I understand that Jimmy McCain is now a registered Democrat. This morning I find myself pondering whether his notable father, the late Senator, would have considering switching parties had he been alive.
If John McCain were still in the Senate, Trump/Musk would surely bankroll Kari Lake or some other MAGA sycophant to defeat him in the Republican primary.
I suppose in that case he could do like Lieberman in 2006 and jump to the general election as an independent (in advance of the primary if needed to comply with Arizona election law).
Question would then be, would Dems essentially stand down for him to avoid putting another MAGAT in the Senate? They did so for Lisa Murkowski in 2022 even while she still caucuses with the GOP, which McCain would probably have done.
He was a diehard republican loyalist. He'd have stayed in the republican party happily. All of the other major elected republicans have stayed throughout all the hate and abuse flung at them.
Keep in mind that McCain played a real part in getting us to where we are today by picking Palin as his running mate.
And that's the lesson that Sinema failed to learn when she was in the Senate. She actually thought she was being the Democratic version of John McCain. Which is fine except. #1. She wasn't and isn't a genuine war hero and #2. while he would occasionally poke the elephant, he stayed true and loyal to the Republican Party throughout his life. Sinema on the other hand got her start as a die hard Green (Getting Republicans Elected Every November) Party member and never stopped moving to the right.
In 2016, I was on Medi-Cal after becoming disabled, had open, infected wounds in my left foot,had recently had brain surgery to remove a tumor, was wheelchair bound, and was unemployable and uninsurable. Without John McCain's vote to save the ACA, I probably would be dead.
I often disagreed with McCain, but you might say where it mattered, I'm a big fan.
I'm not saying he did no good ever! I'm saying he was a republican loyalist through and through and would have stayed that way if he were still around.
He described his vote to save ACA as one to help the republican party because he thought repeal would be disastrously unpopular and would hurt the party. It aligns perfectly with my point. He still did the right thing, but not for reasons that align with our party or would make him want to join us.
He probably would have voted with us here and there if he were still around, more than most republicans (not that this is a high bar to clear), but he would still be a republican and still caucus with them.
I also don't think McCain would have become Democrat, but I believe he would have continued to be a more traditional Republican and vocally anti Trump similar to the Cheneys. Cindy McCain did come out for Biden in 2020, and I believe John would have too.
You're forgetting one thing. McCain was thin-skinned and was always most driven by revenge against the President who most recently upstaged or embarrassed him. For this reason, I don't think McCain would have stayed a Republican in the party of Trump if he was still in the Senate. The most likely scenario is that Kari Lake or Blake Masters would have defeated him in a GOP primary. Not sure what sore loser laws exist in Arizona that may or may not have led him to run as an independent and caucus with Democrats after that, but I just don't see any scenario where McCain would coexist in Trump's party.
I’d say he had a big BS detector but what he didn’t like where as follows:
-Negative mud-slinging. Bush Jr did this in the 2000 GOP Primary Race and that pissed McCain off.
-Pork barrel legislation
-Overly negative partisan politics. McCain was a big believer in being bipartisan and working across the isle. He was not a fan of the Tea Party agenda.
Kudos to Al Green and to those who boycotted, like AOC and Brian Schatz, or walked out, like Jasmine Crockett and Maxwell Frost. Unfortunately, they were a minority of the Democrats in congress.
Then he told the Sergeant At Arms "Here I am, come and take me" and other Dems "You ought to be with me".
Not sure if it would have been a great look for everyone to be loudly heckling at the same time, but as Dems we're all on the same page, so Let's Stay Together and not argue too much about this.
Very striking reflections from a leading British military strategist, Andrew Fox. Unfortunately it is paywalled, for subscribers only. But let me quote a few choice passages:
"We are now at the point where we should be having open conversations about requiring the US to remove its forces from Europe. We should, at minimum, pull European exchange officers from US HQs to send a message...
"From Trump’s stance, we can reasonably assume that those US forces in Europe will not do anything for us if we are attacked (other than acting as human shields, at best). At this point, we must be seriously concerned about which side US forces would weigh in on. There is every chance they could try and force a pro-Russian ceasefire on us, as they are trying to do in Ukraine, should the other side’s “deal” be more attractive to Trump."
