Does anyone know if any NC statewide Democrat other than Josh Stein won any of the Republican congressional districts?
I was wondering because Dems made important gains in the western part of the state, and they should definitely contest NC-11 heavily. And it occurred to me that maybe there was a slight chance that one of the other victorious statewide Dems had won it.
Unfortunately this is not easy to get. The state Board of Elections site gives results by county but not by congressional district. This isn't enough information since, for example, solidly Democratic Guilford County, where I live, is split between three overwhelmingly Republican districts.
However, given that the other Democratic winners generally won by solid for NC (2-3%) margins, but not by the 15% landslide that Stein got, and given how gerrymandered our congressional districts are, I would bet that none of the other Democrats won any of those Republican-held districts.
CA-Lege: About a month ago I shared whispers I had heard that Trump was ahead in an open Dem-held Assembly seat that Biden had won by double digits. From today's Politico:
"One of the biggest blows to Democrats in the Assembly was the loss of an open Imperial County seat held by Assemblymember Eduardo Garcia, who opted not to run for reelection. The Latino-majority district, in the far southeastern corner of California along the Arizona and Mexico border, has long been a Democratic stronghold. Republican Jeff Gonzalez, a former Marine, defeated Democrat Jose Acuña Jr. by hammering Democrats over the state’s high cost of living and crime rates."
I don't think all of these Latino gains will hold in 2028, but curious how they fare in the midterms. Somewhat shocked to see Kamala outright lose most of the Central Valley and Inland Empire.
That district was made more Republican in redistricting with the addition of part of Hemet along with areas near Menifee and Murrieta. Without that western extension, and if the district had included places like Desert Hot Springs or even La Quinta instead, I'll bet the Dem would've won.
Question: Can Democrats consider recruiting stealth candidates who run as Republicans or Independents in critical, selected deep-Red races (where Democrats would have no chance) – and who, after winning, switch parties or vote with Democrats?
Background: Republicans have run and elected "Democratic" candidates that later proved to be Trojan horses. Amongst them are Tricia Cotham, the North Carolina State Representative who infamously switched parties, giving Republicans veto-proof control in both chambers of the legislature. That was a huge setback for Governor Roy Cooper, and it allowed Republican legislators to force through a series of hardline policies on abortion rights, health care, public education, gun safety and civil rights – all of them issues on which Cotham had previously stated positions that were diametrically opposed to what she was now voting for.
Democrats should do this at a large scale - both for Congress and for state legislatures, the latter especially in years ending in zero (i.e. just before redistricting). Imagine if we could elect a whole bunch of fake Republicans who would then switch parties and give Democrats majorities just in time for them to draw and pass Democratic gerrymanders.
We should definitely try to do this. And getting the closet Dems through Republican primaries shouldn't be too difficult, since we know very well what Republican primary voters are looking for in their candidates.
"And getting the closet Dems through Republican primaries shouldn't be too difficult, since we know very well what Republican primary voters are looking for in their candidates"
Eh . .this is much easier said than done. Especially in more rural districts, people know each other and are suspicious of folks who seemingly sweep in from nowhere. Where it could potentially work is fast growing exhurban counties, but the world of GOP politics is often very insular in general. I'm not saying don't try, but I wouldn't have hope of it having much success.
What if? Seen a lot of chatter on Twitter that picking Shapiro as VP would’ve at least helped Casey and a couple house seats across the finish line. But… Walz didn’t exactly help in MN (this ticket did worse than Biden) and Kamala herself slipped about 8 points in CA. Is the era of the home state bump truly over, at least with national headwinds this strong?
I predicted Tim Walz would have no more effect on the ticket in 2024 than Tim Kaine did in 2016 and it appears that was the case. Shockingly, Walz lost significant ground to Biden even in his hometown of Mankato. Not entirely sure what contributed to that...perhaps a much more conservative student body at Mankato State than four years ago. Either way, Blue Earth County flipped from blue to red with the hometown boy on the ticket. Quite an embarrassment.
I think it's fair to say that Shapiro probably would have helped enough in PA to save Bob Casey but Harris would have still lost the Keystone State.
I'd say the home state bump has been dead for a while unless it's a very small state like Alaska (McCain-Palin) or Delaware (Biden). If Doug Burgum had been chosen as running mate, Trump would have probably dominated North Dakota even more strongly.
As stated prior, I think the campaign's use of Walz was their biggest mistake. They had a blue collar guy who could do the Midwestern "attack dog with a smile" routine and could help mitigate male voter losses and they just seemingly put a muzzle on him after the convention. The debate with Vance was tough to watch. I think a lot of Dem operatives are stuck in the politics of the Obama era and don't realize that SWING voters aren't looking for the polite, respectful person anymore-they want someone who will fight and get in the mud a little bit.
As for home-state bounce, I do think it's noteworthy that relative to the national PV (assuming Trump ends up at around 1.5%) Wisconsin was R+4 in 2020 and just under 0.5% D this year. MN also went from D+2.6 to D+2.75% . . so accounting for the national environment the campaign actually did do better in both states (more notably in WI where they of course ran a more active campaign)
He pumped life into the campaign, and the consultants and operatives sucked it back out. Their version of the Hippocratic oath is, first, take no chances.
It's bizarre because in the last weeks the campaign at times did take a few chances-I remember Harris doing the Fox interview was actually when I first got concerned, as a campaign with internal polling showing them ahead wouldn't have made that move. Same with the overtures to Joe Rogan.
It was like after the debate the campaign couldn't figure out whether to toss long balls or run out the clock.
Seems to me that Trump was right all along and was doing better with black and Latino men the entire time. Harris’ campaign couldn’t budge them so in the end, they went after moderate Republicans. Nail in the coffin.
I would LOVE to know the true scoop about what the Harris and Biden internals were showing going back to 2022. If O'Malley wants to do a tell-all put me down for an advance copy.
Could also argue VP picks don’t matter beyond any slight home state advantage so it wouldn’t matter to MI.
I’d still argue Walz was the correct pick compared to Shapiro. We already have one fancy ass looking lawyer on the ticket, why have two? His debate was painful, though.
Yes. I was wondering if there'd even be enough ticket splitting for her to win MN-01. I had my doubts she'd be able to hang on in MN-08 and I knew MN-06 and MN-07 were out of the question. Her 2024 showing certainly wasn't as comprehensive as her previous three runs, but as you dig into the precinct data, there was still considerable ticket-splitting.
