I think Marx at least wins the 4th or Weiser wins it with a pluarlity with a split vote between Marx and Lopez who is a right wing independent running who represented this district breifly as a Republican between Ken Buck and Lauren Bobert.
Yeah people are forgetting about Greg Lopez being in the race as an independent, I think the final statewide result might end up something like Weiser 60, Marx 30, Lopez 8 (other randos 2). That could be enough for Weiser to carry CO-04 like 45-40-13. Boebert would probably still win but with mid single digits.
It flew under the radar, but several unions endorsed Keohokalole. Hawaii is also the most unionized state in the country. Case has also made maritime unions upset because he supports repealing the Jones Act.
The main reason why Case is able to get elected is, because Hawaii is such a Democratic stronghold in recent years, a lot of voters who would vote in Republican primaries in nearly every other state vote in Democratic primaries instead, and this is especially notable in HI-1, which is centered around the core Honolulu urban area.
Case has represented both of Hawaii's congressional districts, although, due to redistricting over the years, Case may have not represented the entire state, although I'd have to check past Hawaii congressional district maps to be certain one way or the other.
Or maybe not - coming from the Piedmont, I'm not that familiar with the state senators outside of Mecklenburg and the surrounding counties (i.e., Charlotte Metro).
But am I correct in thinking that any incumbent n the NCGL who gets the GOP nomination for NC-11 would have to drop out of their state race?
The GOP has two job reports, 8-12 weeks, to turn the economic story around. A herculean task for any administration, impossible for one so self-destructive and incapable of rational economic policy.
The midterms will happen before October's numbers are released in November. In that economic informational timeline context, I am interested what if anything will change until then, and how the various house candidates go about navigating a defense for these circumstances. Also interested to see how if and how the midterms may serve as an inflection point for the US-Iran war. I see no reason for the Iranians to be anything but increasingly hostile and willing to slow-walk negotiations, to deny trump a political victory as well as gas price relief before the midterms. I also see increasing pressure and desperation on the admin to strike a deal, precisely because of the relief sought for election timing.
Curious if Democrats will be able to form a coherent policy around data centers, many of which are causing serious discontent in communities around the country. It is one of the precious few issues which is "new" and for which Dems don't have a 40-50 year track record for voters to hate. It is new ground which should be seized immediately. If Democrats were thinking of an issue to get in with more rural and exurban voters, I can't think of a better one. "We will defend you from these rapacious centers which ruin your quality of life, temporarily bring a few dozen jobs, then leaving a skeleton crew of a couple of engineers and security, and which your community is quite possibly subsidizing by giving them funds and breaks which should be used on your schools and hospitals instead".... etc, not to mention the pollution, noise, massive increases in rates for utilities. this is insanely juicy low hanging fruit, and it would be malpractice not to take advantage.
Not even that long; usually by Labor Day, the state of the economy is pretty much locked in for the election. Bush Senior's economy started to rally in late September, but it was too late, and that was in an election environment without early voting.
The thing is, we never really had data centers back in the 90's that supported all this internet activity then. Sure, there was infrastructure but it was in the early age as the internet was still new to everyone in the public back then.
Unfortunately, as digital technology evolves, so does cost and the power that's needed to support it. Democrats really ought to find a way to balance this argument instead of simply running on "no more data centers."
It's an interesting issue politically, since there's pretty broad bipartisan opposition, but both parties have a powerful part of their coalition that supports them. (big business and labor unions)
Coming up with some sort of regulations that continue to allow hyperscale datacenters to be built, but with restrictions and community protections seems what will likely be the path forward. Part of the problem is the way power companies work. Having a new large consumer of electricity shouldn't, in theory, raise everyone else's bills, since the overall cost of distributing power would go down. (It may make the cost of generating power more expensive, but that should be made up in distribution savings) However, in many states, the power company no longer generates, which has been "deregulated", and instead has a distribution monopoly. As a result, they jack up the rates anytime they do any work on the grid, even if that work lowers their costs. States that didn't "deregulate" in this way have seen lower cost growth, even before the datacenter boom started. So part of the solution is to change who owns the grid and who pays for it. Or at least make sure the PUCs aren't in the pockets of the utilities, just blindly approving every rate increase they propose.
Thank you for responding. I agree, a blanket "no new data centers" would be counterproductive, as some of this infrastructure is needed. However, the current way it is, with local residents finding out about the drawbacks, the noise, pollution and skyrocketing utility costs after these things are already built and running shouldn't continue, and I think Dems have some real opportunities in this area.
