably perform similarly to Caruso in 2022. However, if supervisor Lindsey Horvath challenges Bass from the right, Bass could be more vulnerable.
LA-Controller: I think Zack Sokoloff has a real chance to unseat Mejia. He has raised a lot and has major establishment support.
OR-Sen: I think Wyden will retire, and I think Dexter along with Andrea Salinas and possibly Janelle Bynum will be interested.
VT-AL: I think Welch will retire after one term and Balint will run then. Not sure who will run to succeed Sanders in 2030 or Balint in 2028/30.
MA-Sen: Auchincloss, Pressley, perhaps Wu. Would say Auchincloss has the best shot but I wouldn't count Pressley out either.
NY-Sen: Maybe an NYC progressive (there are plenty).
2028: Senate: Welch (re: VT-AL), Blumenthal, Schumer, Fetterman, Johnson (iffy on him), Grassley, Boozman, Kennedy, Moran, Crapo, Wyden, Murkowski (if she doesn't run for governor this year, which it's likely she won't)
2028 House: Balint to run for Welch's seat (re: VT-AL), Neal, Larson and/or DeLauro, Hayes (to run for Blumenthal's seat), Goldman (if he makes it out of this year) and/or Torres and Ryan (if Schumer retires), Ocasio-Cortez (to either run against or succeed Schumer), Tonko, Norcross, Pallone (gives him 40 years pretty much even), Boyle and/or Dean and Deluzio (if Fetterman retires), Kelly (PA), Mfume, Scott (VA), Beyer, Foxx (really old), Clyburn (if not this year), Bishop, McCormick (to run against Warnock), Allen, Scott (GA) (if not this year), Rutherford, Webster (if not this year), Steube (seems like an early retirement kind of guy), Frankel, Wilson, Thompson, Fleischmann, Rogers (KY) (he might try for 50 years but he's like 88), Beatty (think she has some health issues already), Latta, Bergman, Baird (if not this year), Steil (if Johnson retires), Moore (WI), McCollum, one of the Iowa reps elected this year (to run for Grassley's seat), Graves, anyone from Arkansas (all somewhat longtime at this point), Self, Weber, Williams, Cloud, Carter, Babin, Lucas, Cole, Mann and/or Schmidt (to run for Moran's seat), Estes, DeGette, Simpson, Larsen, Dexter and/or Salinas (to run for Wyden's seat), Titus (if not this year), Thompson (CA), Garamendi, DeSaulnier, Lofgren (if not this year, and Robert Rivas will almost certainly be her successor), Sherman, Correa, one of the San Diego people other than Jacobs, Begich (to succeed Murkowski)
Potential wave: I don't think it'll be as big as 1932, but I think it'll be bigger than 2018.
What makes you think Auchincloss has the best shot in the state that has repeatedly elected progressives like Markey and Warren? He isn't very well known out of centrist circles as well.
I don't think he'd be the favorite, but I do think he'd be a real danger and we'd be wise to take a potential candidacy from him seriously so we can ensure a progressive does win.
He will almost certainly have a meaningful financial advantage and will be the favorite of DC based establishment groups. He's exactly the type of candidate that Schumer and the DSCC would put a thumb on the scale for. Even if Schumer is (as I hope!) out of office by 2030, he will still have influence and chances are the DSCC will be led by someone with a similar candidate preference.
I don't know. Maybe not in Massachusetts. But I think people like Jack Schlossberg (doesn't matter what we think of him) have a shot in national politics.
I am not so sure about an upset but a closer-than-expected margin of a win by Lindsay Graham is possible.
Past Democratic Senate Candidates haven't been able to get beyond 10% againsty Graham or even Tim Scott. Jaime Harrison got 44.2% against Graham back in 2020 although that still suggests there's room for improvement for Democrats in SC.
Malinowski probably wins, due to having appeal to both progressive and moderate voters, and high name recognition.
Mejia probably comes second, she seems pretty popular among progressives, but the Morris and western Essex portions aren't going to net her many votes.
Gill and Way are hard to predict, because they're both running as the moderate establishment candidates, and are probably cannibalizing support for each other. Gill's base is probably western Essex and Way has no base and is completely reliant on advertising. While both have raised a lot, most of Way's funding comes from outside the state and her in-state numbers are unimpressive, and Gill doesn't seem to have any small donor support to speak of. Way's sheer number of ads and slightly better small donor numbers mean she's probably likely to get 3rd and Gill 4th, but she could bomb Sabina Matos style. (useful funding numbers: (https://www.somaaction.org/voter-guide)
Beecher, Bartlett, and Grayzel will all probably finish somewhere between 5-7th, they are all running moderate campaigns of slightly different flavors (military, Passaic, and Jewish interests respectively) and won't win, but will siphon enough votes from Gill and Way to keep them from coming particularly close to winning
Croft's campaign is noteworthy for being mostly out-of-state donations that still don't amount to much, Cauvin hasn't gained traction in the resistance libs circles as far as I can tell, Strickland hasn't even put out fundraising numbers, and Williams will get 11th.
If that Pew polling is to be believed, I’m curious to know more about some of our first-tier reach seats. Not Tossup, maybe not even Lean R - what Likely R tier seats look juicy?
