I am surprised to see Jared Golden underwater in ME-02. Golden has carefully (and frustratingly) positioned himself as perhaps the most conservative Democrat in the House, at least on some issues. Probably with a view to his rather-Red constituency, Golden was one of the few Congressional Democrats that refused to endorse Kamala Harris. Moreover, he even gave an interview where he appeared indifferent as to who would win this year’s Presidential Election!
Do we know anything about this pollster, Pan Atlantic Research? I’ve never heard of them.
Cultivating an independent image is one thing, completely crapping on the party you purport to represent is another. All that accomplishes is imprinting the idea in people’s minds that “if the Democrats are so bad, why should I vote for any of them?”
Not sure about the pollster, but I think the assault weapons ban shift he bravely and rightly made after tragedy hit his district changed the vibes on him from “conservative, different Democrat” to “same as party”. He needs some conservative issues to give enough credence with Trump voters to crossover and losing that tie on guns probably hurts him electorally in such a district.
I still don’t know whether he wins or loses and obviously I hope he does, but I think he’s got the toughest fight of his brief congressional career this year imo. Realistically, I think Golden probably needs Trump to win by less than 5 in the district to have a shot. Or maybe I’m wrong and he wins in a romp. I really hope that happens, but we shall see!
Good observations! We live in his district – and one of the most unnerving things we hear is the not-so-occasional fire of automatic weapons. Presumably target-shooting but perhaps preparing for that longed-for Civil War.
They have, but a mixed bag as far as accuracy. In 2022 they had Pingree winning by 35 when she won by 26, and Golden up by three candidates when he ended up ahead by 3.5. In 2020 they had Golden out-performing Pingree, winning by 28 to her 20. He ended up winning by 6, she won by 24.5. 2018 they were pretty good. Golden down 1 when he ended up winning by 1. Pingree polled at +24 and won by 26.
One additional legislature we would like to flip is the ever elusive Arizona one. It would require picking up 2 seats in the house and 2 in senate. Given this is a presidential year, if we have any type of D wave nationally, I believe it's possible, but still well under 50%. We also have help this year of reproductive rights on the ballot in Arizona.
Given we have democratic control of the top statewide offices, controlling the legislature would allow for undoing damage Ducey & Co. and prior Republican governors have done.
What’s the status on the fight to control elections in Maricopa County? Last I heard, there was an alarming chance that a Trumpist election denier could win the top spot.
A barrage of polling overnight. A Trump-friendly drop from Emerson: +1 in AZ, PA and WI and + 3 in GA, tied in NV, Harris + 1 in NC and +2 in MI.
Marist has Harris + 5 in MI, + 1 in WI and tied in PA.
Washington Post has it tied in PA (this poll also has Casey and McCormick tied), Franklin and Marshall has Harris + 3 in PA and Siena has Harris + 4 in PA.
I do think today and maybe tomorrow will be the peak. I imagine pretty much every high level pollster went into the field in the days immediately after the debate and that's what we're now seeing.
Looks like 2020, Harris with a 1-2 point lead across Wisconsin, Michigan and Penn. U of New Hampshire had Rhode Island at 58-38 and Massachusetts at 62-31...which looks like 2020.
Iowa Senate: Republicans currently hold 34 of 50 seats, which is enough to confirm all of the governor's appointees without any Democratic support.
Democrats have a decent chance to pick up Iowa Senate district 22 in the Des Moines suburbs (Zaun). However, they are also defending several tough Iowa Senate seats.
Question about your independent expenditures tracker: I'm pretty sure I saw some DCCC-funded ad against Nunn in IA-03. What is the usual time lag in reporting? Your Google doc shows some spending by HMP in IA-03 but not DCCC yet.
Great Q. We update weekly. Every Monday, I pull all the IE reports for the "Big Four" for the prior week from the FEC's site. We then publish an update on Tuesday.
But they only filed their first IE report yesterday (Wednesday). Now you'll notice that some of those items have "expenditure dates" that date back to last week. But every IE has three different dates associated with it:
1) Date of expenditure. Literally the day you fork over money—say, to a TV station to run an ad.
2) Date of dissemination. The day the fruits of your IE become public, like your TV ad starting to actually run on the airwaves.