I've done my usual deep dive into Minnesota numbers and will report on my findings for the weekend digest, but outside of the five Minnesota counties in the core of the metro area (Hennepin, Ramsey, Anoka, Dakota, and Washington), Harris won 53 communities and Klobuchar won 158. Both numbers seem abysmal compared to outstate Minnesota numbers from 10 years ago or anytime before, but it's also a fair guess that Klobuchar won in a number of places that no Democrat is likely to win again for at least a generation.
What’s so stupid with polling is we all thought maybe Klobuchar’s ticket splitting days were over and she really might win by single digits. The polls said so. She still pulled out a big win while Harris lost ground. Conundrum.
My guess is that Klobuchar juiced her numbers in the final two weeks with the combination of media scrutiny against Royce White's lack of fitness for the position and Klobuchar's one-sided advertising. The latter is not as valuable as it was in 2008 because fewer people watch ads, but I still suspect it inspired some ticket-splitting that otherwise wouldn't have happened.
I think if they let him be him instead of putting a politically correct collar on him it would have made a difference. Maybe marginally but still better.
He was picked for his viral clips calling Trump a robber barron and the weird thing definitely was impactful early on. But the campaign definitely took some of that blue collar angry politically incorrect vibe from his sails and we was more polished than he should have been. I think he is the perfect type of mouthpiece we need. Very Dan Osborn, John Fettermanesque in his language.
With that said the debate was extremely cringeworthy and I was very disappointed by no bounce coming even from Minnesota. Personally I think he'd make a good DNC chair but I know he's going for a third term.
The problem from what I've read from a professional political strategist, was not Waltz himself. Rather it was the political consultants in the DNC and Harris campaign. Apparently, Walz was forced and urged to follow focus groups and limited to speaking the way they wanted him to based on focus groups, statistics, and surveys. It did eventually show later in the campaign that Walz was sounding and feeling rather off. He was most in his A game and hitting homers with audiences apparently when he was allowed to be himself - going out buying food and responding on social media or impromptu interviews.
Elections have consequences – and in 2024, might one of these consequences be that a handful of Republicans suddenly discover or grow a spine? I realize this might be hugely overoptimistic, but there are some initial hopeful signs from Senator Susan Collins, of all people. She is loudly insisting that the Senate do the vetting and investigation of Cabinet picks that Team Trump has failed to do.
Collins' shtick is that she makes noises about being moderate when they don't matter, and then goes along with the republican caucus at every moment that it does matter.
Saying that they need to vet nominees is easy noise to make. Is she going to be a pain in the ass to Thune if it doesn't happen? She has options to delay and slow things, even if she couldn't outright stop it on her own. Unlikely that she will.
Unless somebody surprises her in a close vote and she’d have to actually go back and change her vote to in order to throw it to the GOP. Thanks again for that, Johnny Boy.
Well, and assuming the results of PA-SEN don't change, she's also making this noise from a position where she knows her vote doesn't actually matter. They would still have 52 votes (51 if Murkowski goes along).
I think all but maybe 2 of the Trump appointments will sail through; concurrently I don't think there's any chance of the whole Johnson adjournment strategy materializing; absolutely no way he could get over 90% of the conference to go to bat for Matt Gaetz.
The issue is now that if Bob Casey can't come back then 53 seats gives us a huge problem. Republicans then lose 3 members and still have a majority.
That means Murkowski can do her thing because she's not even up in two years. And Collins and Tillis -our two biggest targets in 2026- can be given a pass to break ranks when necessary and they can still confirm wackos to positions and vote for bad legislation without repercussions.
We would have been in a great position to attack them had we only had 52 seats.
Being able to do what they want is both a blessing and a curse. They have little ability now to stop themselves from doing something incredibly stupid.
I think while it is true that most Republicans will kowtow to Trump, either outta fear or for some advantage, I doubt that many will just 100% kneel to him aside from the most blindly loyal sycophants. You gotta remember at the end of the day, reelection impending aside, Collins and many others still strongly value their influence as senators - and a swing vote at that. Collins is not about to just make herself politically irrelevant just to appease Trump for picks that are so blatantly atrocious, even for many conservatives. Everyone in Congress knows that Trump's on a timer, and whether it be his declining health or the impending midterms, his time and influence will wane. For a swing state vote like Collins, its to her benefit to exert as much leverage with Trump as possible and being a doormat does the total opposite.
I absolutely agree with most of your analysis. Specifically, I do not think the Senate will recess on Hair Furore’s request, just so he can push through his most extreme and unqualified appointments. Nor will the House do so, allowing Trump to order the Senate too to recess or adjourn. With such a narrow advantage, Speaker Mike Johnson can’t afford to lose even three or four Republican votes – and surely there will be at least a handful resisting the White House’s power grab.
That said, given that Republicans will have a 53–47 majority (after Vance is replaced), I don’t think the Senate will reject terribly many of Trump’s unqualified extremist nominations, which is a very long list!
The math has seemingly changed dramatically on NBC's election tracker page today. Though the tracker says there are only 17k outstanding votes left, the map of outstanding ballots shows a far different map with more than twice as many votes. What caused this who knows, but Philadelphia county according to this map alone is the lion's share with 32k votes, with the next biggest Berks county at a mere 6.5k. If Casey wins just 55% of that Philadelphia county vote share, that alone puts him over the top, and that's a very conservative estimate of what he will win. It seems that despite the current numbers, the race is far from over.
Apparently Trump has nominated Linda McMahon for Secretary of Education. Her husband Vince McMahon has recently been forced out of the WWE due to a series of terrible sex scandals and cover-ups. Linda McMahon has been accused of covering up these scandals. I can't give the following enough trigger warnings- in a court filing, Vince McMahon was accused of sexually misconduct with a female underling and during sex with her, he is accused of defecating on her head. The McMahons have been close friends with Donald Trump for 40 years.
Besides this, McMahon is not considered a lightning rod as Education Secretary like Betsy DeVos was. She was previously head of the Small Business Administration and considerably low profile. Did not cause any controversy that I can think of.
I don’t know how the scandal will play out in the confirmation hearings other than McMahon will be probed by Democrats on this matter. Otherwise, I expect she’ll get overwhelming confirmation by both Democrats and Republicans.
