Photo credit: slaynews.com

On January 15 a new poll covering the 2026 U.S. Senate election in Texas was released. That poll, taken by Emerson College, shows phony Christian state representative Holy James Talarico with a 9-point lead (47% to 38%) over unhinged racist congresswoman Jasmine Crockett. In the 3-way primary on the Republican side, Attorney General Ken Paxton holds a 1-point advantage (27%-26%) over incumbent squish John Cornyn, with congressman Wesley Hunt trailing at 16%. Nearly 30% remain undecided.

The primary elections will take place on March 3. If a runoff is required because no candidate reaches 50% in the primary -- as will surely happen with the GOP -- that runoff will be held on May 26. The probability of the Democrat primary resulting in a runoff is infinitesimal, a factor which will give that party's March winner nearly a 3-month head start on general election campaigning.

Hunt, the virtual unknown in the Republican race, has actually seen his percentage slip in the polls recently instead of increasing. Practically every survey shows a tight primary battle between Paxton and Cornyn, although some of them had previously indicated the possibility of Hunt making the runoff at Cornyn's expense. One Democrat push-poll of Republican voters taken in early December showed Paxton well ahead of the other two GOP candidates, a polling outcome which conceivably reflects nothing more than the Democrat desire to have Paxton as the eventual nominee because they feel he would be easiest to defeat in November.

Emerson's general election polling matchups reveal that Talarico would be a slightly tougher (about 2% tougher) opponent for the Republican nominee than Crockett would. Paxton, as expected due to the years-long smear campaign against him, polled the weakest among the 3 GOP combatants against both Democrats; he is shown as tied against both possible Democrat nominees.

The article linked above is from January 6 and pertains to the new GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas which was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court a month earlier. The effects of that plan were well-known long before January (or even December) but the folks at Gateway Pundit apparently didn't bother to examine the plan at all. Instead, they posted the following falsehood; the big lie is highlighted:

• The redistricting plan consolidates Democrat-heavy urban districts and redraws lines that previously insulated left-wing incumbents. Among those affected are Crockett and Democrat Rep. Al Green, whose districts were effectively dismantled. [Crockett's] once-safe seat is now a battleground, forcing her to abandon ship and launch a desperate bid for the U.S. Senate seat currently held by John Cornyn. In a profanity-laced rant on video, Crockett spewed her bile. She accused President Trump, Republican governors, and state legislatures of "rigging the system" before directing an explicit vulgarity at the nation's highest court.

Texas CD-30, as configured in 2024

When Johnson retired from Congress, Crockett lined up with 8 other Democrats to see who would be selected to replace the elderly incumbent. Although former congressional staffer Jane Hamilton had much of the establishment support, Crockett won the primary easily and almost avoided a runoff. She won the 2022 general election without breaking a sweat, and then had no serious opposition of any kind -- Democrat or Republican -- in 2024. Despite being in only her second term in Congress, some may assume (based on the enormous amount of attention and adoration she receives from the liberal media) that Crockett is among the Democrat party leadership in the House, but she is not. She's simply a back-bencher with a voting record that is just about 100% liberal.

Metroplex-area congressional districts (including CD-30), as configured for 2026
Source: Dave's Redstricting

The version of CD-30 in which Crockett has won twice is rated by Charlie Cook as D+25. We call it D+27. In either case, it's well within "landslide Democrat" territory, just as it was during the (Eddie Bernice) Johnson Administration. Because Republican redistricters sought to flip CD-32 from D to R -- which they did; formerly D+14, now R+6 -- they increased the number of Democrats in adjacent districts such as CD-30 and CD-33. If Crockett had decided to remain in CD-30, she would have been running in a D+28 district and no other Democrat would have dared oppose her in the primary.

In short, despite her lie Crockett was not "forced" in any way to abandon her still-safe House seat and run for the Senate this year. It's just that her ego and campaign bank account are both too large for another mere House race at this point. The House is not without benefits for her: she is the lowest-ranked Democrat on the important House Judiciary Committee yet has been gifted the Ranking Member position on its Oversight Subcommittee. It's not much, but it's something. Despite her lack of experience, Crockett has also been named Vice Ranking Member of the full Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

If she had opted to run for re-election to the House this year, and if Democrats pick up the tiny number of seats they need to seize control for 2027, Crockett would certainly have advanced in her committees -- possibly all the way to the top of one of them. But the lure of a higher-profile office and the power she covets were too great for Crockett to pass up.

Some lunatics are already boosting her for Vice President in 2028. After she loses in 2026, it remains to be seen whether Crockett will give up her safe seat on "The View" to accept the Democrat VP slot.

Tags:

2026 Texas Senate Crockett's big lie

On October 27, one week before the state of California was inevitably going to approve its most recent Democrat gerrymander (it passed by 3,000,000 votes and will cost Republicans 4 or 5 House seats), Indiana Governor Mike Braun called for a special session of his state's legislature in order to retaliate against California to some degree. There's only so much that a relatively small state such as Indiana can do against a behemoth like California, but Braun and Indiana conservatives -- encouraged by President Donald Trump -- prepared to revise the Hoosier State's congressional district map in such a way as to enable Republicans to go from a 7-2 advantage in the Indiana delegation to possibly as much as a 9-0 sweep in a good election year.

Republicans have a solid hold on both houses of the Indiana state legislature, 70-30 in the House and 40-10 in the Senate.

The special session of the legislature did not even commence until December 1, however on November 18 a Twitter user named "johnny maga" posted a new district map which was allegedly proposed by the Indiana House Republicans. The map was accompanied by a statement from House Speaker Todd Huston in which he vowed that Indiana would stand up against the Democrat gerrymanders in California (which by then was a done deal) and Virginia. The Virginia plan is still on the drawing board but, if implemented, could cost Republicans up to 4 more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.

The proposed Indiana map from November 18 was ludicrous (not that such a thing has ever stopped Democrat map creators) and probably was never seriously considered; it contained two districts which stretched from Lake Michigan to practically the Kentucky border. On December 1 the Indiana House Republicans released a different map -- an eminently reasonable map with compact districts which is pictured above. It would obliterate one of the two Democrat-held House districts (CD-7) and would make the other Rat-held district (CD-1) into one which leans slightly towards the right.

Four days later the Indiana state House approved this new map by a vote of 57-41. On December 11, twenty-one RINOs in the Indiana state Senate became darlings (temporarily) of the liberal media by voting alongside every Democrat in order to sabotage their own party and defeat the new redistricting plan. The final vote was 19 in favor and 31 against.

Indiana Congressional District 1

CD-1 has been in Democrat hands for almost 100 years without interruption; no Republican has ever won a House race there since the district was created in 1932. At that time Lake County (Gary, Hammond) was given its own congressional district, the rapidly growing county having gone from 38,000 residents in 1900 to a population of 261,000 by 1930. Since then, CD-1 has always contained most or all of Lake County, but in recent years Porter County and parts of LaPorte County have been added. Lake County has been losing population since the late 1960's, when Whites began fleeing in droves -- leaving behind a county and congressional district which thus became even more Democrat-oriented.

From 1974 through 2018 no GOP House candidate even broke 40% in CD-1 except for a fluke in 1994 and the time the seat was open in 1982. In 1982 racist Democrat Richard Hatcher was in charge of selecting his party's nominee after the incumbent in CD-1 died following the primary election. Hatcher bypassed better-qualified White candidates and forced his party to accept a black nominee. The Republican still lost by 13% in both 1982 and 1994, and that was as close as the GOP came during that 44-year interval.

Indiana Congressional District 7

This district, which was the old CD-10 until Indiana was reduced to 9 districts in 2002, was only slightly D-leaning in the 1990s. Republicans made a concerted effort in 1996 when Andy Jacobs retired. Jacobs, a Democrat who was first elected in 1964, was known for spending practically zilch on his campaigns yet he still prevailed time after time; Democrats had to spend nearly $600K to hold the seat in '96.