An underlying problem is that AI just isn't very useful to most people. When Google started building large datacenters back in the day people generally thought "oh, cool" because they had a positive view of the company. These days "Americans are much more concerned than excited" about AI., per Pew Research. So even if you reduce the adverse effects—I don't think you'll ever eliminate them entirely—you'd still get a decent amount of opposition, since people just don't want AI.
AI is actually quite powerful if you want to build a career by preparing your LinkedIn profile, resume and get insights into companies and professions in a general way without having to spend too much time trying to get information. AI is also effective in helping customer service deal with less stress by filtering out inquiries even while Chatbots are still flawed even with their efficiency.
AI on the other hand is used as a justification for executives and corporate shareholders to lay off employees in large numbers as they want to follow the money and improve efficiency operations wise. However, a recent study by Deloitte is showing companies are having a hard time getting operations to work better with the push to AI. The issue isn’t so much the AI technology but the hype over it.
Now Deloitte and other consulting firms are having to advise companies on how to manage the environment better. This is basically the same BS as the push to remote work, which isn’t really solving everything unless it’s done carefully and selectively.
Something that's underappreciated is that AI tools have a strong bias towards AI writing. So if you're trying to get a job at a firm that uses AI to sort resumes, you're much more likely to get an interview if you also use AI to write your resume. Likewise when lazy or overworked instructors use AI for grading.
Noise pollution, water rates and possible pollution, and air pollution are also major factors, plus decreased home values to nearby residents and the tax breaks these companies got to build.
NC-09: I think most folks are familiar with Rich Ojeda from his campaigns in WV. I knew he had relocated to property in NC, built a group of houses for multiple households in his extended family, and later launched another Congressional bid in NC. What I didn't realize is that he'd lived in Fayetteville for 15 years of his 24 in the Army, while stationed at Bragg. It's at R+8, but with Cooper at the top of the ticket in a blue wave and with Ojeda's history of overperforming in GOP leaning country, it seems like a possibility. The DCCC agreed and added it to the target list this past week. It will be interesting to see if Cook, Sabato, and IE move it from Solid R, and how much money is spent here.
Lifelong Dem AFAIK, you're probably confusing it either with his public 2016 vote for Trump (while winning WV SD-07 on the same ballot), or with Dem-elected Gov. Jim Justice's switch? Rich's endorsed by the progressive caucus of the NC state party.
I wish we had somebody good to run here again. Carol Miller and my rep Riley Moore are not good in the slightest. And the challengers I supported lost their primaries (Brit Aguirre and Stephanie Tomana).
LA-5: The field is set; state Sen. Stewart Cathey, state Reps. Mike Echols and Gabe Firment, and Board of Regents member Misti Cordell are the major Republicans running to succeed Rep. Julia Letlow.
Not a big fan of Abigail Spanberger, but I'd like to give her a big hand for restoring the voting rights of 66,000 Virginia citizens last Friday, continuing T-Mac's good work, delayed by racist shithead Glenn Youngkkkin. Abolition of felony disenfranchisement is on the ballot in November in VA, and Spanberger has endorsed that effort. Worth noting that her action to restore voting rights to these folks is something both our current Dem Senators from VA failed/refused to do as Governor, despite it being entirely within their power. It likely helps that in January a federal judge declared Virginia's history of disenfranchisement since re-admission to the Union to violate the terms of their readmission. While Spanberger hasn't been as aggressive on this front as the ACLU and others of us would have preferred, this is a huge step forward.
This one's a bit of a long, complex one, so be advised.
-The Marion County Board of Education, a body that is elected by voters, chose Donna Heston (then Hage) as their new superintendent in 2021. She worked in education for many years before that, as well as working under my mother, on a more personal note. Her contract was set for 5 years.
-So, this year, it came time to renew her contract. She had done, at least to my knowledge, a decent job. You'd hear the occasional critique of her giving too many snow days to the school district by parents and teachers and whatnot. During her first term as superintendent, she also got a divorce from her husband, a fellow educator. The state Board of Education said in March that she had met all requirements to be able to be renewed for another term as superintendent.
-However, the board that appointed her didn't seem to agree. In a 3-2 spring decision, her contract was not renewed, and she was expected to leave her position in June. By this point rumors of Heston covering up sexual abuse in schools started to come around, which probably factored into the board's decision.
-But after public backlash, the board astoundingly voted again, this time to renew her contract. All's well that ends well, right? Heston will be superintendent for five years again.
-The board is elected during West Virginia's primary cycle in May, and incumbents Donna Costello and Tom Dragich as well as newcomer Sam Brunett were elected amidst the uncertainty of Heston's position.
