2026 Midterm Elections

[BlueSmoke]

Looking at the Dem primary in Michigan, there are three candidates that are polling about the same vs. GQPer Rogers in a tight race. My worry that a hotly contested 3 person Dem primary is more the problem than if just one of them were able to marshal resources to run against Rogers. My preference would be McMorrow of the three, but three Dems attacking each other is not good at this point

Can't say I know anything about Michigan, but in general I would say that a highly contested primary is a good thing. Yea, money is blown and feelings get hurt and some of your own voters get mad and sit out. But I'd rather end up with a candidate that the voters respect and has credibility in their eyes. A contested primary usually produces that. Anointed candidates always suffer a credibility issue. Kinda like when Trump anoints someone as an extreme example.

And both parties severely lack credibility right now.

 

[Mulberry Heel]

In the Maine race, I'm worried it will be a NC Chuck Schumer redux. He pushed out Jeff Jackson and put his thumb on Beasley and we know how that turned out. It turned a sure win into a defeat.

If Mills wins the Dem primary, then Collins is likely to keep her seat.
If Platner wins the Dem primary, then we will gain a seat in the Senate.

We need a new Dem leader in the Senate who understands that we do not need to support septuagenarians for Congress when we have very qualified dynamic younger folks to promote who will lead us going into the future.

One difference between NC and Maine is that Jackson never ran in the Democratic primary against Beasley, he opted out of the race when Schumer made it clear that the DNC and Congressional Democrats would support her in the primary. Platner is actively running against Mills and likely has a good chance to beat her, as Jackson might have had he not bowed out and left her unchallenged in the Democratic Senate primary. Not that I blame him for opting out, as he ended up winning a US House seat and then the NC State Attorney General position, which historically has been a great springboard for NC Governor, and I think he'd make a great governor after Stein.

 

[Paine]

One difference between NC and Maine is that Jackson never ran in the Democratic primary against Beasley, he opted out of the race when Schumer made it clear that the DNC and Congressional Democrats would support her in the primary. Platner is actively running against Mills and likely has a good chance to beat her, as Jackson might have had he not bowed out and left her unchallenged in the Democratic Senate primary. Not that I blame him for opting out, as he ended up winning a US House seat and then the NC State Attorney General position, which historically has been a great springboard for NC Governor, and I think he'd make a great governor after Stein.

Right, but I’d wager Jackson decided against jumping in after it became clear Beasley was the choice of Schumer and the DSCC. Part of Platner’s appeal in this moment is that he doesn’t care what the kingmakers in D.C. think of his campaign. In fact, bucking Schumer adds to his appeal now. I don’t think Democratic primary voters were in the same headspace in 2022.

 

[superrific]

Also, 2022 was supposed to be a very bad cycle for Dems. I think that's why Jackson sat it out. It was a wise move.

 

[superrific]

Georgia has proof of concept. NC doesn’t.

There have been as many Dem senators in NC this century as in GA. If you don't count Zell Miller, who was appointed and wasn't really a Dem anyway.

Those odds are obviously taking incumbency into account, as they should. What they aren't taking account of are the candidates. Outgoing governors should be counted as at least a half-incumbent.

 

[Calheel]

There have been as many Dem senators in NC this century as in GA. If you don't count Zell Miller, who was appointed and wasn't really a Dem anyway.

Those odds are obviously taking incumbency into account, as they should. What they aren't taking account of are the candidates. Outgoing governors should be counted as at least a half-incumbent.

And if you want to go to ancient history, NC always had democratic senators.

But I’m talking recent proof of concept. Georgia voted D for president and elected two D senators in 2020/2021. NC hasn’t done that since Obama 2008.

Hence, people are going to give the benefit of the doubt to Georgia because they have shown they can do it recently.

 

[superrific]

And if you want to go to ancient history, NC always had democratic senators.

But I’m talking recent proof of concept. Georgia voted D for president and elected two D senators in 2020/2021. NC hasn’t done that since Obama 2008.

Hence, people are going to give the benefit of the doubt to Georgia because they have shown they can do it recently.

Sure. I get the point. I would say that the difference between eking out a victory and a close loss isn't that significant and I know you get that. But sure, Georgia has done it, NC hasn't.

It's also true that if the Pubs had run a decent candidate in 2022, Warnock would probably not be a Senator now. Mark Robinson was a gift, but it was a race the Dems were probably going to win anyway given recent trends. Hershel was even more of a gift, I think.

But anyway, my opinion not matching the market odds is hardly an epistemic crisis. I guess I could go long on Cooper and short on Ossoff and thus create a pure play on NC-GA. If I cared enough.