Given that she served at SBA without any real incidents this doesn't seem like he's being disruptive for its own sake like with Gaetz, Hegseth, RFKjr, or Gabbard. I was expecting him to pick some Moms for Liberty raging asshole for Education.
He's just handing out jobs to donors and ass-kissers without any consistent nod to an ideological framework, which in its own way is slightly comforting. I think his number #1 priority is making his legal problems go away, #2 is deportations since that's what his campaign revolved around, and everything else is a distant 3rd+.
At the same time, it says to me that they really do want to eliminate the Dept of Education. They could’ve chosen a weirdo religious person but then that person would want to keep the dept going and make it into some Bible thumping bullshit. Kind of indicative of where they’re going as an administration.
I'm disappointed by Fontes and everyone supporting his primary challenge to Hobbs. Incumbency for Governors is still very helpful in getting re-elected . Primarying a sitting Governor should only be done with very good reasons.
The most likely outcome of an primary challenge is Hobbs winning and everyone involved being less popular afterwards.
So far I haven't heard any credible arguments for a primary challenge.
Hobbs performance in 2022 was fine. The only state level candidate performing better then her was Fontes who had an even worse opponent. And the benefit of swing state dem SoS candidates overperforming in generel.
Lake in 2022 was a better candidate then in 2024.
The legislative results in 2024 shouldn't be blamed on Hobbs who wasn't even on the ballot. This is driven by Trump winning the state by 5.
Primarying Hobbs over her centrist stance on the boarder is insanity. Latinos voted in record numbers for a candidate promising mass deportations.
I have zero expectations that he actually does this; I think he's setting himself up for a future run for the seat after Hobbes second term (or possible loss)
Agreed. As the quote in the article points out, it’s just bullshit posturing. And, her handedly winning against an opponent from the left sets her up nicely for the general election. Politics be politics.
Even if Fontes loses the primary in a landslide, that still opens up the SoS position. Having an incumbent there would help a lot defending a crucial position to ensure an free and fair election in 2028.
Is there anything left in IA-01? Kaptur grew her margin by 0.3% compared to a few days ago, so am wondering if there's a similar batch (provisionals?) that could boost Bohannan. If we're just holding out for a recount, might as well just call it for Miller-Meeks.
I'm not axlee, but it looks like each county has about 5% or so of the vote outstanding. Gray is ahead in the two most populous counties in the district, so with only a 200+ vote difference at the moment, he's definitely still got a chance, depending on how the remaining votes break down.
Project 2025 architect Russ Vought will head up the Office of Management and Budget under Donald Trump once again, just like what he did in his first term.
Teamsters President Sean O'Brian backs potential Trump labor secretary representative Lori Chavez-DeRemer
Democrats need to start making clear to the Teamsters, the firefighters, and other unions that if they're going to be bipartisan, Democrats will no longer be killing themselves to protect union interests.
How are Democrats “killing themselves to protect union interests”? We naturally support unions because they make life better for workers across the country. It would be nice if the Teamsters supported us more, but we’re going to back them and other unions regardless because we actually care about making things better.
Most union members out there aren't in the republican leaning ones today. Nurses, teachers, municipal workers are the new main part of union membership. Those groups do help democrats; we'd only be punishing ourselves if we stopped protecting unions.
There really isn't much of a market for a left-of-center version of Trump-style transactional politics within the Democratic Party. You're not going to hear AOC, for example, call for busting labor unions that she doesn't agree with, for example.
AOC shows she's being inclusive, which is a trait many liberals possess, and she's listening to those who aren't unanimously with Democrats. If unions are being more receptive to Trump's agenda, it's important to listen rather than be petty.
Transgender rights advocates attack Delaware Congresswoman-elect Sarah McBride (D) for announcing her compliance with new House rules barring her from using women's restrooms on Capitol Hill despite the fact that she is a woman:
"Many expressed disappointment with McBride’s decision. Michelle Vallet, a parent of a transgender son, shared her frustration: “Now, to see Sarah McBride essentially confirm that if those who hate my son scream loud enough he should be expected to comply is a heartbreak I didn't really know existed. I need people to stand with and for my son, to risk their own comfort to protect his ability to see himself not only in my eyes but in this nation's eyes and heart. How do I tell him that a leader in his government's Congress doesn't think he's worth fighting for? I'm astounded at the shortsightedness of McBride's response, and I hope for the sake of all trans youth that she rethinks her position.”
Transgender advocate and Harvard Clinical Instructor Alejandra Caraballo emphasized the broader implications: “This isn't just about her. These rules apply to trans staffers and interns who do not have the protections and privilege that she has.”
Ash Orr, a transgender organizer in West Virginia, was equally critical: “Rep. McBride’s messaging essentially suggests that if a federal ban is enacted, trans people should simply comply. While I understand the difficult position she is in, she holds a position of immense power and privilege. She should be using that power to defend and protect her community, not falling in line. Trans lives are at stake.”"
Not being trans myself, I'm inclined to defer to McBride here. She knows what's best for trans people a lot better than I do (or any non-trans person does).
I don't really see this as obeying in advance so much as picking her battles. She may think she can do better work in Congress without picking this particular fight, and I agree with PNE above about being inclined to defer to her judgment.
Also, the timing of the GOP trolling her here was obviously calculated to distract from Trump's horrible cabinet nominations. McBride was right to not take the bait.
I don't know, to be honest, as I've never been in one of the House office buildings in D.C.
However, Erin Reed pointed out something important at the end of her article:
"It remains to be seen what further restrictions might be aimed at McBride. Congress operates under a male/female dress code, raising the possibility of additional regulations targeting her presentation. The House could even allow or require the use of masculine honorifics when addressing her. So far, Republicans have shown no signs of slowing their campaign against transgender rights, making it likely that McBride will face further attacks in the days ahead."
If Republicans go even further than what Reed suggested they might do against McBride and try to deny seating McBride in Congress altogether on the "basis" of listing herself as her legal and actual gender of female on campaign legal paperwork (statement of candidacy, etc.) instead of her gender assignment at birth of male, McBride would have zero choice whatsoever but to put up a major legal battle against the House GOP that would be virtually certain to end up before SCOTUS.
And there are unisex bathrooms I'm pretty sure. Anyway, she knows she's entering a lion's den of cretins so she just gotta take it on the chin and let them look bad for being bullies.
