Midterms: The Republican National Committee has approved a midterm convention for their candidates, set to be held tentatively in ~October in either Las Vegas or Dallas.
I suspect it's a good idea. Force a bunch of media coverage for themselves, possibly fire up the base, keep activists feeling involved. I'm pretty sure I advocated for us to adopt that idea in the distant past.
In this specific case I suspect it's going to be a cult fest centered entirely around their undying loyalty for the worst person. If so, they'll get a lot less benefit out of it than they could otherwise.
I personally think this midterm RNC is a stupid idea, as I’ve said before. Just imagine a bunch of loony GOP candidates having a national audience for their antics — including those in swing races. During a blue wave. Are they insane?
A big part of me doesn't want to believe, but I really think there's a chance that Ramaswamy could lose Ohio. (Deeply unlikeable personality combined with virulent MAGA-base racism.)
Vivek Ramaswamy Adopts New Persona in Governor’s Bid
“He is also calling out bigotry and racism, while adopting a congenial tone more reminiscent of the Republican he hopes to succeed, term-limited Gov. Mike DeWine. Once a brash showman, Ramaswamy now presents himself to Ohioans as an open-minded statesman.”
I think Zaid Jilani, a Pakistani American heterodox leftist, had the most apt observation on Ramaswamy:
"I think Vivek gets psyched out from Twitter Nazis into thinking his biggest liability is that he’s brown when his biggest liability is that he’s a libertarian" quoting Vivek's exchange with Ezra Klein.
I will always wonderful how well Jim Tressel could have done in a primary against him. Especially if they had gotten started around the same time. I know Tressel has had his share of scandals in his time, but it would have made for an interesting race. No matter who Trump endorsed or didn't endorse.
Anyone who tunes in to a midterm Nazi rally already has their mind made up. It’s only downside for them. Any stupid things they inevitably say in these speeches will be made into soundbites.
I get the thinking, but I do not believe it is a fluke that presidential conventions generate huge bumps for their party in the days after. Obviously that bump fades with time, but it doesn't wholly disappear and that bump can be capitalized on. That's the product of an enormous amount of media attention and energizing of the party base. Utilized properly I think the parties can absolutely benefit from it.
The reason the presidential conventions don't matter much, in my opinion, is that there's two of them: the benefit of the DNC on democrats is cancelled out by the benefit of the RNC on republicans. They're both reasonably competently run and executed, so the difference between a "good" convention and a "bad" convention is minimal and largely inside baseball to fill media story slots.
A midterm convention could be a great chance for candidates to spotlight themselves and create an identity that is separate from the incumbent admin, without inherently running away from that admin. Will republicans try to do that? I doubt it. But that's on them and their cult behavior, not on the idea itself.
For the party out of power it carries equally possible benefits, allowing the party to generate a lot of coverage that it is otherwise difficult to do while not holding the WH.
I did a deep dive into the California Congressional maps for climate groups yesterday, and here's the toplines. (I posted in today's morning digest too but I figure it'll get more eyeballs on it on the weekly open thread. Hope that's all right -- if not, I will delete.)
If all goes well, Cal goes from 43-D, 9-R to 48-D, 4-R. Of those 48, at least 8 (winners in 1, 6, 11, 14, 22, 26, 38, and 48) and as many as 12 will be new faces.
In addition, the makeup of 9, 13, and 27 is changing to be much more Democratic. These 3 legislators are known for siding with the GOP majority on tough votes, so I'm hopeful that they'll be better representatives of their Democratic majority voters. (the makeup of 45, 47, and 49 is also changing to be more Democratic... the shifts are smaller, and IMO these reps are more reliable Dem votes on tough bills)
As for how I got to "up to 12" new faces: 5 Dem incumbents are facing challengers who have organized well enough to block their automatic endorsements at the party convention. All of these incumbents are old, and most are facing well funded primary challenges. They may all end up fine. But they're worth eyeballing esp if they still can't get endorsed at party convention. Those districts are 3 (Bera), 4, 7, 8, and 32.
Oh, and any climate group that endorses Jacqui Irwin in CA-26 needs to surrender their climate card.
Jimmy Gomez is a perennial target for the DSA folk. They won a big race for LA City Controller (Kenneth Mejia) and they keep running people against Gomez. It was David Kim for a few cycles, and now they're on to Angela Gonzales-Torres. Gomez was caught napping one cycle, but from what I can see he's not going to make that mistake again. This will be a Dem vs Dem runoff in November.
And my own two cents' worth -- I'm on a "hug you at convention" basis with Gomez. He is a progressive. He's an establishment, non-DSA progressive (see Jamie Raskin) but he is good people. DSA needs to find someone better to target. They yammer on him for taking corporate PAC money, which is legit, but he doesn't take really bad money (Raytheon is the highest profile bad money). This is an extremely poor district with no money in it other than DTLA so I'm not surprised he's going outside the district for fundraising.
Hector de la Torre hasn't been on my radar yet and I will check him out. I'd like to see the overlap between old CA-38 and new CA-41. He's been out of office a LONG time and "CARB leader" isn't exactly a winning ballot designation.
It's an agency in California's own EPA. They're probably best known for regulating vehicle emissions, and other states can (and some do) adopt California's CARB vehicle emissions regulations, even when those other states cannot necessarily create their own independent standards.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’d heard Gomez also took AIPAC money, which was another motivator for his primary.
I do agree that there are worse targets. At least he’s sort of progressive. Dan Goldman reps a similarly left wing district and doesn’t vote like it (and most likely is gunning for statewide office anyway). And even he is less awful than, say, Ed Case, who has literally no excuse for his lousy record.
(Funny you mention Mejia, I’m pretty sure he actually ran against Gomez as a Green prior. He’s an independent now and was briefly a Dem.)
As much as I detest AIPAC, trying to primary everyone who has ever taken money from them is a fools game, they will donate to practically any incumbent who says the right words. Voting records are a better judgement of character than money in my book.
Are you checking out Bernie and Khanna backed Randy Villegas running against Jasmeet Bains a pro-oil pro-ICE Blue Dog? I'm sure there is a lot of pressure from the establishment to support her.
The Kern River Oil field is in this district before and even now. Ironically, Oildale is excluded. How is she reactionary? That's a heavy accusation because people like Pat Buchanan and James Dobson are reactionary.
No offense, but the term "reactionary centrist" seems like an abuse of the English language. It strikes me as political obfuscation, a term designed primarily to stigmatize politicians who don’t embrace sufficiently-progressive policy positions.
PS. Mind you, I am by no means defending Bains! But I do care about language and the terms used in our discourse.
I've made it clear to anyone who hasn't yet tuned in that Villegas is the progressive choice. I just don't know if he makes it out of the primary. DCCC might not be doing anything official but they're sacrificing goats to make Bains the nominee.