-But in July, Costello and two other board members, Kevin Rogers and James Saunders, accused Heston of sexual harassment and a hostile workplace. These accusations stemmed from an alleged affair Heston had with Kirsten DeVaul, who worked for the board of education.
-So now, Heston is suing the members of the board for discrimination based on her sex and saying rumors of an affair are categorically false.
Michigan: The Democratic Party's full slate of statewide candidates (Abdul El-Sayed for U.S. Senate, Jocelyn Benson for Governor, Eli Savit for Attorney General and Garlin Gilchrist for Secretary of State), are rallying together in Detroit.
They are joined by former DOT head Pete Buttigieg, Michigan Democratic Party chair Curtis Hertel, and Detroit mayor Mary Sheffield.
Former NC Dem Congressman David Price (1986-2022) continues to give $1000 checks to Dem candidates from his almost exhausted campaign account. He sent a grand to each Dem nominee for Congress in NC just before the end of Q2.
On that note though, I made this document detailing congressional delegations + gubernatorial seats of the past 40 years so it's easier to remember them. Feel free to browse.
The seat he lost and then won back, didn’t have any of Durham County. Just Orange County, plus most of Wake and Chatham which leaned Republican at that time. Unbelievable today.
The 1992 D legislature gerrymandered the Congressional map to 1) spread the sweets among D incumbents; 2) to create two districts with Black majority, one being the famous 12th going from Charlotte uptown to city centers in Triad and then to Durham along the freeway. Didn’t go well in 94.
Dems did a better job in NC in 1992 than they did in GA or AL.
The only big mistake was that they made NC-01 and NC-12 have way too high of an African American percentage (57%), when it could have been around 52%-53%, which would have allowed a higher AA % in NC-03 which may have allowed the Dem incumbent there to be reelected in 1994.
The two should have been Black opportunity seats, with AA CVAP in high 40’s which practically would elect Black Democrats.
Packing Black votes to 57%, and let many tentacles to go all over all sorts of towns with a sizable Black population, esp 12th going into Durham, was really hideous. Also the goals were not just to elect more Democrats, but to protect some conservative Democratic incumbents, which they thought could hold the general election but more immune to a primary challenge.
WI-Gov - David Axelrod made what sounded to me like a racist remark about Francesca Hong by using the word "exotica" in reference to her, although Hong either didn't notice the racial slur or didn't interpret it as racist:
Based on what I saw in Axelrod’s post, I don’t think the “exotica” wording was used as a racial slur or even racist at all. I don’t think Hong responded with this in mind anyway as she seems to be more focused on making the argument that Axelrod is out of touch with the working class and is apart of the consultant class.
Problem is, Hong is making exactly the wrong kind of response here. She’s running for Governor of Wisconsin, could become the general election nominee, and seems to be getting distracted with Axelrod’s rhetoric. She’s also being really cringe here when she’s asking Axelrod to @ her when he mentions her name. Is she going to start calling out every politician mentioning her name without @ her on their tweet? It’s petty.
Hong might want to know that Axelrod has actually echoed what she’s saying about the Democratic Party. Over a year ago he said his concern about the Democratic Party was that it’s too cosmopolitan.
Also the one thing that stood out to me in her response mocking consultants is that she desperately needs good consultants and media training for her to have any hope of winning. She has had some pretty terrible interviews and has struggled to refute her old stances, is she going to get any help to improve her campaign or not?
For Hong to adopt a more conventional political campaign approach would require her to adopt a completely different mindset about how she views and approaches politics. Her approach to campaigning is heavily rooted in grassroots organizing, combined with a digital and social media-oriented approach to advertising and communication. Hong hasn't had to run any TV ads in the primary campaign because the establishment completely imploded in the primary, but she'd have to run some TV ads during the general election campaign if she wins the primary.
Why do we assume she is the one posting, rather than someone on her staff, which is the more common scenario? Haley Stevens' account posted a rather curious and aggressive tweet the week before the election, but I don't recall anyone saying Stevens herself posted it.
For the Hawaiian primaries tonight, I’m rooting for Della Au Bellatti for LG and Keohokalole for HI-01. I have my doubts though that Case can be beat. Do any locals have any insight?
*Raises hand* I think Case is in legitimate danger but the unpredictable nature of Hawaii primaries makes it hard to really guess the result. I'd believe anything from Case +20 to Keohokalole +10. It's a completely open primary state, Republicans and conservative independents can and do vote in the Dem primaries, and even then, a lot of typical Dem voters are just low partisanship, low polarization, picking candidates for less ideological reasons.