3) Filing date. This is the day you file your IE report with the FEC. Generally, that's within 48 hours of #2 (dissemination), except in the final three weeks before an election, in which case you have to file within 24 hours.
For reasons that aren't clear to me, if you click that link I shared above, the FEC highlights the expenditure (ie, payment) date, but that's seldom very helpful. I mean, if you wanted to, you could pay a TV station three months in advance (not that you ever would), so there would be a huge gap between #1 and #2, and therefore #3 wouldn't happen until long after your check was cashed.
So when I gather these reports, I always do so based on filing date.
Who would they even replace him with? And aren’t ballots already printed (after an initial delay due to partisan NC SCOTUS requiring RFK Jr to be removed) so Robinson’s name would remain on the ballot?
Article you and Paleo link below says the state party executive committee would pick a replacement, but his name would stay on the ballot. Anyone that ran in the primary is ineligible, apparently.
North Carolina Republicans are bracing Thursday morning as word spreads about a damning news story looming regarding Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson.
Sources with direct knowledge have spoken with Carolina Journal on the condition of anonymity and said that Robinson is under pressure from staff and members of the Trump campaign to withdraw from the governor’s race due to the nature of the story, which they say involves activity on adult websites in 2000s.
According to sources, Robinson has resisted withdrawing and privately denies the story.
Which begs the question of how many Trumpers would still support him if he had personally murdered a girl. Of course he is responsible for hundreds of thousands of excess deaths from his demagogic handling of COVID and had police officers killed in the Capitol, but they explain those away.
I agree but it's just one more negative story that the Republicans have done to themselves; own goal after own goal; Robinson may be the worst sitting elected official to ever seek higher office(I'm talking in terms of electability)
Every time i think that voters really do pay attention there's a Mark Robinson who comes along to prove, no they don't always pay attention. Dude should have no chance to win elective office but he did.
That's not how I read the attached story. It says:
"Thursday evening is the state deadline to withdraw from the race. The deadline to remove Robinson’s name from the ballot already has passed. . . . Should Robinson decide to withdraw from the race . . . the North Carolina Republican Party Executive Committee would need to choose a replacement candidate for November."
To me, this says that if he does not withdraw by tonight, they cannot replace him.
Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson's spokesman, Michael Lonergan, has stated that it is "complete fiction" to suggest that Lt. Gov. Robinson will drop out of this year's North Carolina gubernatorial race.
Name replacement really doesn't matter per se(not talking the political ramifications); his votes would be counted for the Republican (whoever that is)
Imo the real question is can the NCRP state executive committee force a replacement; some state EC s have bylaws in place for that(I'm not sure which state's do or don't) for instance I know the GADP state EC had that power at 1 time
Pressure mounting in Nebraska to switch their system for awarding EVs. Once again, I hope Maine is paying attention. The Blue Wall will only take Kamala to exactly 269 EVs. She cannot win without NE-02 unless she is winning other states.
Yeah, the core blue states plus the Blue Wall is exactly 269 EVs. NE-02 takes her to 270 exactly. Without it or another state (NV, AZ, GA, NC), Trump wins.
I think this was more of a concern with Biden than Harris. That was his primary (only?) route to victory. Not to say that result is not possible, but Harris seems to have many more options, including ME-02 in at least one poll.
Other sites are reporting on this today. Apparently Maine has a state law that says new laws take effect 90 says after passage unless they were passed with a supermajority. So it's legally too late to change the law in Maine in time for this election. Total malpractice on the part of Maine Dems, who should understand this already.
Here's how North Carolina Republicans can proceed if Mark Robinson drops out in the next few hours (the deadline for Robinson to drop out is this evening):
"Thursday evening is the state deadline to withdraw from the race. The deadline to remove Robinson’s name from the ballot already has passed. There are just four weeks to go until early voting, and absentee ballots are due to go in the mail Friday.
[...]
Should Robinson decide to withdraw from the race, something that Carolina Journal’s sources say he is opposed to at the moment, the North Carolina Republican Party Executive Committee would need to choose a replacement candidate for November.
According to elections expert Andy Jackson of the John Locke Foundation’s Civitas Center for Public Integrity, the deadline to change the name on the ballot has passed under state law. Once the North Carolina State Board of Elections mails the absentee, overseas, and military ballots on Friday, changing the names could run afoul of the 14th Amendment. Instead, any votes Robinson receives on Nov. 5 would go to the replacement candidate chosen by the NCGOP."