"Scoop: Mills flew to California fundraisers while ICE raided Maine
Why it matters: Incumbent governors can typically seize on a public safety crisis or natural disaster to demonstrate leadership and dominate news cycles. But that only works if they are in state.
Mills' precise whereabouts from Tuesday to Thursday of this week were a source of speculation in Maine media, after the Bangor Daily News published a grainy image of Mills boarding a flight from Boston Logan International Airport to San Francisco.
Her staff later told the Portland Press Herald that she was heading to California for a "previously scheduled event.""
As if that's equivalent, we'll see. I hope Mills loses badly. All she can do is go beg for money from Schumer's bosses in California while ICE invades her state.
Next—is her choice to not participate in yesterday’s large anti-ice rally where Platner & many Governor and ME-2 candidates all gave speeches to rally the crowd and all of these candidates also stood arm in arm in solidarity. Her campaign continues to avoid public events and actually talking to Maine voters directly. Maybe she doesn’t want questions on her actual pro-Ice executive orders that she thankfully recently cancelled or her decision not to sign anti-ice legislation so it is delayed for months.
Rumor has it California has cell phone service and Governor Mills was doing an excellent job of keeping in touch with her staff, staying updated on developments – and even speaking to journalists.
Granted, I could be wrong about California having cell phone service...
Clearly you and I have very different ideas of what constitutes a "scandal". I’ll leave it at that. (Thank you for editing your post and removing the word scandal.)
Well, he's back at his antics again just like he was pushed by the Tea Party back in 2010-2015 to go after anything and everything with the Obama Administration.
Yes, Darrell Issa again but this time, he's delusional if he thinks this kind of questioning of Jack Smith on investigating Trump is going to help him politically heading to the midterms.
By how much do you think Issa is going to lose this November if in fact all of the millions of wealth and donors can't save him? He's literally become a gnat that you can't ever get rid of.
I once thought it would be awesome to be a columnist or news writer. However, if I have to always be focused on these narrative pieces that don’t aim to be objective all the time, I’d probably resign from The NY Times or elsewhere.
by Public Policy Polling on behalf of Katie Porter
Lots of time before the 6/2 primary so please do not panic. The R's only have 35%, most of the undecideds likely are Dems, and the Dem vote will surely consolidate.
Porter on the issues is better than Swalwell but Swalwell I’d argue offers more of an intent to competently run CA state government without being another Newsom. And he can fight back as well.
I love Porter with a whiteboard! Not sure I trust her in a boardroom or the Governor’s Mansion. If I was still living on the Left Coast, I’d vote Swalwell unless someone better comes along.
About the only thing I am critical with Swalwell about is the tech regulation issue.
However, I have also been impressed by his ability to give short and sharp answers to questions without getting long winded. Anything with tech regulation really should be applied at the federal level as it won’t give tech companies an excuse to move from one state to the next in pursuit of “business friendly” policies.
I also have spent plenty of time in Dublin, where Swalwell grew up, and someone coming from this part of the Bay Area as Governor would be more middle ground oriented. This would be a welcome change in state government.
I wouldn't put odds on the Dem candidates at this point. Apart from Steyer the campaign really hasn't started, and very few voters are even thinking much about it. The only thing that might be indicative now is fundraising, because that comes from insiders and hardcore types. Porter probably has less room to grow than the others though, because she was recently in a high-profile primary.
Interesting that Steyer is up at 8%. He is currently bombarding TV media in the LA area. He's the only candidate who I've seen advertising since getting back to California.
Nathan Mathis was the guy who did surprisingly well in AL-02 in 2016. Looking at his Wikipedia page, he's pretty much a perennial candidate as he lives in a very red area that stopped electing Dems locally starting in 1994. He's a peanut farmer, interestingly enough.
"Five Republicans qualified for Public Service Commission Place 2, including incumbent Chris Beeker III and former Alabama Auditor Jim Zeigler... Zeigler served a term on the PSC about 50 years ago. He’s most recently been the state’s two-term auditor. He ran unsuccessfully for secretary of state in 2022."
Also going out of the way to endorse the state party chair for LG when the term-limited secretary of state and agriculture commissioner are also running. My guess is they're looking to influence the party long beyond Trump and aim for this stooge to become governor in eight years.
2026 will be the first year that Arizona will elect a lieutenant governor. Before, the SOS was in line to become governor, and has many times, often due to corruption.
The gubernatorial candidates choose the LG running mate and must do so at least 60 days prior to the general election. While there is a lot of speculation, none of the candidates have picked yet.
Yeah, we'll wait and see. But this is sounding more like the armed militia thugs under Ghana military dictator (later turned elected president when the republic was restored) Jerry Rawlings that my girlfriend grew up under, who were far more interested in settling petty grudges (both personal and inter-ethnic) than executing justice.
Specifics of those above linked videos aside, there are now dozens of broadly documented, verified instances of these agents openly violating the constitutional and human rights of the people they interact with. US citizens holding up passports are being swept up, citizens and non citizens are ending up dead on the street or in government custody, in ways that would make the Russian justice system blush. Cellphones, documents, laws and court decisions, all ignored. Clearly, evil is being perpetrated. That footage is brutal. I don't think emotionally investing in debating specific video instances is productive or beneficial for my mental health tbh, but of course you cannot turn away, you must face it.
What I am interested in are the structural mechanics of how cleaning this up is going to work. Let's say in our fantasy that come 2029, we have a trifecta with a healthy margin in the House and somehow, 54-55 in the Senate. (not 60 of course).
How does the new, incoming administration go about investigating and prosecuting tens of thousands of federal agents, and ultimately, holding everyone From Trump, to the each member of the cabinet, down to all the mid level guys accountable? Are there even enough prosecutors? Would the court system permit such a thing? Do we have Democrats ready, willing and able to do the opposite of what Obama did, and spend almost all of their time and political capital looking BACK, and engaging in Nuremberg style cleaning and mass detrumpification of our institutions? Is such a thing even possible, given how committees, the Senate, Courts and prosecution works? Are the likes of Schumer, Jeffries going to be the patriots to put everything on the line to get this done? Everyone involved in these sordid crimes against humanity needs to be behind bars. Thousands of people.
We had better actually hold these people accountable when we’re in power again. If we don’t I honestly don’t think I could in good conscience be a Democrat. And if Trump pardons them all, I want them all brought up on state charges and I want the people who could be tried in other countries or international court extradited to face trial.
Failing to "look back" is part of what got us here in the first place. If we had spent some time focusing on the crimes of the Bush Administration and the Financial sector maybe we wouldn't be where we are today if there were actual consequences for some of these people.