Not being disrespectful to the trans community but I think it helps to elect more trans House members who can organize with Sarah McBride to fight back.
For starters, there's no Transgender Congressional Caucus that I can think of. It would help to start one if the circumstances allowed it to.
Today there were only OC votes reported in CA-45. Tran won this drop with 772 votes to 689 for Steel. That gain of 83 votes puts his lead at 397. Looking good!
CD-13 had a Madera drop earlier today which helped Duarte. The GOP incumbent now leads by 348 votes (from the sos.ca.gov website.) Now Madera and Fresno are mostly done, and Gray should do better in the remaining votes. There are 5K remaining in Stanislaus, 11K in San Joaquin and 3K in Merced. Not all of these votes will be in the district (except all of Merced). I think Adam Gray will win this, but he hasn't yet.
Not sure if this is making an impact but as it so happens, Merced also has UC Merced. It's one of the smallest UC colleges but the students there may be a voting bloc that could make an impact on CA-13 long-term (if they aren't already doing so).
According to Gray’s camp, about nearly 6,000 ballots from the 13th district remain to be counted, with more than 85 percent of those coming from Stanislaus, Merced and San Joaquin counties, where Gray is currently running ahead.
For sure. I think Peltola was always going to have a tough race even if Harris could close the gap somewhat I think this is/was the reddest seat we held? The Rs settling on Begich post-primary this time around was a big deal. Still, it feels like one of the 4-5 red states Dems need to invest in long-term to have a shot at a durable Senate majority.
That was a big part of my assessment. I think if it was another year with another non-gadfly republican in that Peltola would have won.
Wiki has the RCV totals up. There were 4,021 undervotes out of 17,155 votes for eliminated candidates. Works out to a rate of 23%.
Not a shocking result but it's frustrating. A slightly better year and she would have held on and would be better positioned to run for senate in the future. On the bright side, the modern penalty for a once-loser has been relatively minimal and we've seen candidates who successfully move up from their initial target, because they didn't have any currently held seat to lose (eg Ossoff).
Let's not forget that the late Don Young served in the House for nearly 50 years. While I don't think the GOP will have another Young type of Republican who will be serving Alaska At-Large for decades, that doesn't mean Nick Begich won't have a chance to hold on to the seat for a good number of years.
The good news is, the RCV process survives to live another cycle. The last batch of ballots was 54% "No", less blue than the previous two, but enough to give a 664 vote winning margin.
Comcast spins off nearly all of NBCU’s cable networks, including USA, CNBC, MSNBC, and E!, into a separate spin-off company named SpinCo. NBCUniversal will retain NBC, Telemundo, Bravo, and Peacock as its key assets.
Splitting off CNBC and MSNBC, and possibly USA, from NBCU, is a disastrous decision, mainly due to newsgathering resources being shared (MSNBC and CNBC) and sports coverage (primarily USA, but also some CNBC).
Fun political and electoral fact time: Every vice presidential candidate that has either ran or served as president post Harry Truman has had some major political setback. None of those elected president have been reelected. Lyndon Johnson was basically sunk by his botched handling of the Vietnam War and declined to run for reelection. Gerald Ford failed to get reelected after Nixon's Watergate scandal. George Bush Sr. was infamously sunk by violating his infamous "no new taxes" pledge. Al Gore was first candidate to win the popular vote, but still lose since the election of 1888. And now Harris sadly, joins that list of vice presidential losers who failed to have electoral success. I'm starting to question the viability of VP candidates running for president now too, given this lackluster and dubious track record.
Does anyone know if any NC statewide Democrat other than Josh Stein won any of the Republican congressional districts?
I was wondering because Dems made important gains in the western part of the state, and they should definitely contest NC-11 heavily. And it occurred to me that maybe there was a slight chance that one of the other victorious statewide Dems had won it.
Unfortunately this is not easy to get. The state Board of Elections site gives results by county but not by congressional district. This isn't enough information since, for example, solidly Democratic Guilford County, where I live, is split between three overwhelmingly Republican districts.
However, given that the other Democratic winners generally won by solid for NC (2-3%) margins, but not by the 15% landslide that Stein got, and given how gerrymandered our congressional districts are, I would bet that none of the other Democrats won any of those Republican-held districts.
I agree, but we'll know for sure when DRA is updated to include this year's election results.
NC-11 is not too hard to estimate, since only one county (Polk) is split:
Start with the 2nd best Dem, Jeff Jackson (AG)
Won Buncombe by 46K
Lost the other counties (i.e. not including Polk) by at least 53K
Other Dems likely did worse
CA-Lege: About a month ago I shared whispers I had heard that Trump was ahead in an open Dem-held Assembly seat that Biden had won by double digits. From today's Politico:
"One of the biggest blows to Democrats in the Assembly was the loss of an open Imperial County seat held by Assemblymember Eduardo Garcia, who opted not to run for reelection. The Latino-majority district, in the far southeastern corner of California along the Arizona and Mexico border, has long been a Democratic stronghold. Republican Jeff Gonzalez, a former Marine, defeated Democrat Jose Acuña Jr. by hammering Democrats over the state’s high cost of living and crime rates."
I don't think all of these Latino gains will hold in 2028, but curious how they fare in the midterms. Somewhat shocked to see Kamala outright lose most of the Central Valley and Inland Empire.
That district was made more Republican in redistricting with the addition of part of Hemet along with areas near Menifee and Murrieta. Without that western extension, and if the district had included places like Desert Hot Springs or even La Quinta instead, I'll bet the Dem would've won.
Question: Can Democrats consider recruiting stealth candidates who run as Republicans or Independents in critical, selected deep-Red races (where Democrats would have no chance) – and who, after winning, switch parties or vote with Democrats?
Background: Republicans have run and elected "Democratic" candidates that later proved to be Trojan horses. Amongst them are Tricia Cotham, the North Carolina State Representative who infamously switched parties, giving Republicans veto-proof control in both chambers of the legislature. That was a huge setback for Governor Roy Cooper, and it allowed Republican legislators to force through a series of hardline policies on abortion rights, health care, public education, gun safety and civil rights – all of them issues on which Cotham had previously stated positions that were diametrically opposed to what she was now voting for.
