A group of state senators from Orange, Riverside, and San Diego Counties, Ken Calvert, and the Lincoln Club of Orange County are pulling petitions to circulate a constitutional amendment for the 2026 general election ballot on one of the most draconian voter ID laws in the country. It would require not only ID but proof of citizenship every time you vote.
Polling for this proposition showed that even Democrats by a small margin support it.
In 2024, California passed a law prohibiting local jurisdictions from requiring ID, which Huntington Beach already is violating and challenging in court.
Given California Democrats already have a history of politically shooting ourselves in the foot (redistricting commission), this proposition is alarming.
Voter ID is something voters overwhelmingly support. Even citizenship proof has majority support.
With the current coalitions, it doesn't even hurt democrats. Only allowing voting with a passport for example would help democrats quite a bit.
At this point further resistance against voter ID is a losing battle. Dems should concentrate on making it easy for every citizen to have an ID and citizenship proof.
The thing about red and purple states with voter ID laws purposely don’t inform voters which IDs are good for voting and how to get one. That’s the real problem there.
That is bad but also has little partisan impact. Confusion about what ID is valid doesn't impact all groups the same.
If you have high formal education and pay attention to politics you will know what ID to bring. These are the people that swung the most towards dems over the last years.
Republicans made their biggest gains with the kinds of voters that are more likely to get confused by ID requirements. Young, low formal education, pay little attention to politics etc.
And people with high formal education and who pay attention to politics are already becoming one of the fastest-shrinking demographics and will get vastly smaller after the AI revolution.
If that's a prediction of AI replacing educated white collar workers . . .AI (whose potential at job replacement is vastly overrated and I'll die on that hill) is much more likely to impact certain working class and LMC office jobs than educated white collar work.
I don't think that's true. Don't get me wrong - automation and a variety of other social factors are working against blue collar jobs, but my perspective is that AI will hit white collar jobs pretty hard...just take software engineers as one example, and creative types as another...
Republicans push voter ID laws because they are beneficial to them. Minority, low income, and older voters are less likely to have required IDs.
I would be unable to vote under the proposed proposition because I don't have a real idea, and my expired passport is in process of getting renewed. I'm hoping to get my passport back to get my real id by May even though I have no plans to get on a plane.
Some states do offer “free ID”, but getting the paperwork and getting to the DMV isn’t free (like here in NC). That’s how some red states are trying to avoid these laws being struck down in federal court.
I recommend people who are having trouble getting ID to vote (or anything else) go straight to VoteRiders. They will pay for the documents you need and any other costs to get an ID.
You know voter id is aimed at rural, elderly, young, and more low income voters. We defeated it back in 2012 in Minnesota on the ballot with a strong progressive coalition. It can be stopped in California also.
They have strong support out of the gate, but informing voters can make a difference. We saw that in Minnesota back in 2012. Early polling showed 75-80% support for the voter ID amendment, but in the end it ended up losing by a larger margin than Obama's win that year.
Likely that dems could drag down the voter ID amendment and win through partisanship in state as blue as CA.
The question is if that is worth it. Taking unpopular positions like opposing voter ID has a price among swing voters. Take enough unpopular positions and you lose power.
There are unpopular issues where dems think it is worth the price we pay. I do not think voter ID is worth it.
The partisan impact is minimal. With full control in CA dems can make it very easy to get ID and citizenship proof for our voters.
Do they? MN voted down a voter id law back in 2012 and I don’t recall other states getting a vote on it. I could be wrong and 2012 was a lifetime ago in American politics.
I don’t have any strong feelings on voter ID laws in theory. What gets me is when they play games about which IDs are allowed or when a free state-issued non-driver’s license ID isn’t easily available.
Yeah, most of these red states that accept US passports to vote but a handful don’t allow passport cards. And the fact that certain states deliberately refuse to allow college IDs to vote, like in Idaho and Texas, know EXACTLY what they’re doing. There’s no uniform list of IDs that are acceptable for voting, you’re at the mercy of whichever state you’re in. You might be able to skirt a photo ID law if you VBM in a state like Florida, Ohio or Idaho, but not in Texas.