A compounding factor is that federal enforcement would have a high chance of being undone with pardons by a future republican. Unless the judicial process moves very fast and the punishments are short enough to be over before a next-next admin could do anything. The latter might be true, but not the former.
That would suggest we'd benefit from having a future democratic admin assisting state AGs going after ICE agents. This doesn't work in every state, but MN is unlikely to have a republican governor elected in a time frame to grant said pardons. Similar for many major blue states like CA, NY, IL, MA, MD, etc. The difficulty is getting such an effort to work and get all the associated state AGs on board.
For the people at the top we'd want it done by the federal government anyway, but for the lower level people I think pushing for state level actions makes more sense, where legally feasible.
Yes, appears he has died. Disputed claims as to whether had a weapon or drew one. I’m seeing a lot of calls for Walz to deploy the national guard to protect the populace. Wouldn’t count on him doing that.
More of this is going to happen until or unless congress does something about them. Unfortunately I am not holding my breath, even with their budget being up right now. Republicans like this, and while democrats do not, not enough of our elected officials in the senate are brave enough to do anything about it.
We're going to see more and more stories like this. It's scary. That fear is a big part of what they want, unfortunately: for people to be too afraid to protest, to follow ICE, to do anything that impedes or publicly opposes ICE at all.
If Democrats actually do take control of Congress this fall, Trump is just going to completely ignore everything they do. He's not going to follow their laws at all.
Here's my question: is ICE still hiring new agents? If they are, perhaps progressives and Democrats should flood them with applications in order to change ICE from the inside.
Did you read the end of my comment? The whole point would be to change ICE from the inside so it stops doing what it did today. Anyone on the left who wants to ostracize someone trying to do that is an idiot.
They wouldn't except applications of people who are clearly there to do the right thing. And, even if there was some widespread agreement that liberal should join to change the culture, any member of ICE would still be looked at askance by liberals in the future. "No, I was one of the good Nazi's, I swear".
Regarding your first sentence, any progressive who's observed MAGA behavior should be able to fake being one fairly easily. As Spock pointed out in the Star Trek episode "Mirror, Mirror", it's a lot easier for civilized people to fake being a barbarian than for barbarians to fake being civilized people.
And your second sentence demonstrates something fundamentally wrong with a certain segment of the left. If someone has espoused progressive positions their whole life, and it is known that some progressives joined ICE for this reason, then someone who has done that shouldn't be looked at askance by liberals at all. And yet, unfortunately, some will. This goes right along with the fact that many liberals want their political candidates to be perfect, angelic people, who can somehow change conservatives' minds about any issue through simple conversation. Unfortunately, no such people exist, but certain segments of the left refuse to accept this and continue to refuse to support anyone but these nonexistent angels.
Relatedly, I'm really sick and tired of some liberals' tendency to quickly reject out-of-the-box ideas for mitigating the damage that Trump is doing. Especially when they refuse to provide any workable alternatives.
I'm not a hiring manager, but can anyone here imagine themselves in the shoes of a hiring manager in 2029 and seeing ICE during these 4 years on a person's resume? Chances are they would move to the next qualified applicant with nary a thought, unless they were in a deep red area.
We don't even have to wait until the next congress. Their budget is up right now. Democrats can -- but probably will not -- do something right fucking now.
With respect to them ignoring the law: maybe, maybe not. If they will, we gain absolutely nothing by acquiescing in advance. Force them to eat the political cost.
. "God Punishes Trump by Turning US into Greenland"
THE CELESTIAL REALM (The Borowitz Report) — Stating that He had had “just about enough of this idiot,” on Saturday God wreaked revenge on Donald J. Trump by transforming the United States of America into Greenland.
In a terse public statement, the Almighty declared, “Prayers answered, jerkwad.”
The act of God coupled with His blistering pronouncement left many atheists reconsidering their positions, nonbelievers reported.
In Canada, Prime Minister Mark Carney extended a helping hand to his beleaguered American counterpart, offering, “Since we know how to handle cold weather, we would consider making the United States our eleventh province.”
I was going to type up a longer diatribe here, but I don't think I can without getting myself even more upset, but suffice it to say that Prime Minister Carney (the real one, not the Borowitz parody) speaks for me, and if YouTube comments are to be believed, people in most of Europe, the Commonwealth, and elsewhere. You all seem like nice, reasonable people for the most part, but understand that now, and for a damned long time to come, we aren't going to trust you as a nation, and probably won't trust you as individuals, at least not without a lot of rapport-building first. There are far too many Americans who still think this will all get better in a couple of years, that the rest of the world just needs to get over it and things will be forgotten, and I cannot stress enough that this will not be the case. We will remember all of this.
You're telling me. Just got back from a Reddit thread where some of the users were (mockingly) implying Americans deserved to die in the ice storm going on now. If I needed a reminder not to go back to Reddit, that was it.
Just keep in mind that the American people, by and large, do not want to invade Canada or Greenland or wherever. Trump =/= the American people.
Andrew, as a displaced Norseman, I totally understand your sentiments. For the record, Mark Carney’s speech at Davos is one of the best speeches I have heard from a statesman in many, many years.
I think most of us know that. Canadians know many Americans don't support Trump, but a plurality elected him. There's absolutely no good reason for Canadians to trust current or future American politicians or the American people in general.
MD-5: Del. Adrian Boafo received an endorsement from incumbent Rep. Steny Hoyer. Del. Nicole Williams and Prince George's County councilwoman Wala Blegay also filed to run.
I don't any Republicans winning statewide in MN for the foreseeable future, even in red wave years. The state's trending away from them anyway because it's so dominated by the Minneapolis metro.
The man fatally shot by Border Patrol agents in Minneapolis is Alex Jeffrey Pretti, a U.S. citizen with no criminal record, according to a senior law enforcement official familiar with the investigation.
Mr. Pretti, who was 37, had a firearms permit, required by state law in Minnesota to carry a handgun, officials said. He was a registered nurse in Minnesota, public records show, and lived in an apartment in Minneapolis a short drive away from where he was killed.
Ms. Anway said Mr. Pretti followed the news closely and cared deeply about social justice and fighting for fairness.
I’ve been thinking that Walz would’ve been fine had he ran for re election. The fraud stuff has completely dropped from the news and pales in comparison to the atrocities with ICE right now.
Speaking of which: Trump has been described – by himself of his acolytes – as a "stable genius". Quite possibly, but I first want to see him shoveling the shit out of the stables.