Figuring they had a chance in the 2000s, Republican redistricters moved CD-7 five points to the right, but the GOP never came particularly close to a House win in that decade. They moved it 5 more points to the right for 2012, and it still didn't help. As of that year the district was the southern three-quarters of Marion County (Indianapolis), omitting the northern tier. The Republicans had two reasons for giving up on CD-7 in 2022 (they spent literally nothing there in 2024): they apparently couldn't win CD-7 under any conditions, and the adjacent CD-5 was worsening. So the northern tier of Marion County was moved from CD-5 to CD-7. Now CD-7 is the northern 70% of Marion, omitting the good southern portion.

A Republican nominee in CD-5 no longer has to deal with Marion County at all, and that district has added good rural territory while also losing deteriorating Boone County which is northwest of Indianapolis. Demographic sewage mainly flows north from Indianapolis and is harming the southeastern corner of Boone, and has already polluted formerly rock-solid Hamilton County to a serious extent. Hamilton is the primary county of CD-5 and has been for a while, but now it is only 50-55% Republican -- and dropping -- whereas it was once consistently 70% GOP or even more. Shoring up CD-5 for Republicans was the tradeoff for them forfeiting CD-7 entirely.

The proposed map for 2026 would have nullified that forfeiture. It split Marion County into 4 districts instead of into two as it is now (the good southern portion is in CD-6). The new versions of CD-4 (R+7), CD-6 (R+8), CD-7 (R+7) and CD-9 (R+8) would each have contained some part of Indianapolis, but would have been only nominally influenced by the city, leaving none of those districts bad enough that Andre Carson or any other Democrat could win it in a typical election.

Under the current map, which will likely persist for the remainder of the decade, CD-7 is rated as D+19. Which means that no Republican has even the slightest chance of winning it. Carson has approached 70% of the vote in the last two elections, and Democrat presidential candidates achieve similar figures; Trump got 28% in CD-7 in 2024.

Probably not coincidentally, the vast majority of the GOP quislings occupy Senate seats which are in the vicinity of the two U.S. House districts that could have flipped from D to R had these quislings' votes not put an end to that possibility. Of the 21, only two (Dernulc, K. Walker) represent Senate districts which could be described as marginal in a normal election year; the other 19 are varying degrees of safe for the GOP nominee.

Safe in a general election, that is. These 21 cowards may face some highly motivated and well-funded primary opponents next time around. Incumbent liberal Republicans normally have significant advantages in fundraising during primary elections; we'll have to wait and see if any viable opponents actually materialize. President Trump stated, before the vote took place, "Why would a REAL Republican vote against this when the Dems have been [gerrymandering] for years??? If they stupidly say no, vote them out of Office -- They are not worthy -- And I will be there to help!"

• Doddering old RINO stooge Senator Jean Leising, proudly defending her pro-Democrat vote: "Mid-cycle congressional redistricting in Indiana failed on the Senate floor today with my 'no' vote. I believe it is time to move on to our normal session schedule and focus on issues affecting our local communities, like addressing the availability of affordable [Democrat buzzword alert!] rural health care and good jobs so Indiana residents can provide for their families."

• Senator Blake Doriot, an apparent victim of astroturfed pressure: "I heard from friends, neighbors and people I had never met before who overwhelmingly stated they were not in support of this and were concerned that the proposed changes would only hurt our community. My vote reflected those concerns, and I stand by my decision to vote against this bill to support those who rely on me to represent them."

• Senate Majority Leader Rod Bray, talking out both sides of his mouth at the same time: "We support President Trump, and we are with him on many issues."
  
  (But not this one.)
  
  Also from Bray: "We want to see a Republican majority in congress at the midterms. The issue before us today was how to get there, and many of my caucus members don't think redrawing our Congressional map mid-cycle is a guaranteed way for Indiana -- or our country -- to achieve that outcome."
  
  (Surrendering surely is the "guaranteed way" to accomplish the opposite outcome, though.)

• Another RI-No voter, Senator Spencer Deery, speaking gibberish: "Some say we should gerrymander because Democrats have been doing it for years and it's time for Republicans to catch up. That would be a sensible question to ask four years ago or four years in the future."

• Senator Linda Rogers, after being astroturfed: "Over the last few months, I have heard from thousands of constituents who were overwhelmingly opposed. When I chose to run for Senate District 11, I promised to serve and advocate for those in our local community, and I believe I upheld that promise today."

BREAKING - It has been revealed that Indiana Republicans secretly went behind President Trump?s back and struck a deal with Maryland Democrats and Gov. Wes Moore to freeze both states? redistricting, saving two Indiana Dem seats in exchange for Maryland keeping it?s one GOP seat. pic.twitter.com/OFcNKStlVd

— Right Angle News Network (@Rightanglenews) December 12, 2025

Maryland 2024 House results: 1 R, 7 D

The Democrat president of the Maryland state Senate had already announced that gerrymandering would not be on the agenda during the special session which has been called for mid-December, despite pressure from Maryland Governor Barack Obama 2.0 (a clean and articulate empty suit, who for years has been carefully groomed in preparation for achieving high political office). Additionally, a Democrat gerrymandering expert has warned that an attempt to create an 8-0 sweep of the Maryland congressional delegation would likely not withstand a court challenge, assuming the sleepy, complacent GOP would choose to file a challenge.

Map source: Dave's Redistricting

In North Carolina, a panel of federal judges dismissed Democrat claims of "racism" and refused to order the injunction which the professional racists sought. This presumably means that the new congressional district map drawn by the Republican legislature will be used for the 2026 midterms. Republicans currently hold a 10-4 advantage in the North Carolina delegation, the new map makes only minor changes, and those changes primarily affect only two districts (CD-1 and CD-3). CD-1, which is held at this time by Democrat Don Davis, is being changed from a PVI of D+1 to perhaps R+3. This could be enough to dislodge Davis, assuming 2026 isn't a "blue" wave of any kind. The adjacent CD-3 moves from R+8 to R+3. As we have noted many times, most of the 10 GOP-held districts are marginal to some degree, and in a bad election year we could see a real bloodbath in the Tarheel State. Having an uninspiring simp like Michael Whatley lose big to Roy Cooper in the Senate race is not going to help matters down the ballot.

Map source: Dave's Redistricting

In extremely Republican Utah, a RINO judge has sided with Democrats and is forcing the state to discard the district map which was used in 2022 and 2024 (which resulted in the GOP winning all 4 House seats). Initially, she was expected to select a new map which would have two super-safe Republican districts and two iffy ones, both of which tilted a little to the right. Instead she chose a map which would guarantee one Democrat pickup. Therefore, at best, the supposed GOP win in North Carolina is negated by the certain loss in Utah.

Map source: Dave's Redistricting

On December 4, the U.S. Supreme Court in a 6-3 decision granted an "emergency stay" which allows the new Republican-drawn map in Texas to be used in 2026 while Democrat lawsuits continue indefinitely. As a result of the stay, Republicans expect to pick up as many as 5 U.S. House seats which are currently held by Democrats. The affected districts are:

• CD-9, which will be R+3 (was D+26 on behalf of deranged racist Al Green, who has fled to CD-18)
• CD-28, D+3 (was D+4)
• CD-32, R+6 (was D+14)
• CD-34, even (was D+8)
• CD-35, R+2 (was D+19)

Map source: Dave's Redistricting

California voters in November passed Proposition 50, which allows the state to proceed with its hyper-partisan gerrymander which is designed to eliminate 5 Republicans from the California delegation in the U.S. House. Using the same tactic which Democrats have relied on (with much success) over the past 30+ years, the U.S. Department of Justice has joined California Republicans who are suing California on the basis that the new map mandates racially-gerrymandered districts, which is illegal. The motion to intervene is still pending before a U.S. District Court in California. Don't hold your breath in anticipation of any relief here. The case was scheduled to be heard on December 15. Another Republican lawsuit has already been dismissed for the good, old "lack of standing" reason that liberal judges often use against Republicans who have a good case (remember 2020?).