Democrats should do this at a large scale - both for Congress and for state legislatures, the latter especially in years ending in zero (i.e. just before redistricting). Imagine if we could elect a whole bunch of fake Republicans who would then switch parties and give Democrats majorities just in time for them to draw and pass Democratic gerrymanders.
We should definitely try to do this. And getting the closet Dems through Republican primaries shouldn't be too difficult, since we know very well what Republican primary voters are looking for in their candidates.
"And getting the closet Dems through Republican primaries shouldn't be too difficult, since we know very well what Republican primary voters are looking for in their candidates"
Eh . .this is much easier said than done. Especially in more rural districts, people know each other and are suspicious of folks who seemingly sweep in from nowhere. Where it could potentially work is fast growing exhurban counties, but the world of GOP politics is often very insular in general. I'm not saying don't try, but I wouldn't have hope of it having much success.
What if? Seen a lot of chatter on Twitter that picking Shapiro as VP would’ve at least helped Casey and a couple house seats across the finish line. But… Walz didn’t exactly help in MN (this ticket did worse than Biden) and Kamala herself slipped about 8 points in CA. Is the era of the home state bump truly over, at least with national headwinds this strong?
I predicted Tim Walz would have no more effect on the ticket in 2024 than Tim Kaine did in 2016 and it appears that was the case. Shockingly, Walz lost significant ground to Biden even in his hometown of Mankato. Not entirely sure what contributed to that...perhaps a much more conservative student body at Mankato State than four years ago. Either way, Blue Earth County flipped from blue to red with the hometown boy on the ticket. Quite an embarrassment.
I think it's fair to say that Shapiro probably would have helped enough in PA to save Bob Casey but Harris would have still lost the Keystone State.
I'd say the home state bump has been dead for a while unless it's a very small state like Alaska (McCain-Palin) or Delaware (Biden). If Doug Burgum had been chosen as running mate, Trump would have probably dominated North Dakota even more strongly.
As stated prior, I think the campaign's use of Walz was their biggest mistake. They had a blue collar guy who could do the Midwestern "attack dog with a smile" routine and could help mitigate male voter losses and they just seemingly put a muzzle on him after the convention. The debate with Vance was tough to watch. I think a lot of Dem operatives are stuck in the politics of the Obama era and don't realize that SWING voters aren't looking for the polite, respectful person anymore-they want someone who will fight and get in the mud a little bit.
As for home-state bounce, I do think it's noteworthy that relative to the national PV (assuming Trump ends up at around 1.5%) Wisconsin was R+4 in 2020 and just under 0.5% D this year. MN also went from D+2.6 to D+2.75% . . so accounting for the national environment the campaign actually did do better in both states (more notably in WI where they of course ran a more active campaign)
He pumped life into the campaign, and the consultants and operatives sucked it back out. Their version of the Hippocratic oath is, first, take no chances.
It's bizarre because in the last weeks the campaign at times did take a few chances-I remember Harris doing the Fox interview was actually when I first got concerned, as a campaign with internal polling showing them ahead wouldn't have made that move. Same with the overtures to Joe Rogan.
It was like after the debate the campaign couldn't figure out whether to toss long balls or run out the clock.
Seems to me that Trump was right all along and was doing better with black and Latino men the entire time. Harris’ campaign couldn’t budge them so in the end, they went after moderate Republicans. Nail in the coffin.
I would LOVE to know the true scoop about what the Harris and Biden internals were showing going back to 2022. If O'Malley wants to do a tell-all put me down for an advance copy.
You can argue that Slotkin would have lost in Michigan had she picked Shapiro.
Fair point.
Could also argue VP picks don’t matter beyond any slight home state advantage so it wouldn’t matter to MI.
I’d still argue Walz was the correct pick compared to Shapiro. We already have one fancy ass looking lawyer on the ticket, why have two? His debate was painful, though.
It seems Klobuchar won only one R held seat in MN01 against an opponent basically a walking joke.
Is that your expectation?
Yes. I was wondering if there'd even be enough ticket splitting for her to win MN-01. I had my doubts she'd be able to hang on in MN-08 and I knew MN-06 and MN-07 were out of the question. Her 2024 showing certainly wasn't as comprehensive as her previous three runs, but as you dig into the precinct data, there was still considerable ticket-splitting.
I've done my usual deep dive into Minnesota numbers and will report on my findings for the weekend digest, but outside of the five Minnesota counties in the core of the metro area (Hennepin, Ramsey, Anoka, Dakota, and Washington), Harris won 53 communities and Klobuchar won 158. Both numbers seem abysmal compared to outstate Minnesota numbers from 10 years ago or anytime before, but it's also a fair guess that Klobuchar won in a number of places that no Democrat is likely to win again for at least a generation.
What’s so stupid with polling is we all thought maybe Klobuchar’s ticket splitting days were over and she really might win by single digits. The polls said so. She still pulled out a big win while Harris lost ground. Conundrum.
My guess is that Klobuchar juiced her numbers in the final two weeks with the combination of media scrutiny against Royce White's lack of fitness for the position and Klobuchar's one-sided advertising. The latter is not as valuable as it was in 2008 because fewer people watch ads, but I still suspect it inspired some ticket-splitting that otherwise wouldn't have happened.
I think if they let him be him instead of putting a politically correct collar on him it would have made a difference. Maybe marginally but still better.
He was picked for his viral clips calling Trump a robber barron and the weird thing definitely was impactful early on. But the campaign definitely took some of that blue collar angry politically incorrect vibe from his sails and we was more polished than he should have been. I think he is the perfect type of mouthpiece we need. Very Dan Osborn, John Fettermanesque in his language.
With that said the debate was extremely cringeworthy and I was very disappointed by no bounce coming even from Minnesota. Personally I think he'd make a good DNC chair but I know he's going for a third term.
Yeah, when the campaign rebuked him for talking against the Electoral College, it was pretty clear they had him on a short leash.
The problem from what I've read from a professional political strategist, was not Waltz himself. Rather it was the political consultants in the DNC and Harris campaign. Apparently, Walz was forced and urged to follow focus groups and limited to speaking the way they wanted him to based on focus groups, statistics, and surveys. It did eventually show later in the campaign that Walz was sounding and feeling rather off. He was most in his A game and hitting homers with audiences apparently when he was allowed to be himself - going out buying food and responding on social media or impromptu interviews.