I'd vastly prefer that we go into 2030 with a one term incumbent than either an open seat or someone running for their 4th term. Walz was always likely to win this year simply due to the environment. It's the next midterm. Him retiring is better for us, even if it is unlikely to change the outcome this year.
even if you had a permit to carry would you go into this raging hell with a gun clearly visible in a holster? would you rely on these ICE nazis to act rationally and respect your rights? The ice folks just love to see law abiding citizens do anything that could be interpreted as a threat to them so they feel justified in murdering someone. To paraphrase Don Corleone: "this war (must) stop now".How long before martial law/24 hour curfew or 4 fingers.
I'm probably in the minority here, but I've long hoped more people left-of-center would lawfully arm themselves. We're seeing exactly why in real time. The irony of all this is that for years it was the right screeching about needing the 2nd Amendment to protect from governmental tyranny. I don't think ICE cares whether or not you had a gun. They shot an unarmed woman in the face because she committed the sin of following conflicting instructions to turn her vehicle around.
Yeah, many people on the left have this misguided belief that the system will always do the right thing and protect them so long as they follow all the rules. That's complete BS, but plenty of people still believe it.
My sister used to believe that, until her experience as a member of her graduate student union and the blatantly illegal things the university administration and chancellor did to try to suppress it and violate the contracts and agreements they signed with it. Even for a year or two, she maintained that following the rules was the best way to go, even after I repeatedly told her that the only ultimate solution was the removal of the chancellor. It wasn't until she was about to graduate that she admitted that I was right with that.
A caustic observation: I have in all seriousness quipped that the fastest way to get gun control passed is for America’s women to arm themselves and "stand their ground" to defend their bodily autonomy and reproductive rights!
(For those who remember their history, California passed gun control under Governor Ronald Reagan, after the Black Panthers armed themselves to defend Black communities.)
I think the time has absolutely come for this. I have a buddy that's a progressive Marine and I went shooting with him back in October. I know many other of my normie Democratic friends thinking the same way.
Georgetown, Texas - Instead of trading barbs and highlighting their disagreements, Rep. Jasmine Crockett and state Rep. James Talarico were cordial and agreeable in their first Democratic primary debate in the Texas senate race today.
Considering what TX Democrats have to grapple with in this political environment and having to get traction in the state, better to make the debate about the issues and not negative mudslinging.
This is a good sign and reason to believe both of them are going to unite together once the primary is over.
For all of these cases I've heard of, the vacancy happens at the same time, or an instant before, she would take office. Even if Walz could in theory legally make the appointment, in practice he'd have no real world time to do so.
I know Paul Wellstone's son briefly considered running for Senator Smith's seat. That would be some fascinating history. I am sure there are plenty of names to consider,
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rnc-midterms-convention-2026/
Midterms: The Republican National Committee has approved a midterm convention for their candidates, set to be held tentatively in ~October in either Las Vegas or Dallas.
I suspect it's a good idea. Force a bunch of media coverage for themselves, possibly fire up the base, keep activists feeling involved. I'm pretty sure I advocated for us to adopt that idea in the distant past.
In this specific case I suspect it's going to be a cult fest centered entirely around their undying loyalty for the worst person. If so, they'll get a lot less benefit out of it than they could otherwise.
All it’ll be is pledging their undying allegiance to Der Fuehrer. They and their media do that every day as it is.
I personally think this midterm RNC is a stupid idea, as I’ve said before. Just imagine a bunch of loony GOP candidates having a national audience for their antics — including those in swing races. During a blue wave. Are they insane?
It’s a moronic idea. What are they going to do? Trot out Laura Loomer, JD Vance, Pillow Guy, and Vivek Ramaswamy? I encourage them to proceed. LMAO.
A big part of me doesn't want to believe, but I really think there's a chance that Ramaswamy could lose Ohio. (Deeply unlikeable personality combined with virulent MAGA-base racism.)
Ramaswamy is apparently re-branding himself...
https://politicalwire.com/2026/01/23/vivek-ramaswamy-adopts-new-persona-in-governors-bid/
Vivek Ramaswamy Adopts New Persona in Governor’s Bid
“He is also calling out bigotry and racism, while adopting a congenial tone more reminiscent of the Republican he hopes to succeed, term-limited Gov. Mike DeWine. Once a brash showman, Ramaswamy now presents himself to Ohioans as an open-minded statesman.”
Oh, MAGA folks just *love* having their bigotry and racism called out.
Also, when was he ever a "brash showman"? "Obnoxious, insufferable know-it-all" would be a more apt description.
I think Zaid Jilani, a Pakistani American heterodox leftist, had the most apt observation on Ramaswamy:
"I think Vivek gets psyched out from Twitter Nazis into thinking his biggest liability is that he’s brown when his biggest liability is that he’s a libertarian" quoting Vivek's exchange with Ezra Klein.
https://x.com/ZaidJilani/status/2012405360980562043
Could be a typo – probably meant "brash conman".
I will always wonderful how well Jim Tressel could have done in a primary against him. Especially if they had gotten started around the same time. I know Tressel has had his share of scandals in his time, but it would have made for an interesting race. No matter who Trump endorsed or didn't endorse.
I mean, in this environment you're only chance at minimizing losses is firing up the base. Swing and indie voters are off the table.
Anyone who tunes in to a midterm Nazi rally already has their mind made up. It’s only downside for them. Any stupid things they inevitably say in these speeches will be made into soundbites.
I'm not convinced that conventions make much of a difference nowadays even in presidential years.
I don't see how this will in any way benefit Republicans.
I get the thinking, but I do not believe it is a fluke that presidential conventions generate huge bumps for their party in the days after. Obviously that bump fades with time, but it doesn't wholly disappear and that bump can be capitalized on. That's the product of an enormous amount of media attention and energizing of the party base. Utilized properly I think the parties can absolutely benefit from it.
The reason the presidential conventions don't matter much, in my opinion, is that there's two of them: the benefit of the DNC on democrats is cancelled out by the benefit of the RNC on republicans. They're both reasonably competently run and executed, so the difference between a "good" convention and a "bad" convention is minimal and largely inside baseball to fill media story slots.
A midterm convention could be a great chance for candidates to spotlight themselves and create an identity that is separate from the incumbent admin, without inherently running away from that admin. Will republicans try to do that? I doubt it. But that's on them and their cult behavior, not on the idea itself.
For the party out of power it carries equally possible benefits, allowing the party to generate a lot of coverage that it is otherwise difficult to do while not holding the WH.
Midterm convention?
This is good news for the GOP! /s
I did a deep dive into the California Congressional maps for climate groups yesterday, and here's the toplines. (I posted in today's morning digest too but I figure it'll get more eyeballs on it on the weekly open thread. Hope that's all right -- if not, I will delete.)
If all goes well, Cal goes from 43-D, 9-R to 48-D, 4-R. Of those 48, at least 8 (winners in 1, 6, 11, 14, 22, 26, 38, and 48) and as many as 12 will be new faces.