Map source: Dave's Redistricting

There will be a new congressional district map in Ohio for 2026, but it is not substantially different from the map which was used in 2022 and 2024. A revised map was required by state law because the previous one was passed without bipartisan support and was therefore only permitted to be used twice. The 2026 map does have bipartisan support, which ought to tell you something about how effective it will be for Republicans in 2026 and beyond. The GOP currently holds 10 of the 15 U.S. House seats in Ohio, but three Democrat-held districts (CD-1, CD-9, CD-13) are shaky at best. Yet Republicans failed to capture any of the three in 2022 or 2024. They will give it another try in 2026 under district boundaries which have received only subtle alterations from those which existed in the past two elections. CD-1 and CD-9 are moved imperceptibly to the right, while CD-13 goes the opposite direction in a similarly negligible way. There are some shaky GOP-held districts too, so if 2026 goes sour there could be a few House results in Ohio which would surprise the unaware.

Map source: Dave's Redistricting

The redistricting effects of Texas (R) and California (D) will cancel each other out, or come close to doing so; North Carolina (R) and Utah (D) also may be a net-zero. Ohio will likely end up with a 10-5 GOP advantage, no change from the current situation. Missouri's revised 5th Congressional District is going to be about R+8, an easy GOP pickup from the existing Democrat in CD-5. That makes the current aggregate redistricting score probably +1 for the GOP in 2026, with some variation depending on the overall demeanor of the election. If there is some "blue" wave, which should be greatly expected as things stand now, then any minor redistricting advantage accruing to the Republicans would be swamped by a general swing to the left overall.

Republican-controlled Kansas was going to redistrict before the 2026 midterms but they are pulling an "Indiana" and chickening out for the same reason as Indiana -- a lack of RINO support for picking up a House seat from a Democrat. Democrats are going to gain at least two seats in Virginia when that gerrymander is put into place, and large Rat-infested states such as New York and Illinois are looking to screw Republicans there even harder than they already have. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is looking to have his state mimic Texas; he believes a new map could oust 5 Democrats from the Florida delegation and make it 25-3 in favor of the GOP. That sounds extremely unlikely, but a gain of even one or two seats would be helpful.


A final word:

And then there's the whole bullshit idea of "Republican gerrymandering very bad", "Democrat 'response' merely self-defense". Democrats for years have relied on judicial mid-decade redistricting rather than doing it legislatively. What liberal judges have done frequently on behalf of Democrats is far worse than anything President Trump and the GOP are trying here, but of course the media spin is that what is happening now is "unprecedented".

Indiana illustrates the risk involved with trying to do things the right way; it can be difficult to get a sufficient number of RINO legislators to overcome their fears and vote properly on some redistricting plan. However ONE solitary black-robed liberal tyrant can singlehandedly mandate not only that a Republican map be scrapped -- normally by decreeing it to be "racist", with no pertinent evidence required -- but that it be replaced with a map which is guaranteed to cause a specific outcome which is desired by Democrats.

Tags:

Indiana U.S. House Surrender RINOs

Democrats were counting on Santa coming early to Tennessee this year.

He must be running late.

On December 2, Republican Matt Van Epps defeated radical leftist Democrat Aftyn Behn in a special election in Tennessee's 7th Congressional District. With all precincts reporting, Van Epps had 54% to Behn's 45%. The district is routinely (but erroneously) described as "dark red", because Donald Trump won there in 2024 by 22%, and former congressman Mark Green (R) prevailed by a similar margin the last two times he ran. Green resigned from Congress last July. Van Epps will be sworn in later this month and, along with all other House members, will be up for re-election in November, 2026.

This special election was supposed to be much closer than usual -- and it was -- for the same reasons that special elections often work that way in GOP districts: Democrat money, motivation and organization are nearly always superior to that of Republicans, and Tuesday was no exception. The district is rated by us as being R+8, which means that the normal GOP margin of victory is approximately 16 points, not 8 points; Charlie Cook calls it R+10 (which would imply a 20-point Republican win) based on the limited data he uses. Van Epps won by 9.

Behn took nearly 80% in Davidson County (Nashville), but lost all of the other 13 counties in the district. Every county swung to the left as compared to 2024, with the biggest leftward lurches occurring in Davidson (19 points) and in suburban Montgomery County (12 points). Those are the two largest counties in the district, and together they account for just under half of the votes. Behn received 45% in Montgomery, which is the first time since 2008 that any Democrat House candidate has even attained 40% there.

Photo credit: Tennessee Star

Van Epps' win was quite an important result, given the narrow GOP margin in the House, and the amount by which he triumphed is not nearly as important though it will be the subject of rigorous analysis in the media for the next few days before being forgotten.

Do not completely discount the closeness of the race; an ignorant "we had 'em all the way" attitude may be fine for casual observers who know little or nothing about the dynamics of this election, but if the GOP establishment takes a win which was half of the usual margin as an excuse for complacency, then they may be in for a rude surprise 11 months from now. Special elections often mean little as a harbinger of future events, however current generic polls for Congress indicate a 4 to 6 point advantage for Democrats next year. If that gets translated into votes in November, the GOP would probably be looking at a net loss of something like 15-20 House seats. They can't afford anything even close to those numbers.

1. A narrow Republican win is "a bad sign" [for the GOP] because Donald Trump had carried the seat by double digits every time he was on the ballot.

2. Aggressive GOP "gerrymanders" -- like slicing Nashville into three Republican-leaning seats -- can backfire once demographics shift and Trump isn't literally on the ballot.

3. Investing in "hopeless" red seats can force the GOP to spend money it doesn't have and build Democrat bench strength for later cycles.

4. Independents [even in TN-7] have turned sharply against Trump.

5. Republicans had to unleash every lever of MAGA power to hang on to a seat they once took for granted.

6. Democrats have been surging -- outperforming 2024 presidential margins in special elections by an average of nearly 20 points from Florida to Arizona, and now Tennessee.

TN-7 results: December, 2025 special election

Election report card:

Nashville cast 22.3% of the vote in the 7th District in 2024; they moved up slightly to 23.6% this time. The surplus of votes (23,798) for the Democrat in Nashville was almost identical to the margin which Van Epps obtained in Robertson, Williamson, Dickson & Cheatham counties combined (23,338). But where is Montgomery County? It was right there with Robertson and Williamson at the top of Mark Green's list of benefactors in 2024. In 2025 it still cast the most votes of any county. We noted that "Green won Montgomery by 19.7% in 2024; Van Epps will not approach that number". Van Epps won Montgomery by only 8%; that was the biggest leap to the left outside of Nashville itself.

Here is the data for all counties, comparing 2025 to 2024. Every county in the district experienced a swing to the left in 2025.

Tags:

2025 Tennessee Special election Merry Christmas!

Photo credit: The Tennessee Conservative

On December 2 there will be a special election in Tennessee's 7th Congressional District to fill the vacancy which was caused when Republican Mark Green resigned from the House in July to "take a job in the private sector". The GOP currently controls the House by the count of 219-213. There are two vacant Democrat seats (TX-18, NJ-11) which will be easily retained by other Democrats when the special elections for those seats roll around next year. The outcome of this Tennessee election next week will determine whether the Republican advantage is eventually 5 seats (220-215) or 3 seats (219-216).


Background:

Green, who was in his fourth term in Congress, was first elected in 2018 when former CD-7 incumbent Marsha Blackburn chose to run for the Senate. He had been a reliably conservative vote in the House and was chairman of the important Homeland Security Committee. Green almost declined to run for a fourth term, announcing in February of 2024 that he would not be a candidate for re-election that November. He changed his mind two weeks later, ran again in November 2024, and won easily.