It is important to note that the Civitas Center is a right-wing think tank, although they're citing NC state law. Additionally, a similar scenario played out in a U.S. House race in Florida in 2006 after the Mark Foley scandal.
Looks like dems got outsmarted on the Nebraska vs. Maine electoral college battle. Dems are past the 90 day period before a law takes effect for a law to count towards the Dec 16 meeting of the electoral college. Maine dems have the votes but not a supermajority which is necessary for a law to take effect sooner than the 90 days. Nebraska GOP obviously read the Maine constitution.
The GOP is always willing to change the rules to their benefit (aggressive gerrymanders, SCT appointments, EV distributions, elections board in GA) while Dems stupidly won't (blue slips, filibuster, DC statehood, no gerrymanders in NY & CA, expanding SCROTUS, etc.).
We all saw this coming in slow motion months ago. Maine stood by and did nothing, and now it's too late. Maine Dems do not appear to understand their own state law. Meanwhile, the ONE thing you can count on the GOP for is changing the rules to suit their needs; it's basically their only consistent ideology. I'd legitimately be very shocked if they didn't change the law.
I don’t think it’s a question of being outsmarted. They were just against going first to change the rules in the middle of the game. For political and ethical reasons.
There's a long list of things Democrats declined to do for the sake of appearances. Throw it on the pile. Meanwhile the GOP has zero shame or ethics about changing, reinterpreting, or just ignoring any rule that gets in their way. That weakness of character plus the intensity of the current pressure is what have me worried.
Zinke up on Tranel 47-43. This one was always going to be tough but I had hoped for better. Also seeing Tester up 1 in MT-1 should mean he is behind statewide.
Real mixed bag of results here. Tranel has some time and wiggle room to pull ahead and Tester has a better favorability in this district but he needs to do way better. With the abortion amendment performing the strongest, both Tester and Tranel just need to keep emphasizing that Sheehy and Zinke support a National Abortion Ban.
They do, though we know very well from previous experience that that may well not work. And don't reply that they should do it anyway, because I just said that.
What’s a good example of recent previous studies examples since Dobbs where that hasn’t always worked? I was thinking of Tom Souzzi’s playbook however NY-03 and MT-01 are the apples to oranges. But there’s still a Libertarian vibe in a red state like Montana. Tester was dubbed the Libertarian Democrat by Markos himself.
? Just about every Republican state that's passed referenda in favor of abortion rights, raising the minimum wage, extending Medicaid in their state and fair districting has turned around and voted Republican state-wide.
Raising the minimum wage and extending Medicaid ballot initiatives took place in the red states during the Obama years mostly. In 2014, it was a shitty midterm year for the Democrats but the ballot measures won. Also, the gerrymandering in many of those states for the GOP was still in tact and the power of incumbency. Now, here's a good example: Kentucky protected an abortion rights amendment and re-elected Andy Beshear. Now I know that voters can know the difference between the importance of have a Senator and a Governor but Kentucky's a pretty red state itself.
Tester needs to be engaging young voters and encouraging more voters to register. I think a major understated issue is also the soaring housing market in Montana which has priced out many natives in the state. It's one of those issues that's a major headaches and as a CA native that deals with soaring house prices, there's no easy fix to it.
In August, after Donald Trump praised three Republican appointees to the Georgia State Election Board by name at a rally in Atlanta, the MAGA-aligned majority on the board passed a series of rule changes—requiring counties to undertake a “reasonable inquiry” into the vote totals and review “all election-related documentation” before certifying an election—that Democrats and voting rights groups fear could lead GOP-controlled boards not to sign off on the results if Kamala Harris wins the state. “The discrete and immediate concern,” says Abrams, who ran for Georgia governor in 2018 and 2022 and founded the voting rights group Fair Fight, “is that this will delay the counting of Georgia’s Electoral College votes.”
If there’s a lengthy dispute over the vote count, Georgia could miss the December 11 deadline for certifying its Electoral College results. If no candidate receives the 270 votes necessary to win the Electoral College as a result, the presidential election would be thrown to the House of Representatives, where Republicans control a majority of state House delegations, allowing them to swing the election to Trump.[...]