Elections have consequences – and in 2024, might one of these consequences be that a handful of Republicans suddenly discover or grow a spine? I realize this might be hugely overoptimistic, but there are some initial hopeful signs from Senator Susan Collins, of all people. She is loudly insisting that the Senate do the vetting and investigation of Cabinet picks that Team Trump has failed to do.
https://www.axios.com/2024/11/20/collins-trump-health-appointees-extensive-vetting-senate
I think Donald Trump could shoot Susan Collins in the face and she'd still end up backing him 98%, assuming she survived.
As bemused yet horrified as we'd be, I definitely hope we don't find out.
And he might shoot her in the face.....newly invented Presidential immunity from crimes and all.
Well I think he’s learned a lesson from this…
Collins' shtick is that she makes noises about being moderate when they don't matter, and then goes along with the republican caucus at every moment that it does matter.
Saying that they need to vet nominees is easy noise to make. Is she going to be a pain in the ass to Thune if it doesn't happen? She has options to delay and slow things, even if she couldn't outright stop it on her own. Unlikely that she will.
Precisely. She will go against the guys that like 15 other Republicans wont vote for or like one other GOPer would vote against.
She wont be the tie breaking vote against the GOP on anything.
Unless somebody surprises her in a close vote and she’d have to actually go back and change her vote to in order to throw it to the GOP. Thanks again for that, Johnny Boy.
Well, and assuming the results of PA-SEN don't change, she's also making this noise from a position where she knows her vote doesn't actually matter. They would still have 52 votes (51 if Murkowski goes along).
PA-SEN is over - margin is bigger than the number of votes left to count, and way too big for a recount to change.
I think all but maybe 2 of the Trump appointments will sail through; concurrently I don't think there's any chance of the whole Johnson adjournment strategy materializing; absolutely no way he could get over 90% of the conference to go to bat for Matt Gaetz.
Which two? Gaetz and Gabbard? Or do you think RFK Jr is in more danger?
I think Gaetz is toast and number 2 is either Gabbard or RFK; depends on what intelligence briefings divulge about Gabbard IMO.
Ideally Hegesmith would be in trouble too but I'll be shocked if he doesn't get through.
Looks like Trumpworld is feeling down on him based on the SA allegation
Rfk, gabbarr, hegseth if they lose get shifted to non confirmed roles in White House.
I hope Tulsi is the 1, if they only say no to 1. Easily the most dangerous, and I say that as someone who despises RFK even more than Trump.
But a traitor getting that level of security clearance...
The really sad part is that none of the nominees' scandals are as bad as the President-elect's.
The issue is now that if Bob Casey can't come back then 53 seats gives us a huge problem. Republicans then lose 3 members and still have a majority.
That means Murkowski can do her thing because she's not even up in two years. And Collins and Tillis -our two biggest targets in 2026- can be given a pass to break ranks when necessary and they can still confirm wackos to positions and vote for bad legislation without repercussions.
We would have been in a great position to attack them had we only had 52 seats.
Being able to do what they want is both a blessing and a curse. They have little ability now to stop themselves from doing something incredibly stupid.
I think while it is true that most Republicans will kowtow to Trump, either outta fear or for some advantage, I doubt that many will just 100% kneel to him aside from the most blindly loyal sycophants. You gotta remember at the end of the day, reelection impending aside, Collins and many others still strongly value their influence as senators - and a swing vote at that. Collins is not about to just make herself politically irrelevant just to appease Trump for picks that are so blatantly atrocious, even for many conservatives. Everyone in Congress knows that Trump's on a timer, and whether it be his declining health or the impending midterms, his time and influence will wane. For a swing state vote like Collins, its to her benefit to exert as much leverage with Trump as possible and being a doormat does the total opposite.
I absolutely agree with most of your analysis. Specifically, I do not think the Senate will recess on Hair Furore’s request, just so he can push through his most extreme and unqualified appointments. Nor will the House do so, allowing Trump to order the Senate too to recess or adjourn. With such a narrow advantage, Speaker Mike Johnson can’t afford to lose even three or four Republican votes – and surely there will be at least a handful resisting the White House’s power grab.
That said, given that Republicans will have a 53–47 majority (after Vance is replaced), I don’t think the Senate will reject terribly many of Trump’s unqualified extremist nominations, which is a very long list!
The math has seemingly changed dramatically on NBC's election tracker page today. Though the tracker says there are only 17k outstanding votes left, the map of outstanding ballots shows a far different map with more than twice as many votes. What caused this who knows, but Philadelphia county according to this map alone is the lion's share with 32k votes, with the next biggest Berks county at a mere 6.5k. If Casey wins just 55% of that Philadelphia county vote share, that alone puts him over the top, and that's a very conservative estimate of what he will win. It seems that despite the current numbers, the race is far from over.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-elections/pennsylvania-senate-results
Excellent! May I suggest that you post this also to today’s Downballot diary, if you haven’t already done so?
Where would that be? Sorry still not familiar with this website
Follow this link:
https://www.the-downballot.com/p/morning-digest-alaskas-top-four-primary
Apparently Trump has nominated Linda McMahon for Secretary of Education. Her husband Vince McMahon has recently been forced out of the WWE due to a series of terrible sex scandals and cover-ups. Linda McMahon has been accused of covering up these scandals. I can't give the following enough trigger warnings- in a court filing, Vince McMahon was accused of sexually misconduct with a female underling and during sex with her, he is accused of defecating on her head. The McMahons have been close friends with Donald Trump for 40 years.
Besides this, McMahon is not considered a lightning rod as Education Secretary like Betsy DeVos was. She was previously head of the Small Business Administration and considerably low profile. Did not cause any controversy that I can think of.
I don’t know how the scandal will play out in the confirmation hearings other than McMahon will be probed by Democrats on this matter. Otherwise, I expect she’ll get overwhelming confirmation by both Democrats and Republicans.
Given that she served at SBA without any real incidents this doesn't seem like he's being disruptive for its own sake like with Gaetz, Hegseth, RFKjr, or Gabbard. I was expecting him to pick some Moms for Liberty raging asshole for Education.
He's just handing out jobs to donors and ass-kissers without any consistent nod to an ideological framework, which in its own way is slightly comforting. I think his number #1 priority is making his legal problems go away, #2 is deportations since that's what his campaign revolved around, and everything else is a distant 3rd+.
3rd is lower his tax bill/grift/corruption.