That race was not quite as effortless as the ones he'd had in 2018 and 2020. The decreased margins in 2022 and 2024 weren't any reflection on Green himself -- the 7th District had been significantly altered prior to 2022 and was not quite the same as the district which routinely delivered landslides to GOP House members such as Blackburn, Ed Bryant and Don Sundquist. Nor was it the same as the district in which Green first ran 7 years ago.

Current map of Tennessee congressional district 7

In 2021 Tennessee Republican redistricters did something that their colleagues in other states were too chicken to do. They broke up a Democrat district (CD-5) which caused Republicans to pick up one House seat as of 2022. CD-5 formerly contained all of the city of Nashville, and therefore was heavily Democrat. But for 2022 and beyond the city was split into three pieces, and those pieces were attached to heavily Republican suburban and rural territory. CD-5 incumbent Democrat Jim Cooper saw what he would be up against in 2022, and opted to retire.

CD-5 was won by Republican Andy Ogles in 2022, but a side effect of the new and improved CD-5 was that adjacent districts would be less overwhelmingly Republican than they had been. The Democrat Diaspora moved CD-6 and CD-7 somewhere around 10 points to the left. No big deal, they could afford it. So instead of GOP candidates taking 70% of the vote in House races, they would simply win with about 60% instead.

That's exactly what happened in CD-7, with Green losing approximately 10% of his previous support. We still rate the current version of CD-7 as R+8, which means that a typical Republican should win here by an average of 16 points. In 2024, Donald Trump took 60% of the vote in CD-7 and prevailed by 22 points; Green won by almost exactly the same amount that year.


The candidates:

Photo credit: Nashville Tennesseean

GOP nominee Matt Van Epps is a West Point graduate, U.S. Army veteran and current member of the Tennessee Army National Guard. He is a former official in the administration of Tennessee Governor Bill Lee, most recently as director of the state's Department of General Services. Van Epps previously served as Lee's "COVID Czar", which is not exactly a resume-enhancer. Van Epps, like Lee, is considered by many to be a member in good standing of the squishy GOP establishment. There was an 11-way Republican primary in October, which was decisively won by Van Epps after he received the endorsement of President Trump, much to the dismay of conservatives.

State representative Jody Barrett, who finished second to Van Epps in the primary, later confessed that he "didn't really want to win" because he never wished to seek federal office but was pushed into it. He also lamented the fact that the establishment (including Trump) was against him, both in terms of endorsements and money. Barrett made a point of not endorsing Van Epps for the general election.

Van Epps sounds like a solid conservative on all the issues: the economy, border control, Second Amendment rights, being pro-life, anti-transvestite, and so forth. GOP candidates running in (supposedly) solid "red" districts always sound like that when running for office.

Photo credit: Tennessee Star

His opponent, radical leftist Aftyn Behn, could hardly provide a more stark contrast.

Behn prevailed with just under 28% of the vote in a 4-way Democrat primary which couldn't have been much closer, with less than a 5-point spread from top to bottom. Behn won only one of the district's 14 counties, but did well enough elsewhere to secure the victory. Longtime state representative Bo Mitchell was the relatively sane Democrat in the race, but he lacked the funds to truly compete for the W.

Behn, who has been lovingly described as the "AOC of Tennessee", is on the extreme left on every conceivable issue. No matter how much assistance she is receiving from the liberal establishment and the liberal media, this approach should be a recipe for abject failure in a House district which doesn't much resemble the one represented by the actual AOC. Nashville is bad, but it's not the Bronx.

The following items represent Aftyn Behn's "qualifications". That may sound sarcastic, but to her rabid, hate-filled supporters these are seen as being 100% in her favor:

• Admits to imitating the "Mamdani platform".

• Harasses ICE agents and police: "our girl squad [is] bullying ICE vehicles and state troopers".

• Believes the Nashville police department should be disbanded and that burning down police stations is justified.

• Sides with child sex traffickers.

• Her recently-uncovered "I hate Nashville" remarks.

• Supports transvestite-ism and sex changes for children (and believes that men can give birth). Immediately after a psychotic transvestite murdered six innocent Christian students at the Covenant School in Nashville in 2023, Behn raced to the nearest media outlet to express her sympathy and concern -- for the murderer.

Photo credit: Drill Down with Peter Schweitzer

Nearly all of the $1.2 million which Behn has raised allegedly comes from "individual" contributors. The Democrats' ActBlue Laundromat routinely splits billionaire donations into tiny fragments and assigns those fragments to unaware individuals in a process known as "smurfing". This creates the illusion of broad "mom-'n-pop" support (not to mention evading campaign finance laws) and allows the Democrat to declare with a straight face that she is a candidate "of the little people". Van Epps, on the other hand, must rely on actual individual contributions, and those have been insufficient to be competitive in a high-stakes race like this one. To bridge the fundraising gap, the Republican has had to take a substantial amount (about 30% of his receipts) from PACs.

Tags:

2025 Tennessee Special election

We've already covered the eight U.S. Senate seats which have the greatest probability of changing hands in 2026. The list includes 3 seats currently held by Democrats and 5 which have GOP incumbents. Most of the other 27 Senate seats which will have elections next year appear to be perfectly safe for the party which holds them. A few others fall just short of "perfectly safe".

Perfectly safe (or close to it) Senate seats:

• Republican: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida (special), Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, West Virginia, Wyoming

• Democrat: Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Virginia

Louisiana gubernatorial jungle primary, 1987

Louisiana:

This Senate seat is highly unlikely to slip away from the GOP next year, but it may be an interesting race.

As of 2026 Louisiana is abandoning its "jungle" primary system which was instituted in 1975 by Democrat Governor (and eventual convicted felon) Eddie Edwards. Louisiana is returning to single-party closed primaries, and that sounds like a good thing.

But it probably isn't.

In 1975 Republicans accounted for less than 10% of the Louisiana electorate and were outnumbered by as many as 2,000,000 Democrats statewide. From the end of Radical Reconstruction, Republicans were never anything close to being a viable factor in Pelican State elections. The GOP had not elected a Governor since 1876 and would never elect a Senator prior to the 21st century. Until the 1960's, Republicans were unheard of in the congressional delegation or in the state legislature. In these respects, Louisiana was no different from many other Deep South states.

By 1975 however, Edwards may have noticed that the GOP (though still largely nascent) was beginning to grow, and the Democrat Governor desired to rig the system to favor his party. In a jungle primary, all candidates regardless of party run together on the same ballot. The top two finishers -- also regardless of party -- advance to the general election which is essentially a runoff. A wrinkle which was added in Louisiana is that if any candidate achieves a majority of the vote in the jungle primary, then that candidate is declared the winner of the race and there is no general election for that office. An example of how this worked is the 2020 U.S. Senate election, in which RINO Bill Cassidy was re-elected.

In the jungle primary which took place on November 3, 2020, Cassidy faced 14 challengers (5 Democrats, 1 Republican, 1 Libertarian, 7 independents), exactly zero of which posed a serious threat -- all 5 Democrats combined added up to only 36% and the one other Republican contender barely registered a pulse. Cassidy won with 59.3% of the vote. Had his percentage not exceeded the magic number of 50, he would have been forced into a runoff with the second-place finisher.

Photo of inmate No. 03128-095 from wwltv.com

What really triggered Edwards was the February, 1972 gubernatorial race, in which he first won the Democrat primary against over a dozen other candidates (but did not even get 25% of the vote) and then narrowly prevailed in a grueling runoff against Bennett Johnston and then had to face Republican David Treen in the general which turned out much closer than expected. Treen had cruised easily through the GOP primary and did not need to endure any runoff. So why, Edwards asked, should the vastly outnumbered Republican party be guaranteed a spot on a general election ballot like in every other state, while Democrats had to face as many as two bruising contests just to get to that same spot?