Jessica Marsden, counsel to the free and fair elections program at Protect Democracy, called a contingent election scenario “extremely unlikely.” She said that while she was alarmed by election deniers taking over state and county election boards in Georgia, she remained confident that top state officials, such as Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who resisted Trump’s demand to “find 11,780 votes” to reverse Biden’s victory in 2020, along with state courts, would once again uphold the integrity of the election.
While I never want to gamble on honest Republicans, at least in Georgia there is still a real Never Trump sentiment in a small but significant portion the Georgia Republican Party. I watched the Stop The Steal doc on Max and I would bet on Raffensperger for doing the right thing in this situation. Him and Kemp benefitted from having open primaries in their state and won over crossover appeal. They were rewarded by the voters for standing up to Trump. Also, after watching the Stop The Steal documentary, I think after everything Raffensberger has gone through with Trump's people, I don't get a vibe from him that he has any major political aspirations, at least not in Georgia politics. I could be wrong though about that part.
Yes, I think they will insist on counting the votes that passed the unnecessary hurdles on voting that they supported, but isn't it a bit much to call them "never-Trump"?
I’ve heard throughout the Daily Kos community from folks who live in Georgia that there is a “Never Trump” sentiment there and I think both Kemp and Raffensberger’s primary wins against Trump backed candidates prove that. I don’t doubt there are right leaning Independents and traditional Republicans that just don’t like and can’t vote for Trump. The former GOP Lt. Governor of Georgia endorsed Harris. In a state like Georgia, his support might go further for Harris than say Kasich’s support for Biden in Ohio in 2020. But I could also be wrong about that part too.
I see: you're talking about some of the support for those guys, not them, themselves. Yes, sure. But Kemp has at least tepidly endorsed Trump, and I thought Raffensperger had, too. I know both of them said they voted for him in 2020.
I am surprised to see Jared Golden underwater in ME-02. Golden has carefully (and frustratingly) positioned himself as perhaps the most conservative Democrat in the House, at least on some issues. Probably with a view to his rather-Red constituency, Golden was one of the few Congressional Democrats that refused to endorse Kamala Harris. Moreover, he even gave an interview where he appeared indifferent as to who would win this year’s Presidential Election!
Do we know anything about this pollster, Pan Atlantic Research? I’ve never heard of them.
Cultivating an independent image is one thing, completely crapping on the party you purport to represent is another. All that accomplishes is imprinting the idea in people’s minds that “if the Democrats are so bad, why should I vote for any of them?”
Not sure about the pollster, but I think the assault weapons ban shift he bravely and rightly made after tragedy hit his district changed the vibes on him from “conservative, different Democrat” to “same as party”. He needs some conservative issues to give enough credence with Trump voters to crossover and losing that tie on guns probably hurts him electorally in such a district.
I still don’t know whether he wins or loses and obviously I hope he does, but I think he’s got the toughest fight of his brief congressional career this year imo. Realistically, I think Golden probably needs Trump to win by less than 5 in the district to have a shot. Or maybe I’m wrong and he wins in a romp. I really hope that happens, but we shall see!
Good observations! We live in his district – and one of the most unnerving things we hear is the not-so-occasional fire of automatic weapons. Presumably target-shooting but perhaps preparing for that longed-for Civil War.
Yes, they’ve polled Maine in previous elections
They have, but a mixed bag as far as accuracy. In 2022 they had Pingree winning by 35 when she won by 26, and Golden up by three candidates when he ended up ahead by 3.5. In 2020 they had Golden out-performing Pingree, winning by 28 to her 20. He ended up winning by 6, she won by 24.5. 2018 they were pretty good. Golden down 1 when he ended up winning by 1. Pingree polled at +24 and won by 26.
One additional legislature we would like to flip is the ever elusive Arizona one. It would require picking up 2 seats in the house and 2 in senate. Given this is a presidential year, if we have any type of D wave nationally, I believe it's possible, but still well under 50%. We also have help this year of reproductive rights on the ballot in Arizona.
Given we have democratic control of the top statewide offices, controlling the legislature would allow for undoing damage Ducey & Co. and prior Republican governors have done.
What’s the status on the fight to control elections in Maricopa County? Last I heard, there was an alarming chance that a Trumpist election denier could win the top spot.
That's covered in the digest above. The moderate Republican who was defeated in the primary endorsed the Democrat.
