Any one want to tell me how good of a candidate Males will be in CA-25? I don’t care that Ruiz won by 12, that district is yet another Hispanic district shifting hard to the right. I’m honestly shocked that the NRCC didn’t add it or CA-21 to its target list
Right, but do we know how good of an opponent Males is? Because while that ‘06 and ‘18 stat is true, I’ve watched too much sports to say that’s a pattern that will hold forever.
It swung hard right in 2024, but I wouldn't assume that this was an ongoing or even permanent one-time shift. Trump's approvals among Latinos are terrible, considerably worse than his overall approvals.
Maybe I'm smoking hopium, but it's hard to see the "Trump coalition" staying unified post-Trump. Unless a seamless replacement comes along (which seems unlikely; autocrats absolutely HATE the idea of passing their torch to a successor), I think a lot of MAGA cult voters will bow out of political participation, and at least some of Trump's softer support—the "I never thought the leopard would eat MY face!" types—will swing back toward Democrats.
Right, but do we know how good of an opponent Males will be? Because if he’s stronger than Ruiz’s last opponent, we could end up with a dogfight regardless.
I don't see a city councilman from a small town as much of a threat. If he were a popular countywide officeholder it might be different, although 2026 is shaping up as a very bad environment for the GOP.
I'm glad Wiley is officially throwing his hat into the U.S. Senate race here in North Carolina. Hopefully it'll get Roy Cooper to jump in (and beat Thom Tillis) after his Harvard excursion ends late next month.
I would be...pretty surprised if Nickel jumping in was done without conversations with Cooper. The "normie lane" folks generally avoid stepping on each other's toes, and I really don't think Cooper has any interest in another campaign.
I think Nickel announced today because FDJT's policies are MUCH worse than people thought, and voters here want a Dem candidate now to call out Tillis' cowardice directly.
Cooper still has a month to really make up his mind.
underrated possibility that Cooper genuinely isn't sure at this point, wants to take some time to recharge, and Wiley can raise money that could be used for a future House or Senate campaign if Cooper does get in this summer. If Cooper doesn't get in, it behooves Nickel to announce earlier for fundraising purposes.
It's hard to say. He might've given Cooper the heads up that he was jumping in to at least keep attention on Tillis and this race. He also said last year once he was gerrymandered out of his district that he was eyeing the Senate race. He might prove to be the stronger candidate or not. Either way, the primary campaign for this race needs to start sooner than later.
Not sure what the argument for Nickel being a stronger candidate would be. Seems like a liability to me that he ran in California of all places earlier in his career.
And McCormick never ran for office in Connecticut.
I'm worried about my home state of Pennsylvania, honestly. Shapiro will be re-elected (hopefully with downballot coattails), but given the trajectory of the party registration numbers, it sure looks like we might be on the precipice of becoming East Ohio.
I fully understand retaking Congress is more important holding NJ Governor, and not trying to beat a dead horse here, but we still may end up with a not great nominee. Spiller has no donor support, just all money from his Super Pac, and seems to be taking votes away from Baraka/Fulop within their fellow executive officials lane. While I would love either Baraka or Sherill, the otherwise positive demise of the line has me concerned we have a general election on our hands if Spiller somehow pulls this off. Hat tip to Paleo for explaining my concern about Sweeney is overblown, there arent enough votes in the cow counties to get him the nomination.
Sherrill is the stronger candidate in my honest opinion. Well spoken, decorated veteran, down-to-earth congresswoman. Would make a damn good Governor. Her House seat would need filled in a special election, though? The safe choice considering how close Murphy's 2021 reelection was against the possible repeat Republican nominee Ciattarelli, who suggested creating a state-level DOGE in Trenton. Democrats should immediately pounce on that!! 💙🇺🇲
I have a reason for that. In 2024, Trump only gained around 100k votes in NJ (average 1.8 million in 2020 & 1.9 million in 2024), whereas Harris got around 400k LESS than Biden in 2020 (Biden 2.6 million in 2020 & Harris 2.2 million in 2024).