The answer to that question, beginning in 1977, was to make Republicans in Louisiana into an effectively-disenfranchised minority group. Until the 1990's, the majority of statewide general elections in Louisiana were Democrat against Democrat. Furthermore, when no general election was needed because someone got over 50% in the jungle primary, that "someone" was always a Democrat.

This contrivance worked well for Louisiana Democrats for a long time. But Treen was elected Governor in a 1979 upset and by the 1980's the GOP at least fielded a candidate in most elections. Although after Treen won it was 16 years before another Republican was elected Governor, and it wasn't until 2004 that Republicans elected their first U.S. Senator from Louisiana. Democrats continued to dominate other statewide offices as well.

Photo credit: wwltv.com

Cassidy has a major cash advantage, Miguez and Fleming are building their war chests, and Seiden has only recently thrown her hat into the ring. Whoever wins the GOP primary will be Louisiana's next U.S. Senator. Miguez, though more of a centrist, will still take more votes from Fleming and Seiden than he will from Cassidy. Best case scenario is that at least one of the two actual conservatives makes the runoff. With one Democrat now guaranteed to be on the general election ballot (thanks again, Louisiana RINOs) billionaire ActBlue contributors may go all-out to try to steal this seat, but this is one state where it is very unlikely that they will succeed.

Democrats have nobody yet for this race in what people falsely assume is a Republican state; the GOP has only 24% of voter registrations in Alaska while 59% are registered independents. But the Democrats believe (and left-wing polls back them up) that fake-moderate ex-congresswoman Mary Peltola would be a formidable opponent against incumbent Republican Dan Sullivan. Sullivan, an actual moderate, was first elected to the Senate in 2014 when he defeated incumbent Democrat Mark Begich and then was re-elected in 2020 by an unimpressive margin over big-spending liberal Al Gross.

An obscure former state legislator from the outback, Peltola entered the spotlight in August, 2022 when she reaped the full benefit of Alaska's Rigged Choice Voting (RCV) election system and won the House seat of the departed Don Young by taking 39.7% of the vote in a special election. Sarah Palin's entry into that race split the GOP vote (which totaled 58.7%), and after RCV worked its black magic Peltola was declared the winner. She won again in November against the same two GOP combatants. Republicans finally got smart in 2024 and stopped the internal warfare, with Nick Begich winning the House seat he had been denied twice previously. Democrats desperately want Peltola to run for something in 2026, whether it be Governor, Senator or House, because no other Democrat seems to be remotely viable. Alaska's filing deadline isn't until June, so the "Peltola Watch" may go on for some time.

Peltola may have a greater chance at becoming Governor rather than Senator because no Republican (so far) is stepping up to plausibly challenge Sullivan; the GOP vote will not be split, and Sullivan's squishiness will appeal to so-called independents who might otherwise vote for a Democrat. However the Governor race is wide-open and numerous Republicans will be splitting the vote in the jungle primary and probably in the general election too. If Peltola gets into that race, other Rats will flee. The over-abundance of Republican wannabes gives Democrats and Peltola the perfect opportunity to use Rigged Choice Voting to their advantage again, a la 2022.

Even if Sullivan wins another Senate term in 2026, Alaska still might hand Senate control to the Democrats. As we first predicted over 3 years ago, if Senate control hangs in the balance, uber-RINO Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski will almost certainly switch parties -- either ending her charade and becoming a Democrat, or going the Independent route and caucusing with the Dems -- and hand the Senate over to the Rats. The GOP majority hasn't been thin enough yet for this grandstanding attention whore to make any difference in that manner, but after 2026 it very well might be. Or Republicans may lose outright, and Murkowski might switch just to be on the winning team and get some better committee assignments in the last two years of her final term (before voters kick her to the curb in 2028 -- hopefully).

Murkowski previewed her intentions here, a few months ago.

Photo credit: Lexington Herald Leader

The Bluegrass State is wide open due to the long-overdue retirement of Mitch McConnell. The best-known candidates in the Republican primary are moderate congressman Andy Barr and former Attorney General Daniel Cameron. Barr has represented the Lexington-area district in Congress since 2013 and he's turned what was once a marginal House seat into a rather safe one which Democrats no longer seriously go for in most elections; they are putting it back on their radar in 2026, however. Cameron, elected as A.G. in 2019, was seen by some on the right as insufficiently tough on Democrat crimes while in office, and his bid to move up to Governor ended dismally when he was totally outclassed (and vastly outspent) in 2023. There is also businessman Nate Morris running on the GOP side, and he is definitely the most conservative option of the three. Barr is currently the leader in the fundraising portion of the race.

Democrats seem to be pinning their hopes on one of two female statewide failures:

• Amy McGrath, who once wasted $8 million running against Barr in the 6th District and couldn't even win in hyper-Democrat 2018. The national party again spared no expense in 2020, spending nearly $100 million on McGrath as she failed to defeat the unpopular McConnell for the Senate. She won 3 counties. McGrath's 2026 campaign is built around "I hate Donald Trump, just like you do!" and nothing else aside from wrapping herself in the flag and posing as a patriot because she once was in the military. Democrats often try that approach; it seldom works outside of "blue" states (where that sort of thing isn't necessary and is probably counterproductive).

• State House Minority Leader Pamela Stevenson, who represents a Louisville ghetto district. Stevenson doesn't appear to have much of a campaign organization yet. Stevenson ran for Attorney General in 2023 and lost by 16 points even as Empty Suit Andy Beshear was winning at the top of the Rat ticket. Stevenson, like McGrath, also has military cred, having once been in the Judge Advocate General's Corps in the U.S. Air Force.

• There is also former CIA spook Joel Willett, the Deep State entrant into the race; Kentucky's version of Virginia's Abby Spanberger, but without any electoral history. He's trying to seize the all-important Democrat "Working Class Hero" (W.C.H.) designation for himself, and also has the "victim card" handy; this guy who nobody's ever heard of is apparently such a menace to GOP chances in the 2026 election that he claims to have received death threats from Republicans.

2024 presidential results in Minnesota

This state, like Virginia (see below) is nothing but a Republican pipe dream. The congressional delegation is always pretty well balanced, either 4-4 or 5-3 every election since 2000. The state House and state Senate are very close. Minnesota doesn't register voters by party, but a company whose business it is to estimate party breakdowns calculates that Minnesota is one-third Democrat, one-third Republican and one-third independent or minor parties. This may be an oversimplification, but the Twin Cities and their suburbs (at least the first two "rings") are terrible, the rest of the state is fine. The first part of that sentence is definitely true, anyway.

When it comes to statewide elections, the GOP sometimes comes close -- but never wins. Trump won every single county in Minnesota except 4 in the Twin Cities area, 3 in the Arrowhead Region, and the counties containing Rochester and Moorhead. He still lost by 4 points, which isn't too bad a showing for a Republican in the Great White (75% and dropping) North. But the last time a Republican presidential candidate won in Minnesota was back in 1972 -- 53 years ago. There's usually some hope but it's always false hope.

It's no different in other statewide elections. From 2008 to 2024 there were 23 non-presidential statewide elections in Minnesota, for offices ranging from Governor and U.S. Senator to Auditor, Attorney General and Secretary of State. Only one candidate (Amy Klobuchar) has ever exceeded 55% of the vote during those years, and she's done that 3 times. The other 20 elections were close. Democrats won all 20 of them.