 

[Mulberry Heel]

Right, but I’d wager Jackson decided against jumping in after it became clear Beasley was the choice of Schumer and the DSCC. Part of Platner’s appeal in this moment is that he doesn’t care what the kingmakers in D.C. think of his campaign. In fact, bucking Schumer adds to his appeal now. I don’t think Democratic primary voters were in the same headspace in 2022.

No doubt Jackson didn't run because of what Schumer told him, and he then sought other offices instead, such as the US House and now the State Attorney General's office. My point was that I don't think Schumer has the power to choose in Maine as he did in NC, because Jackson chose not to run in 2022 after Schumer made clear his preference for Beasley, and as you said Platner decided to run in spite of Schumer backing another candidate. Trump's 2024 win has changed the Democratic electorate and made aging centrists and establishment DC pols like Schumer even more disconnected from their base.

 

[heelinhell]

Also, 2022 was supposed to be a very bad cycle for Dems. I think that's why Jackson sat it out. It was a wise move.

Depends upon what you mean by wise move....

Budd won with 50.5 % of the vote which was the lowest for a GQPer in an "off year" election. Jackson won the AG race with over 51% in a presidential cycle where he received a higher % of votes than Trump did

Jackson did not sit out the race; He was pushed out by Schumer. If Chuck had backed Jackson for the Senate we very likely would have Jackson as our Senator today. It would have been nice to see Jackson and Cooper representing us in the Senate.

That said, I'm happy Jackson is our AG . He is one of the rising stars in the Democratic Party.

 

[superrific]

Depends upon what you mean by wise move....

Budd won with 50.5 % of the vote which was the lowest for a GQPer in an "off year" election. Jackson won the AG race with over 51% in a presidential cycle where he received a higher % of votes than Trump did

Jackson did not sit out the race; He was pushed out by Schumer. If Chuck had backed Jackson for the Senate we very likely would have Jackson as our Senator today. It would have been nice to see Jackson and Cooper representing us in the Senate.

That said, I'm happy Jackson is our AG . He is one of the rising stars in the Democratic Party.

Budd won by 3%. It's similar to other senate margins of victory.

The reason it was closer than expected was Dobbs, but that wasn't available during primary season.

We know that Jackson was "pushed out" how exactly? Do we know that he didn't want to be pushed out?

I react negatively to the claims frequently made on this forum that we'd have Dem Senators if only for a couple of people doing slightly different things. Cal Cunningham was not going to win the race, regardless of his infidelity. A Dem was very likely not going to win in 2022. One way to see that is to look at the margins of victory. In 2016, Burr won by 5-6 points with about 51% of the vote, in a favorable cycle for Pubs. In 2020, it was closer, in a favorable environment for Dems. In 2022, a favorable cycle for Pubs, it was less close than 2020.

I would guess that if you modeled NC Senate elections, you'd find that 95% of the results are explained by state partisan lean and national vote share between the two parties. These days, individual candidates usually do not matter, especially on the upside. We've seen absolutely horrid candidates who lose races, but we haven't seen a lot of great candidates winning races that they would otherwise lose. People thought Sherrod Brown was different until he wasn't. People thought Jon Tester was different until he wasn't.

But we have a really good cycle coming up, and Dems can win in those environments, as we saw in 1998 and 2008. In 98 it wasn't even a great environment but we had a president who was generally popular and Edwards carried his style.

 

[nycfan]

Trump urges GOP to take over elections in Blue cities and/or “nationalize voting”

 

[BlueSteel]

Trump urges GOP to take over elections in Blue cities and/or “nationalize voting”

 

[korgguy1971]

Her "lyricism" abilities in the opening description are quite good:

 

[Calheel]

Her "lyricism" abilities in the opening description are quite good:

Good Ole Elle. Her videos on the different fonts are great.

 

[heelinhell]

Budd won by 3%. It's similar to other senate margins of victory.

The reason it was closer than expected was Dobbs, but that wasn't available during primary season.

We know that Jackson was "pushed out" how exactly? Do we know that he didn't want to be pushed out?

I react negatively to the claims frequently made on this forum that we'd have Dem Senators if only for a couple of people doing slightly different things. Cal Cunningham was not going to win the race, regardless of his infidelity. A Dem was very likely not going to win in 2022. One way to see that is to look at the margins of victory. In 2016, Burr won by 5-6 points with about 51% of the vote, in a favorable cycle for Pubs. In 2020, it was closer, in a favorable environment for Dems. In 2022, a favorable cycle for Pubs, it was less close than 2020.