Turnout was 72% in NJ in 2020, dropped 7% down to 65% in 2024, likely reduced DEMOCRATIC turnout, the bad debate Biden had as well as the switcheroo depressed base turnout it seems. Some Independents going to Trump from Biden from 2020 wouldn't have helped either!! 💙🇺🇲
NC Senate race next year will be a major test of the NC state courts green lighting all manner of election chicanery, in the manner of the Riggs-Griffith Supreme Court election FUBAR, with an honest win by a Dem/progressive at the point of now being overturned.
Right now, the Democratic Party in NC could run Christ himself, and still lose by adverse court decisions.
Even if our nominee wins 100% of the vote, expect Tillis to be seated-the North Carolina's Supreme Court has shown it will steal elections (I fully expect North Carolina to also have 14R-0D Congressional Delegation post 2026 thanks to the Supreme Court just stealing elections.)
I don't see Tillis pulling a Griffin if he loses. In his two Senate races, he won by the skin of his teeth both times. If he loses outright by several points or by the same margin, he will likely concede.
Trump has paused the sweeping reciprocal tariffs the U.S. imposed on dozens of countries this week… Economists said the tariffs could cause a severe global recession, and major investors warned of even worse, up to a possible "economic nuclear winter."
We don’t know yet if a recession is set to hit. That’s all speculative at this point. The numbers of jobs added per month since this year began is an indication there’s still growth even if volatile.
The pullback or pausing may make a temporary slowdown to the economy. However, because they’ve been instituted for a short period of time, the economy can potentially pick up overtime depending on the dynamics happening.
A 60bps rise in 10 year yields despite a stock market sell off forced their hands. Bessent is a hack but he’s not a stupid one (ironically he’s a Soros protege - and was around for Black Wednesday in 1992). This is almost certainly him asserting his authority over Navarro and Lutnick.
If Navarro gets fired soon the market probably rallies on that news alone lol
Axios article says it's a 90 day pause instead of cancelled outright. Question is what happens in three months? Does it get delayed again, formally cancelled, or implement anyway.
Things are chaotic enough that all three are plausible.
Mix or delay and implementation on a country level would be my guess, especially if people like Bessent can convince Trump he’s building a grand anti-China trade coalition by negotiating
apparently that’s how Bessent broke through to him - emphasized a trade war with China as politically popular and the rest of it not and turned the Orange Don’s attention entirely on China
My point was more: we do not really know. Policy decisions are entirely opaque right now. Decisions are made haphazardly and whether or not there is follow through is unknowable by anyone, arguably even by insiders.
Only one week removed from "Liberation Day". It's kind of like if on July 11, 1776, George Washington had said "Fuck it! We're going back to the Brits!"
"I'm writing to the White House to demand who knew in advance that the President was going to, once again, flip flop on tariffs. And are people cashing in? There is just all too much opportunity for people in the White House and the administration to be insider trading"
Rep. Mike Levin:
Trump posts THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO BUY!!!—then caves on tariffs hours later. Market surges. Middle-class investors who sold during the chaos lose big. Insiders win again. This is market manipulation to help his base profit. How is this legal or OK?
When you have Ben Shapiro, Rand Paul and even one of Trump’s staunchest supporters on Wall Street, Bill Ackman, being critical of Trump’s original tariff plan, you know he’s cornered and has nowhere to go except cave in.
I’m referring to Treasuries. Spiking 10y yields despite a weak stock market was about as strong a vote of no confidence as you can get from financial markets
Ezra Klein Talks With David Shor about the 2024 Presidential Election
I don’t think this has been shared here but Ezra Klein recently had a conversation with political data scientist David Shor, who has previously worked for David Plouffe, on uncovering findings about the 2024 presidential election.
Among one of the findings is showing how two Harris campaign ads in the beginning of her campaign were effective but that her campaign transitioned to being more about preserving democracy later.
Shor also says that “wokeness” really didn’t impact the 2024 presidential election as much as inflation, cost of living and crime did.
With the benefit of hindsight, I really don't think that 2024 was winnable against Trump. America wanted a return to 2019 and got the opportunity to return 2019's president to power.
Harris excited the base enough to fight the House to a draw and keep at least four Senate seats in the blue column (MI, WI, NV, and AZ). I shudder to think of what might have happened if Biden had stayed in to the end (and I like Biden!).
I think it’s psychologically driven more than it is simply about the economy. Pre-pandemic, it was just a much better and less chaotic economy. You didn’t hear many people dread inflation and talk about it a lot.