Might AK-AL count as a plausible reach likely-R seat? With Peltola running statewide for senate, we'll have our best possible candidate at the top of the ticket in the highest profile race in the state. The governor's office is likely to be modestly competitive too, where we have a (good) Begich running to give us a credible candidate.
I don't remember our candidate quality for the AL house seat, but if we had a credible candidate I think it would pass as a viable Likely-R seat to watch.
Well, the only year we won was when he wasn't on the ballot. And then we came close again with an incumbent, falling just short.
Alaska is a state that has all the markings of being more competitive than it has been, but is hard to work on turning around due to its distance from the continental US + unique characteristics. It's why with the right candidate of Peltola that the senate seat is competitive. Lacking that right candidate I think Likely-R in a wave is appropriate for the house seat.
Back in 2000, Alaska was as red as Wyoming and it is now on the verge of being a light pink state. It has already moved a great deal to the left and it should continue to get bluer as the Anchorage area grows and gets bluer.
I'm looking at Sabato's Crystal Ball for potential upset flips this year in the Likely R category. Apart from FL, TX, and IA (which are on the radar)-- the only other one is NE. They have SC in the Safe R category, that's the only one that I think could flip if everything goes right.
If Jon Tester reconsidered him pushing for an independent candidate, I think he could oust Daines and get his MT-Sen seat back.
Sabato is washed up nowadays. He totally bought into the permanent Republican majority caused by progressivism bullshit and spewed garbage for more than a year.
I don’t really follow the major handicappers (they tend to have terminal “Beltway Brain,” and online hobbyists are often more insightful). Walter’s “analysis” in particular is typically along the lines of “Democrats just won a Trump+17 district: Here’s why that should deeply worry Democrats.”
Just two weeks? I’m sure Trump and Noem are really going to scramble to push their “immigration enforcement” agenda to be finished in two weeks before the funding runs out. /s
1. The Texas state senate special tomorrow should be interesting. I’m not expecting an upset win here, but it might be a good test to see whether those ugly approvals for Trump in Texas are accurate.
2. The Michigan state senate special primary next week, followed by NJ-11 on Thursday. If I had to pick my favored candidates, I guess Chedrick Greene and Tahesha Way, but I don’t feel strongly about either primary.
3. March 3rd is the next big primary on the horizon. Hoping Talarico seals the deal in the first round and Paxton-Cornyn go to a runoff.
4. WISC on April 7th. It seems oddly quiet on that front. The past couple races seemed to really heat up after the New Years. I hope this doesn’t turn into a snoozer that allows Lazar to sneak through like Brian Hagedorn did in 2019. I think Taylor easily wins it in the end, though. Hoping she exceeds Crawford’s and Protasiewicz’s margins.
I think it’s right to raise the alarm early about the race, though I don’t think we’ll lose in the end, or that it’ll be close. Fortunately, the party coalitions have shifted a lot since even 2019 such that there’s no way a Republican can get that kind of margin in Waukesha or Ozaukee counties anymore. Many of those Hagedorn suburban voters are now high-propensity Democrats. But some national efforts and a targeted robocall from Obama might go a long way here.
Counterpoints on Wikler and the fundraising disparities: I just don’t think party chairs are that impactful anymore. Wikler to me seemed to be more the beneficiary of wins from our new high-turnout coalition than anything special about himself. I’d say the same thing about Anderson Clayton here in North Carolina. She’s fine, but we didn’t hold up well downballot in 2024 because of her. We have Mark Robinson to thank for that. Second, incumbent party majorities will typically be able to raise much more just by being the ones currently in power. I’m not surprised Assembly Republicans outraised Democrats by a lot. It’d be a surprise if they did not. The NRSC and NRCC are outraising our committees by a lot due to this same phenomenon.
Nothing uniquely good happened in Wisconsin in bad national years for the party that didn’t also happen in other swing states during the Trump era. Of “bad” years for us, we only have 2024 and debatably 2022 to compare. Swing state Democrats held up very well across the board in 2022, regardless of the perceived state party effectiveness. I chalk that up to our candidates’ superior quality and the typically atrocious opponents Republicans usually put up. If anything, Wisconsin was one of the biggest heartburns of the swing states in 2022 with Ron Johnson’s win.
2024 had the same thing. Tammy Baldwin’s win while Trump won the state was not unique. Three other Senate Democrats did so in Arizona, Michigan and Nevada. Democrats also won six statewide races in North Carolina. I think this is at least 90% due to the strength of our own candidates and the Republicans’ own weaknesses in choosing candidates.
I don’t think Wisconsin is a Lean D state in presidential elections. It might be in off-year elections and midterms nowadays, though. You can argue this is the case because of the new party coalitions where Trump voters don’t bother to vote when he’s not on the ballot.
This is not to say that party chairs aren’t relevant. They are. But outside of the potential sole exception of Allison Riggs’ race, I doubt it was determinative. Maybe that’s how I should have worded it initially. Party chairs will matter at the margins in recount-eligible races like that. They won’t swing a state ten points anymore like Kentucky Democrats used to do.
"They are. But outside of the potential sole exception of Allison Riggs’ race, I doubt it was determinative."
Anderson Clayton has always been about down ballot as well top-of-the-ticket races. The fact that she rallied enough voters to keep the AG, flip the LG and superintendent seats and lead a volunteer effort to cure provisional ballots that put Justice Allison Riggs over the top showed that good leadership matters.