In addition, the makeup of 9, 13, and 27 is changing to be much more Democratic. These 3 legislators are known for siding with the GOP majority on tough votes, so I'm hopeful that they'll be better representatives of their Democratic majority voters. (the makeup of 45, 47, and 49 is also changing to be more Democratic... the shifts are smaller, and IMO these reps are more reliable Dem votes on tough bills)
As for how I got to "up to 12" new faces: 5 Dem incumbents are facing challengers who have organized well enough to block their automatic endorsements at the party convention. All of these incumbents are old, and most are facing well funded primary challenges. They may all end up fine. But they're worth eyeballing esp if they still can't get endorsed at party convention. Those districts are 3 (Bera), 4, 7, 8, and 32.
Oh, and any climate group that endorses Jacqui Irwin in CA-26 needs to surrender their climate card.
Thoughts on Angela Gonzales-Torres and her chances? What about Hector De La Torre?
Jimmy Gomez is a perennial target for the DSA folk. They won a big race for LA City Controller (Kenneth Mejia) and they keep running people against Gomez. It was David Kim for a few cycles, and now they're on to Angela Gonzales-Torres. Gomez was caught napping one cycle, but from what I can see he's not going to make that mistake again. This will be a Dem vs Dem runoff in November.
And my own two cents' worth -- I'm on a "hug you at convention" basis with Gomez. He is a progressive. He's an establishment, non-DSA progressive (see Jamie Raskin) but he is good people. DSA needs to find someone better to target. They yammer on him for taking corporate PAC money, which is legit, but he doesn't take really bad money (Raytheon is the highest profile bad money). This is an extremely poor district with no money in it other than DTLA so I'm not surprised he's going outside the district for fundraising.
Hector de la Torre hasn't been on my radar yet and I will check him out. I'd like to see the overlap between old CA-38 and new CA-41. He's been out of office a LONG time and "CARB leader" isn't exactly a winning ballot designation.
What is CARB as an acronym?
California Air Resources Board.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Air_Resources_Board
It's an agency in California's own EPA. They're probably best known for regulating vehicle emissions, and other states can (and some do) adopt California's CARB vehicle emissions regulations, even when those other states cannot necessarily create their own independent standards.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’d heard Gomez also took AIPAC money, which was another motivator for his primary.
I do agree that there are worse targets. At least he’s sort of progressive. Dan Goldman reps a similarly left wing district and doesn’t vote like it (and most likely is gunning for statewide office anyway). And even he is less awful than, say, Ed Case, who has literally no excuse for his lousy record.
(Funny you mention Mejia, I’m pretty sure he actually ran against Gomez as a Green prior. He’s an independent now and was briefly a Dem.)
As much as I detest AIPAC, trying to primary everyone who has ever taken money from them is a fools game, they will donate to practically any incumbent who says the right words. Voting records are a better judgement of character than money in my book.
Hey, I didn’t say I was in favor of the primary. I just said one of the reasons I’d heard it had some support.
My apologies, although my point still stands more generally
Are you checking out Bernie and Khanna backed Randy Villegas running against Jasmeet Bains a pro-oil pro-ICE Blue Dog? I'm sure there is a lot of pressure from the establishment to support her.
Oil is a big deal in and around Bakersfield. Their high school athletic mascot is an oil rig driller for goodness sake.
The new district is not just Bakersfield and more importantly, she's pro ICE and reactionary (centrist).
The Kern River Oil field is in this district before and even now. Ironically, Oildale is excluded. How is she reactionary? That's a heavy accusation because people like Pat Buchanan and James Dobson are reactionary.
I mean reactionary centrist and the word reactionary has a wide array of uses.
She voted against banning ICE from wearing masks, against Prop 50 and is known to be one of the most conservative Democrats in the legislature.
Wasn't she the one who voted against redistricting yet she's running here. She sounds horrible
No offense, but the term "reactionary centrist" seems like an abuse of the English language. It strikes me as political obfuscation, a term designed primarily to stigmatize politicians who don’t embrace sufficiently-progressive policy positions.
PS. Mind you, I am by no means defending Bains! But I do care about language and the terms used in our discourse.
She also outran Harris by 15 points, she may not be needed to win the district but she's definitely the stronger candidate.
I've made it clear to anyone who hasn't yet tuned in that Villegas is the progressive choice. I just don't know if he makes it out of the primary. DCCC might not be doing anything official but they're sacrificing goats to make Bains the nominee.
"Scoop: Mills flew to California fundraisers while ICE raided Maine
Why it matters: Incumbent governors can typically seize on a public safety crisis or natural disaster to demonstrate leadership and dominate news cycles. But that only works if they are in state.
Mills' precise whereabouts from Tuesday to Thursday of this week were a source of speculation in Maine media, after the Bangor Daily News published a grainy image of Mills boarding a flight from Boston Logan International Airport to San Francisco.
Her staff later told the Portland Press Herald that she was heading to California for a "previously scheduled event.""
https://www.axios.com/2026/01/23/janet-mills-california-fundraisers-ice-maine
And she flew back and has been in Maine and making the rounds on national tv. Next?
Hahaha. You know this makes her look really bad but you'll pretend it doesn't.
God I cannot wait for this stupid primary to be over.
long wait!
136 days until June 9, but who is counting. :)
Not the first thing in this primary to make a candidate look bad
The first thing in the current times though. Voters are not going to care about what he did or wrote years ago.
Uh huh, sure. Just like voters did not care about Mark Robinson's minisoldr account years ago.
As if that's equivalent, we'll see. I hope Mills loses badly. All she can do is go beg for money from Schumer's bosses in California while ICE invades her state.
Next—is her choice to not participate in yesterday’s large anti-ice rally where Platner & many Governor and ME-2 candidates all gave speeches to rally the crowd and all of these candidates also stood arm in arm in solidarity. Her campaign continues to avoid public events and actually talking to Maine voters directly. Maybe she doesn’t want questions on her actual pro-Ice executive orders that she thankfully recently cancelled or her decision not to sign anti-ice legislation so it is delayed for months.
Like it or not, Platner's got an opening in the primary with this.
Rumor has it California has cell phone service and Governor Mills was doing an excellent job of keeping in touch with her staff, staying updated on developments – and even speaking to journalists.
Granted, I could be wrong about California having cell phone service...
Respectfully, there’s no way you can spin this, the optics are bad like Cancun Cruz.
Clearly you and I have very different ideas of what constitutes a "scandal". I’ll leave it at that. (Thank you for editing your post and removing the word scandal.)
Ok.
CA-48:
Well, he's back at his antics again just like he was pushed by the Tea Party back in 2010-2015 to go after anything and everything with the Obama Administration.