Of course, this came before the infrastructure bills President Biden signed into law.
It certainly didn't help that certain moneyed interests spent the entire Biden presidency trying to talk a recession into existence. (Never underestimate the number of people who were BIG MAD that labor made some incremental gains in the aftermath of the pandemic.)
The endless chatter about a recession being on the horizons. Every damn quarter of Biden’s presidency during when the economy was growing. Predictions that never materialized as true.
As far as I’m concerned, I listen to economists like Joseph Stiglitz, Robert Shiller and others who know a lot about severe downturns, depressions and the real nuts and bolts of the economy. Hard facts please!
I don't think it was ever winnable for Biden, even against Trump who was probably the weakest of the plausible GOP candidates. I think Trump would have been beatable if Biden had announced after the midterm that he wouldn't seek a second term, but even the strongest possible Dem probably would have been about 50-50.
Lmao, I told y'all that he's a moderate Republican, a real Sinema and a DINO. After all, he was the protege of Susan Collins. He's extremely sad that Trump repealed the tariffs and claims that most Americans don't own stocks which is absolutely untrue. A real traitor, Progressives should actually primary him. He's useless on most votes including the stopgap funding bill and build back better so Idc even if he loses.
Extremely happy that he won't enter the Senate primary.
Real progressives certainly don't want to tank the global economy. There are smart ways to move toward a fairer trade policy; what Trump is doing ain't one of them.
I think deemphasizing these tariffs with smart regulation and closing the loopholes in the trade deals that corporations use to exploit to get cheap labor is better.
Yes, as well as simply embracing the reality that certain types of manufacturing are no longer feasible in the United States (and the types of manufacturing that ARE feasible generally don't require massive plants with thousands of workers). The 1950s are not coming back.
Technology has contributed a lot to this, especially with automation.
However, having to outsource to other countries for cheap labor is because of arrogant corporations. I have no problem with manufacturing evolving and creating more jobs in the process but not at the expense of labor having to see their jobs shipped overseas.
Yes. I remember in previous discussions you were talking about supporting tariffs up to a certain extent although I don't recall this was about impulsive acts.
Ever since the 1920's, the economy has become increasingly global. It's really hard to implement tariffs without potential adverse ramifications to the global economy unless as you point out there's more careful negotiations.
Also, with countries like Cuba that badly need trade to become more prosperous, it's bad optics.
Any one want to tell me how good of a candidate Males will be in CA-25? I don’t care that Ruiz won by 12, that district is yet another Hispanic district shifting hard to the right. I’m honestly shocked that the NRCC didn’t add it or CA-21 to its target list
I can't imagine Ruiz will lose, not a single D incumbent lost a general election in 2006 or 2018, not even ones in seats won by Bush 04 or Trump 16.
Right, but do we know how good of an opponent Males is? Because while that ‘06 and ‘18 stat is true, I’ve watched too much sports to say that’s a pattern that will hold forever.
It swung hard right in 2024, but I wouldn't assume that this was an ongoing or even permanent one-time shift. Trump's approvals among Latinos are terrible, considerably worse than his overall approvals.
Maybe I'm smoking hopium, but it's hard to see the "Trump coalition" staying unified post-Trump. Unless a seamless replacement comes along (which seems unlikely; autocrats absolutely HATE the idea of passing their torch to a successor), I think a lot of MAGA cult voters will bow out of political participation, and at least some of Trump's softer support—the "I never thought the leopard would eat MY face!" types—will swing back toward Democrats.
Some autocrats love to pass on power to their children. Trump won't, because he's a narcissist who doesn't appear to really like his children.
Right, but do we know how good of an opponent Males will be? Because if he’s stronger than Ruiz’s last opponent, we could end up with a dogfight regardless.
I don't see a city councilman from a small town as much of a threat. If he were a popular countywide officeholder it might be different, although 2026 is shaping up as a very bad environment for the GOP.
I'm glad Wiley is officially throwing his hat into the U.S. Senate race here in North Carolina. Hopefully it'll get Roy Cooper to jump in (and beat Thom Tillis) after his Harvard excursion ends late next month.
I would be...pretty surprised if Nickel jumping in was done without conversations with Cooper. The "normie lane" folks generally avoid stepping on each other's toes, and I really don't think Cooper has any interest in another campaign.