It wouldn't be a problem if everyone was automatically given a free ID, but then that wouldn't suppress votes, which is the whole purpose of these laws.
But but but... with voter ID laws, how in the world will we Democrats be able to continue our George Soros-financed program of getting millions of illegal aliens and dead people to vote, preferably multiple times, to help our radical leftist candidates achieve stolen election victories?
That’s a good seat to be a bellwether for if there is a wave. But, polling isn’t plentiful on House races anymore and CA won’t be done counting votes until December. So we won’t find out who wins until it’s all over with most likely.
We don't need to look at polling for the CA-41 race to know more about where it could potentially be heading in 2026 midterm if there is a wave.
Ken Calvert did worse in 2024 than back in 2022 in facing the same Democratic challenger, Will Rollins. And both 2022 and 2024 weren't exactly wave years for Democrats in the House even while Democrats did pick up quite a few House seats last year. Calvert is quite vulnerable as a House Republican and is not in a good position to getting traction at all in 2026 during a wave.
What will it take to convince Mike Duggan (Democrat turned independent) to do the right thing: to NOT run for Governor of Michigan and NOT risk being a spoiler for his former party’s candidate? Must confess I’m concerned – Jocelyn Benson’s polling leads are pretty modest.
My hope is that Jocelyn Benson remains favored due to the political environment, Republicans nominating a toxic MAGA, and Duggan's support collapsing in the end—as is common for independent candidates (e.g., Betsy Johnson in OR-Gov 2022).
Probably ego and chasing money more than anything. If he thinks he cannot win at all, he'll try to stick it to us. Then after he'll use his defeat to get some level of grift going about how democrats abandoned "the electable candidate" and try to get on some morning TV shows and then sell a ghost written book.
He really doesn't have a better shot as an Independent-his problem was that if he wanted to run for Governor he would have been DOA in a Democratic Primary against any of the top contenders (hell, he'd probably lose a primary by double digits to Buttigeig, and that's being generous to his chances).
My guess would be Bennet would appoint Neguse to the seat. There was a rumor that Weiser and Neguse made a deal where they wouldn’t run for the same seat but the agreement was getting shaky because Neguse wanted to run for governor. I think he would rather be senator though. Probably was hoping Hickenlooper would retire this cycle.
I could see Bennet staying in the senate until he’s inaugurated, but you’re right it could go either way. I still think Neguse will be appointed regardless of who is governor.
I wouldn't rule out Diana DeGette getting the appointment if it's someone from the House delegation. Presumably she wouldn't run in 2028 (allowing Polis or any member of the House delegation the seat if they want it).
Plus, her district is safer than Neguse's-it's very unlikely to flip in a special election.
I’d rule out Degette. She’s old and can’t build up much seniority. And Neguse’s seat is safe blue so Degette’s being safer doesn’t matter. Winning by 30% isn’t much different than 20%. (I’m just throwing out numbers, I don’t feel like looking up the real margins bc I don’t need to.)
Those of us who are Packer fans pine for a star QB who doesn't act like a clown. Jordan Love's just grand so far, but Rodgers seemed ok for a while too (and I was less aware at the time but maybe Farve wasn't always bad either).
My late Grandmother had Parkinson's for over thirty years. Depending on where he is in the progression of his Parkinson's he could beat Hyde-Smith next year and serve a single term if he wanted to (assuming he's getting good treatment -which, he might not be).
I don’t know but Michael J. Fox has also still been sharp in interviews even while Parkinson’s is a problem for his body movements.
On the other hand, Favre may have gotten a concession long ago while playing football. There appears to be correlation with that and how Favre got Parkinson’s.
I have highly conflicted reports on that with a very credible source warning me that we've learned enough in the last year to discern that the CW is right. It's certainly the sort of thing we'll have to wait and see who's right but early indicators aren't great for Team Higher Ed Diploma.
I think the original commenter who I responded to deleted his post so my reply was left without context. I was arguing that the core of the Democrats' coalition--the college-educated--is already losing numbers and that I suspected that the pending AI revolution will accelerate that trend, shrinking the numbers of voters with college degrees and lowering the ceiling on the Democratic coalition. Every indication is that the "coalition of the ascendant" is now on the GOP side.