A barrage of polling overnight. A Trump-friendly drop from Emerson: +1 in AZ, PA and WI and + 3 in GA, tied in NV, Harris + 1 in NC and +2 in MI.
Marist has Harris + 5 in MI, + 1 in WI and tied in PA.
Washington Post has it tied in PA (this poll also has Casey and McCormick tied), Franklin and Marshall has Harris + 3 in PA and Siena has Harris + 4 in PA.
We've gotten to that point in time where we can't effectively keep up with polls as fast as they drop individually.
I am gladdened to see more and more state polling though, that's a welcome addition.
I do think today and maybe tomorrow will be the peak. I imagine pretty much every high level pollster went into the field in the days immediately after the debate and that's what we're now seeing.
Looks like 2020, Harris with a 1-2 point lead across Wisconsin, Michigan and Penn. U of New Hampshire had Rhode Island at 58-38 and Massachusetts at 62-31...which looks like 2020.
538 NC average is even. RCP has Trump up 0.1. As close as you can get.
PA is 1.5 and 1.0. A clear move in her direction. But her lead in Wisconsin has slipped a bit. Michigan is holding firm.
Iowa Senate: Republicans currently hold 34 of 50 seats, which is enough to confirm all of the governor's appointees without any Democratic support.
Democrats have a decent chance to pick up Iowa Senate district 22 in the Des Moines suburbs (Zaun). However, they are also defending several tough Iowa Senate seats.
Question about your independent expenditures tracker: I'm pretty sure I saw some DCCC-funded ad against Nunn in IA-03. What is the usual time lag in reporting? Your Google doc shows some spending by HMP in IA-03 but not DCCC yet.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pOQ6KDBS2dHxd5s8Lb2VujvrP7hmNdhNaZL0N7XDzEM/edit?gid=94332049#gid=94332049
Great Q. We update weekly. Every Monday, I pull all the IE reports for the "Big Four" for the prior week from the FEC's site. We then publish an update on Tuesday.
You're 100% right that the D-Trip started spending in IA-03: https://www.fec.gov/data/independent-expenditures/?data_type=processed&most_recent=true&q_spender=C00000935&cycle=2024&is_notice=true&candidate_office_state=IA&candidate_office_district=03
But they only filed their first IE report yesterday (Wednesday). Now you'll notice that some of those items have "expenditure dates" that date back to last week. But every IE has three different dates associated with it:
1) Date of expenditure. Literally the day you fork over money—say, to a TV station to run an ad.
2) Date of dissemination. The day the fruits of your IE become public, like your TV ad starting to actually run on the airwaves.
3) Filing date. This is the day you file your IE report with the FEC. Generally, that's within 48 hours of #2 (dissemination), except in the final three weeks before an election, in which case you have to file within 24 hours.
For reasons that aren't clear to me, if you click that link I shared above, the FEC highlights the expenditure (ie, payment) date, but that's seldom very helpful. I mean, if you wanted to, you could pay a TV station three months in advance (not that you ever would), so there would be a huge gap between #1 and #2, and therefore #3 wouldn't happen until long after your check was cashed.
So when I gather these reports, I always do so based on filing date.
Thanks for the explanation!
Florida Atlantic University has Harris up 50-45 with LVs nationwide: https://www.fau.edu/newsdesk/articles/sept19electionpoll.php
It was 49-45 in their post-convention poll.
NC Gov: Is Robinson dropping out?
https://x.com/BryanRAnderson/status/1836793713709727895
Uh, what's the requirements for allowing replacement at this stage? Death of candidate?
Who would they even replace him with? And aren’t ballots already printed (after an initial delay due to partisan NC SCOTUS requiring RFK Jr to be removed) so Robinson’s name would remain on the ballot?
Article you and Paleo link below says the state party executive committee would pick a replacement, but his name would stay on the ballot. Anyone that ran in the primary is ineligible, apparently.
They’d have to write in the new candidate then.
Per the article, "any votes Robinson receives on Nov. 5 would go to the replacement candidate chosen by the NCGOP."
Oh, ok. So it’s not that big a deal. At least for hardcore Republicans
North Carolina Republicans are bracing Thursday morning as word spreads about a damning news story looming regarding Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson.
Sources with direct knowledge have spoken with Carolina Journal on the condition of anonymity and said that Robinson is under pressure from staff and members of the Trump campaign to withdraw from the governor’s race due to the nature of the story, which they say involves activity on adult websites in 2000s.