"Moreover, Trump’s posture and many of his cabinet appointments make the USA a security threat to Europe, both directly and diplomatically. Gabbard and Patel are clear security threats, and the other members of the Five Eyes intelligence community must start withholding vital intelligence from Washington as a priority.
"Frozen Russian assets must be repurposed to fund the Ukrainian war effort. Domestic production must ramp up. Ukraine must be given full scope to use our weapons however they see fit, including striking targets within Russia.
"We must acknowledge that, under Trump, the US is no longer a security guarantor for Europe. Europe still has some muscles to flex; we should flex them. It will be painful and expensive for us, but national security is worth some pain and expense."
"The critical shortfall in Europe is ammunition. Rapid increase in air-to-ground missiles is a must. We are not facing a war where we must go on the offensive. Maintaining our borders is enough. We will unlikely need to take and hold ground with armour and infantry. Any conflict with Russia will need to exploit our significant air superiority. That means our fighter jets need missiles, and lots of them.
"This may seem drastic, but Trump’s transactional approach demands that we prepare for the worst-case scenario I have articulated. This scenario may not come to fruition, but we must be ready if it does."
I wouldn't be surprised. It's timed with everything going on, and now the only aggregator of its kind is the RCP one (which, even outside of its rightist bias, is just not that good).
Could be an inside job, but this also could be just general enshittification.
If Tommy Tuberville runs for governor instead of reelection to the Senate, the collective IQ of the United States Senate will increase by at least 10 points.
Loving these Senators effing off to their home states and leaving the rest of us alone. Tuberville and Marsha Blackburn are as bad as humanity gets, so don't expect their replacements to be any worse.
It'll also be nice to have Bennet in Denver and someone better in DC.
I fear if the 2017 special was held today instead of 2017 that Moore would have won comfortably, though with lower margins than a typical Alabama republican.
Republicans were awful back then, but they've managed to get appreciably worse and their voters are far more tolerant of horribleness as a consequence.
He also apparently wasn't a half-bad football coach either. (And quite honestly I would rather have him in the Senate than a hypothetical replacement whose just a pro-fascist and also smarter than he is).
she is indeed divorced(while in the Senate, in 2019); wondering now if she is a cheater, as well as a horrible person; but, just ask her, and she will tells us all what an upstanding 'Christian' she is
"Donald Trump is on track to be the first president to deliberately engineer a severe depression."
One of the economics writers I pay attention to is Robert Kuttner. His articles at The American Prospect are admirably clear to a non-economist such as myself. I believe many here may find this to be of interest.
Yeah, when you're talking about the so-called "roaring 20's" that happened after the 1920 depression, they were certainly short-lived. Ever since the Great Depression happened, it's like the 1920 mild depression was by contrast more of a blip or short recession.
Now that I think about it, there are similar dynamics between what happened in 1982 when Ronald Reagan was in his first year as 1981 as far as fighting inflation.
However, the economy was in a recession before Jimmy Carter left office whereas before President Biden left office the economy towards the end of last year was still growing. Reagan not only was handed a recession, he faced a deep recession from July 1981 - November 1982.
Trying to harmonize Texas law on vacancies in the U.S. House of Representatives, it appears that a special election would be held on May 3. But don't hold me to it.
Apparently Turner was present at President Donald Trump’s joint address to Congress. I cannot help but wonder what impact Trump’s speech had on the good Congressman’s health.
. USAID MUST PAY nearly $2 billion in contracts, Supreme Court says
"The Supreme Court refused to halt a lower court ruling Wednesday that required the Trump administration to unfreeze some $1.9 billion in foreign aid payments.
"Wednesday's order from the highest court marks one of the first times the justices have intervened since Trump's return to the White House"
Washington Post: "The Supreme Court on Wednesday denied the Trump administration’s request to block a lower court order on foreign aid funding, clearing the way for the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development to restart nearly $2 billion in payments for work already done." (Gift link below. Hope it works.)