Photo credit: house.mn.gov

Speaking of "pipe dreams". . . one explanation for some of the previously close outcomes is -- or was -- the presence of doper parties on the ballot. The "Grassroots-Legalize Cannabis" party and the "Legal Marijuana Now!" party are both recognized political entities in Minnesota, but they ceased fielding candidates after 2022. That's because they no longer have any reason to do so; in 2023 the Democrat legislature passed a very lenient law which legalizes cannabis for any type of use, not just medicinal. The fact that the doper parties are now obsolete helps Democrats, because these parties were regularly siphoning off thousands of left-wing votes in major elections.

Photo credit: yahoo.com

This foregone conclusion of an election might be spiced up a bit if ex-sports broadcaster Michele Tafoya were to enter the race on the GOP side. Tafoya was a long-time sideline reporter for NFL games, and during her career she was employed by several networks including CBS, ESPN and NBC. She retired from that profession in January, 2022; the last game she worked was Super Bowl LVI.

Tafoya, a self-described "pro-choice conservative with Libertarian leanings", is now a political commentator, doing podcasts from her home in the suburban Twin Cities area. She has been rumored as a potential candidate for the Minnesota Senate seat, but has not yet made any move towards running. The main challengers to White for the GOP nod are a pair of retired Navy veterans, Adam Schwarze and Tom Weiler, neither of whom have any political experience -- which isn't necessarily a bad thing -- but they have no name recognition (or sufficient funding, or a prayer of winning) either.

Photo credit: Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner

Democrat-in-disguise Dan Osborn is the Great "Independent" Hope for the left in the state of Nebraska. Fresh off of a defeat in the 2024 Senate election against incumbent GOP squish Deb Fischer in which he came closer than some expected, Osborn is rested and ready to give it another go in 2026. Osborn took all of the Democrat money he could get in 2024, but concealed his true political identity by refusing to accept the Democrat party label which is repugnant in the Cornhusker State outside of Omaha and Lincoln. Not even including all of the supposedly-independent liberal cashflow coming from outside the state, Osborn's fundraising dwarfed that of Fischer. Numerous polls showed a close race in 2024, and some even had Osborn prevailing by a small amount. Osborn won the two big liberal cities and lost everywhere else; the final outcome was a 6.7% victory for the Republican. Only one or two forecasters actually got it right; the other polls (nearly all of which were paid for by Osborn's campaign) were nothing but wishful thinking, propaganda and hot air.

Osborn's opponent in 2026 will be Nebraska's other squishy moderate Senator, Pete Ricketts. Ricketts, the former two-term Governor of Nebraska, was appointed in January, 2023 to fill the Senate vacancy caused by the resignation of rabid Trump-hating Republican Ben Sasse. Ricketts then easily won the 2024 special election to fill the remainder of Sasse's unexpired term.

That effortless win came against a Democrat, and defeating any Democrat statewide is a slam dunk in Nebraska these days. In 2024 the national party kept its support of Osborn a secret until the final days of the campaign. National Rats are now out of the closet, and have proudly endorsed the faux independent for 2026. They have yet to support Osborn with the big money which will enable him to easily outspend Ricketts (but that will come). For his part, Osborn is careful to appear in flannel shirts, holding a hunting rifle if possible, and making sure to stress that he was once a member of Organized Labor. So unlike most Democrat "working class hero" wannabes, this guy really did once-upon-a-time work for a living before becoming a politician.

Just like in 2024, the polls purport to indicate a close race. Just like in 2024, those biased polls are very likely to be wrong when the votes are counted. But Democrats have all the money in the world, as they have conclusively shown in recent years, so why not spend it -- even on an "independent", even in a normally unwinnable state?

Because 2026 just might not be a normal election year.

Tags:

2026 Senate Louisiana Alaska Kentucky Minnesota Nebraska Virginia

We have already examined the outlook for 2026 in the aftermath of the 2025 elections. Most of that commentary focused on the U.S. House and how the results from the last disastrous midterm election (2018) might foreshadow the upcoming potentially disastrous midterm election. We spent little time on the Senate, but noted that although 2018 was a train wreck for Republicans over almost the entire ballot, there was one minor exception: Republicans actually gained 2 Senate seats in 2018 and with some luck it could have been as many as 6. Because it was only a net +2, most observers on the right were extremely disappointed. Yet holding onto the Senate at all in 2018 was an important accomplishment and an impressive one under the circumstances. It kept rabid Democrats at least partially at bay. Recall what Democrats did with their total control of the House, and imagine what would have occurred with them in charge of the Senate during the final two years of Trump's first term in the White House.

The 2018 Senate elections provide a history lesson: that it is possible to hold steady (or even improve) at the Senate level even while being decimated up and down the remainder of the election ballot, as happened to the GOP that year.

However the individual Senate skirmishes from 2018 -- unlike the ones from the House -- are not germane as far as predicting what will happen in 2026. All 435 House seats are up for election every two years, which makes recent past midterms at least somewhat comparable to future ones. Many of the House members from 2018 are still in office, even though the configuration of their districts may have changed, and most of those members will be running again next year.

Source: OpenSecrets.org

The current Senate terrain is not as favorable as it was in 2018, when Democrats had to play defense in most of the contested states. In 2026 Republicans have 22 seats to defend (including special elections in Florida and Ohio) while Democrats are up in only 13 states. Of those 13, just 3 present any real opportunity for a GOP gain while there are a minimum of 5 juicy targets for Democrats this time around. All things considered, the playing field is clearly tilted towards the left here.

The top (really the only) probabilities for Republican pickups are in Georgia, Michigan and New Hampshire. Democrats have a fighting chance in Iowa, Maine, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas and perhaps a couple of others, or so they claim.

Any eventual morsel of good news for Republicans, no matter how meager that morsel is ("Generic polls favor Democrats only by 5 points now instead of 6!") will cause hopium addicts on the right to begin fantasizing about Senate pickups in states such as Minnesota, New Mexico and Virginia, which they believe are purple but are in fact completely safe for leftists absent some "red" tsunami. In Louisiana, much like in Alaska in 2022, a RINO (Bill Cassidy) currently holds the seat but might be ejected by a true Republican in the primary. That wouldn't count as a pickup, but it would amount to the same thing and would bolster actual conservative representation in the Senate. It didn't happen in Alaska and probably won't in Louisiana either, but there is a chance.


Here are the 2026 Senate battleground states:
(in order of likelihood to flip, as things stand in November of 2025)

North Carolina Senate results from 2020

1. North Carolina:

Anti-Trump squish Thom Tillis announced months ago that he would not seek re-election to the Senate in 2026, beating GOP primary voters to the punch; Tillis decided to quit rather than being dumped in the primary. Not much more about Tillis needs to be written; we already did that here, describing Tillis' career and his increasingly RINO-ish behavior in 2025.

At the time Tillis made his retirement proclamation, Lara Trump was considered to be the best candidate to hold the NC Senate seat for the GOP. She probably still is the best candidate, but won't be running.

Numerous North Carolina congressmen were in position to be the fallback in the event that Trump opted out of the race. In what is likely to be a regrettable move (we'll find out in about a year), Republican National Committee (RNC) chairman Michael Whatley entered the NC Senate race shortly after Lara Trump passed. Whatley, despite his general ineffectiveness as head of the RNC, quickly received Donald Trump's imperial blessing, which meant that all other viable candidates might as well step aside.

Maine Senate results from 2020

2. Maine:

The Maine Senate seat is the second most likely one to flip from being occupied by a Republican (such as she is) to one filled by a Democrat. Mega-RINO Susan Collins is currently in her fifth Senate term, and she is looking to make it 6 in 2026. Since Collins' last election in 2020, she has voted more often with Democrats than Republicans; she wasn't exactly a bargain before 2020 either. Collins is normally excused for her behavior because she represents Maine, and the GOP is hardly likely to do any better there.