A key priority high on the list, I’d say #2: Increasing Trump’s power.
Actually, considering his other choices, I am ok with McMahon
At the same time, it says to me that they really do want to eliminate the Dept of Education. They could’ve chosen a weirdo religious person but then that person would want to keep the dept going and make it into some Bible thumping bullshit. Kind of indicative of where they’re going as an administration.
I'm disappointed by Fontes and everyone supporting his primary challenge to Hobbs. Incumbency for Governors is still very helpful in getting re-elected . Primarying a sitting Governor should only be done with very good reasons.
The most likely outcome of an primary challenge is Hobbs winning and everyone involved being less popular afterwards.
So far I haven't heard any credible arguments for a primary challenge.
Hobbs performance in 2022 was fine. The only state level candidate performing better then her was Fontes who had an even worse opponent. And the benefit of swing state dem SoS candidates overperforming in generel.
Lake in 2022 was a better candidate then in 2024.
The legislative results in 2024 shouldn't be blamed on Hobbs who wasn't even on the ballot. This is driven by Trump winning the state by 5.
Primarying Hobbs over her centrist stance on the boarder is insanity. Latinos voted in record numbers for a candidate promising mass deportations.
The limited polling shows Hobbs doing okay.
I have zero expectations that he actually does this; I think he's setting himself up for a future run for the seat after Hobbes second term (or possible loss)
Agreed. As the quote in the article points out, it’s just bullshit posturing. And, her handedly winning against an opponent from the left sets her up nicely for the general election. Politics be politics.
Even if Fontes loses the primary in a landslide, that still opens up the SoS position. Having an incumbent there would help a lot defending a crucial position to ensure an free and fair election in 2028.
The Times has called OH-09 for Kaptur bringing the Democrats up to 213 House seats. 4 Remaining: AK-AL, IA-01, CA-13 and CA-45.
Is there anything left in IA-01? Kaptur grew her margin by 0.3% compared to a few days ago, so am wondering if there's a similar batch (provisionals?) that could boost Bohannan. If we're just holding out for a recount, might as well just call it for Miller-Meeks.
All counties in IA certified. No changes.
I guess it is recount time now.
Any hope in CA-13?? your take?
I'm not axlee, but it looks like each county has about 5% or so of the vote outstanding. Gray is ahead in the two most populous counties in the district, so with only a 200+ vote difference at the moment, he's definitely still got a chance, depending on how the remaining votes break down.
Little drop from Madera in CA13. Duarte gains121 votes. THis is just about all from Madera-a very R county- and was expected. https://x.com/CATargetBot0001/status/1859325047640322218
Isn't that the most populous county Duarte was winning, as well?
Am I correct in my thinking that this bodes well for Gray?
Project 2025 architect Russ Vought will head up the Office of Management and Budget under Donald Trump once again, just like what he did in his first term.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-russ-vought-office-of-management-budget/
https://www.mediamatters.org/russ-vought/trump-set-appoint-project-2025-architect-russ-vought-office-management-and-budget
Teamsters President Sean O'Brian backs potential Trump labor secretary representative Lori Chavez-DeRemer
Democrats need to start making clear to the Teamsters, the firefighters, and other unions that if they're going to be bipartisan, Democrats will no longer be killing themselves to protect union interests.
Great. Not only betray one of the principles of your party but also cut off your nose to spite your face because of what two or three unions do.
How are Democrats “killing themselves to protect union interests”? We naturally support unions because they make life better for workers across the country. It would be nice if the Teamsters supported us more, but we’re going to back them and other unions regardless because we actually care about making things better.
The Teamsters have a long history with Republicans; the Democratic party should do the opposite of what the original poster advises
We don’t actually support unions very well anyway. Better than the GOP is a low bar.
In what way could we be significantly be supporting unions better?
Raise the minimum wage; ban sub-minimum wage for waiters etc?
Those aren't issues that unions care that much about.
And we also support raising the minimum wage.
Unionized restaurant workers don’t care about having to accept sub-minimum wage from employers that "expect" tips to make up the difference??
nonsense
Most union members out there aren't in the republican leaning ones today. Nurses, teachers, municipal workers are the new main part of union membership. Those groups do help democrats; we'd only be punishing ourselves if we stopped protecting unions.
There really isn't much of a market for a left-of-center version of Trump-style transactional politics within the Democratic Party. You're not going to hear AOC, for example, call for busting labor unions that she doesn't agree with, for example.
AOC shows she's being inclusive, which is a trait many liberals possess, and she's listening to those who aren't unanimously with Democrats. If unions are being more receptive to Trump's agenda, it's important to listen rather than be petty.
Transgender rights advocates attack Delaware Congresswoman-elect Sarah McBride (D) for announcing her compliance with new House rules barring her from using women's restrooms on Capitol Hill despite the fact that she is a woman:
"Many expressed disappointment with McBride’s decision. Michelle Vallet, a parent of a transgender son, shared her frustration: “Now, to see Sarah McBride essentially confirm that if those who hate my son scream loud enough he should be expected to comply is a heartbreak I didn't really know existed. I need people to stand with and for my son, to risk their own comfort to protect his ability to see himself not only in my eyes but in this nation's eyes and heart. How do I tell him that a leader in his government's Congress doesn't think he's worth fighting for? I'm astounded at the shortsightedness of McBride's response, and I hope for the sake of all trans youth that she rethinks her position.”
Transgender advocate and Harvard Clinical Instructor Alejandra Caraballo emphasized the broader implications: “This isn't just about her. These rules apply to trans staffers and interns who do not have the protections and privilege that she has.”
Ash Orr, a transgender organizer in West Virginia, was equally critical: “Rep. McBride’s messaging essentially suggests that if a federal ban is enacted, trans people should simply comply. While I understand the difficult position she is in, she holds a position of immense power and privilege. She should be using that power to defend and protect her community, not falling in line. Trans lives are at stake.”"
Source, written by Erin Reed, the soon-to-be-wife of Montana State Rep. Zooey Zephyr (D-Missoula): https://open.substack.com/pub/erininthemorn/p/congresswoman-mcbride-announces-she?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=4btu3r
Not being trans myself, I'm inclined to defer to McBride here. She knows what's best for trans people a lot better than I do (or any non-trans person does).
I support McBride here
I don't agree with McBride's decision to obey in advance, but she is in a difficult spot and I understand why she is doing so.