I think Nickel announced today because FDJT's policies are MUCH worse than people thought, and voters here want a Dem candidate now to call out Tillis' cowardice directly.
Cooper still has a month to really make up his mind.
underrated possibility that Cooper genuinely isn't sure at this point, wants to take some time to recharge, and Wiley can raise money that could be used for a future House or Senate campaign if Cooper does get in this summer. If Cooper doesn't get in, it behooves Nickel to announce earlier for fundraising purposes.
Yea this is probably a sign that Cooper isn't running. I don't think Nickel would waste his time in an uphill fight.
It's hard to say. He might've given Cooper the heads up that he was jumping in to at least keep attention on Tillis and this race. He also said last year once he was gerrymandered out of his district that he was eyeing the Senate race. He might prove to be the stronger candidate or not. Either way, the primary campaign for this race needs to start sooner than later.
Not sure what the argument for Nickel being a stronger candidate would be. Seems like a liability to me that he ran in California of all places earlier in his career.
That didn't stop that Connecticut millionaire from unseating an incumbent U.S. Senator in Pennsylvania last year.
yeah but media doesn't just unquestioningly carry our attack ads the way they do for Republican Senate candidates
And McCormick never ran for office in Connecticut.
I'm worried about my home state of Pennsylvania, honestly. Shapiro will be re-elected (hopefully with downballot coattails), but given the trajectory of the party registration numbers, it sure looks like we might be on the precipice of becoming East Ohio.
I fully understand retaking Congress is more important holding NJ Governor, and not trying to beat a dead horse here, but we still may end up with a not great nominee. Spiller has no donor support, just all money from his Super Pac, and seems to be taking votes away from Baraka/Fulop within their fellow executive officials lane. While I would love either Baraka or Sherill, the otherwise positive demise of the line has me concerned we have a general election on our hands if Spiller somehow pulls this off. Hat tip to Paleo for explaining my concern about Sweeney is overblown, there arent enough votes in the cow counties to get him the nomination.
https://newjerseyglobe.com/the-watcher/the-watcher-democratic-governors-race-is-getting-tighter-poll-says/
I don't think Spiller will win. The Fulop poll still has Sherrill ahead.
Sherrill is the stronger candidate in my honest opinion. Well spoken, decorated veteran, down-to-earth congresswoman. Would make a damn good Governor. Her House seat would need filled in a special election, though? The safe choice considering how close Murphy's 2021 reelection was against the possible repeat Republican nominee Ciattarelli, who suggested creating a state-level DOGE in Trenton. Democrats should immediately pounce on that!! 💙🇺🇲
Yeah, I thought that 2021's unexpectedly-close margin was due to Covid, but seeing how New Jersey voted in 2024, I'm not so sure now.
I have a reason for that. In 2024, Trump only gained around 100k votes in NJ (average 1.8 million in 2020 & 1.9 million in 2024), whereas Harris got around 400k LESS than Biden in 2020 (Biden 2.6 million in 2020 & Harris 2.2 million in 2024).
Turnout was 72% in NJ in 2020, dropped 7% down to 65% in 2024, likely reduced DEMOCRATIC turnout, the bad debate Biden had as well as the switcheroo depressed base turnout it seems. Some Independents going to Trump from Biden from 2020 wouldn't have helped either!! 💙🇺🇲
[BItter comments about the Democratic base failing to recognize the threat of Trump withheld]
Yes, there would be a special election. With a Republican in the White House, Democrats should not have much of a problem holding it.
NC Senate race next year will be a major test of the NC state courts green lighting all manner of election chicanery, in the manner of the Riggs-Griffith Supreme Court election FUBAR, with an honest win by a Dem/progressive at the point of now being overturned.
Right now, the Democratic Party in NC could run Christ himself, and still lose by adverse court decisions.
I just hope that—regardless of the outcome—it's not yet another famous NC razor-thin margin of victory.
Even if our nominee wins 100% of the vote, expect Tillis to be seated-the North Carolina's Supreme Court has shown it will steal elections (I fully expect North Carolina to also have 14R-0D Congressional Delegation post 2026 thanks to the Supreme Court just stealing elections.)
That depends on how the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the NC Supreme Court election.