I would guess that if you modeled NC Senate elections, you'd find that 95% of the results are explained by state partisan lean and national vote share between the two parties. These days, individual candidates usually do not matter, especially on the upside. We've seen absolutely horrid candidates who lose races, but we haven't seen a lot of great candidates winning races that they would otherwise lose. People thought Sherrod Brown was different until he wasn't. People thought Jon Tester was different until he wasn't.

But we have a really good cycle coming up, and Dems can win in those environments, as we saw in 1998 and 2008. In 98 it wasn't even a great environment but we had a president who was generally popular and Edwards carried his style

"We know that Jackson was "pushed out" how exactly? Do we know that he didn't want to be pushed out?"

because we Dems in NC followed the news from multiple msm news sources. This was well known. If you have time, google the multiple reports and I think you will see he did not want to be pushed out.

 

[heelinhell]

Her "lyricism" abilities in the opening description are quite good:

I am in love with her

 

[Ddseddse]

I am in love with her

Need to get a better look at the titles on her bookshelf.

 

[05C40]

One difference between NC and Maine is that Jackson never ran in the Democratic primary against Beasley, he opted out of the race when Schumer made it clear that the DNC and Congressional Democrats would support her in the primary. Platner is actively running against Mills and likely has a good chance to beat her, as Jackson might have had he not bowed out and left her unchallenged in the Democratic Senate primary. Not that I blame him for opting out, as he ended up winning a US House seat and then the NC State Attorney General position, which historically has been a great springboard for NC Governor, and I think he'd make a great governor after Stein.

One thing about that 2022 NC Senate race that I hope comes to pass. Jeff Jackson had "Jackson for Senate" comittees in all 100 counties before Shumer annoited Beasley as THE Democratic candidate for NC. And Jackson dropped out of the race and endorsed Beasley. My hope is this action by Jackson has earned and will continue to earn Jackson credibility in the NC Black community. And that this credibility will translate into turn-out. A white Democratic candidate in NC who can get the Black community to turn-out and vote is pretty much unbeatable.

 

[nycfan]

Texas primary between Crockett, Talarico turns ugly​

Texas primary between Crockett, Talarico turns ugly

The Senate Democratic primary in Texas has taken an ugly turn, with the increased infighting threatening to complicate the party’s chances of flipping the seat in November. The most notable inciden…

thehill.com

“… The most notable incident came this week when former Rep. Colin Allred (D-Texas), the Democratic nominee for Senate last cycle, ripped state Rep. James Talarico (D) for allegedly calling him a “mediocre Black man.” Talarico said the comments were a mischaracterization and that he was referring to Allred’s method of campaigning, not Allred personally.

Yet the escalating feud between Talarico and primary rival Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) — who quickly threw her support behind Allred in a statement without mentioning Talarico by name — is rattling some Democrats, who view it as an unhelpful distraction ahead of the March 3 primary.

“We’re taking our eye off the ball,” said Texas Democratic consultant Joel Montfort. “But that this is what Democrats are very good at doing. … We become distracted and we start infighting over things that aren’t particularly beneficial to winning races.”…”

 

[nycfan]

Texas primary between Crockett, Talarico turns ugly​

Texas primary between Crockett, Talarico turns ugly

The Senate Democratic primary in Texas has taken an ugly turn, with the increased infighting threatening to complicate the party’s chances of flipping the seat in November. The most notable inciden…

thehill.com

“… The most notable incident came this week when former Rep. Colin Allred (D-Texas), the Democratic nominee for Senate last cycle, ripped state Rep. James Talarico (D) for allegedly calling him a “mediocre Black man.” Talarico said the comments were a mischaracterization and that he was referring to Allred’s method of campaigning, not Allred personally.

Yet the escalating feud between Talarico and primary rival Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) — who quickly threw her support behind Allred in a statement without mentioning Talarico by name — is rattling some Democrats, who view it as an unhelpful distraction ahead of the March 3 primary.

“We’re taking our eye off the ball,” said Texas Democratic consultant Joel Montfort. “But that this is what Democrats are very good at doing. … We become distracted and we start infighting over things that aren’t particularly beneficial to winning races.”…”

“… “You’re running in the Democratic primary against U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett and there’s been a lot of discourse around her electability, and some would say that is code for they don’t think a Black woman can win statewide,” “The View” co-host Sunny Hostin told Talarico during his appearance on the show Monday.

Talarico said during that appearance he would fully back her if she became the nominee and believed she could win statewide in Texas, calling her a “friend” and saying he had “deep love and respect for her.”

Meanwhile, Punchbowl News reported last week, citing a top Crockett supporter, that the congresswoman’s campaign is planning a rollout of attack ads targeting Talarico.…”