The fact that NC Democrats won the SCONC seat fight (decided by a Trump appointed judge) pissed off NC Rs, who promptly shortened the cure period from 10 to 3 days and stole control of our state board of elections from the governor.
NC Republicans fear Anderson Clayton. And what they did last year will blow up on them this year. If Justice Anita Earls wins by a slim margin in Nov and maintains it after the 3 day ballot cure period -- they sabotaged themselves.
Why is Ben Wikler stepping down in Wisconsin? This state is absolutely crucial to Democrats – and it has finally been moving in the right direction, much of it thanks to Wikler’s immense efforts.
(I was really hoping he’d be the new DNC Chair, but no such luck.)
I don't think Taylor will win by the kind of blowout margins Protasiewicz and Crawford did, but WI Dems are still fired up. If Lazar keeps the seat Bradley is leaving, it's a black eye for Wikler's successor.
I wonder what the campaign spend for the WISC race will be this year.
Some of these numbers for Republicans (both of the Collins, Brown and Hunt in particular) are quite abysmal for them.
Kind of crazy how close all of the Michigan numbers are, across four different candidates.
Scott Brown has a blue box here but he is definitely a republican. Fittingly pathetic that he can't even raise half a million in a quarter.
Thoughts on the sununu endorsement?
I don't think it'll matter much in the grand scheme of things. Sununu had the name advantage due to his brother's recent popularity as governor, even though he himself is 20 years out of date. Brown was never particularly relevant and only got the nomination in 2014 because no one else with a chance was willing to risk their career on Shaheen.
Both should be crushed by Pappas this fall regardless. In a neutral year Sununu could have had a fighting chance. Still an underdog but one that had a realistic chance at an upset. In what we expect to be a wave environment? For a wave their senate nominee doesn't matter much; especially since republicans will have Ayotte likely winning reelection comfortably, avoiding a collapse at the top of the ticket.
My point wasn't about Ayotte being guaranteed a win, it was that with her being the likely winner she's going to do well enough regardless that republicans are not going to see a collapse at the top of the ticket. If she was on track to get e.g. 35-40% of the vote, then republicans would have a lot of reason to care about Sununu vs Brown: Sununu might be able to lose respectably enough to avoid a top of the ticket collapse.
That said I'm not getting my hopes up on beating Ayotte. It's absolutely possible, but I think it requires the kind of environment where we're looking at 51-53 senate seats and winning the governorship of more interesting states, like Georgia or Iowa. Which is to say if it happens, it will be one of the less interesting stories of the night.
Most of Stevens' donations came from Massachusetts and California this quarter while the other two got the most from Michigan. Umichvoter made some good informative maps on it.
I see that in Iowa, Dem candidates raised same as Hinson. Good that we are competitive but our nominee is going to be way behind after the primary.
Waiting to see the COH numbers across the board.
I think our nominee’s fundraising will pop off after the primary. Only four months!
Mind you this is the COH, not what they took in.
One TX political observer says that Remnet is the favorite to win a full term in November as well. So yes, Dems flipping one or both houses this year is possible.
Just flipping one side squelches Abbott from pushing more MAGA red meat shit. Flipping both houses makes him a lame duck.
Why was she a horrible candidate? And even if she were, that hasn’t prevented Republicans in Texas from winning before.
Tell me more about Wambsganss. Is he tied to some mismanagement or fraud?
Expected Rehmet to win, but not by this much!
She’s hitting the copium hard. The acceleration of TX suburban voters leaving the GOP has begun.
Holyyyyyyy crap
Just looked it up for some context. In 2022 SD9 voted 60-40, R-D. That was with a decade long incumbent but that's a huge shift towards us all the same!
Isn't it more like 1981 when State Senator Bill Meier switched to Republican?
Wish they'd just call
Cue TX Republicans hitting the “it’s a special election” copium. You guys are gradually getting the voter backlash you’ve deserved for decades.
To be fair, special elections do tend to favor the out party more than the midterm.
That's not much silver lining for republicans. A >30 point shift in our favor is not even close to the amount that will be lost shifting into a much higher turnout general election. That senate election this November is going to be very interesting.
Peeling away TX just as the GOP has finally moved FL mostly out of reach would be so sweet
Ah man. Shit’s about to get real now!
Precinct totals too - he won a lot of Trump precincts, especially in rural areas
I’m surprised there’s much rural area left in Tarrant County
There's a precinct north of Fort Worth that went 65-35 Trump and 57-43 Rehmet. Another that went 55-43 Trump and also 55-43 Rehmet
We got 2% more :{
Rehmet increased his lead by 0.2%
Ugh
If Rehmet's still leading by midnight, the race is over, right? Isn't that how they want these things decided?
Depends what the margin is at that point.
52%.
I'm sure Collins will get a lot of money from national Republicans
Because?
Platner comparable to the combined total of Mills and Collins together. Though Mills did announce part way into Q4, she only missed the first two weeks.
I'm not enthusiastic about Platner's issues, but I'm not enthusiastic about Mills' issues either. I'm more and more leaning towards thinking Platner is our better shot for the general election.
Collins will exploit all of Platner’s flaws anyway, so might as well lay them all out on the table in the primary and see what the voters think. I don’t think most people are paying attention yet this far out.