I am sure that justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Thomas and Alito know the law and the Constitution just as well. They just have other priorities than upholding them.
They don't have head-to-head for the state supreme court race (Marquette doesn't usually do head-to-head numbers for officially nonpartisan races), although they have favorable/unfavorable numbers for both Schimel (R) and Crawford (D). Neither are especially popular (Schimel at 37-40 and Crawford at 27-27 among voters who self-identified as absolutely certain to vote), but Crawford has less overall name recognition than Schimel, presumably due to Schimel having been a former statewide elected official (Attorney General for one term), whereas this is Crawford's first statewide campaign.
Through 2/26, Musk has spent more than $2.5 million on Schimel and a PAC he has supported in the past has spent an additional $1.6 million. Allwhile Tesla is in litigation against the state in a case likely to go to the state supreme court. (Nothing to see here--move along.) Seriously, I hope WI voters will get angry about this and turnout big.
Lester Holt’s NBC Nightly News successor has been named: Tom Llamas. Llamas previously worked at ABC News, and hosted the weekend editions of ABC World News Tonight.
Pete Buttigieg has met with Schumer about a potential senate run in Michigan. However he was not at a democratic event in Detroit recently which could have been seen as a serious play for support.
Article says Haley Stevens is actively hiring staff for a probable run.
I'm almost curious if Buttigeig would do better trying to run for the seat Haley Stevens is apparently vacating.
I lean towards saying no-I think his 2020 Presidential bid killed any chances of him making through a Democratic Primary pretty much anywhere in the country, but I'm curious about what everyone else thinks.
I think Buttigieg is vulnerable to the sense, fairly or not, that he's not really interested in serving the people of MI but just wants another CV bullet point for another Presidential run. That may not be fatal, but it won't help.
But I don't recall him saying or doing anything that was really offensive or disqualifying for any future bid for office.
I’d say it’s fatal. Throw in he’s a carpet bagging gay guy and the whole narrative writes itself. And not too delve too much into stereotypes and how that’d work in political messaging bc it’s gross. But, we like to talk to shop here. Buttigieg’s husband is the one with ties to MI and he’s considered a “femme gay”. The whole thing would devolve into a weird homophobic campaign of Pete’s not one of us and neither is his husband.
I feel for Pete but his desire to break through as a gay politician is beyond his current abilities. He was born in the wrong place to rise in politics as are many, many talented Democrats. He’s peaked and that’s fine. There are going to be many LGBTQ+ candidates who try to get to POTUS but won’t bc there are so many circumstances to breakthrough. He made his mark by going from a mayor in Indiana to running to POTUS. Take your footnote in history, honey.
I think you are thinking of Hillary Scholten who represents MI-03 but the point remains that if he lives in TC that is on the other side of the state from Stevens district.
If he was willing to carpetbag over to Indianapolis, I'm willing to bet the local party would have cleared the field for him if Andre Carson chose to retire or run for another office.
Honestly, I would far prefer to see Pete Buttigieg in some sort of communications role on behalf of the Democratic Party. I’ve never seen anybody who can hold up better against a right-wing interviewer. Truly impressive!
Honestly, I get that he's not really progressive enough to satisfy the left wing, but Buttigeig strikes me as someone who would have been a fantastic DNC Chairman.
Interesting point. In the past, it has been said that the DNC Chairman has first and foremost been a glorified fundraiser. In this day and age, I believe the primary role of the DNC Chair is to be an organizer and a catalyst for much-needed change within the Democratic Party. The Chair need not be spokesman; that can be left to others.
I’m not sure those are Buttigieg’s foremost strengths. In my opinion, Pete Buttigieg is an eminent communicator, which might mean he’d be a good fit for some sort of key role within the DNC – although not necessarily Chair.
Mitt Romney did serve as Governor of Massachusetts for one term, then ran for POTUS twice, then eventually ran for the Senate in Utah back in 2018 and won the election. Coincidentally, he like Buttigeg also worked at a Big 3 management consulting firm before entering politics.
On the other hand, I think Buttigeg offers more in strategy than he does as a politican.