The coalition of the ascendant rhetoric has always been a sham from Bush to Obama to Trump. No coalition or electoral trend is permanent. Despite what many believe, that poor education has to the rise of Trump; the educational quality and educational attainment including the percentage of people with high school diploma, college degrees, postgraduates has been steadily been increasing since decades. Some say that the ai revolution will hit working class jobs that can be automated the most while others say that that it will hit technical professions. There has been a lot of heterodox and divergent thought about it. One of the factors that has led to a rising number of people with college degrees is the unaffordable COI which doesn't seem to be getting any better. Democrats have simply been bleeding the working class since Bill Clinton and there may not be enough college educated voters to replace the losses.
Illinois 9th Congressional District - Jan Schakowsky has a primary challenger in the form of Kat Abughazeleh. Schakowsky is the right Democrat for these types of primary challenges: 80 years old, been in office for as long as her challenger has been alive, and a district with a vote share over 65%. As a former resident of the Chicago suburbs I'll be watching this one closely.
I'm in IL-9 and curious to see how this one plays out. I'm certainly open to voting for a primary challenger. Schakowsky's great but it may be time for someone younger.
It's an interesting district, really a slice (literally) of Chicagoland. It includes Uptown, Edgewater, and Rogers Park in the city. These are North Side neighborhoods but not the most expensive ones. Then it grabs a mix of pretty progressive inner burbs (Evanston, Skokie), wealthier middle burbs (Glenview, bits of Des Plaines), and some light red areas (Niles and outer burbs near Algonquin). Completely safe D regardless of nominee. The cross-section it provides should be an interesting test case for this kind of primary.
I'm interested to see if the CW will hold true in this environment that the suburbs aren't fond of Firebrands like Kat. I think my best friend from Middle School is in this district and I used to live in Gurnee so I know the area. I hope this is just the first of many.
Also, running a firebrand primary challenge against one of the most progressive members of Congress won’t work particularly well imo, unless if people are just voting based on wanting change regardless of ideology.
I think age is an issue that we shouldn't sweep under the rug. It also is not automatically disqualifying.
We already had two older representatives die this congress and the longer old representatives stay around the higher the chances that they will do the same. There is a demand from voters for some level of generational changeover, especially from the democratic part of the electorate. Right now there are 15 members of the house that are 80+ years old, and 12 of them are democrats.
It's also a lot easier to ensure a like-minded progressive successor if an official retires on a reasonable time table on their own terms while they still have influence over the process.
I believe that generational change is going to be a big theme in the 2026 elections. You'll have nearly a half a century age gap between the two candidates. Whether or not she'll be a good congressperson and can adjust to the role remains to be seen and it's not like Kat isn't progressive either. I think all things being equal if you can upgrade the position with a slightly more progressive candidate but 50 years younger, I think you go for it. We'll see how it works out.
It really is automatically disqualifying at this point.
The next constitutional amendment passed needs to include a maximum age for all state and federal elective and appointed offices-let's say a maximum of 60 for all offices.
Ok, that’s just ridiculous. I don’t think anyone seriously believes that John Kerry would have been too old to be president in 2004, or that JB Pritzker is too old to be governor of Illinois, or that Tammy Baldwin is too old to be a Senator.
The overt ageism on this board and the Discord is really getting ridiculous. For just one example, Pelosi turns 85 in a few days and she's still sharp as a tack. If she had been run off at 60 or 65 or 70 as some people seem to want, we probably wouldn't have gotten any of the big legislative wins of the past 15 years including the ACA.
Age as such is not the problem. It's unwillingness to adjust to 21st century politics. Pelosi, Sanders, and a bunch of other oldsters have adjusted. There's plenty of younger deadwood like Gillibrand (58) and Schatz (52) who haven't and need to be removed ASAP.
It appears that she's a carpetbagger so we'll see how that hurts her. She doesn't even CURRENTLY live in the district which is another knock against her.