Benefit for us is that the stories already came out. It's hard to get the media to care about a story from a week ago without any new details coming out. Let alone half a year.
The stories likely came out because of Mills' entrance, so she presumably is willing to go on the attack with it. But as you say she lacked the fire to deliver the follow up knock out attacks. Now he gets months to move on from the story. Collins will be able to put a lot of money into trying to bring it up again, but I'm not sure how well that will work if the media is already bored.
I agree, that's why I said "But as you say" and then went on to describe her not nuking him !
Platner can always be primaried in 2032 if he ends up being a walking liability to Democrats.
But given the necessity of needing to regain control of the Senate, as long as Platner ends up winning the general election, better to worry about him more after this. Unless he becomes a liability to himself in the general election.
I see both him and Mills as having enough problems I'm not going to be particularly happy about either.
That said: I've seen too many failed times where people conclude we can primary someone out if they're a problem. When Auchincloss won his initial primary due to progressives splitting the majority of the vote, there were a lot of people thinking we could replace him next cycle. Instead, he has yet to face a challenger in a primary or the general election since winning in 2020.
It takes a lot to unseat an incumbent. Many times difficult incumbents will stay on for cycle after cycle. Even ones that eventually lose like Lipinski take a long time to replace and multiple tries in a primary. Sinema was forced out due to an all-but-certain primary loss, and that's the only example I can think of in recent memory where a "liability" incumbent was ousted easily and quickly. She generated a LOT of bad headlines for herself. If she took things down a few notches and was only as difficult as someone like Tester, she'd probably still be a senator today.
If Platner wins and becomes senator, we should assess that under the scenario of him likely staying senator for a long time, even if he is a problem. That's one of the bigger worries with him. That if he wins and becomes a problem, he stays our problem for many years. Mills' worst problem is her age; which ironically mitigates her other problems (e.g. pro-filibuster) -- she physically cannot be around for more than two terms at most, and realistically would be a one-and-done.
We've had discussion here about Platner being another Fetterman but that's to the extent where I am going here as far as looking at a primary down the road for Platner. Otherwise, I am not really arguing we should think about primary challenges by default just because we want to simply get anyone in to replace incumbent Republicans in the Senate, House, etc. That's not a winning strategy and it's lazy.
That said, the main argument I'm making is that Collins is an entrenched incumbent so on that basis, we really don't have a choice. It's either Mills or Platner unless another Democratic Senate Candidate jumps in the race. At some point, we're going to have to come to terms with the fact that we have to end in the end coalesce around one Democratic Senate Candidate here. What choice to we have?
Besides, Platner came out and campaigned with Democratic gubernatorial candidate Troy Jackson. It's not as if he's being distant from ME Democrats and may very well be a loyal Democrat in the end.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_Platner#/media/File:Jackson_and_Platner_at_Hearts_of_Pine.jpg
I doubt he's going to be another Fetterman, and I 100% agree that the eyes on the prize focus is beating Collins.
What I'm saying is that if -- emphasis if -- he becomes a problem, I am not encouraged at all with the solution of "we can primary him." For the aforementioned reasons that this is an extremely difficult solution to implement. This applies to any candidate, not just Platner.
You posted it here as a comment.
To remind everyone who Ian Roberts is:
https://apnews.com/article/ian-roberts-ice-superintendent-iowa-schools-8bc3cc1a8605814b4d650071d71e967e
"A federal grand jury in October returned a two-count indictment. According to the plea agreement, Roberts admits he knowingly and intentionally made a 'false attestation' that he was a U.S. citizen on the Employment Eligibility Verification form, known as an I-9, that he submitted in Des Moines. Roberts answered: 'Yes, your honor' when asked by the federal judge if that statement on the I-9 was, in fact, false.
That carries a punishment of up to five years in prison and a fine.
Roberts also faces a federal weapons charge, punishable by up to 15 years in prison and a fine. In addition to the one in his vehicle when he was arrested, a second pistol, a rifle and a shotgun were found during a search of Roberts’ home, authorities said."
Do you think if the shoe were on the other foot, a Democrat wouldn't be using photos of the Republican candidate with Roberts?
I don’t think most people would care about it either way? Definitely not people open to changing their minds, unless the photo was taken after all the bad stuff had come out.
I agree with that, if voters are being logical, though voters are far from always logical.
Can’t read the name Wamsgans without thinking of Tom on Succession, which I thought just made it up to sound silly and stereotypically Midwestern.
Definitely that show’s co-best character. “Greg… are you asking for permission to blackmail me? Ok. I accept your blackmail.”
This Wambsgans also happens to be a media executive like Tom.
I see that name and think of and old time baseball player named Bill Wambsganss who made an unassisted triple play in the 1920 Worlds Series.
That is not a common family name...
I am interested in numerous races, as usual, including some from 2028 and 2030. Here are some specific ones on my mind:
- NJ-11: Who do posters here think is favored? Tom Malinowski? Brendan Gill? Tahesha Way? Analilia Mejia? Someone else?
- MN-Sen: Flanagan is leading in this race's polls. Does this mean she has a good shot, or could Craig potentially gain later?
- MI-Sen: While Abdul El-Sayed is unlikely to win this race, I have a hypothetical to pose -- if he were to somehow win, would this race be shot, or would we still have a possible path to victory?