Yes, Darrell Issa again but this time, he's delusional if he thinks this kind of questioning of Jack Smith on investigating Trump is going to help him politically heading to the midterms.
By how much do you think Issa is going to lose this November if in fact all of the millions of wealth and donors can't save him? He's literally become a gnat that you can't ever get rid of.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_8BNFb_5Us
Is the NY Times hoping that Mayor Mamdani mishandles the upcoming major snowstorm?
New York City Could Get a Foot of Snow. Mamdani Knows It’s a Test. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/23/nyregion/mamdani-snow-nyc.html
It's a test for how Mamdani handles a major snowstorm?
Not the economy?
Flooding from hurricanes?
Another terrorist attack (god forbid)?
Housing?
NY Times sure wants to get those hits and clicks!
Yeah, hits and clicks. In the meantime, the NYT keeps printing hit pieces.
That’s what exhausts me about The NY Times.
I once thought it would be awesome to be a columnist or news writer. However, if I have to always be focused on these narrative pieces that don’t aim to be objective all the time, I’d probably resign from The NY Times or elsewhere.
The NYT desperately wants to turn Mamdani into another, to use a Chicago analogy, Michael Bilandic.
CA-Gov poll:
Bianco 18%
Hilton 17%
Porter 14%
Swalwell 11%
Steyer 8%
Becerra 6%
Mahan 5%
Villaraigosa 2%
Thurmond 1%
by Public Policy Polling on behalf of Katie Porter
Lots of time before the 6/2 primary so please do not panic. The R's only have 35%, most of the undecideds likely are Dems, and the Dem vote will surely consolidate.
If Mahan was smart, he would not run for Governor.
sorta surprising to me how the Anti Porter vote had been Becerra and to a lesser extent AV, but once Swalwell jumped in he vacuumed it all up.
link to the poll? did Betty Three become Betty Less Than One?
Mahan seems to have divided the centrist vote too.
Seems to be pretty even between Porter and Swalwell to be the next governor.
I am really caught in a bind.
Porter on the issues is better than Swalwell but Swalwell I’d argue offers more of an intent to competently run CA state government without being another Newsom. And he can fight back as well.
I love Porter with a whiteboard! Not sure I trust her in a boardroom or the Governor’s Mansion. If I was still living on the Left Coast, I’d vote Swalwell unless someone better comes along.
About the only thing I am critical with Swalwell about is the tech regulation issue.
However, I have also been impressed by his ability to give short and sharp answers to questions without getting long winded. Anything with tech regulation really should be applied at the federal level as it won’t give tech companies an excuse to move from one state to the next in pursuit of “business friendly” policies.
I also have spent plenty of time in Dublin, where Swalwell grew up, and someone coming from this part of the Bay Area as Governor would be more middle ground oriented. This would be a welcome change in state government.
I wouldn't put odds on the Dem candidates at this point. Apart from Steyer the campaign really hasn't started, and very few voters are even thinking much about it. The only thing that might be indicative now is fundraising, because that comes from insiders and hardcore types. Porter probably has less room to grow than the others though, because she was recently in a high-profile primary.
We have just over four months left until the primary. Still time for the primary to start becoming more competitive.
Interesting that Steyer is up at 8%. He is currently bombarding TV media in the LA area. He's the only candidate who I've seen advertising since getting back to California.
Well, Steyer has the money for that. It’s not as if he as a billionaire is cash strapped.
https://aldailynews.com/wahl-brooks-and-others-shake-up-gop-primaries-on-final-day-to-qualify/
The Alabama filing deadline was yesterday. Here's some updates:
Senate - Lt. Gov Will Ainsworth did not run, or for any other office, for that matter.
Governor - Former Democratic state Rep. Nate Mathis, 82, will run.
Lt. Governor - State GOP Chair John Wahl filed on the last day with an endorsement from Donald Trump.
U.S. House - Democratic Rep. Terri Sewell is running uncontested.
HD 20 - Former U.S. Rep Mo Brooks is primarying state Rep. Jim Lomax.
Nathan Mathis was the guy who did surprisingly well in AL-02 in 2016. Looking at his Wikipedia page, he's pretty much a perennial candidate as he lives in a very red area that stopped electing Dems locally starting in 1994. He's a peanut farmer, interestingly enough.
"Five Republicans qualified for Public Service Commission Place 2, including incumbent Chris Beeker III and former Alabama Auditor Jim Zeigler... Zeigler served a term on the PSC about 50 years ago. He’s most recently been the state’s two-term auditor. He ran unsuccessfully for secretary of state in 2022."
lol why not just stay retired?
Also going out of the way to endorse the state party chair for LG when the term-limited secretary of state and agriculture commissioner are also running. My guess is they're looking to influence the party long beyond Trump and aim for this stooge to become governor in eight years.
2026 will be the first year that Arizona will elect a lieutenant governor. Before, the SOS was in line to become governor, and has many times, often due to corruption.
The gubernatorial candidates choose the LG running mate and must do so at least 60 days prior to the general election. While there is a lot of speculation, none of the candidates have picked yet.
Katie Hobbs-Anna Tovar and Andy Biggs-Jake Hoffman tickets?
CBP executes man point-blank on the ground.
https://x.com/BTnewsroom/status/2015089230158999833?s=20
https://x.com/allenanalysis/status/2015101606102958258?s=20
They are not even human. Shame to those Dems who voted to fund them this week.
New clearer angles:
https://x.com/ryangrim/status/2015227532589580347?s=20
https://x.com/ChrisCernoch/status/2015157348264783960?s=20
Condition and circumstances unclear at this point. Be best not to get ahead of things.
Yeah, we'll wait and see. But this is sounding more like the armed militia thugs under Ghana military dictator (later turned elected president when the republic was restored) Jerry Rawlings that my girlfriend grew up under, who were far more interested in settling petty grudges (both personal and inter-ethnic) than executing justice.
Specifics of those above linked videos aside, there are now dozens of broadly documented, verified instances of these agents openly violating the constitutional and human rights of the people they interact with. US citizens holding up passports are being swept up, citizens and non citizens are ending up dead on the street or in government custody, in ways that would make the Russian justice system blush. Cellphones, documents, laws and court decisions, all ignored. Clearly, evil is being perpetrated. That footage is brutal. I don't think emotionally investing in debating specific video instances is productive or beneficial for my mental health tbh, but of course you cannot turn away, you must face it.
What I am interested in are the structural mechanics of how cleaning this up is going to work. Let's say in our fantasy that come 2029, we have a trifecta with a healthy margin in the House and somehow, 54-55 in the Senate. (not 60 of course).