"Abughazaleh moved to the Chicago area in July but voted in the 2024 election in Washington, D.C., because her lease wasn’t yet up, she told POLITICO. She said she registered to vote in Illinois last month and currently lives outside the district but plans to move into the district “soon.”
Yeah, this seems like an issue. With a House candidate, especially someone who's young, I don't expect that they necessarily lived here all their lives. The district has plenty of transplants. But I do expect them to be fluent in local issues. We'll see if she's able to meet that bar. Not super optimistic based on being here for less than a year, but stranger things have happened.
That's what it's looking like. I guess I'm more hoping that this just opens the floodgates to either get her to retire or allow someone more connected to the district to run. Then again... As a Millennial, I've moved around Los Angeles 6 times in the 15 years I've been here so it is hard to put down roots as a renter so as long as she gives a halfway decent rationale for WHY Chicago and WHY now other than district shopping, I could get onboard.
Apparently she used to be a College Republican at ASU Tempe several years back so that's interesting. I don't see her campaign getting far as a transplant who won't spend on cable ads though.
She's raised a good chunk of change but I wonder how long this challenge lasts; the progressives in the district love Jan and she's gonna run into a brick wall there
What does everyone make of the most incompetent, oligarchic administration in the history of the union's big mistake with the leaked texts? Makes me sick!! 😢🇺🇲
I think Tillis is toast next year. The energy here in NC right now is mirroring what happened before Cory Gardner was ousted in Colorado. Town halls are being hosted around the state and he’s invited to each one. And just like Gardner, he’s ducking every single one of them.
And if Cooper does enter the race, Tillis WILL lose.
Proposed CA voter ID law
A group of state senators from Orange, Riverside, and San Diego Counties, Ken Calvert, and the Lincoln Club of Orange County are pulling petitions to circulate a constitutional amendment for the 2026 general election ballot on one of the most draconian voter ID laws in the country. It would require not only ID but proof of citizenship every time you vote.
Polling for this proposition showed that even Democrats by a small margin support it.
In 2024, California passed a law prohibiting local jurisdictions from requiring ID, which Huntington Beach already is violating and challenging in court.
Given California Democrats already have a history of politically shooting ourselves in the foot (redistricting commission), this proposition is alarming.
Voter ID is something voters overwhelmingly support. Even citizenship proof has majority support.
With the current coalitions, it doesn't even hurt democrats. Only allowing voting with a passport for example would help democrats quite a bit.
At this point further resistance against voter ID is a losing battle. Dems should concentrate on making it easy for every citizen to have an ID and citizenship proof.
The thing about red and purple states with voter ID laws purposely don’t inform voters which IDs are good for voting and how to get one. That’s the real problem there.
That is bad but also has little partisan impact. Confusion about what ID is valid doesn't impact all groups the same.
If you have high formal education and pay attention to politics you will know what ID to bring. These are the people that swung the most towards dems over the last years.
Republicans made their biggest gains with the kinds of voters that are more likely to get confused by ID requirements. Young, low formal education, pay little attention to politics etc.
And people with high formal education and who pay attention to politics are already becoming one of the fastest-shrinking demographics and will get vastly smaller after the AI revolution.
If that's a prediction of AI replacing educated white collar workers . . .AI (whose potential at job replacement is vastly overrated and I'll die on that hill) is much more likely to impact certain working class and LMC office jobs than educated white collar work.
I don't think that's true. Don't get me wrong - automation and a variety of other social factors are working against blue collar jobs, but my perspective is that AI will hit white collar jobs pretty hard...just take software engineers as one example, and creative types as another...
I'm anti-Luddite, except when this simulated intelligence they call "AI" is involved. Also, f*** transhumanism with the power of a million suns.
AI is just the Silicon Valley investor-whore term for machine learning.
Republicans push voter ID laws because they are beneficial to them. Minority, low income, and older voters are less likely to have required IDs.
I would be unable to vote under the proposed proposition because I don't have a real idea, and my expired passport is in process of getting renewed. I'm hoping to get my passport back to get my real id by May even though I have no plans to get on a plane.