Case was on a smooth path to be a US senator but got impatient and threw it all away 20 years ago. He managed to find his way back into the house (eventually, after additional losses) but I think his support is quite soft and a lot of Dems remain largely ambivalent on him. Keohokalole has been smart not to be overly aggressive on the left vs moderate angle, trusting he'll get progressives anyway, but not wanting to antagonize the center and Republicans. A lot of non-leftist local interests want Case gone regardless, including what's left of the Inouye machine, older Dems mad that Case ran out of turn, unions who depend on the Jones Act (which Case has been a long opponent of, something I actually respect about him, but that's another whole story).
Seems like low turnout which is probably good for Keohokalole. Case is counting on name rec and crossover voting to carry him again. I voted for Keohokalole and Belatti, here's hoping!
Yeh, I'm all for supporting unions, and I don't know how it impacts Hawaii uniquely, but here in Puerto Rico, it is suffocating us. It's interesting because in Alaska and Hawaii most of the federal politicians support the Jones Act, with the Hawaiian senators being significant supporters, but in PR, not a single elected official supports the Jones Act, and actively oppose it. It's also interesting because a significant majority of voters in Hawaii oppose it.
Meant that it would be a bad idea to antagonize them too early, to the point that they all show up in the Dem primary to stop him. Everyone gets the exact same primary ballot in the mail, you just pick whichever party you want to vote in at that time. Very easy for bored Republicans to jump in to our side...back in Case's big 2006 race, he managed to drive 90% of the primary electorate to be in the Dem race!
Unless Rudy is running for something, I don't really see what this has to do with downballot races
He's a former mayor, but it's definitely a stretch.
Miracle recovery, followed by Mamdani vs Giuliani 2029.
Reported for spamming and liking own posts.
How can you tell who liked which posts?
Click on their profile then go to the likes section. If you're on mobile and don't have the app then I don't think you can.
I see.
I think Weiser could sweep all 8 congressional districts.
I think Marx at least wins the 4th or Weiser wins it with a pluarlity with a split vote between Marx and Lopez who is a right wing independent running who represented this district breifly as a Republican between Ken Buck and Lauren Bobert.
Yeah people are forgetting about Greg Lopez being in the race as an independent, I think the final statewide result might end up something like Weiser 60, Marx 30, Lopez 8 (other randos 2). That could be enough for Weiser to carry CO-04 like 45-40-13. Boebert would probably still win but with mid single digits.
Yeah I think Lopez ends up around 10 maybe more depending on how much Marx implodes.
I'm interested in tomorrow's HI primary to see the Democrats can oust Ed Case.
I am also very interested in seeing who the NC GOP nominates to replace scandal-ridden Chuck Edwards.
It looks like they'll nominate state Sen. Tim Moffitt.
https://yournews.com/2026/08/06/7145629/election-2026-moffitt-among-leading-choices-in-11th-congressional-district/
https://www.citizen-times.com/story/news/2026/08/06/who-could-replace-chuck-edwards-nc-11th-district-candidates/91179740007/?gnt-cfr=1&gca-cat=p&gca-uir=true&gca-epti=z117021p119750l115550c119750e007000v117021d--43--b--43--&gca-ft=151&gca-ds=sophi
It flew under the radar, but several unions endorsed Keohokalole. Hawaii is also the most unionized state in the country. Case has also made maritime unions upset because he supports repealing the Jones Act.
https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2026/07/21/case-says-shipping-interests-out-get-me-by-funding-keohokalole/
Every elected Democrat should always be mindful that you don't mess with the unions.
The main reason why Case is able to get elected is, because Hawaii is such a Democratic stronghold in recent years, a lot of voters who would vote in Republican primaries in nearly every other state vote in Democratic primaries instead, and this is especially notable in HI-1, which is centered around the core Honolulu urban area.
Case has represented both of Hawaii's congressional districts, although, due to redistricting over the years, Case may have not represented the entire state, although I'd have to check past Hawaii congressional district maps to be certain one way or the other.
I wouldn't be surprised Case gets primaried considering what's been going on across the country in primary challengers in recent months.
Not to be pendantic, but he has already been primaried - he is an incumbent who drew a primary challenger.
Being successfully primaried out of office is what I meant.
I was wrong.
https://www.hendersonvillelightning.com/four-seasons-politics/16233-moffitt-withdraws-bid-to-be-on-11th-district-ballot.html
Thanks for the link!
Hmm... the plot thickens.