- MI-SD-35: A special election is to occur here, and it's come out that the GOP is running disguised ratfucking ads intending to give progressive Pamela Pugh the edge in the primary. Does this mean she's weaker in the general? If so, by how much?
- NY state legislative races: With Mamdani's win and his so far pretty good work as mayor, which seats might the DSA or other progressives pull off primary wins in? Are any state reps or state senators particularly vulnerable to such a challenge? And where might they fall short?
- SC-Sen: Annie Andrews, the Dem, raised an eye-popping amount of money in spite of her relative obscurity and the lack of Dem attention here. Is an upset brewing?
- MA-08: Might Pat Roath be able to pull off an upset primary win against Lynch?
- SC-06: Is Jim Clyburn going to actually retire? If so, will he pull a Chuy Garcia-style last-second filing, or retire in time to allow a fair primary to occur?
- LA Mayor: How is Karen Bass doing as far as re-election goes? I'd heard she wasn't popular due to the fires. If she does lose, who might defeat her? Rick Caruso isn't running, as he recently said.
- LA City Controller: How is Kenneth Mejia doing? I know he quit the Democrats recently, and two Dems are running to unseat him from the center. Who is favored?
- 2028 retirement watch: Which Reps or Senators might retire in 2028? Any people being watched closely in particular?
- OR-Sen (2028): While Ron Wyden has filed paperwork for another run, I believe, there's been speculation he may retire. If he does, who are some possible candidates who may be interested here? Someone on Bluesky floated Rep. Maxine Dexter. May she try? If she does, might State Rep. Travis Nelson try for her House seat?
- VT-AL (2030): Sen. Bernie Sanders has said this term will be his last, and Rep. Becca Balint is a shoe-in for the seat he'd leave behind. Who might be interested, then, in Balint's now-open seat?
- MA-Sen (2030): If/when Warren retires, who might run to succeed her? Who'd be her likeliest successor?
- NY-Sen (2030): Who might try to primary Kirsten Gillibrand, given her low popularity with the left? If AOC wins Schumer's seat, who else might be interested?
One more question: in a recent article (https://www.semafor.com/article/01/28/2026/tester-on-democrats-chances-horrible-message-but-a-winning-hand), former Sen. Jon Tester predicted a possible 1932-style wave for Dems. Is he overly optimistic, or might he be seeing something others aren't? Might he be hearing things on the ground in ruby-red Montana that make him think such a landslide is possible?
Why would Dems be leaving a bunch of purple districts for higher office in 2030 when the year is likely to be a tough one for Dems? They’d be unlikely to win higher office in a swing state in such a year.
Yeah I’m seeing that now. Hopefully the DCCC can try and limit the number of swing seat Dems that try to run for higher office for each race. If they are trailing in the primary polls they can show the those and try and convince them not to run for that race.
An example of this is when Tom Suozzi left his House seat open to run against Kathy Hochul for governor in the Dem primary and he was polling at less than 20%. Did anyone at the DCCC say to him “hey you can’t win that race, just look at the polling. Run for re-election to the house where you can actually win”?
Yes, he was discouraged from running. But it didn't work.
This argument about Klobuchar appointing Craig or Flanagan seems pretty dumb to me. Why would a new Governor spend her capital by causing a controversy and appointing the loser of the a divisive primary race. I think she appoints someone uncontroversial like how Newsom appointed Padilla. Either of their careers are over for good if they lose this.
I think McMorrow or Stevens would win easily and El-Sayed would underperform the blue wave baseline but still win easily. He would not be able to hold that seat in another 6 seats which is the biggest problem imo. His comments were about abolishing ICE and defunding the police, the former doesn't work now and the latter will hurt him but he's disavowed it.
Tester's not wrong about there being a potential 1932-style wave but everything has to go wrong for Republicans (more Trump induced chaos) and everything right for Democrats in order for that to happen.
It's hard for me to see a blue wave being that big, and for a full 1932 we'd need to take back the WH, so 2028 would potentially be a better time for that comparison.
One might wonder why Tester isn't running if he's so optimistic about Democratic prospects. Maybe he thinks that now would be a good time to let a new generation of state Democrats come to the fore? In any case, he can't run forever.
I can’t say this enough: If 2026 is a 1932 style wave, especially in state legislatures, Democrats need to start prepping almost immediately after that for the assumption that they win the White House in 2028 and that 2030 is going to be a defensive midterm (and a redistricting table setting midterm). This means immediately working on getting independent redistricting commissions established in swing states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania if we get trifectas there. In both those states if 2030 is a Dem President’s midterm election, our majorities (and control of the governorship in PA since Shapiro will be term limited) are likely going to vanish as they did in 2010. Redistricting commissions in both those states will take the worry of Republicans getting a trifecta for redistricting off the table. I can’t repeat this or shout it from the rooftops enough.
The only way that a 1932 style landslide will happen is if the economy tanks. If Trump keeps messing with the fed and agitating our trade partners, this could happen.
NJ-11 - I presume Malinowski is in the driver's seat but not a lock. Even if only due to name recognition + facing the most attacks. There's a small upside to being everyone's target, in that all the attention goes to that person.