Maine Republicans have little choice but to pin their hopes on Collins, because nobody who is more conservative would stand a chance in a statewide election, Paul LePage's fluke wins for Governor in 2010 and 2014 notwithstanding; the outcome of his 2022 quest for a non-consecutive third term (he got 42%) is more in line with Maine's preferences these days. It's possible that Collins won't do significantly better than 42% in 2026, but she's been counted out before. Notably in 2020 when Collins squeaked by with 51% against an ultra-liberal Democrat who raised over $75 million for the challenge (Collins barely got to $30 million). Collins received about 57,000 more votes in Maine in 2020 than Donald Trump did.

There will apparently be a two-way battle for the Democrat nomination between current term-limited Governor Janet "Butch" Mills and some guy who wants to be Maine's version of Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman (before Fetterman began acting more sensibly and enraged the radical left): that guy would be alleged "working class hero" Graham Platner, who has described himself as a "communist" and "ANTIFA supersoldier" but denies being a "secret Nazi". We believe him. Whoever said it was a secret?

Mills ought to be the favorite in the Rat primary, but if she is it's not by much. One ludicrous poll had her down to Platner by 34 points; that poll must have been taken either on a college campus or in a media newsroom. The geriatric Mills (age 77) started her campaign by refusing to release her medical records, while Platner is suddenly raising millions of dollars from the type of people who think that the 2025 election results are a referendum in favor of killing Republicans. It's going to be quite a battle unless Mills bows out or Platner is dragged down by his past (and present). Democrat voters forgave the murderous racist in Virginia two weeks ago; Maine Democrats aren't likely to abandon any candidate no matter how much of a lunatic he may be -- as long as they think he can win next November.

Keep in mind that Maine uses Rigged Choice Voting (RCV), just like Alaska does. Imagine a 3-way race with Collins, Platner and some other leftist candidate who isn't violently nutzoid. Nobody gets to 50% initially so RCV kicks in and the comparatively moderate independent who finishes third is eliminated. Who gets his votes then?

We might not like the answer.

Georgia Senate results from 2020 runoff

3. Georgia:

The incumbent Democrat, Hollywood Jon Ossoff, will once again be backed by enormous amounts of out-of-state money, just as he was in 2017 (when running for a House seat) and in 2020 when he spent over $150 million to defeat GOP Senator David Perdue. Ossoff lost in November of 2020, but won the January, 2021 runoff which was required because Perdue came up 0.3% short of 50% in the initial election. In the wake of the "questionable" (to put it mildly) presidential election results in 2020, you may recall that some GOP folks in high places were spitefully calling for Republican voters to boycott the January runoff. We've never really been sure what that was meant to accomplish, but you have to admit it worked. Hello, Senator Ossoff.

Ossoff will not have to face a primary opponent in 2026. Democrats nearly always do that -- clearing the field in situations like this, which helps their candidate and frees up Democrat voters to pollute Republican primaries in states (like Georgia) where that is permitted. In the general election Ossoff will take on one of the three current GOP frontrunners: congressman Buddy Carter (85% lifetime conservative rating), congressman Mike Collins (96% conservative) or football coach Derek Dooley; Dooley is running well behind the two congressmen. As of September 30, Ossoff (3% conservative) already had raised over $50 million with much more to come. Georgia deserves better than a couple of liberal stooges in the Senate. Republican-leaning pollsters indicate a close race, but Ossoff maintains a small lead across the board -- so far.

Michigan Senate results from 2020

4. Michigan:

Michigan occasionally votes Republican for President lately (albeit by very small amounts), as it did in 2016 and 2024. It wasn't too long ago (2010 and 2014) that Michigan elected a GOP Governor; OK, Biden-supporter/Trump-hater Rick Snyder was basically a Democrat regardless of the letter after his name, but he did get elected twice as a Republican. Now here's a trivia question: when was the last time Michigan elected a Republican U.S. Senator?

The answer is. . . 1994. The have been 9 Senate elections in Michigan over the subsequent 30+ years, and the GOP is 0-for-9. The most recent two have been close; the other 7 weren't. In 2026 ex-congressman Mike Rogers is going to make a second run at the Senate on the Republican side. We covered Rogers a year ago as he was making his first run, which turned out to be unsuccessful but could hardly have been closer. Rogers lost by less than half a percent in 2024 while running 1.3% behind Donald Trump. Rogers needed to hang onto those coattails a little bit tighter, but apparently he couldn't.

Rogers' Democrat opponent, as in 2024, will be a congresswoman. Last time it was Elissa Slotkin; this time it's Haley Stevens, a far-left Democrat who once worked for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Since 2019 Stevens has represented a deteriorating congressional district in suburban Oakland County, near Detroit. Stevens was first elected in the anti-Trump landslide of 2018, when the 11th district was still politically borderline. After 2020 the district was pushed farther to the left, aided by continuing demographic degradation in Oakland County. The district is now very safe (about D+11) for whatever Democrat runs there.

When Rogers lost in 2024 his Democrat opponent had a massive financial advantage, outspending him $51 million to $13 million. That chapter of the story will be the same in 2026, though as of the end of September Rogers was very close to Stevens in $$$; but the major part of fundraising season is not yet underway. Stevens will also have her hands full before (probably) moving on to face Rogers, because she has two primary opponents who are as well-funded as she is. Democrats were able to bypass a contentious Senate primary in 2024 (Slotkin had only token opposition), but that won't be the case next year. Perhaps some Democrat divisiveness will give Rogers the little extra boost he needs to become Michigan's next Senator. We wouldn't rely on it.

Photo credit: John H. Sununu

Chris and his father are RINOs, if not outright Democrats; John E. Sununu is the conservative in the family. By "Sununu" standards, anyway. He's one of those oxymoronic "fiscal conservatives" now (i.e. anti-conservative on every other issue). There's no such thing as a fiscal conservative/social liberal. Because "social liberalism" is clearly anything but fiscally conservative when you look at how much those social programs cost.

Ohio Senate results from 2024

6. Ohio:

Ohio's 2026 Senate contest is a special election to fill the seat for the remaining two years of J.D. Vance's term. When Vance advanced to the Vice Presidency, Ohio Lt. Governor Jon Husted was promoted to the Senate via an appointment from Governor Mike DeWine. Husted entered politics at an early age (25), losing a bid for state House in 1992. He eventually served in the state House for 4 terms (becoming Speaker in 2005), had one state Senate term, was elected Secretary of State for 8 years beginning in 2011 and was DeWine's Lieutenant from 2019 until joining the U.S. Senate. Husted, now 58, is still quite young by Senate standards. During his short time in D.C., Husted has been a reliable albeit low-profile GOP vote on every issue.

Husted's Democrat opponent next November will be 73-year-old ex-Senator Sherrod Brown, who will be making his third appearance on a ballot in the past 8 years. Brown, a career politician, took a path which was somewhat similar to that of Husted, with Brown initially being elected to the Ohio state House in 1974 at the age of 21. Also like Husted, Brown was Ohio Secretary of State for several years (1983-1992). Brown won an open U.S. House seat in the Cleveland suburbs in 1992, the seat being open because incumbent Democrat Edward Feighan was implicated in the House Bank scandal which enveloped several Democrats that year, and Feighan chose to exit politics as a result.

Brown was a solidly liberal vote (lifetime ACU rating: 6% conservative) but began faking to the center in 2006 in preparation for his first Senate race. Brown defeated incumbent Senator Mike DeWine in that anti-Republican year, immediately resumed his ultra-liberal positions upon taking office in 2007, and was easily re-elected in 2012. Brown's past history of domestic (and other) violence was used against him as Brown was seeking a third Senate term in 2018. However Brown, with the assistance of his allies in the liberal media -- and a massive advantage in fundraising -- was able to shrug that off and score another relatively easy win. Those on the right expected a better outcome since Ohio had suddenly become (or so they thought) a "solid red" state now that it had voted convincingly for Donald Trump in 2016.