According to sources, Robinson has resisted withdrawing and privately denies the story.
https://www.carolinajournal.com/robinson-under-pressure-to-withdraw-from-gubernatorial-race/
Oh, the irony if it turns out to be transgender porn…
That wouldn't be enough to drive him out of the race. My guess is child porn.
A Republican? Yes it would.
His Howard Stern radio shows went there with the miss teen pageant he owned.
It's even weirder.
They're ok with their candidate raping but it has to be a woman that's being attacked.
Pure speculation but doesn't it almost have to involve children(think of what Trump has done)
Hence the qualification about "a dead girl, or a live boy", I assume?
Which begs the question of how many Trumpers would still support him if he had personally murdered a girl. Of course he is responsible for hundreds of thousands of excess deaths from his demagogic handling of COVID and had police officers killed in the Capitol, but they explain those away.
Perhaps impermissible, but for a while I was hoping Covid might change the composition of the Supreme Court.
Well, well, well
https://x.com/BryanRAnderson/status/1836835688450511193
Robinson wanting to own slaves??
Oh, the irony. The Farce is strong and vile in this one!
This seems like small potatoes for someone in today's highly Nazi-adjacent Republican Party, in comparison to liking trans porn and so on, but when it rains, it pours: https://politicalwire.com/2024/09/19/mark-robinson-may-have-referred-to-himself-as-a-black-nazi/
Credit to the Stein campaign for gradually rolling out more and more damning information.
I agree but it's just one more negative story that the Republicans have done to themselves; own goal after own goal; Robinson may be the worst sitting elected official to ever seek higher office(I'm talking in terms of electability)
NAILED IT
Every time i think that voters really do pay attention there's a Mark Robinson who comes along to prove, no they don't always pay attention. Dude should have no chance to win elective office but he did.
Credit to Stein campaign to sit on this until now(imo perfect timing)
Seems they should have waited until at least Robinson could not withdraw and be replaced (until tomorrow) to leak it.
That's not an issue he can be replaced as a candidate while his name remains on the ballot
That's not how I read the attached story. It says:
"Thursday evening is the state deadline to withdraw from the race. The deadline to remove Robinson’s name from the ballot already has passed. . . . Should Robinson decide to withdraw from the race . . . the North Carolina Republican Party Executive Committee would need to choose a replacement candidate for November."
To me, this says that if he does not withdraw by tonight, they cannot replace him.
Not sure of reliability of the sources, but this story says he’s being pressured to drop out and that it involves activity on “adult websites”.
https://www.carolinajournal.com/robinson-under-pressure-to-withdraw-from-gubernatorial-race/
Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson's spokesman, Michael Lonergan, has stated that it is "complete fiction" to suggest that Lt. Gov. Robinson will drop out of this year's North Carolina gubernatorial race.
Military ballots have been sent out. The deadline to change candidates has passed.
Name replacement really doesn't matter per se(not talking the political ramifications); his votes would be counted for the Republican (whoever that is)
Wow what a day! And it's not even 10 AM on the West Coast yet.
Imo the real question is can the NCRP state executive committee force a replacement; some state EC s have bylaws in place for that(I'm not sure which state's do or don't) for instance I know the GADP state EC had that power at 1 time
Pressure mounting in Nebraska to switch their system for awarding EVs. Once again, I hope Maine is paying attention. The Blue Wall will only take Kamala to exactly 269 EVs. She cannot win without NE-02 unless she is winning other states.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4888350-nebraska-republicans-call-presidential-victor/
I think you are wrong in the math
Never mind; I misunderstood(you are actually counting the Nebraska as a whole)
Yeah, the core blue states plus the Blue Wall is exactly 269 EVs. NE-02 takes her to 270 exactly. Without it or another state (NV, AZ, GA, NC), Trump wins.
I think this was more of a concern with Biden than Harris. That was his primary (only?) route to victory. Not to say that result is not possible, but Harris seems to have many more options, including ME-02 in at least one poll.
Blue wall + NV is 275.
That is the easiest path minus NE-02.
Other sites are reporting on this today. Apparently Maine has a state law that says new laws take effect 90 says after passage unless they were passed with a supermajority. So it's legally too late to change the law in Maine in time for this election. Total malpractice on the part of Maine Dems, who should understand this already.