How does the new, incoming administration go about investigating and prosecuting tens of thousands of federal agents, and ultimately, holding everyone From Trump, to the each member of the cabinet, down to all the mid level guys accountable? Are there even enough prosecutors? Would the court system permit such a thing? Do we have Democrats ready, willing and able to do the opposite of what Obama did, and spend almost all of their time and political capital looking BACK, and engaging in Nuremberg style cleaning and mass detrumpification of our institutions? Is such a thing even possible, given how committees, the Senate, Courts and prosecution works? Are the likes of Schumer, Jeffries going to be the patriots to put everything on the line to get this done? Everyone involved in these sordid crimes against humanity needs to be behind bars. Thousands of people.
This has been my exact question. There will be so many to prosecute. How will it be done?
As in other countries coming out of a fascist-type regime, appointment of a truth commission may do some good.
I don't want immunity in exchange for truth. New tribunals and Justice Department officials can be appointed:
We had better actually hold these people accountable when we’re in power again. If we don’t I honestly don’t think I could in good conscience be a Democrat. And if Trump pardons them all, I want them all brought up on state charges and I want the people who could be tried in other countries or international court extradited to face trial.
They can't spend almost all their time looking back. They also have to do things in real time to try to prevent it from happening again.
Failing to "look back" is part of what got us here in the first place. If we had spent some time focusing on the crimes of the Bush Administration and the Financial sector maybe we wouldn't be where we are today if there were actual consequences for some of these people.
I couldn't agree more, but _only_ (or almost only) looking back is not an option.
A compounding factor is that federal enforcement would have a high chance of being undone with pardons by a future republican. Unless the judicial process moves very fast and the punishments are short enough to be over before a next-next admin could do anything. The latter might be true, but not the former.
That would suggest we'd benefit from having a future democratic admin assisting state AGs going after ICE agents. This doesn't work in every state, but MN is unlikely to have a republican governor elected in a time frame to grant said pardons. Similar for many major blue states like CA, NY, IL, MA, MD, etc. The difficulty is getting such an effort to work and get all the associated state AGs on board.
For the people at the top we'd want it done by the federal government anyway, but for the lower level people I think pushing for state level actions makes more sense, where legally feasible.
Seems like he was just an observer and they fired multiple rounds into him. Vile.
https://x.com/allenanalysis/status/2015117858372554787
Yes, appears he has died. Disputed claims as to whether had a weapon or drew one. I’m seeing a lot of calls for Walz to deploy the national guard to protect the populace. Wouldn’t count on him doing that.
Potential for conflict between different forces, but Trump would try to federalize them.
If Trump does federalize them, what might happen next?
They follow his orders.
Based on the video and witnesses:
He had a permit to carry
He was legally exercising his 2nd Amendment right.
He did not draw the weapon.
He was filming when they approached him.
They had taken his weapon from its holster before they shot him.
https://x.com/adamscochran/status/2015129605565288899?s=46&t=sbdQQeYBqp0h_Zql717iTw
More of this is going to happen until or unless congress does something about them. Unfortunately I am not holding my breath, even with their budget being up right now. Republicans like this, and while democrats do not, not enough of our elected officials in the senate are brave enough to do anything about it.
We're going to see more and more stories like this. It's scary. That fear is a big part of what they want, unfortunately: for people to be too afraid to protest, to follow ICE, to do anything that impedes or publicly opposes ICE at all.
If Democrats actually do take control of Congress this fall, Trump is just going to completely ignore everything they do. He's not going to follow their laws at all.
Here's my question: is ICE still hiring new agents? If they are, perhaps progressives and Democrats should flood them with applications in order to change ICE from the inside.
Progressives and Democrats would ostracize anyone who joined ICE so how would that plan work?
Did you read the end of my comment? The whole point would be to change ICE from the inside so it stops doing what it did today. Anyone on the left who wants to ostracize someone trying to do that is an idiot.
They wouldn't except applications of people who are clearly there to do the right thing. And, even if there was some widespread agreement that liberal should join to change the culture, any member of ICE would still be looked at askance by liberals in the future. "No, I was one of the good Nazi's, I swear".
Regarding your first sentence, any progressive who's observed MAGA behavior should be able to fake being one fairly easily. As Spock pointed out in the Star Trek episode "Mirror, Mirror", it's a lot easier for civilized people to fake being a barbarian than for barbarians to fake being civilized people.
And your second sentence demonstrates something fundamentally wrong with a certain segment of the left. If someone has espoused progressive positions their whole life, and it is known that some progressives joined ICE for this reason, then someone who has done that shouldn't be looked at askance by liberals at all. And yet, unfortunately, some will. This goes right along with the fact that many liberals want their political candidates to be perfect, angelic people, who can somehow change conservatives' minds about any issue through simple conversation. Unfortunately, no such people exist, but certain segments of the left refuse to accept this and continue to refuse to support anyone but these nonexistent angels.
Relatedly, I'm really sick and tired of some liberals' tendency to quickly reject out-of-the-box ideas for mitigating the damage that Trump is doing. Especially when they refuse to provide any workable alternatives.
I'm not a hiring manager, but can anyone here imagine themselves in the shoes of a hiring manager in 2029 and seeing ICE during these 4 years on a person's resume? Chances are they would move to the next qualified applicant with nary a thought, unless they were in a deep red area.
it wouldn't
We don't even have to wait until the next congress. Their budget is up right now. Democrats can -- but probably will not -- do something right fucking now.
With respect to them ignoring the law: maybe, maybe not. If they will, we gain absolutely nothing by acquiescing in advance. Force them to eat the political cost.
And in other news:
. "God Punishes Trump by Turning US into Greenland"
THE CELESTIAL REALM (The Borowitz Report) — Stating that He had had “just about enough of this idiot,” on Saturday God wreaked revenge on Donald J. Trump by transforming the United States of America into Greenland.
In a terse public statement, the Almighty declared, “Prayers answered, jerkwad.”
The act of God coupled with His blistering pronouncement left many atheists reconsidering their positions, nonbelievers reported.
In Canada, Prime Minister Mark Carney extended a helping hand to his beleaguered American counterpart, offering, “Since we know how to handle cold weather, we would consider making the United States our eleventh province.”
https://www.borowitzreport.com/p/god-punishes-trump-by-turning-us
Speaking as a Canadian, the hell we will.
I was going to type up a longer diatribe here, but I don't think I can without getting myself even more upset, but suffice it to say that Prime Minister Carney (the real one, not the Borowitz parody) speaks for me, and if YouTube comments are to be believed, people in most of Europe, the Commonwealth, and elsewhere. You all seem like nice, reasonable people for the most part, but understand that now, and for a damned long time to come, we aren't going to trust you as a nation, and probably won't trust you as individuals, at least not without a lot of rapport-building first. There are far too many Americans who still think this will all get better in a couple of years, that the rest of the world just needs to get over it and things will be forgotten, and I cannot stress enough that this will not be the case. We will remember all of this.