Crawford still leads Schmiel 44-40 when they're identified as the "liberal and conservative candidates" in the RMG poll, despite that poll showing a Trump approval rating several points higher than Marquette's (a pattern that extends to RMG's national polls.)
I think you meant this year's VA governors race not next year.
You're right. Thank you for the catch, I've fixed.
The poll number looks promising and hope the spread grows as VA heads to the polls in November.
I understand that Jimmy McCain is now a registered Democrat. This morning I find myself pondering whether his notable father, the late Senator, would have considering switching parties had he been alive.
If John McCain were still in the Senate, Trump/Musk would surely bankroll Kari Lake or some other MAGA sycophant to defeat him in the Republican primary.
I suppose in that case he could do like Lieberman in 2006 and jump to the general election as an independent (in advance of the primary if needed to comply with Arizona election law).
Question would then be, would Dems essentially stand down for him to avoid putting another MAGAT in the Senate? They did so for Lisa Murkowski in 2022 even while she still caucuses with the GOP, which McCain would probably have done.
He was a diehard republican loyalist. He'd have stayed in the republican party happily. All of the other major elected republicans have stayed throughout all the hate and abuse flung at them.
Keep in mind that McCain played a real part in getting us to where we are today by picking Palin as his running mate.
And that's the lesson that Sinema failed to learn when she was in the Senate. She actually thought she was being the Democratic version of John McCain. Which is fine except. #1. She wasn't and isn't a genuine war hero and #2. while he would occasionally poke the elephant, he stayed true and loyal to the Republican Party throughout his life. Sinema on the other hand got her start as a die hard Green (Getting Republicans Elected Every November) Party member and never stopped moving to the right.
The things McCain bucked his party on were actually popular too.
McCain was also vocal about raising awareness on climate change back in 2008.
In 2016, I was on Medi-Cal after becoming disabled, had open, infected wounds in my left foot,had recently had brain surgery to remove a tumor, was wheelchair bound, and was unemployable and uninsurable. Without John McCain's vote to save the ACA, I probably would be dead.
I often disagreed with McCain, but you might say where it mattered, I'm a big fan.
I'm not saying he did no good ever! I'm saying he was a republican loyalist through and through and would have stayed that way if he were still around.
He described his vote to save ACA as one to help the republican party because he thought repeal would be disastrously unpopular and would hurt the party. It aligns perfectly with my point. He still did the right thing, but not for reasons that align with our party or would make him want to join us.
He probably would have voted with us here and there if he were still around, more than most republicans (not that this is a high bar to clear), but he would still be a republican and still caucus with them.
I also don't think McCain would have become Democrat, but I believe he would have continued to be a more traditional Republican and vocally anti Trump similar to the Cheneys. Cindy McCain did come out for Biden in 2020, and I believe John would have too.
You're forgetting one thing. McCain was thin-skinned and was always most driven by revenge against the President who most recently upstaged or embarrassed him. For this reason, I don't think McCain would have stayed a Republican in the party of Trump if he was still in the Senate. The most likely scenario is that Kari Lake or Blake Masters would have defeated him in a GOP primary. Not sure what sore loser laws exist in Arizona that may or may not have led him to run as an independent and caucus with Democrats after that, but I just don't see any scenario where McCain would coexist in Trump's party.
I cannot agree. McCain still endorsed and voted for Trump in 2016 after everything Trump said about him.
McCain thin-skinned?
I’d say he had a big BS detector but what he didn’t like where as follows:
-Negative mud-slinging. Bush Jr did this in the 2000 GOP Primary Race and that pissed McCain off.
-Pork barrel legislation
-Overly negative partisan politics. McCain was a big believer in being bipartisan and working across the isle. He was not a fan of the Tea Party agenda.
Doubtful. McCain would have likely retired from the Senate and would have handed things over for another GOP Candidate.
Kudos to Al Green and to those who boycotted, like AOC and Brian Schatz, or walked out, like Jasmine Crockett and Maxwell Frost. Unfortunately, they were a minority of the Democrats in congress.
https://x.com/acnewsitics/status/1897143284365222227
What did Al Green actually say? I have yet to read, let alone hear, any quotes.