Here's how North Carolina Republicans can proceed if Mark Robinson drops out in the next few hours (the deadline for Robinson to drop out is this evening):
"Thursday evening is the state deadline to withdraw from the race. The deadline to remove Robinson’s name from the ballot already has passed. There are just four weeks to go until early voting, and absentee ballots are due to go in the mail Friday.
[...]
Should Robinson decide to withdraw from the race, something that Carolina Journal’s sources say he is opposed to at the moment, the North Carolina Republican Party Executive Committee would need to choose a replacement candidate for November.
According to elections expert Andy Jackson of the John Locke Foundation’s Civitas Center for Public Integrity, the deadline to change the name on the ballot has passed under state law. Once the North Carolina State Board of Elections mails the absentee, overseas, and military ballots on Friday, changing the names could run afoul of the 14th Amendment. Instead, any votes Robinson receives on Nov. 5 would go to the replacement candidate chosen by the NCGOP."
It is important to note that the Civitas Center is a right-wing think tank, although they're citing NC state law. Additionally, a similar scenario played out in a U.S. House race in Florida in 2006 after the Mark Foley scandal.
Source: https://www.carolinajournal.com/robinson-under-pressure-to-withdraw-from-gubernatorial-race/
Ah yes, the old "punch Foley for Negron" scheme.
Someone should have actually punched Foley the pedo in the mouth
#New Governor Poll - New Hampshire
🔵 Craig - 47% (+1)
🔴 Ayotte - 46%
UNH #C - 1639 LV - 9/16
NH Gov poll Craig by 1 https://x.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1836819348813664658
Why would they have a special election on a Wednesday?
Looks like dems got outsmarted on the Nebraska vs. Maine electoral college battle. Dems are past the 90 day period before a law takes effect for a law to count towards the Dec 16 meeting of the electoral college. Maine dems have the votes but not a supermajority which is necessary for a law to take effect sooner than the 90 days. Nebraska GOP obviously read the Maine constitution.
The GOP is always willing to change the rules to their benefit (aggressive gerrymanders, SCT appointments, EV distributions, elections board in GA) while Dems stupidly won't (blue slips, filibuster, DC statehood, no gerrymanders in NY & CA, expanding SCROTUS, etc.).
They haven't changed the rules in NE for a long, long time, so no, they are not always willing to change the rules to their benefit.
The others have. And most are willing. Just a couple stragglers.
That's all it takes.
Has anything actually happened?
No. But in Nebraska, it is being discussed again seriously and pressure is being applied to the R's that had prevented a supermajority. https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/09/18/winner-take-all-push-gets-help-of-gov-jim-pillen-sen-lindsey-graham-trump/
Dems should hammer Bacon on this.
We all saw this coming in slow motion months ago. Maine stood by and did nothing, and now it's too late. Maine Dems do not appear to understand their own state law. Meanwhile, the ONE thing you can count on the GOP for is changing the rules to suit their needs; it's basically their only consistent ideology. I'd legitimately be very shocked if they didn't change the law.
Well, according to the article they’re still short.
I don’t think it’s a question of being outsmarted. They were just against going first to change the rules in the middle of the game. For political and ethical reasons.
There's a long list of things Democrats declined to do for the sake of appearances. Throw it on the pile. Meanwhile the GOP has zero shame or ethics about changing, reinterpreting, or just ignoring any rule that gets in their way. That weakness of character plus the intensity of the current pressure is what have me worried.
MT poll Tester ahead by 1. https://x.com/JacobRubashkin/status/1836834818119917589
Just MT CD-1
Zinke up on Tranel 47-43. This one was always going to be tough but I had hoped for better. Also seeing Tester up 1 in MT-1 should mean he is behind statewide.
In 2020, Bullock lost this district by 2, so Tester is doing 3 points better. BUT, Bullock lost the state by 10. In 2022 ,Tranel lost to Zinke 50-47.
Real mixed bag of results here. Tranel has some time and wiggle room to pull ahead and Tester has a better favorability in this district but he needs to do way better. With the abortion amendment performing the strongest, both Tester and Tranel just need to keep emphasizing that Sheehy and Zinke support a National Abortion Ban.