MN-Sen - I'd rather be Flanagan right now, but Craig can still close the gap. Can and will are different things entirely. Flanagan should hope to win the DFL convention nod and generate positive impressions off anti-ICE rhetoric in a way that advantages her over Craig. She wants to stay in a positive spotlight for as long as possible so that even as ICE begins to lower in prominence, she maintains an advantage. Craig wants to avoid being too hurt in the interim and then do a big money-bomb blitz as the primary starts to close, while selling herself as the establishment favorite. Which pathway wins is far from certain right now.
MA-08: Lynch is an overwhelming favorite. But who knows. MA's primaries a long way off and things can change. I'd love to see Lynch replaced with a good dem.
MA-Sen: Assuming Warren retires in 2030, the two people to keep an eye on are Pressley and Auchincloss. Pressley would be Warren's preferred successor; Auchincloss will be the preference of standard dem establishment organizations. Pressley will probably have a meaningful advantage for in state official support; Auchincloss will probably have a meaningful advantage for fundraising. I don't see her going for it -- I think she wants to stay mayor -- but Wu could be a darkhorse candidate if Pressley doesn't run. Healey could also run and throw such a primary into disarray. Not sure if Healey wants to be senator; she wants to be president and has yet to show interest in non-executive roles.
NJ-11: Mallinowski should be favored. I predict Gill and Way will battle for 2nd place and then Mejia will come in a distant 4th, followed by another distance between her and the others.
MN-Sen: I still predict Flanagan to win the primary, but I don't expect her to be favored in every poll. The race should get closer.
MI-Sen: It depends on if Perry Johnson becomes the nominee for governor on the Republican side - I have a feeling he'll be as volatile as someone like Doug Mastriano, who helped John Fetterman win in 2022. Rogers has also already run statewide in a year that Trump won Michigan and Tom Barrett flipped Rogers' and Slotkin's former congressional district but still lost to Slotkin, so there may be some voter fatigue there.
MI-SD-35: Since Joe Biden and even Kamala Harris won this seat and Democrats consistently overperform in special elections, this should be another seat Democrats hold. Will be interesting to see the margins to get an idea of Michigan's statewide (and other congressional and local) races.
SC-Sen: People thought Jaime Harrison could win in 2020. He didn't even make it competitive. There's no reason to believe Andrews has a shot here. It's not that big of a wave, I don't think.
MA-8: Here's hoping Roath gives Lynch a run for his money, but the latter will probably still be in Congress come January.
SC-6: Clyburn seems like the type to pull a Garcia. Probably with his daughter, if anyone. But I recently read something that said he was leaning towards running again.
LA-Mayor: With the current candidates, Beutner probably has the best shot to take down Bass but would probably perform similarly to Caruso in 2022. However, if supervisor Lindsey Horvath challenges Bass from the right, Bass could be more vulnerable.
LA-Controller: I think Zack Sokoloff has a real chance to unseat Mejia. He has raised a lot and has major establishment support.
OR-Sen: I think Wyden will retire, and I think Dexter along with Andrea Salinas and possibly Janelle Bynum will be interested.
VT-AL: I think Welch will retire after one term and Balint will run then. Not sure who will run to succeed Sanders in 2030 or Balint in 2028/30.
MA-Sen: Auchincloss, Pressley, perhaps Wu. Would say Auchincloss has the best shot but I wouldn't count Pressley out either.
NY-Sen: Maybe an NYC progressive (there are plenty).
2028: Senate: Welch (re: VT-AL), Blumenthal, Schumer, Fetterman, Johnson (iffy on him), Grassley, Boozman, Kennedy, Moran, Crapo, Wyden, Murkowski (if she doesn't run for governor this year, which it's likely she won't)
2028 House: Balint to run for Welch's seat (re: VT-AL), Neal, Larson and/or DeLauro, Hayes (to run for Blumenthal's seat), Goldman (if he makes it out of this year) and/or Torres and Ryan (if Schumer retires), Ocasio-Cortez (to either run against or succeed Schumer), Tonko, Norcross, Pallone (gives him 40 years pretty much even), Boyle and/or Dean and Deluzio (if Fetterman retires), Kelly (PA), Mfume, Scott (VA), Beyer, Foxx (really old), Clyburn (if not this year), Bishop, McCormick (to run against Warnock), Allen, Scott (GA) (if not this year), Rutherford, Webster (if not this year), Steube (seems like an early retirement kind of guy), Frankel, Wilson, Thompson, Fleischmann, Rogers (KY) (he might try for 50 years but he's like 88), Beatty (think she has some health issues already), Latta, Bergman, Baird (if not this year), Steil (if Johnson retires), Moore (WI), McCollum, one of the Iowa reps elected this year (to run for Grassley's seat), Graves, anyone from Arkansas (all somewhat longtime at this point), Self, Weber, Williams, Cloud, Carter, Babin, Lucas, Cole, Mann and/or Schmidt (to run for Moran's seat), Estes, DeGette, Simpson, Larsen, Dexter and/or Salinas (to run for Wyden's seat), Titus (if not this year), Thompson (CA), Garamendi, DeSaulnier, Lofgren (if not this year, and Robert Rivas will almost certainly be her successor), Sherman, Correa, one of the San Diego people other than Jacobs, Begich (to succeed Murkowski)
Potential wave: I don't think it'll be as big as 1932, but I think it'll be bigger than 2018.
What makes you think Auchincloss has the best shot in the state that has repeatedly elected progressives like Markey and Warren? He isn't very well known out of centrist circles as well.