If they're allowed to annul 63,000+ votes, it doesn't matter how big a margin of potential victory Democrats get.
I don't see Tillis pulling a Griffin if he loses. In his two Senate races, he won by the skin of his teeth both times. If he loses outright by several points or by the same margin, he will likely concede.
TRUMP CAVES!
Trump has paused the sweeping reciprocal tariffs the U.S. imposed on dozens of countries this week… Economists said the tariffs could cause a severe global recession, and major investors warned of even worse, up to a possible "economic nuclear winter."
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/live-blog/2025-04-08/trump-tariffs-stock-market-updates?srnd=homepage-americas
https://www.axios.com/2025/04/09/trump-tariffs-pause-china-stocks-recession
I wonder how this will influence the markets and upcoming elections? Too early to tell, of course.
(Meanwhile, someone ought to reassign this "stable genius" to a task better suited to his talents: Shoveling out the stables!)
is 130% tariff on China and a 10% global tariff caving? Seems like the markets are overreacting here.
Considering the rates to be levied on Vietnam and other major import partners absolutely
A recession is coming regardless, but those tariff rates in place for months would've resulted in a global depression.
We don’t know yet if a recession is set to hit. That’s all speculative at this point. The numbers of jobs added per month since this year began is an indication there’s still growth even if volatile.
The pullback or pausing may make a temporary slowdown to the economy. However, because they’ve been instituted for a short period of time, the economy can potentially pick up overtime depending on the dynamics happening.
Absolutely, but as we know, markets are irrational, because they're composed of people.
A 60bps rise in 10 year yields despite a stock market sell off forced their hands. Bessent is a hack but he’s not a stupid one (ironically he’s a Soros protege - and was around for Black Wednesday in 1992). This is almost certainly him asserting his authority over Navarro and Lutnick.
If Navarro gets fired soon the market probably rallies on that news alone lol
Is this pumping and dumping or dumping and pumping?
Sell high, buy low. Especially if you’re in the know.
Axios article says it's a 90 day pause instead of cancelled outright. Question is what happens in three months? Does it get delayed again, formally cancelled, or implement anyway.
Things are chaotic enough that all three are plausible.
Mix or delay and implementation on a country level would be my guess, especially if people like Bessent can convince Trump he’s building a grand anti-China trade coalition by negotiating
Yeah, Trump needs to be convinced that he's winning.
I’d like the pressure on him to give Democrats what they want count as winning.
If that’s the case, sign me up please.
apparently that’s how Bessent broke through to him - emphasized a trade war with China as politically popular and the rest of it not and turned the Orange Don’s attention entirely on China
Forced to guess that's what I would say too.
My point was more: we do not really know. Policy decisions are entirely opaque right now. Decisions are made haphazardly and whether or not there is follow through is unknowable by anyone, arguably even by insiders.
Only one week removed from "Liberation Day". It's kind of like if on July 11, 1776, George Washington had said "Fuck it! We're going back to the Brits!"
I’d like to get a look at his stock portfolio. I don’t think he’d look so stupid.
Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA):
"I'm writing to the White House to demand who knew in advance that the President was going to, once again, flip flop on tariffs. And are people cashing in? There is just all too much opportunity for people in the White House and the administration to be insider trading"
Rep. Mike Levin:
Trump posts THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO BUY!!!—then caves on tariffs hours later. Market surges. Middle-class investors who sold during the chaos lose big. Insiders win again. This is market manipulation to help his base profit. How is this legal or OK?
Nixon said it wasn't illegal when the president did it. That wasn't true then, but it's the country we live in now.
When you have Ben Shapiro, Rand Paul and even one of Trump’s staunchest supporters on Wall Street, Bill Ackman, being critical of Trump’s original tariff plan, you know he’s cornered and has nowhere to go except cave in.
Setting aside all that, bond markets are undefeated
True.
You mean other than U.S. treasuries?
I’m referring to Treasuries. Spiking 10y yields despite a weak stock market was about as strong a vote of no confidence as you can get from financial markets
Oh, I didn't realize you were making a sarcastic remark.
Ezra Klein Talks With David Shor about the 2024 Presidential Election
I don’t think this has been shared here but Ezra Klein recently had a conversation with political data scientist David Shor, who has previously worked for David Plouffe, on uncovering findings about the 2024 presidential election.