They do, though we know very well from previous experience that that may well not work. And don't reply that they should do it anyway, because I just said that.
What’s a good example of recent previous studies examples since Dobbs where that hasn’t always worked? I was thinking of Tom Souzzi’s playbook however NY-03 and MT-01 are the apples to oranges. But there’s still a Libertarian vibe in a red state like Montana. Tester was dubbed the Libertarian Democrat by Markos himself.
? Just about every Republican state that's passed referenda in favor of abortion rights, raising the minimum wage, extending Medicaid in their state and fair districting has turned around and voted Republican state-wide.
Raising the minimum wage and extending Medicaid ballot initiatives took place in the red states during the Obama years mostly. In 2014, it was a shitty midterm year for the Democrats but the ballot measures won. Also, the gerrymandering in many of those states for the GOP was still in tact and the power of incumbency. Now, here's a good example: Kentucky protected an abortion rights amendment and re-elected Andy Beshear. Now I know that voters can know the difference between the importance of have a Senator and a Governor but Kentucky's a pretty red state itself.
Tester needs to be engaging young voters and encouraging more voters to register. I think a major understated issue is also the soaring housing market in Montana which has priced out many natives in the state. It's one of those issues that's a major headaches and as a CA native that deals with soaring house prices, there's no easy fix to it.
Without having a local ground report; I'm going to trust Tester to run as strong as possible; then let the chips fall where they may
For better and worse, this is where we are, once again depending on honest Republicans to resist the authoritarian conspiracy. All quotes below:
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2024/09/how-republicans-could-block-a-democratic-victory-in-georgia-stacey-abrams/
In August, after Donald Trump praised three Republican appointees to the Georgia State Election Board by name at a rally in Atlanta, the MAGA-aligned majority on the board passed a series of rule changes—requiring counties to undertake a “reasonable inquiry” into the vote totals and review “all election-related documentation” before certifying an election—that Democrats and voting rights groups fear could lead GOP-controlled boards not to sign off on the results if Kamala Harris wins the state. “The discrete and immediate concern,” says Abrams, who ran for Georgia governor in 2018 and 2022 and founded the voting rights group Fair Fight, “is that this will delay the counting of Georgia’s Electoral College votes.”
If there’s a lengthy dispute over the vote count, Georgia could miss the December 11 deadline for certifying its Electoral College results. If no candidate receives the 270 votes necessary to win the Electoral College as a result, the presidential election would be thrown to the House of Representatives, where Republicans control a majority of state House delegations, allowing them to swing the election to Trump.[...]
Jessica Marsden, counsel to the free and fair elections program at Protect Democracy, called a contingent election scenario “extremely unlikely.” She said that while she was alarmed by election deniers taking over state and county election boards in Georgia, she remained confident that top state officials, such as Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who resisted Trump’s demand to “find 11,780 votes” to reverse Biden’s victory in 2020, along with state courts, would once again uphold the integrity of the election.
While I never want to gamble on honest Republicans, at least in Georgia there is still a real Never Trump sentiment in a small but significant portion the Georgia Republican Party. I watched the Stop The Steal doc on Max and I would bet on Raffensperger for doing the right thing in this situation. Him and Kemp benefitted from having open primaries in their state and won over crossover appeal. They were rewarded by the voters for standing up to Trump. Also, after watching the Stop The Steal documentary, I think after everything Raffensberger has gone through with Trump's people, I don't get a vibe from him that he has any major political aspirations, at least not in Georgia politics. I could be wrong though about that part.
Yes, I think they will insist on counting the votes that passed the unnecessary hurdles on voting that they supported, but isn't it a bit much to call them "never-Trump"?
I’ve heard throughout the Daily Kos community from folks who live in Georgia that there is a “Never Trump” sentiment there and I think both Kemp and Raffensberger’s primary wins against Trump backed candidates prove that. I don’t doubt there are right leaning Independents and traditional Republicans that just don’t like and can’t vote for Trump. The former GOP Lt. Governor of Georgia endorsed Harris. In a state like Georgia, his support might go further for Harris than say Kasich’s support for Biden in Ohio in 2020. But I could also be wrong about that part too.
I see: you're talking about some of the support for those guys, not them, themselves. Yes, sure. But Kemp has at least tepidly endorsed Trump, and I thought Raffensperger had, too. I know both of them said they voted for him in 2020.