Or maybe not - coming from the Piedmont, I'm not that familiar with the state senators outside of Mecklenburg and the surrounding counties (i.e., Charlotte Metro).
But am I correct in thinking that any incumbent n the NCGL who gets the GOP nomination for NC-11 would have to drop out of their state race?
The GOP has two job reports, 8-12 weeks, to turn the economic story around. A herculean task for any administration, impossible for one so self-destructive and incapable of rational economic policy.
The midterms will happen before October's numbers are released in November. In that economic informational timeline context, I am interested what if anything will change until then, and how the various house candidates go about navigating a defense for these circumstances. Also interested to see how if and how the midterms may serve as an inflection point for the US-Iran war. I see no reason for the Iranians to be anything but increasingly hostile and willing to slow-walk negotiations, to deny trump a political victory as well as gas price relief before the midterms. I also see increasing pressure and desperation on the admin to strike a deal, precisely because of the relief sought for election timing.
Curious if Democrats will be able to form a coherent policy around data centers, many of which are causing serious discontent in communities around the country. It is one of the precious few issues which is "new" and for which Dems don't have a 40-50 year track record for voters to hate. It is new ground which should be seized immediately. If Democrats were thinking of an issue to get in with more rural and exurban voters, I can't think of a better one. "We will defend you from these rapacious centers which ruin your quality of life, temporarily bring a few dozen jobs, then leaving a skeleton crew of a couple of engineers and security, and which your community is quite possibly subsidizing by giving them funds and breaks which should be used on your schools and hospitals instead".... etc, not to mention the pollution, noise, massive increases in rates for utilities. this is insanely juicy low hanging fruit, and it would be malpractice not to take advantage.
Not even that long; usually by Labor Day, the state of the economy is pretty much locked in for the election. Bush Senior's economy started to rally in late September, but it was too late, and that was in an election environment without early voting.
The thing is, we never really had data centers back in the 90's that supported all this internet activity then. Sure, there was infrastructure but it was in the early age as the internet was still new to everyone in the public back then.
Unfortunately, as digital technology evolves, so does cost and the power that's needed to support it. Democrats really ought to find a way to balance this argument instead of simply running on "no more data centers."
It's an interesting issue politically, since there's pretty broad bipartisan opposition, but both parties have a powerful part of their coalition that supports them. (big business and labor unions)
Coming up with some sort of regulations that continue to allow hyperscale datacenters to be built, but with restrictions and community protections seems what will likely be the path forward. Part of the problem is the way power companies work. Having a new large consumer of electricity shouldn't, in theory, raise everyone else's bills, since the overall cost of distributing power would go down. (It may make the cost of generating power more expensive, but that should be made up in distribution savings) However, in many states, the power company no longer generates, which has been "deregulated", and instead has a distribution monopoly. As a result, they jack up the rates anytime they do any work on the grid, even if that work lowers their costs. States that didn't "deregulate" in this way have seen lower cost growth, even before the datacenter boom started. So part of the solution is to change who owns the grid and who pays for it. Or at least make sure the PUCs aren't in the pockets of the utilities, just blindly approving every rate increase they propose.
Thank you for responding. I agree, a blanket "no new data centers" would be counterproductive, as some of this infrastructure is needed. However, the current way it is, with local residents finding out about the drawbacks, the noise, pollution and skyrocketing utility costs after these things are already built and running shouldn't continue, and I think Dems have some real opportunities in this area.
Bottom line:
Find solutions that don’t create adverse effects for the environment and don’t jack up energy costs.
An underlying problem is that AI just isn't very useful to most people. When Google started building large datacenters back in the day people generally thought "oh, cool" because they had a positive view of the company. These days "Americans are much more concerned than excited" about AI., per Pew Research. So even if you reduce the adverse effects—I don't think you'll ever eliminate them entirely—you'd still get a decent amount of opposition, since people just don't want AI.
Well…
AI is actually quite powerful if you want to build a career by preparing your LinkedIn profile, resume and get insights into companies and professions in a general way without having to spend too much time trying to get information. AI is also effective in helping customer service deal with less stress by filtering out inquiries even while Chatbots are still flawed even with their efficiency.
AI on the other hand is used as a justification for executives and corporate shareholders to lay off employees in large numbers as they want to follow the money and improve efficiency operations wise. However, a recent study by Deloitte is showing companies are having a hard time getting operations to work better with the push to AI. The issue isn’t so much the AI technology but the hype over it.
Now Deloitte and other consulting firms are having to advise companies on how to manage the environment better. This is basically the same BS as the push to remote work, which isn’t really solving everything unless it’s done carefully and selectively.