Among one of the findings is showing how two Harris campaign ads in the beginning of her campaign were effective but that her campaign transitioned to being more about preserving democracy later.
Shor also says that “wokeness” really didn’t impact the 2024 presidential election as much as inflation, cost of living and crime did.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Sx0J7dIlL7c&pp=ygUVZXpyYSBrbGVpbiBkYXZpZCBzaG9y
With the benefit of hindsight, I really don't think that 2024 was winnable against Trump. America wanted a return to 2019 and got the opportunity to return 2019's president to power.
Harris excited the base enough to fight the House to a draw and keep at least four Senate seats in the blue column (MI, WI, NV, and AZ). I shudder to think of what might have happened if Biden had stayed in to the end (and I like Biden!).
I think it’s psychologically driven more than it is simply about the economy. Pre-pandemic, it was just a much better and less chaotic economy. You didn’t hear many people dread inflation and talk about it a lot.
Of course, this came before the infrastructure bills President Biden signed into law.
It certainly didn't help that certain moneyed interests spent the entire Biden presidency trying to talk a recession into existence. (Never underestimate the number of people who were BIG MAD that labor made some incremental gains in the aftermath of the pandemic.)
The endless chatter about a recession being on the horizons. Every damn quarter of Biden’s presidency during when the economy was growing. Predictions that never materialized as true.
As far as I’m concerned, I listen to economists like Joseph Stiglitz, Robert Shiller and others who know a lot about severe downturns, depressions and the real nuts and bolts of the economy. Hard facts please!
And Trump’s rapidly deteriorating approvals are a function of the realization that he’s not actually bringing 2019 back and never will
To which I say "Duh!"
Sadly, it appears that America had to FA&FO.
Like Germany in 1933, but only -32% of their electorate.
I don't think it was ever winnable for Biden, even against Trump who was probably the weakest of the plausible GOP candidates. I think Trump would have been beatable if Biden had announced after the midterm that he wouldn't seek a second term, but even the strongest possible Dem probably would have been about 50-50.
https://www.axios.com/2025/04/08/trump-tariffs-house-democrats-jared-golden
Lmao, I told y'all that he's a moderate Republican, a real Sinema and a DINO. After all, he was the protege of Susan Collins. He's extremely sad that Trump repealed the tariffs and claims that most Americans don't own stocks which is absolutely untrue. A real traitor, Progressives should actually primary him. He's useless on most votes including the stopgap funding bill and build back better so Idc even if he loses.
Extremely happy that he won't enter the Senate primary.
Can't imagine a trade war with Canada would be good for his district.
You do know that real progressives don’t worship on the altar of free trade and Wall Street.
Real progressives certainly don't want to tank the global economy. There are smart ways to move toward a fairer trade policy; what Trump is doing ain't one of them.
I think deemphasizing these tariffs with smart regulation and closing the loopholes in the trade deals that corporations use to exploit to get cheap labor is better.
Yes, as well as simply embracing the reality that certain types of manufacturing are no longer feasible in the United States (and the types of manufacturing that ARE feasible generally don't require massive plants with thousands of workers). The 1950s are not coming back.
Technology has contributed a lot to this, especially with automation.
However, having to outsource to other countries for cheap labor is because of arrogant corporations. I have no problem with manufacturing evolving and creating more jobs in the process but not at the expense of labor having to see their jobs shipped overseas.
Those ways also involve negotiations, not absolutely harebrained sudden huge tariffs based on no kind of mathematical sense at all.
Yes. I remember in previous discussions you were talking about supporting tariffs up to a certain extent although I don't recall this was about impulsive acts.
Ever since the 1920's, the economy has become increasingly global. It's really hard to implement tariffs without potential adverse ramifications to the global economy unless as you point out there's more careful negotiations.
Also, with countries like Cuba that badly need trade to become more prosperous, it's bad optics.
Golden sucks on trade. He's still the best we're going to get out of that district.
He was there when it mattered during the first two years of the Biden presidency. (I don't recall him pulling any Sinemanchin tantrums.)
And he was never going to run against Collins—he worked for her at one time, and I'm pretty sure they're still cordial.
Yeah, I don’t recall him screwing us over and causing us to not pass legislation. He does what he does because it helps him win.