Republicans think that it benefits them. However research has found negligible average effects of voter ID.
If you look at the swing in the 2024 election, all the groups most impacted by voter ID swung towards republicans. Often by a lot.
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2217323120
These same groups swung toward Republicans AND are the new coalition of the ascendant.
Then the State should provide ID's free of charge. Otherwise, it's an indirect poll tax.
Some states do offer “free ID”, but getting the paperwork and getting to the DMV isn’t free (like here in NC). That’s how some red states are trying to avoid these laws being struck down in federal court.
I recommend people who are having trouble getting ID to vote (or anything else) go straight to VoteRiders. They will pay for the documents you need and any other costs to get an ID.
You know voter id is aimed at rural, elderly, young, and more low income voters. We defeated it back in 2012 in Minnesota on the ballot with a strong progressive coalition. It can be stopped in California also.
They have strong support out of the gate, but informing voters can make a difference. We saw that in Minnesota back in 2012. Early polling showed 75-80% support for the voter ID amendment, but in the end it ended up losing by a larger margin than Obama's win that year.
Likely that dems could drag down the voter ID amendment and win through partisanship in state as blue as CA.
The question is if that is worth it. Taking unpopular positions like opposing voter ID has a price among swing voters. Take enough unpopular positions and you lose power.
There are unpopular issues where dems think it is worth the price we pay. I do not think voter ID is worth it.
The partisan impact is minimal. With full control in CA dems can make it very easy to get ID and citizenship proof for our voters.
Do they? MN voted down a voter id law back in 2012 and I don’t recall other states getting a vote on it. I could be wrong and 2012 was a lifetime ago in American politics.
I don’t have any strong feelings on voter ID laws in theory. What gets me is when they play games about which IDs are allowed or when a free state-issued non-driver’s license ID isn’t easily available.
Yeah, most of these red states that accept US passports to vote but a handful don’t allow passport cards. And the fact that certain states deliberately refuse to allow college IDs to vote, like in Idaho and Texas, know EXACTLY what they’re doing. There’s no uniform list of IDs that are acceptable for voting, you’re at the mercy of whichever state you’re in. You might be able to skirt a photo ID law if you VBM in a state like Florida, Ohio or Idaho, but not in Texas.
It’s an unnecessary barrier. Period.
It wouldn't be a problem if everyone was automatically given a free ID, but then that wouldn't suppress votes, which is the whole purpose of these laws.
But but but... with voter ID laws, how in the world will we Democrats be able to continue our George Soros-financed program of getting millions of illegal aliens and dead people to vote, preferably multiple times, to help our radical leftist candidates achieve stolen election victories?
Ken Calvert ought to watch out for his re-election chances in 2026 instead of getting involved in voter ID initiatives.
That’s a good seat to be a bellwether for if there is a wave. But, polling isn’t plentiful on House races anymore and CA won’t be done counting votes until December. So we won’t find out who wins until it’s all over with most likely.
We don't need to look at polling for the CA-41 race to know more about where it could potentially be heading in 2026 midterm if there is a wave.
Ken Calvert did worse in 2024 than back in 2022 in facing the same Democratic challenger, Will Rollins. And both 2022 and 2024 weren't exactly wave years for Democrats in the House even while Democrats did pick up quite a few House seats last year. Calvert is quite vulnerable as a House Republican and is not in a good position to getting traction at all in 2026 during a wave.
What will it take to convince Mike Duggan (Democrat turned independent) to do the right thing: to NOT run for Governor of Michigan and NOT risk being a spoiler for his former party’s candidate? Must confess I’m concerned – Jocelyn Benson’s polling leads are pretty modest.
My hope is that Jocelyn Benson remains favored due to the political environment, Republicans nominating a toxic MAGA, and Duggan's support collapsing in the end—as is common for independent candidates (e.g., Betsy Johnson in OR-Gov 2022).
Still don't understand the calculation that he has a better shot as an Indie then running in the Dem primary.
Seems like a remnant of immediate post-2024 thinking that doesn’t hold water today.