Something that's underappreciated is that AI tools have a strong bias towards AI writing. So if you're trying to get a job at a firm that uses AI to sort resumes, you're much more likely to get an interview if you also use AI to write your resume. Likewise when lazy or overworked instructors use AI for grading.
I think the big issue with data centers is that they drive utility rates up, and they don't offset that with permanent jobs.
Noise pollution, water rates and possible pollution, and air pollution are also major factors, plus decreased home values to nearby residents and the tax breaks these companies got to build.
NC-09: I think most folks are familiar with Rich Ojeda from his campaigns in WV. I knew he had relocated to property in NC, built a group of houses for multiple households in his extended family, and later launched another Congressional bid in NC. What I didn't realize is that he'd lived in Fayetteville for 15 years of his 24 in the Army, while stationed at Bragg. It's at R+8, but with Cooper at the top of the ticket in a blue wave and with Ojeda's history of overperforming in GOP leaning country, it seems like a possibility. The DCCC agreed and added it to the target list this past week. It will be interesting to see if Cook, Sabato, and IE move it from Solid R, and how much money is spent here.
Fascinating. Didn't Ojeda change parties at a certain point from D to R?
Lifelong Dem AFAIK, you're probably confusing it either with his public 2016 vote for Trump (while winning WV SD-07 on the same ballot), or with Dem-elected Gov. Jim Justice's switch? Rich's endorsed by the progressive caucus of the NC state party.
I had a memory of this too but I guess not, based on a quick Google search
I wish we had somebody good to run here again. Carol Miller and my rep Riley Moore are not good in the slightest. And the challengers I supported lost their primaries (Brit Aguirre and Stephanie Tomana).
https://voterportal.sos.la.gov/candidateinquiry
Louisiana House filing deadline:
LA-5: The field is set; state Sen. Stewart Cathey, state Reps. Mike Echols and Gabe Firment, and Board of Regents member Misti Cordell are the major Republicans running to succeed Rep. Julia Letlow.
LA-6: Trump-endorsed (?) state Sen. Blake Miguez as well as state Sen. Rick Edmonds are running here. Miguez's move into the district was highly anticipated. He's another problematic Republican running this cycle, having rape allegations (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/mar/11/louisiana-republican-blake-miguez).
Not a big fan of Abigail Spanberger, but I'd like to give her a big hand for restoring the voting rights of 66,000 Virginia citizens last Friday, continuing T-Mac's good work, delayed by racist shithead Glenn Youngkkkin. Abolition of felony disenfranchisement is on the ballot in November in VA, and Spanberger has endorsed that effort. Worth noting that her action to restore voting rights to these folks is something both our current Dem Senators from VA failed/refused to do as Governor, despite it being entirely within their power. It likely helps that in January a federal judge declared Virginia's history of disenfranchisement since re-admission to the Union to violate the terms of their readmission. While Spanberger hasn't been as aggressive on this front as the ACLU and others of us would have preferred, this is a huge step forward.
https://boltsmag.org/virginia-governor-restores-voting-rights/
Happy birthday Abigail!
Somewhat ironice what you are referring to Youngkin as here when it was the previous Democratic governor that actually dressed up as one
Northam restored voting rights to 111,000 VA voters.
https://www.wboy.com/news/marion/full-lawsuit-marion-county-superintendent-sues-board-of-education-over-alleged-sex-based-discrimination/
Marion County, West Virginia:
This one's a bit of a long, complex one, so be advised.
-The Marion County Board of Education, a body that is elected by voters, chose Donna Heston (then Hage) as their new superintendent in 2021. She worked in education for many years before that, as well as working under my mother, on a more personal note. Her contract was set for 5 years.
-So, this year, it came time to renew her contract. She had done, at least to my knowledge, a decent job. You'd hear the occasional critique of her giving too many snow days to the school district by parents and teachers and whatnot. During her first term as superintendent, she also got a divorce from her husband, a fellow educator. The state Board of Education said in March that she had met all requirements to be able to be renewed for another term as superintendent.
-However, the board that appointed her didn't seem to agree. In a 3-2 spring decision, her contract was not renewed, and she was expected to leave her position in June. By this point rumors of Heston covering up sexual abuse in schools started to come around, which probably factored into the board's decision.
-But after public backlash, the board astoundingly voted again, this time to renew her contract. All's well that ends well, right? Heston will be superintendent for five years again.
-The board is elected during West Virginia's primary cycle in May, and incumbents Donna Costello and Tom Dragich as well as newcomer Sam Brunett were elected amidst the uncertainty of Heston's position.