I don't think he'd be the favorite, but I do think he'd be a real danger and we'd be wise to take a potential candidacy from him seriously so we can ensure a progressive does win.
He will almost certainly have a meaningful financial advantage and will be the favorite of DC based establishment groups. He's exactly the type of candidate that Schumer and the DSCC would put a thumb on the scale for. Even if Schumer is (as I hope!) out of office by 2030, he will still have influence and chances are the DSCC will be led by someone with a similar candidate preference.
I doubt an out-of-office Schumer would have much influence on Senate selection.
He's young and ambitious and would immediately have establishment support, not to mention the nepotism.
Markey ended the Kennedy dynasty with the nepo baby charge.
I don't know. Maybe not in Massachusetts. But I think people like Jack Schlossberg (doesn't matter what we think of him) have a shot in national politics.
SC-SEN:
I am not so sure about an upset but a closer-than-expected margin of a win by Lindsay Graham is possible.
Past Democratic Senate Candidates haven't been able to get beyond 10% againsty Graham or even Tim Scott. Jaime Harrison got 44.2% against Graham back in 2020 although that still suggests there's room for improvement for Democrats in SC.
https://ballotpedia.org/Jaime_R._Harrison
My predictions for NJ-11:
Malinowski probably wins, due to having appeal to both progressive and moderate voters, and high name recognition.
Mejia probably comes second, she seems pretty popular among progressives, but the Morris and western Essex portions aren't going to net her many votes.
Gill and Way are hard to predict, because they're both running as the moderate establishment candidates, and are probably cannibalizing support for each other. Gill's base is probably western Essex and Way has no base and is completely reliant on advertising. While both have raised a lot, most of Way's funding comes from outside the state and her in-state numbers are unimpressive, and Gill doesn't seem to have any small donor support to speak of. Way's sheer number of ads and slightly better small donor numbers mean she's probably likely to get 3rd and Gill 4th, but she could bomb Sabina Matos style. (useful funding numbers: (https://www.somaaction.org/voter-guide)
Beecher, Bartlett, and Grayzel will all probably finish somewhere between 5-7th, they are all running moderate campaigns of slightly different flavors (military, Passaic, and Jewish interests respectively) and won't win, but will siphon enough votes from Gill and Way to keep them from coming particularly close to winning
Croft's campaign is noteworthy for being mostly out-of-state donations that still don't amount to much, Cauvin hasn't gained traction in the resistance libs circles as far as I can tell, Strickland hasn't even put out fundraising numbers, and Williams will get 11th.
If that Pew polling is to be believed, I’m curious to know more about some of our first-tier reach seats. Not Tossup, maybe not even Lean R - what Likely R tier seats look juicy?
Agreed with all except Florida 28 and Texas 23. Would put them in reach. And NY-11 could be competitive with the new map.
Might AK-AL count as a plausible reach likely-R seat? With Peltola running statewide for senate, we'll have our best possible candidate at the top of the ticket in the highest profile race in the state. The governor's office is likely to be modestly competitive too, where we have a (good) Begich running to give us a credible candidate.
I don't remember our candidate quality for the AL house seat, but if we had a credible candidate I think it would pass as a viable Likely-R seat to watch.
I’d count it as a reach, yes. It’d be great if we could get Kawasaki or Wieleckowski in there
The Trump administration’s decision to deny disaster aid to Alaska that was promised is on brand, but doesn’t seem like good politics with competitive races https://alaskabeacon.com/2026/01/30/trump-administration-denies-full-disaster-funding-for-western-alaska-storms-state-files-appeal/
Was AK-AL often close only due to Don Young being a rather weak incumbent though?
Well, the only year we won was when he wasn't on the ballot. And then we came close again with an incumbent, falling just short.
Alaska is a state that has all the markings of being more competitive than it has been, but is hard to work on turning around due to its distance from the continental US + unique characteristics. It's why with the right candidate of Peltola that the senate seat is competitive. Lacking that right candidate I think Likely-R in a wave is appropriate for the house seat.
Back in 2000, Alaska was as red as Wyoming and it is now on the verge of being a light pink state. It has already moved a great deal to the left and it should continue to get bluer as the Anchorage area grows and gets bluer.
I'm looking at Sabato's Crystal Ball for potential upset flips this year in the Likely R category. Apart from FL, TX, and IA (which are on the radar)-- the only other one is NE. They have SC in the Safe R category, that's the only one that I think could flip if everything goes right.
If Jon Tester reconsidered him pushing for an independent candidate, I think he could oust Daines and get his MT-Sen seat back.
I doubt that last one, and Tester clearly disagrees.
Sabato is washed up nowadays. He totally bought into the permanent Republican majority caused by progressivism bullshit and spewed garbage for more than a year.
Are you sure that's not Cook/Amy Walter?
Maybe?
I don’t really follow the major handicappers (they tend to have terminal “Beltway Brain,” and online hobbyists are often more insightful). Walter’s “analysis” in particular is typically along the lines of “Democrats just won a Trump+17 district: Here’s why that should deeply worry Democrats.”
CO-05.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/senate-passes-bill-resolve-shutdown-clash-punting-dhs-two-weeks-rcna256540
Senate passes funding bill 71-29. It strips funding from DHS for now but funds other departments.