I don't really see this as obeying in advance so much as picking her battles. She may think she can do better work in Congress without picking this particular fight, and I agree with PNE above about being inclined to defer to her judgment.
Also, the timing of the GOP trolling her here was obviously calculated to distract from Trump's horrible cabinet nominations. McBride was right to not take the bait.
Has nothing to do with whatever Trump is doing, they're just horrible people in general looking to score points with the MAGAt base
It's a deflection though
My best guess is she is following "traditional" logic:
If a cis man walks into a women's bathroom, that is a red flag moment.
If a cis woman needs to use a men's bathroom, the "gentlemanly" thing to do is for the others to leave and let her use it in peace.
Inconsistent, but fits with the general perception that society must protect women first.
Do they not have bathrooms in their office? It's probably something she knew she could easily avoid
I don't know, to be honest, as I've never been in one of the House office buildings in D.C.
However, Erin Reed pointed out something important at the end of her article:
"It remains to be seen what further restrictions might be aimed at McBride. Congress operates under a male/female dress code, raising the possibility of additional regulations targeting her presentation. The House could even allow or require the use of masculine honorifics when addressing her. So far, Republicans have shown no signs of slowing their campaign against transgender rights, making it likely that McBride will face further attacks in the days ahead."
If Republicans go even further than what Reed suggested they might do against McBride and try to deny seating McBride in Congress altogether on the "basis" of listing herself as her legal and actual gender of female on campaign legal paperwork (statement of candidacy, etc.) instead of her gender assignment at birth of male, McBride would have zero choice whatsoever but to put up a major legal battle against the House GOP that would be virtually certain to end up before SCOTUS.
I can just about guarantee that GOP members will misgender her time and time again.
Some of those House MAGA extremists are such drama queens.
She'd eventually win that(the voters already decided to choose the candidate) but it may drag out
And there are unisex bathrooms I'm pretty sure. Anyway, she knows she's entering a lion's den of cretins so she just gotta take it on the chin and let them look bad for being bullies.
Not being disrespectful to the trans community but I think it helps to elect more trans House members who can organize with Sarah McBride to fight back.
For starters, there's no Transgender Congressional Caucus that I can think of. It would help to start one if the circumstances allowed it to.
CA 45: Looks like Tran expanded his lead from 314 to 397.
Today there were only OC votes reported in CA-45. Tran won this drop with 772 votes to 689 for Steel. That gain of 83 votes puts his lead at 397. Looking good!
CD-13 had a Madera drop earlier today which helped Duarte. The GOP incumbent now leads by 348 votes (from the sos.ca.gov website.) Now Madera and Fresno are mostly done, and Gray should do better in the remaining votes. There are 5K remaining in Stanislaus, 11K in San Joaquin and 3K in Merced. Not all of these votes will be in the district (except all of Merced). I think Adam Gray will win this, but he hasn't yet.
Yeah, looking at the counties left I would probably rather be Gray.
But I said the same about Kamala the day before the election so what do I know.
The concerning part is that the San Joaquin updates keep coming in favoring Duarte...
Not sure if this is making an impact but as it so happens, Merced also has UC Merced. It's one of the smallest UC colleges but the students there may be a voting bloc that could make an impact on CA-13 long-term (if they aren't already doing so).
According to Gray’s camp, about nearly 6,000 ballots from the 13th district remain to be counted, with more than 85 percent of those coming from Stanislaus, Merced and San Joaquin counties, where Gray is currently running ahead.
https://www.turlockjournal.com/news/government/race-for-ca-district-13-remains-close/
Not bad! Not bad at all.
Didn't see it posted here but Begich (R) wins Alaska post RCV 51.3-48.7 not unexpected but ugh.
This is one where I want to definitely look at where the vote (turnout and margins) changed geographically.
For sure. I think Peltola was always going to have a tough race even if Harris could close the gap somewhat I think this is/was the reddest seat we held? The Rs settling on Begich post-primary this time around was a big deal. Still, it feels like one of the 4-5 red states Dems need to invest in long-term to have a shot at a durable Senate majority.
That was a big part of my assessment. I think if it was another year with another non-gadfly republican in that Peltola would have won.
Wiki has the RCV totals up. There were 4,021 undervotes out of 17,155 votes for eliminated candidates. Works out to a rate of 23%.
Not a shocking result but it's frustrating. A slightly better year and she would have held on and would be better positioned to run for senate in the future. On the bright side, the modern penalty for a once-loser has been relatively minimal and we've seen candidates who successfully move up from their initial target, because they didn't have any currently held seat to lose (eg Ossoff).
Let's not forget that the late Don Young served in the House for nearly 50 years. While I don't think the GOP will have another Young type of Republican who will be serving Alaska At-Large for decades, that doesn't mean Nick Begich won't have a chance to hold on to the seat for a good number of years.
The good news is, the RCV process survives to live another cycle. The last batch of ballots was 54% "No", less blue than the previous two, but enough to give a 664 vote winning margin.
I loved it when his close relative Mark Begich (D) represented Alaska in the US Senate for just 1 term.
How are they related again? 💙🇺🇲
Comcast spins off nearly all of NBCU’s cable networks, including USA, CNBC, MSNBC, and E!, into a separate spin-off company named SpinCo. NBCUniversal will retain NBC, Telemundo, Bravo, and Peacock as its key assets.
Splitting off CNBC and MSNBC, and possibly USA, from NBCU, is a disastrous decision, mainly due to newsgathering resources being shared (MSNBC and CNBC) and sports coverage (primarily USA, but also some CNBC).
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/comcast-cable-tv-channels-spinoff_n_673dbc7ce4b0f17b35e0691d
Fun political and electoral fact time: Every vice presidential candidate that has either ran or served as president post Harry Truman has had some major political setback. None of those elected president have been reelected. Lyndon Johnson was basically sunk by his botched handling of the Vietnam War and declined to run for reelection. Gerald Ford failed to get reelected after Nixon's Watergate scandal. George Bush Sr. was infamously sunk by violating his infamous "no new taxes" pledge. Al Gore was first candidate to win the popular vote, but still lose since the election of 1888. And now Harris sadly, joins that list of vice presidential losers who failed to have electoral success. I'm starting to question the viability of VP candidates running for president now too, given this lackluster and dubious track record.
Let's hope that track record continues for Vance