This seems totally reasonable.
You're telling me. Just got back from a Reddit thread where some of the users were (mockingly) implying Americans deserved to die in the ice storm going on now. If I needed a reminder not to go back to Reddit, that was it.
Just keep in mind that the American people, by and large, do not want to invade Canada or Greenland or wherever. Trump =/= the American people.
Andrew, as a displaced Norseman, I totally understand your sentiments. For the record, Mark Carney’s speech at Davos is one of the best speeches I have heard from a statesman in many, many years.
I think most of us know that. Canadians know many Americans don't support Trump, but a plurality elected him. There's absolutely no good reason for Canadians to trust current or future American politicians or the American people in general.
https://marylandmatters.org/2026/01/23/hoyer-backs-boafo-new-leaders-for-black-caucus-muse-makes-a-choice-more-in-political-notes/
MD-5: Del. Adrian Boafo received an endorsement from incumbent Rep. Steny Hoyer. Del. Nicole Williams and Prince George's County councilwoman Wala Blegay also filed to run.
NC-4:
https://www.instagram.com/p/DTvylHpDxeR/
College Democrats are backing Nida Allam.
I voted for her in this year’s primary. I think some safe D seats across the country will flip to more progressive candidates this year.
The incumbent, Valerie Foushee, is already a strong progressive. I suspect she wins re-election easily.
The district has a lot of immigrants and was drawn to be friendlier to Allam. And Foushee's 70, Allam is young.
I hope Lisa Demuth loses her MN governor's race BIG TIME after ICE murdered another innocent person, a 38 year old white male RN, today.
I'm numb and furious at the same time.
Lindell might just get the nomination
Or Jensen again
I don't any Republicans winning statewide in MN for the foreseeable future, even in red wave years. The state's trending away from them anyway because it's so dominated by the Minneapolis metro.
A VA nurse to boot.
The man fatally shot by Border Patrol agents in Minneapolis is Alex Jeffrey Pretti, a U.S. citizen with no criminal record, according to a senior law enforcement official familiar with the investigation.
Mr. Pretti, who was 37, had a firearms permit, required by state law in Minnesota to carry a handgun, officials said. He was a registered nurse in Minnesota, public records show, and lived in an apartment in Minneapolis a short drive away from where he was killed.
Ms. Anway said Mr. Pretti followed the news closely and cared deeply about social justice and fighting for fairness.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/24/us/alex-jeffrey-pretti-was-an-icu-nurse-at-the-va-hospital.html?smid=url-share
He’s in my age bracket. All the white men in this country (myself included) who think their skin color will protect them are mistaken.
I hope the murderers of Pretti and Good stand trial some day and get the death penalty. But it won’t be until Trump is out of office.
Life without parole would be good. And they can be charged under state laws.
I’ve been thinking that Walz would’ve been fine had he ran for re election. The fraud stuff has completely dropped from the news and pales in comparison to the atrocities with ICE right now.
only thing a repub could get more than a handful of votes is shit house cleaner. then again, maybe not!
Speaking of which: Trump has been described – by himself of his acolytes – as a "stable genius". Quite possibly, but I first want to see him shoveling the shit out of the stables.
I'd vastly prefer that we go into 2030 with a one term incumbent than either an open seat or someone running for their 4th term. Walz was always likely to win this year simply due to the environment. It's the next midterm. Him retiring is better for us, even if it is unlikely to change the outcome this year.
Same rationale why Evers retiring was the correct move. I’ll be forever grateful to him that he stopped Wisconsin from going the way of Iowa.
even if you had a permit to carry would you go into this raging hell with a gun clearly visible in a holster? would you rely on these ICE nazis to act rationally and respect your rights? The ice folks just love to see law abiding citizens do anything that could be interpreted as a threat to them so they feel justified in murdering someone. To paraphrase Don Corleone: "this war (must) stop now".How long before martial law/24 hour curfew or 4 fingers.
I'm probably in the minority here, but I've long hoped more people left-of-center would lawfully arm themselves. We're seeing exactly why in real time. The irony of all this is that for years it was the right screeching about needing the 2nd Amendment to protect from governmental tyranny. I don't think ICE cares whether or not you had a gun. They shot an unarmed woman in the face because she committed the sin of following conflicting instructions to turn her vehicle around.
Yeah, many people on the left have this misguided belief that the system will always do the right thing and protect them so long as they follow all the rules. That's complete BS, but plenty of people still believe it.
My sister used to believe that, until her experience as a member of her graduate student union and the blatantly illegal things the university administration and chancellor did to try to suppress it and violate the contracts and agreements they signed with it. Even for a year or two, she maintained that following the rules was the best way to go, even after I repeatedly told her that the only ultimate solution was the removal of the chancellor. It wasn't until she was about to graduate that she admitted that I was right with that.
A caustic observation: I have in all seriousness quipped that the fastest way to get gun control passed is for America’s women to arm themselves and "stand their ground" to defend their bodily autonomy and reproductive rights!
(For those who remember their history, California passed gun control under Governor Ronald Reagan, after the Black Panthers armed themselves to defend Black communities.)
I think the time has absolutely come for this. I have a buddy that's a progressive Marine and I went shooting with him back in October. I know many other of my normie Democratic friends thinking the same way.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5704882-texas-senate-democrats-debate/amp/
Georgetown, Texas - Instead of trading barbs and highlighting their disagreements, Rep. Jasmine Crockett and state Rep. James Talarico were cordial and agreeable in their first Democratic primary debate in the Texas senate race today.
Good. No reason for Talarico to go negative on her.
There's really no reason to go negative here, it'll just backfire.
I concur with Anonymouse and Kevin H.
Considering what TX Democrats have to grapple with in this political environment and having to get traction in the state, better to make the debate about the issues and not negative mudslinging.
This is a good sign and reason to believe both of them are going to unite together once the primary is over.
Just 38 days until the Mar 3rd primary election day, and early voting starts a couple weeks before that. It's almost showtime...
If Senator Klobuchar enters the Gubernatorial Race, does she clear the Democratic Primary field?
I would imagine so
Yeah, probably. Potentially a progressive challenge but I doubt a serious elected/former elected.
If (when) Amy wins, who would appoint her Senate vacancy? Walz or her?
And how long is that appointment until a special election?
And any guesses on the top possibilities who might get named?
For all of these cases I've heard of, the vacancy happens at the same time, or an instant before, she would take office. Even if Walz could in theory legally make the appointment, in practice he'd have no real world time to do so.
Klobuchar would make the appointment.
I know Paul Wellstone's son briefly considered running for Senator Smith's seat. That would be some fascinating history. I am sure there are plenty of names to consider,