(Maybe I’m strange, but I want to hear what the good hecklers are saying/shouting!)
He said, I'm So Tired of Being Alone.
Actually, he very well could have said that.
Then he told the Sergeant At Arms "Here I am, come and take me" and other Dems "You ought to be with me".
Not sure if it would have been a great look for everyone to be loudly heckling at the same time, but as Dems we're all on the same page, so Let's Stay Together and not argue too much about this.
https://youtu.be/UvXX2OtdIAc?feature=shared
Al Green fighting for preservation of Medicaid, Medicare and programs for the poor people.
EUROPEAN SECURITY: "Trump Has Changed Everything"
Very striking reflections from a leading British military strategist, Andrew Fox. Unfortunately it is paywalled, for subscribers only. But let me quote a few choice passages:
"We are now at the point where we should be having open conversations about requiring the US to remove its forces from Europe. We should, at minimum, pull European exchange officers from US HQs to send a message...
"From Trump’s stance, we can reasonably assume that those US forces in Europe will not do anything for us if we are attacked (other than acting as human shields, at best). At this point, we must be seriously concerned about which side US forces would weigh in on. There is every chance they could try and force a pro-Russian ceasefire on us, as they are trying to do in Ukraine, should the other side’s “deal” be more attractive to Trump."
https://mrandrewfox.substack.com/p/trump-has-changed-everything
(2) Andrew Fox continues:
"Moreover, Trump’s posture and many of his cabinet appointments make the USA a security threat to Europe, both directly and diplomatically. Gabbard and Patel are clear security threats, and the other members of the Five Eyes intelligence community must start withholding vital intelligence from Washington as a priority.
"Frozen Russian assets must be repurposed to fund the Ukrainian war effort. Domestic production must ramp up. Ukraine must be given full scope to use our weapons however they see fit, including striking targets within Russia.
"We must acknowledge that, under Trump, the US is no longer a security guarantor for Europe. Europe still has some muscles to flex; we should flex them. It will be painful and expensive for us, but national security is worth some pain and expense."
(3) And…
"The critical shortfall in Europe is ammunition. Rapid increase in air-to-ground missiles is a must. We are not facing a war where we must go on the offensive. Maintaining our borders is enough. We will unlikely need to take and hold ground with armour and infantry. Any conflict with Russia will need to exploit our significant air superiority. That means our fighter jets need missiles, and lots of them.
"This may seem drastic, but Trump’s transactional approach demands that we prepare for the worst-case scenario I have articulated. This scenario may not come to fruition, but we must be ready if it does."
Bittersweet: Yesterday we found out that ABC is going to shutter 538, and the next morning, Trump's approval finally goes negative.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/approval/donald-trump/
I wonder if, perchance, there has been a request from the Oval Office headquarters of Trump’s Project 2025?
I wouldn't be surprised. It's timed with everything going on, and now the only aggregator of its kind is the RCP one (which, even outside of its rightist bias, is just not that good).
Could be an inside job, but this also could be just general enshittification.
Considering the state of journalism and polling today I’d lean towards enshittification
But look who's about to jump back in with a presidential approval aggregator....
https://nitter.poast.org/NateSilver538/status/1897160709378875788#m
There's been inklings of 538 being on the chopping block for awhile. Major news companies aren't doing well and are shedding costs.
Where did you see that?
https://variety.com/2025/tv/news/disney-200-layoffs-tv-abc-news-1236328122/
Maybe someone else will pick it up.
Wonder if someone like ProPublica could be convinced to do it.
That's a shame, I was hoping that 538 would last long enough for its name to become an anachronism.
https://bsky.app/profile/baseballot.bsky.social/post/3ljnq6bnxy32d
The 538 data is still on GitHub.
More like Disney is going to shutter 538.
The decision to make the cuts was made by Disney, which owns ABC News.
Another reason why Disney as a media company should be broken up.
GA Governor: McBath forms exploratory committee.
https://www.ajc.com/politics/lucy-mcbath-takes-first-step-toward-likely-georgia-governor-bid/3ODOY54MSFHIZJPID65E6C7C3A/
Now we’re talking.