-But in July, Costello and two other board members, Kevin Rogers and James Saunders, accused Heston of sexual harassment and a hostile workplace. These accusations stemmed from an alleged affair Heston had with Kirsten DeVaul, who worked for the board of education.
-So now, Heston is suing the members of the board for discrimination based on her sex and saying rumors of an affair are categorically false.
Wow! That's quite a mystery, who is telling what amount of truth.
https://www.mobilize.us/teammichigan/event/1000262/
Michigan: The Democratic Party's full slate of statewide candidates (Abdul El-Sayed for U.S. Senate, Jocelyn Benson for Governor, Eli Savit for Attorney General and Garlin Gilchrist for Secretary of State), are rallying together in Detroit.
They are joined by former DOT head Pete Buttigieg, Michigan Democratic Party chair Curtis Hertel, and Detroit mayor Mary Sheffield.
Good. I've been pleasantly surprised how quickly MI Dems have adjusted to the post-primary reality and shifted into GE mode.
Report on OH 7:
• Nobody believes Miller will withdraw from the race or resign
• They say he seems dug in and that this is now more personal than political
• Folks treated today at 4pm as the final deadline for him to withdraw since that's when local Boards of Election close ahead of the Aug. 10 deadline
• Pretty much everyone in Ohio GOP circles has tried to convince Miller to withdraw
• Nobody wants him on the ballot as this controversy balloons.
https://x.com/taylorpopielarz/status/2085824976301551932?s=46&t=sbdQQeYBqp0h_Zql717iTw
The GOP would be wise to cut their losses and vote to expel him from Congress.
That's extra GOP-in-disarray news cycles; I don't think they want that either.
Would that remove him from the ballot or compel him to exit the race?
Well then. We can count on more than just Trump to help the turnout for Democrats in OH.
Laura Belin takes a look under the hood of the recent Emerson poll of Iowa.
https://www.bleedingheartland.com/2026/08/07/looking-beyond-the-toplines-emersons-latest-iowa-poll/
TIL: There is a Libertarian on the IA-Sen ballot whose last name is similar to the GOP nominee for IA-Gov. Both Laehn and Lahn are pronounced “LANE.”
WATN:
Former NC Dem Congressman David Price (1986-2022) continues to give $1000 checks to Dem candidates from his almost exhausted campaign account. He sent a grand to each Dem nominee for Congress in NC just before the end of Q2.
1986-1994 then 1996-2022. He lost during the Republican Revolution to Fred Heineman then unseated him two years later.
No, you're thinking of Brad Miller. Price stayed in the House until 22.
You're right. My bad--I mixed them up. I should have checked myself before commenting.
I'm deleting my previous comment to avoid confusion.
On that note though, I made this document detailing congressional delegations + gubernatorial seats of the past 40 years so it's easier to remember them. Feel free to browse.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hv2_wFI9gxpJlFAA2EGduCrQ0umrQYyqPeuOTJ4mlO4/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.nl8pnhgh3z0r
The seat he lost and then won back, didn’t have any of Durham County. Just Orange County, plus most of Wake and Chatham which leaned Republican at that time. Unbelievable today.
The 1992 D legislature gerrymandered the Congressional map to 1) spread the sweets among D incumbents; 2) to create two districts with Black majority, one being the famous 12th going from Charlotte uptown to city centers in Triad and then to Durham along the freeway. Didn’t go well in 94.
Dems did a better job in NC in 1992 than they did in GA or AL.
The only big mistake was that they made NC-01 and NC-12 have way too high of an African American percentage (57%), when it could have been around 52%-53%, which would have allowed a higher AA % in NC-03 which may have allowed the Dem incumbent there to be reelected in 1994.
The two should have been Black opportunity seats, with AA CVAP in high 40’s which practically would elect Black Democrats.
Packing Black votes to 57%, and let many tentacles to go all over all sorts of towns with a sizable Black population, esp 12th going into Durham, was really hideous. Also the goals were not just to elect more Democrats, but to protect some conservative Democratic incumbents, which they thought could hold the general election but more immune to a primary challenge.
I have a vague recollection that GHWB's DOJ was interpreting things so that not packing black voters was being construed as dilution?
Democrats could have and should have fought that in federal courts.
WI-Gov - David Axelrod made what sounded to me like a racist remark about Francesca Hong by using the word "exotica" in reference to her, although Hong either didn't notice the racial slur or didn't interpret it as racist:
https://www.threads.com/share/BAU0tTQH0N/
Based on what I saw in Axelrod’s post, I don’t think the “exotica” wording was used as a racial slur or even racist at all. I don’t think Hong responded with this in mind anyway as she seems to be more focused on making the argument that Axelrod is out of touch with the working class and is apart of the consultant class.