Probably ego and chasing money more than anything. If he thinks he cannot win at all, he'll try to stick it to us. Then after he'll use his defeat to get some level of grift going about how democrats abandoned "the electable candidate" and try to get on some morning TV shows and then sell a ghost written book.
It's absolutely an ego thing. And it's not just Duggan.
He really doesn't have a better shot as an Independent-his problem was that if he wanted to run for Governor he would have been DOA in a Democratic Primary against any of the top contenders (hell, he'd probably lose a primary by double digits to Buttigeig, and that's being generous to his chances).
Former UT congresswoman Mia Love has now passed from her tragic brain cancer at only 49.
Oh my goodness, that's awful.
I feel bad for her family and that she passed so young, but her voting record as a House Representative was abhorrent.
Except on immigration. Love was quite moderate on this issue and worked with Democrats in this sense, especially with supporting DACA.
If Michael Bennet decides to run for governor, will termed-out Jared Polis run for his Senate seat? Will Jason Crow? Joe Neguse? Ed Perlmutter?
Seat's not up till 2028. Someone would be appointed in the interim.
But who would be appointed? Might Polis appoint himself?
That's a bad look. Depends on whether he would want a placeholder.
Well if he wants to run he’d need a placeholder. Because yeah, appointing yourself doesn’t work.
My guess would be Bennet would appoint Neguse to the seat. There was a rumor that Weiser and Neguse made a deal where they wouldn’t run for the same seat but the agreement was getting shaky because Neguse wanted to run for governor. I think he would rather be senator though. Probably was hoping Hickenlooper would retire this cycle.
Polis would more likely make the appointment.
I could see Bennet staying in the senate until he’s inaugurated, but you’re right it could go either way. I still think Neguse will be appointed regardless of who is governor.
I don't think so? The vacancy wouldn't occur until Bennet becomes governor, right?
He can resign any time after the election. Which would permit the new senator to get a leg up in seniority.
Neguse would create a vacant house seat for a few months though.
Maybe Weiser would get the appointment. Or Griswold. Or Adam Frisch.
True it will probably depend on how large a hypothetical Dem majority in the House is.
I wouldn't rule out Diana DeGette getting the appointment if it's someone from the House delegation. Presumably she wouldn't run in 2028 (allowing Polis or any member of the House delegation the seat if they want it).
Plus, her district is safer than Neguse's-it's very unlikely to flip in a special election.
I’d rule out Degette. She’s old and can’t build up much seniority. And Neguse’s seat is safe blue so Degette’s being safer doesn’t matter. Winning by 30% isn’t much different than 20%. (I’m just throwing out numbers, I don’t feel like looking up the real margins bc I don’t need to.)
Neguse’s seat almost certainly isn’t flipping in a special election.
Oakland Mayor: Loren Taylor’s campaign has released an internal poll showing Barbara Lee leading 45%-41%. All other candidates combined have 5%. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iPNGzDDK9f4fjktfFyOl5X5wzS939_hC/view?emci=a9df0527-6f07-f011-90cd-0022482a9fb7&emdi=37246487-7607-f011-90cd-0022482a9fb7&ceid=12236122 The February poll by the same firm (Blueprint Polling) had Lee leading 40%-30%. The election is April 15 and is by RCV. Mail ballots are already out.
Brett Favre endorsed Schimel. Not surprised, one dumb ass MAGA scam artist endorsing this clown but still pretty ridiculous for this race: https://www.foxnews.com/sports/wisconsin-supreme-court-hopeful-receives-big-endorsement-from-nfl-legend
Those of us who are Packer fans pine for a star QB who doesn't act like a clown. Jordan Love's just grand so far, but Rodgers seemed ok for a while too (and I was less aware at the time but maybe Farve wasn't always bad either).
Favre can't even use the excuse he took too many shots to the brain (which he did) for his Maga bullshit!
At this point, Brett Favre should follow the footsteps of Herschel Walker and run for the Senate.
He might actually be an upgrade over Cindy Hyde-Smith (barring no new Farve scandals coming out), to be honest.