McBath could be a stronger GA gubernatorial candidate than Stacey Abrams.
If Tommy Tuberville runs for governor instead of reelection to the Senate, the collective IQ of the United States Senate will increase by at least 10 points.
Loving these Senators effing off to their home states and leaving the rest of us alone. Tuberville and Marsha Blackburn are as bad as humanity gets, so don't expect their replacements to be any worse.
It'll also be nice to have Bennet in Denver and someone better in DC.
i think both replacements will actually be worse though
Even a Katie Britt clone would be a significant improvement over Tuberville who is probably the worst Senator
Correction:
Tuberville isn’t really a Senator. He’s just an idiot.
Probably the only one who would be significantly worse than Tuberville would be Roy Moore, and he's proven a bridge too far even for Alabama.
I fear if the 2017 special was held today instead of 2017 that Moore would have won comfortably, though with lower margins than a typical Alabama republican.
Republicans were awful back then, but they've managed to get appreciably worse and their voters are far more tolerant of horribleness as a consequence.
Moore would win by 15 points if he ran in Alabama today.
Adolf Hitler would win by at least thirty points in most states that Trump won.
I will give Tuberville credit. He’s not creepy nor does he have the same history as Roy Moore.
He also apparently wasn't a half-bad football coach either. (And quite honestly I would rather have him in the Senate than a hypothetical replacement whose just a pro-fascist and also smarter than he is).
Don't count on that.
does Ernst have a husband?..i thought she was married; maybe divorced?
she is indeed divorced(while in the Senate, in 2019); wondering now if she is a cheater, as well as a horrible person; but, just ask her, and she will tells us all what an upstanding 'Christian' she is
lets all remember here that first and foremost, it is always about the hypocritical with the entire Trump Gang
I was stunned when Senator Joni Ernst, a retired military officer, couldn’t find the spine to vote No on Pete Hegseth as SecDef.
I was not. She's a loyal Trumper through and through.
Except on the issue of Russia. Ernst I believe has been consistent on this.
Unless there’s something that’s changed with her since the 2024 presidential election.
Re: The Trump Depression
"Donald Trump is on track to be the first president to deliberately engineer a severe depression."
One of the economics writers I pay attention to is Robert Kuttner. His articles at The American Prospect are admirably clear to a non-economist such as myself. I believe many here may find this to be of interest.
https://prospect.org/economy/2025-03-05-trump-depression/
A severe depression is unlikely as the banking sector is holding up fine and isn’t projected to contract.
That said, a mild depression could happen. 2020 like 1920 had a mild depression.
FYI, technically speaking mild depressions last a shorter time than severe depressions, which usually go on for years.
The 1920 depression is one that history has sort of forgotten. The pivot to a peacetime economy was very rough
Yeah, when you're talking about the so-called "roaring 20's" that happened after the 1920 depression, they were certainly short-lived. Ever since the Great Depression happened, it's like the 1920 mild depression was by contrast more of a blip or short recession.
Now that I think about it, there are similar dynamics between what happened in 1982 when Ronald Reagan was in his first year as 1981 as far as fighting inflation.
However, the economy was in a recession before Jimmy Carter left office whereas before President Biden left office the economy towards the end of last year was still growing. Reagan not only was handed a recession, he faced a deep recession from July 1981 - November 1982.
Former Houston mayor and current member of Congress Sylvester Turner has died.
https://www.khou.com/article/news/local/sylvester-turner-obit/285-1ef36f35-9291-4fe2-91f4-1cdbaa92cbee
Sad news.
Trying to harmonize Texas law on vacancies in the U.S. House of Representatives, it appears that a special election would be held on May 3. But don't hold me to it.
https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/EL/htm/EL.204.htm
https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/EL/htm/EL.203.htm#203
https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/laws/advisory2024-37-may-3-2025-election-law-calendar.shtml
Glad Texas in this case has firm laws on the matter and not perpetual gubernatorial discretion
Those can be changed.