Problem is, Hong is making exactly the wrong kind of response here. She’s running for Governor of Wisconsin, could become the general election nominee, and seems to be getting distracted with Axelrod’s rhetoric. She’s also being really cringe here when she’s asking Axelrod to @ her when he mentions her name. Is she going to start calling out every politician mentioning her name without @ her on their tweet? It’s petty.
Hong might want to know that Axelrod has actually echoed what she’s saying about the Democratic Party. Over a year ago he said his concern about the Democratic Party was that it’s too cosmopolitan.
Also the one thing that stood out to me in her response mocking consultants is that she desperately needs good consultants and media training for her to have any hope of winning. She has had some pretty terrible interviews and has struggled to refute her old stances, is she going to get any help to improve her campaign or not?
For Hong to adopt a more conventional political campaign approach would require her to adopt a completely different mindset about how she views and approaches politics. Her approach to campaigning is heavily rooted in grassroots organizing, combined with a digital and social media-oriented approach to advertising and communication. Hong hasn't had to run any TV ads in the primary campaign because the establishment completely imploded in the primary, but she'd have to run some TV ads during the general election campaign if she wins the primary.
Why do we assume she is the one posting, rather than someone on her staff, which is the more common scenario? Haley Stevens' account posted a rather curious and aggressive tweet the week before the election, but I don't recall anyone saying Stevens herself posted it.
CA Governor Gavin Newsom’ office manages the trolling tweets he makes about Trump but the agenda was obviously planned.
By contrast, a staff member using Hong’s Threads account and making a post saying “next time @ me” would make her look even more ridiculous.
Staff member or not, how is this even professional? Social media posts by an elected official's staff should ideally be formal and responsive.
The context doesn't seem obviously racist, though the choice of words is certainly questionable.
I’m loving Abdul el-Sayed going scorched earth on Mike Rogers this early.
I mean, I hate that this is our politics right now but, yeah, you have to fight fire with fire.
My state's primary is next week, so I'm interested in that.
For the Hawaiian primaries tonight, I’m rooting for Della Au Bellatti for LG and Keohokalole for HI-01. I have my doubts though that Case can be beat. Do any locals have any insight?
*Raises hand* I think Case is in legitimate danger but the unpredictable nature of Hawaii primaries makes it hard to really guess the result. I'd believe anything from Case +20 to Keohokalole +10. It's a completely open primary state, Republicans and conservative independents can and do vote in the Dem primaries, and even then, a lot of typical Dem voters are just low partisanship, low polarization, picking candidates for less ideological reasons.
Case was on a smooth path to be a US senator but got impatient and threw it all away 20 years ago. He managed to find his way back into the house (eventually, after additional losses) but I think his support is quite soft and a lot of Dems remain largely ambivalent on him. Keohokalole has been smart not to be overly aggressive on the left vs moderate angle, trusting he'll get progressives anyway, but not wanting to antagonize the center and Republicans. A lot of non-leftist local interests want Case gone regardless, including what's left of the Inouye machine, older Dems mad that Case ran out of turn, unions who depend on the Jones Act (which Case has been a long opponent of, something I actually respect about him, but that's another whole story).
Seems like low turnout which is probably good for Keohokalole. Case is counting on name rec and crossover voting to carry him again. I voted for Keohokalole and Belatti, here's hoping!
Yeh, I'm all for supporting unions, and I don't know how it impacts Hawaii uniquely, but here in Puerto Rico, it is suffocating us. It's interesting because in Alaska and Hawaii most of the federal politicians support the Jones Act, with the Hawaiian senators being significant supporters, but in PR, not a single elected official supports the Jones Act, and actively oppose it. It's also interesting because a significant majority of voters in Hawaii oppose it.
It would probably be fine if Keohokalole "antagonized Republicans". The district is very far from being a swingy one.
(Though, famously, a Republican did win it when Case decided to split the Democratic field in 2010)
Meant that it would be a bad idea to antagonize them too early, to the point that they all show up in the Dem primary to stop him. Everyone gets the exact same primary ballot in the mail, you just pick whichever party you want to vote in at that time. Very easy for bored Republicans to jump in to our side...back in Case's big 2006 race, he managed to drive 90% of the primary electorate to be in the Dem race!
Welp that aged poorly more quickly than any post I think I’ve made yet. LOL
You win some, you lose some.