Favre has Parkinson's, I'm a little surprised he is still wading into electoral politics
My late Grandmother had Parkinson's for over thirty years. Depending on where he is in the progression of his Parkinson's he could beat Hyde-Smith next year and serve a single term if he wanted to (assuming he's getting good treatment -which, he might not be).
I don’t know but Michael J. Fox has also still been sharp in interviews even while Parkinson’s is a problem for his body movements.
On the other hand, Favre may have gotten a concession long ago while playing football. There appears to be correlation with that and how Favre got Parkinson’s.
"A" concussion...how about 50-100 during a career as long as his
Favre is involved in scams?
I have highly conflicted reports on that with a very credible source warning me that we've learned enough in the last year to discern that the CW is right. It's certainly the sort of thing we'll have to wait and see who's right but early indicators aren't great for Team Higher Ed Diploma.
Huh?
Mark, would you kindly repost that in plain English? Usually your posts are admirably clear.
I think the original commenter who I responded to deleted his post so my reply was left without context. I was arguing that the core of the Democrats' coalition--the college-educated--is already losing numbers and that I suspected that the pending AI revolution will accelerate that trend, shrinking the numbers of voters with college degrees and lowering the ceiling on the Democratic coalition. Every indication is that the "coalition of the ascendant" is now on the GOP side.
Thank you.
The coalition of the ascendant rhetoric has always been a sham from Bush to Obama to Trump. No coalition or electoral trend is permanent. Despite what many believe, that poor education has to the rise of Trump; the educational quality and educational attainment including the percentage of people with high school diploma, college degrees, postgraduates has been steadily been increasing since decades. Some say that the ai revolution will hit working class jobs that can be automated the most while others say that that it will hit technical professions. There has been a lot of heterodox and divergent thought about it. One of the factors that has led to a rising number of people with college degrees is the unaffordable COI which doesn't seem to be getting any better. Democrats have simply been bleeding the working class since Bill Clinton and there may not be enough college educated voters to replace the losses.
More Students Than Ever Are Set to Enroll
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/25/us/colleges-students-financial-crisis-politics-affirmative-action.html
Illinois 9th Congressional District - Jan Schakowsky has a primary challenger in the form of Kat Abughazeleh. Schakowsky is the right Democrat for these types of primary challenges: 80 years old, been in office for as long as her challenger has been alive, and a district with a vote share over 65%. As a former resident of the Chicago suburbs I'll be watching this one closely.
https://www.axios.com/2025/03/24/kat-abughazaleh-jan-schakowsky-primary-challenge
I'm in IL-9 and curious to see how this one plays out. I'm certainly open to voting for a primary challenger. Schakowsky's great but it may be time for someone younger.
It's an interesting district, really a slice (literally) of Chicagoland. It includes Uptown, Edgewater, and Rogers Park in the city. These are North Side neighborhoods but not the most expensive ones. Then it grabs a mix of pretty progressive inner burbs (Evanston, Skokie), wealthier middle burbs (Glenview, bits of Des Plaines), and some light red areas (Niles and outer burbs near Algonquin). Completely safe D regardless of nominee. The cross-section it provides should be an interesting test case for this kind of primary.
I'm interested to see if the CW will hold true in this environment that the suburbs aren't fond of Firebrands like Kat. I think my best friend from Middle School is in this district and I used to live in Gurnee so I know the area. I hope this is just the first of many.
Also, running a firebrand primary challenge against one of the most progressive members of Congress won’t work particularly well imo, unless if people are just voting based on wanting change regardless of ideology.
I assume they are hoping for the same kind of lightening strike that took out Honda.
Schakowsky’s been a fine rep and progressive. Age alone is not a reason to give her the boot.
I think age is an issue that we shouldn't sweep under the rug. It also is not automatically disqualifying.
We already had two older representatives die this congress and the longer old representatives stay around the higher the chances that they will do the same. There is a demand from voters for some level of generational changeover, especially from the democratic part of the electorate. Right now there are 15 members of the house that are 80+ years old, and 12 of them are democrats.
It's also a lot easier to ensure a like-minded progressive successor if an official retires on a reasonable time table on their own terms while they still have influence over the process.