Apparently Turner was present at President Donald Trump’s joint address to Congress. I cannot help but wonder what impact Trump’s speech had on the good Congressman’s health.
What a horrible way to have to spend your last 24 hours on Earth. Poor guy.
Was checking his wiki page. His birthday is today. Died on his birthday after putting himself through a Trump speech.
That's insane, so sudden. Seemed like a great guy, RIP
Let's keep supporting ancient politicians who can't let go of power please.
This guy was a 70 year old freshman.
That's not ancient at all. Dying at 70 is unlucky.
His predecessor for the seat was Sheila Jackson Lee. She also died in office last year.
One more of these and the seat is going to feel cursed.
Question: Does Congress regulate how collected tariffs are spent, or does this authority reside in the Executive Branch?
It goes into the general treasury. Where it's mixed with tax revenue, etc. To be used on general obligations.
SUPREME COURT rules against TRUMP
. USAID MUST PAY nearly $2 billion in contracts, Supreme Court says
"The Supreme Court refused to halt a lower court ruling Wednesday that required the Trump administration to unfreeze some $1.9 billion in foreign aid payments.
"Wednesday's order from the highest court marks one of the first times the justices have intervened since Trump's return to the White House"
https://www.axios.com/2025/03/05/supreme-court-trump-usaid-contractors
Washington Post: "The Supreme Court on Wednesday denied the Trump administration’s request to block a lower court order on foreign aid funding, clearing the way for the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development to restart nearly $2 billion in payments for work already done." (Gift link below. Hope it works.)
https://wapo.st/43iTdc7
5-4 decision, with Roberts and Barrett siding with the three dems on the court.
Distressing that there were still four votes against. But a win is a win.
Yes. It also shows that the Supreme Court still knows the law better than Trump does.
I am sure that justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Thomas and Alito know the law and the Constitution just as well. They just have other priorities than upholding them.
Of course.
When I say the Supreme Court knows the law better than Trump, that is not a ringing endorsement of what the “conservative” justices are doing.
The dissent is painful to read; just illogical spaghetti thrown at the wall .
Glad that Trump lost at SCOTUS today.
Supposed to be getting a Marquette poll today. Interested to see where the WI Supreme Court race stands.
Here's the Marquette poll released today: https://law.marquette.edu/poll/2025/03/05/a-month-before-the-election-large-percentages-of-registered-voters-lack-opinions-of-candidates-for-wisconsin-supreme-court-state-superintendent-of-public-instruction/
They don't have head-to-head for the state supreme court race (Marquette doesn't usually do head-to-head numbers for officially nonpartisan races), although they have favorable/unfavorable numbers for both Schimel (R) and Crawford (D). Neither are especially popular (Schimel at 37-40 and Crawford at 27-27 among voters who self-identified as absolutely certain to vote), but Crawford has less overall name recognition than Schimel, presumably due to Schimel having been a former statewide elected official (Attorney General for one term), whereas this is Crawford's first statewide campaign.
Trump job performance at 48/51. So he’s not an advantage to Schlemiel.
And Musk's numbers are 41/53.
Through 2/26, Musk has spent more than $2.5 million on Schimel and a PAC he has supported in the past has spent an additional $1.6 million. Allwhile Tesla is in litigation against the state in a case likely to go to the state supreme court. (Nothing to see here--move along.) Seriously, I hope WI voters will get angry about this and turnout big.
Haha, you went there!
Lester Holt’s NBC Nightly News successor has been named: Tom Llamas. Llamas previously worked at ABC News, and hosted the weekend editions of ABC World News Tonight.
https://www.mediaite.com/media/breaking-nbc-names-tom-llamas-as-anchor-of-nightly-news/
Any good? I would love to see the always-professional and excellent Christiane Amanpour of CNN in a far more prominent role.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/04/pete-buttigieg-chuck-schumer-potential-senate-bid-00212271
Pete Buttigieg has met with Schumer about a potential senate run in Michigan. However he was not at a democratic event in Detroit recently which could have been seen as a serious play for support.
Article says Haley Stevens is actively hiring staff for a probable run.