Just two weeks? I’m sure Trump and Noem are really going to scramble to push their “immigration enforcement” agenda to be finished in two weeks before the funding runs out. /s
Races I’m interested in on the horizon:
1. The Texas state senate special tomorrow should be interesting. I’m not expecting an upset win here, but it might be a good test to see whether those ugly approvals for Trump in Texas are accurate.
2. The Michigan state senate special primary next week, followed by NJ-11 on Thursday. If I had to pick my favored candidates, I guess Chedrick Greene and Tahesha Way, but I don’t feel strongly about either primary.
3. March 3rd is the next big primary on the horizon. Hoping Talarico seals the deal in the first round and Paxton-Cornyn go to a runoff.
4. WISC on April 7th. It seems oddly quiet on that front. The past couple races seemed to really heat up after the New Years. I hope this doesn’t turn into a snoozer that allows Lazar to sneak through like Brian Hagedorn did in 2019. I think Taylor easily wins it in the end, though. Hoping she exceeds Crawford’s and Protasiewicz’s margins.
I think it’s right to raise the alarm early about the race, though I don’t think we’ll lose in the end, or that it’ll be close. Fortunately, the party coalitions have shifted a lot since even 2019 such that there’s no way a Republican can get that kind of margin in Waukesha or Ozaukee counties anymore. Many of those Hagedorn suburban voters are now high-propensity Democrats. But some national efforts and a targeted robocall from Obama might go a long way here.
Counterpoints on Wikler and the fundraising disparities: I just don’t think party chairs are that impactful anymore. Wikler to me seemed to be more the beneficiary of wins from our new high-turnout coalition than anything special about himself. I’d say the same thing about Anderson Clayton here in North Carolina. She’s fine, but we didn’t hold up well downballot in 2024 because of her. We have Mark Robinson to thank for that. Second, incumbent party majorities will typically be able to raise much more just by being the ones currently in power. I’m not surprised Assembly Republicans outraised Democrats by a lot. It’d be a surprise if they did not. The NRSC and NRCC are outraising our committees by a lot due to this same phenomenon.
Nothing uniquely good happened in Wisconsin in bad national years for the party that didn’t also happen in other swing states during the Trump era. Of “bad” years for us, we only have 2024 and debatably 2022 to compare. Swing state Democrats held up very well across the board in 2022, regardless of the perceived state party effectiveness. I chalk that up to our candidates’ superior quality and the typically atrocious opponents Republicans usually put up. If anything, Wisconsin was one of the biggest heartburns of the swing states in 2022 with Ron Johnson’s win.
2024 had the same thing. Tammy Baldwin’s win while Trump won the state was not unique. Three other Senate Democrats did so in Arizona, Michigan and Nevada. Democrats also won six statewide races in North Carolina. I think this is at least 90% due to the strength of our own candidates and the Republicans’ own weaknesses in choosing candidates.
I don’t think Wisconsin is a Lean D state in presidential elections. It might be in off-year elections and midterms nowadays, though. You can argue this is the case because of the new party coalitions where Trump voters don’t bother to vote when he’s not on the ballot.
This is not to say that party chairs aren’t relevant. They are. But outside of the potential sole exception of Allison Riggs’ race, I doubt it was determinative. Maybe that’s how I should have worded it initially. Party chairs will matter at the margins in recount-eligible races like that. They won’t swing a state ten points anymore like Kentucky Democrats used to do.
"They are. But outside of the potential sole exception of Allison Riggs’ race, I doubt it was determinative."
Anderson Clayton has always been about down ballot as well top-of-the-ticket races. The fact that she rallied enough voters to keep the AG, flip the LG and superintendent seats and lead a volunteer effort to cure provisional ballots that put Justice Allison Riggs over the top showed that good leadership matters.
The fact that NC Democrats won the SCONC seat fight (decided by a Trump appointed judge) pissed off NC Rs, who promptly shortened the cure period from 10 to 3 days and stole control of our state board of elections from the governor.
NC Republicans fear Anderson Clayton. And what they did last year will blow up on them this year. If Justice Anita Earls wins by a slim margin in Nov and maintains it after the 3 day ballot cure period -- they sabotaged themselves.
Why is Ben Wikler stepping down in Wisconsin? This state is absolutely crucial to Democrats – and it has finally been moving in the right direction, much of it thanks to Wikler’s immense efforts.
(I was really hoping he’d be the new DNC Chair, but no such luck.)
Maybe he is gonna run for something? (He said hopefully.)
I also wanted him for DNC Chair.
Does Wisconsin have an equally-skilled and dedicated replacement? Or at least a competent one?
1. I actually expect an upset from the Democrat here. He did really well in November and is in a strong position. Depends on turnout, I guess.
2. I favor Greene in Michigan but probably Mallinowski in NJ.
3. Agreed. Also hope Green keeps his seat and Allred gets rid of Johnson (not that he was the best, but he's better than her IMO)
4. Taylor should be fine.
I don't think Taylor will win by the kind of blowout margins Protasiewicz and Crawford did, but WI Dems are still fired up. If Lazar keeps the seat Bradley is leaving, it's a black eye for Wikler's successor.
I wonder what the campaign spend for the WISC race will be this year.
Nice call on Texas! Earth-shaking win.
You called the Texas race!