I believe that generational change is going to be a big theme in the 2026 elections. You'll have nearly a half a century age gap between the two candidates. Whether or not she'll be a good congressperson and can adjust to the role remains to be seen and it's not like Kat isn't progressive either. I think all things being equal if you can upgrade the position with a slightly more progressive candidate but 50 years younger, I think you go for it. We'll see how it works out.
It really is automatically disqualifying at this point.
The next constitutional amendment passed needs to include a maximum age for all state and federal elective and appointed offices-let's say a maximum of 60 for all offices.
Ok, that’s just ridiculous. I don’t think anyone seriously believes that John Kerry would have been too old to be president in 2004, or that JB Pritzker is too old to be governor of Illinois, or that Tammy Baldwin is too old to be a Senator.
I'm open to compromise on what the age in question should be. The point is that there should be a maximum age for state and federal officials.
I think 65-70 is a fair retirement age.
The overt ageism on this board and the Discord is really getting ridiculous. For just one example, Pelosi turns 85 in a few days and she's still sharp as a tack. If she had been run off at 60 or 65 or 70 as some people seem to want, we probably wouldn't have gotten any of the big legislative wins of the past 15 years including the ACA.
Age as such is not the problem. It's unwillingness to adjust to 21st century politics. Pelosi, Sanders, and a bunch of other oldsters have adjusted. There's plenty of younger deadwood like Gillibrand (58) and Schatz (52) who haven't and need to be removed ASAP.
It’s worth remembering what the Japanese master artist, Hokusai, said about age and painting.
And does Kat have any ties to the district? Her linkedin says she’s from Arizona and went to college and worked in DC.
It appears that she's a carpetbagger so we'll see how that hurts her. She doesn't even CURRENTLY live in the district which is another knock against her.
"Abughazaleh moved to the Chicago area in July but voted in the 2024 election in Washington, D.C., because her lease wasn’t yet up, she told POLITICO. She said she registered to vote in Illinois last month and currently lives outside the district but plans to move into the district “soon.”
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/24/illinois-progressive-congress-member-attracts-gen-z-challenger-027500
Yeah, this seems like an issue. With a House candidate, especially someone who's young, I don't expect that they necessarily lived here all their lives. The district has plenty of transplants. But I do expect them to be fluent in local issues. We'll see if she's able to meet that bar. Not super optimistic based on being here for less than a year, but stranger things have happened.
So she district shopped? I don't predict success in her challenge
That's what it's looking like. I guess I'm more hoping that this just opens the floodgates to either get her to retire or allow someone more connected to the district to run. Then again... As a Millennial, I've moved around Los Angeles 6 times in the 15 years I've been here so it is hard to put down roots as a renter so as long as she gives a halfway decent rationale for WHY Chicago and WHY now other than district shopping, I could get onboard.
Sounds like her candidacy will go nowhere. Who is this person?
Gen Z TikTok political influencer. She mostly shits on Conservative Media Personalities.
Apparently she used to be a College Republican at ASU Tempe several years back so that's interesting. I don't see her campaign getting far as a transplant who won't spend on cable ads though.
She's raised a good chunk of change but I wonder how long this challenge lasts; the progressives in the district love Jan and she's gonna run into a brick wall there
I see no reason to get rid of her, she's close friends with Bernie, a decent human being and a damn reliable congresswoman!! 💙🇺🇲
More WI EVs Madison and Milwaukee with big days https://x.com/tobymgdata/status/1904352610083115063?s=61&t=5copDbz1aPl7ASsRCUclLg
What does everyone make of the most incompetent, oligarchic administration in the history of the union's big mistake with the leaked texts? Makes me sick!! 😢🇺🇲
It’s awful and sickening.
I think Tillis is toast next year. The energy here in NC right now is mirroring what happened before Cory Gardner was ousted in Colorado. Town halls are being hosted around the state and he’s invited to each one. And just like Gardner, he’s ducking every single one of them.
And if Cooper does enter the race, Tillis WILL lose.
I think it's pretty funny. This is what happens when you make a DUI hire.