McMorrow has told people she's running.
Hope Schumer told him not to run
I'm almost curious if Buttigeig would do better trying to run for the seat Haley Stevens is apparently vacating.
I lean towards saying no-I think his 2020 Presidential bid killed any chances of him making through a Democratic Primary pretty much anywhere in the country, but I'm curious about what everyone else thinks.
I think Buttigieg is vulnerable to the sense, fairly or not, that he's not really interested in serving the people of MI but just wants another CV bullet point for another Presidential run. That may not be fatal, but it won't help.
But I don't recall him saying or doing anything that was really offensive or disqualifying for any future bid for office.
I’d say it’s fatal. Throw in he’s a carpet bagging gay guy and the whole narrative writes itself. And not too delve too much into stereotypes and how that’d work in political messaging bc it’s gross. But, we like to talk to shop here. Buttigieg’s husband is the one with ties to MI and he’s considered a “femme gay”. The whole thing would devolve into a weird homophobic campaign of Pete’s not one of us and neither is his husband.
I feel for Pete but his desire to break through as a gay politician is beyond his current abilities. He was born in the wrong place to rise in politics as are many, many talented Democrats. He’s peaked and that’s fine. There are going to be many LGBTQ+ candidates who try to get to POTUS but won’t bc there are so many circumstances to breakthrough. He made his mark by going from a mayor in Indiana to running to POTUS. Take your footnote in history, honey.
Does he live in her district?
How is carpetbagging from one district to another in Michigan more ridiculous than carpetbagging from Indiana to Michigan in the first place?
It wouldn't help.
A less extreme move, maybe?
No. He lives in Traverse City. She represents Grand Rapids iirc.
I think you are thinking of Hillary Scholten who represents MI-03 but the point remains that if he lives in TC that is on the other side of the state from Stevens district.
Right. Got them mixed up.
I don't see anything he did in the primary that would generally harm him in primary. His big problem is that he can't get elected in his home state.
If he was willing to carpetbag over to Indianapolis, I'm willing to bet the local party would have cleared the field for him if Andre Carson chose to retire or run for another office.
Sure, but he seems too ambitious to run for the House.
You could have said the same thing about Sarah Palin post-2008 and she ran in the special election to succeed Don Young.
That was a state-wide House election. It's different.
Honestly, I would far prefer to see Pete Buttigieg in some sort of communications role on behalf of the Democratic Party. I’ve never seen anybody who can hold up better against a right-wing interviewer. Truly impressive!
Honestly, I get that he's not really progressive enough to satisfy the left wing, but Buttigeig strikes me as someone who would have been a fantastic DNC Chairman.
Interesting point. In the past, it has been said that the DNC Chairman has first and foremost been a glorified fundraiser. In this day and age, I believe the primary role of the DNC Chair is to be an organizer and a catalyst for much-needed change within the Democratic Party. The Chair need not be spokesman; that can be left to others.
I’m not sure those are Buttigieg’s foremost strengths. In my opinion, Pete Buttigieg is an eminent communicator, which might mean he’d be a good fit for some sort of key role within the DNC – although not necessarily Chair.
Anyways, just my $ 0.02.
Mitt Romney did serve as Governor of Massachusetts for one term, then ran for POTUS twice, then eventually ran for the Senate in Utah back in 2018 and won the election. Coincidentally, he like Buttigeg also worked at a Big 3 management consulting firm before entering politics.
On the other hand, I think Buttigeg offers more in strategy than he does as a politican.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Susan Crawford: 42%
Brad Schimel: 35%
---
Undecided: 17%
——
• @NapolitanNews | RMG Research (B)
• 800 RV | 2/25-28 | MoE: ±3.5%
Crawford still leads Schmiel 44-40 when they're identified as the "liberal and conservative candidates" in the RMG poll, despite that poll showing a Trump approval rating several points higher than Marquette's (a pattern that extends to RMG's national polls.)
I like your misspelling of "Schmiel," as it's almost "Shlemiel," but "Schimmel" means "mold"
RMG is literally Trump's best pollster; they show rosier numbers than Mclaughlin!