Texas Senate results from 2020

7. Texas:

The 2026 Senate race in Texas will feature spirited primaries on both sides, which is not a common thing in recent years. While it's true that Republicans often conduct a no-holds-barred donnybrook on their side (costing a considerable amount in money, and in hard feelings afterwards), Democrats regularly attempt to whittle down the number of candidates in any statewide election, whether for the benefit of a Democrat incumbent -- especially a vulnerable one -- or to anoint a "chosen one" to be their standard-bearer without interference from pesky voters. They even take that approach for presidential elections sometimes. There are several smart reasons why Democrats do this:

1. It avoids a bloody primary fight in which even the winner suffers potentially mortal wounds, and is therefore less effective in the general election because of those wounds.

2. It saves money (not that Democrat campaign funds are ever scarce) which can be used to greater effect in the general election.

3. With diminished reason to vote on the Democrat side in the primary, this tactic frees up Democrat voters to sabotage Republican primaries by participating in those, in order to try to select the weakest possible GOP opponent. Even so-called closed primary states are not immune to this.

Photo credit: splinter.com

Talarico describes himself as a deeply religious Christian, but is a phony who spouts that "Jesus-was-a-liberal" bullshit a la the self-righteous "He Gets Us" television ad campaign, which you may have seen. Picture Talarico as a combination of Bernie Sanders and Jimmy Swaggart (apologies to Swaggart). Talarico the "True Christian" adamantly opposed displaying the Ten Commandments in Texas schools, preferring that those institutions remain atheistic and free from anything which might accidentally encourage good moral values. He represents an ultra-liberal (D+26) Austin district in the state House, so Talarico's views are surely considered to be mainstream by his constituents but most of the rest of the state of Texas would disagree. Talarico is a one-trick pony, wearing his version of far-left Christianity on his sleeve at all times and using it to explain all of his immoral, pro-abortion, pro-crime and other radical votes in the legislature. He surely believes he can "out-liberal" and "out-hate" Crockett and Allred, but he's got his work cut out for him in those departments.

Colin Allred we already know about (click here for more info) from his 2024 Senate attempt. He is a former Dallas-area congressman who was first elected in Congressional District 32 in 2018 when Dallas County swung hard-left in elections that year. The Texas GOP did him a "solid" in 2022 by extending his district up into left-trending Plano (there is an ongoing massive influx of Muslims and Hindus into southern Collin County) and down into ghetto Balch Springs. Previously CD-32 was a D+1 district but became safely D+13 after the new leftist areas were added. Republican redistricters did this favor not so much for Allred but for themselves, sacrificing that district so that adjacent ones like CD-3, CD-5 and CD-24 would be safer for Republicans. When Allred left the House in 2024 to run for the Senate against Ted Cruz, the GOP didn't waste any resources trying to reclaim CD-32. But Allred wasted $94 million in his attempt to acquire a seat in the Senate.

This is nothing new for Ken Paxton. The former state legislator was first elected as Texas Attorney General in 2014, succeeding Greg Abbott in that office as Abbott stepped up to become Governor. The solidly-conservative Paxton quickly showed that he was (and still is) one of the most effective A.G.'s in the entire country. However he is much too effective to suit the RINOs who perpetually have control of the Texas GOP and the Texas state House; Democrats loathe him even more than RINOs do.

The GOP establishment failed to stop Paxton from being elected to a third term in 2022 although they recruited a clueless geriatric congressman (Louie Gohmert) along with Land Commissioner George P. Bush, who is the son of former Florida Governor and momentary (2016) presidential candidate Jeb! Bush. The plan in 2022 was that RINO Bush and Clueless Gohmert and one other hopeless candidate would combine to steal enough primary votes to force Paxton into a runoff where he would either be defeated or severely damaged. The establishment strategy worked, up to a point.

Paxton dominated the runoff against Georgie P. and then won by nearly 10 points in November against the Democrat; all Texas statewide Republican candidates did better than expected in 2022, with Paxton having the closest race of any of them and it still wasn't very close. Maybe it was the "Beto Effect", with Beto the Bozo (D) helpfully running statewide again, and this time being demolished by Abbott, 55%-44%.

Having failed in their 2022 assignment, Texas RINOs led by state House Speaker Dade Phelan and Rep. Andrew Murr impeached Paxton in 2023. Other RINOs joined the Phelan-Murr witch hunt, and Paxton ended up on the wrong end of a 121-23 vote in the House; 60 of those 121 votes for impeachment came from "Republicans". However the Texas state Senate, which is not RINO-controlled, was tasked with completing the impeachment process. During the Senate hearings, one witness who accused Paxton admitted he actually had "no evidence" whatsoever of wrongdoing. Another witness conceded that the claims of malfeasance he made against Paxton were about things he "didn't know whether [they] were true or not", but he regurgitated them anyway. No credible evidence was presented at all. Mere accusations against a Republican are normally sufficient for conviction, but the Senate wasn't buying it this time. In September of 2023 Paxton was acquitted of all charges.

With his enemies living in mortal terror of Paxton becoming a U.S. Senator, the smear campaign against him has ramped up again in 2025 since he announced his run against Cornyn in April. The smear campaign seems to be having an effect, judging from the polls. Paxton has only a slight lead over the unpopular GOP incumbent, Cornyn, and is only neck-and-neck with Allred in hypothetical general election polls. Our opinion is that Paxton is so good at what he is currently doing (you can tell by the amount of hate he receives), that we'd be much better off with him in a fourth term as Texas Attorney General rather than a first term as a U.S. Senator.

Photo credit: Texas Scorecard

As noted above, the GOP primary is not just a 2-way race anymore. In October, congressman Wesley Hunt announced that he would abandon his safe (R+10) district in the suburban Houston area and join the Senate race. The 44-year-old Hunt has a fine military background, graduating from West Point in 2004, serving 8 years in the U.S. Army before earning 3 Masters' Degrees, and then entering politics. Hunt's first bid for Congress came in 2020 in the deteriorating 7th District and was unsuccessful though he made a solid showing (47.5%) under difficult circumstances. When the new 38th District was created in 2022 in approximately the same area, Hunt won a majority in a crowded 10-way Republican primary and then easily sealed the deal in November. Hunt was re-elected in 2024 with only token opposition, and has been a reliable conservative vote in the House. He currently trails his primary opponents in fundraising (and is way behind the wealthy Democrats) but he's only been in the race for about 6 weeks.

Although Texas remains a relentlessly "purpling" state due to demographic changes caused by invaders both domestic and foreign, most forecasters agree that -- as things stand now -- Republicans should be able to hold this Senate seat in 2026. We concur, although the GOP winning percentages are more likely to be in the same range as they were in Texas from 2016-2020 (~50-55%) than their slightly higher levels (sometimes 55-60%) from 2022-2024.

Iowa Senate results from 2020

8. Iowa:

Moderate GOP incumbent Joni Ernst is calling it quits in the Hawkeye State after two Senate terms during which she moved gradually but perceptibly to the left. President Trump attempted to prevail upon Ernst to run one more time, but she declined and decided to proceed with her retirement (shades of 2018, egad!). Ernst, who is probably the only pig castrator currently serving in Congress, has been described as a "fiscal conservative". That's far more letters than are necessary to spell "RINO".

The supposed Democrat heavyweight in Iowa -- i.e. a Democrat who can actually get elected -- is state auditor Rob Sand. But he's running for Governor in 2026, not for the Senate, and he's not some electoral wizard anyway. Sand won in the hyper-Democrat year of 2018 with 51% of the vote and held on by his fingernails (50.1%) in 2022 after outspending his Republican opponent by a mere 40:1 ratio.

Ernst's withdrawal is a golden opportunity for the GOP to find a true conservative as a replacement. Or at least it would be, if they cared to try. Instead, squishy congresswoman Ashley Hinson is the clear favorite among Republicans. Not only would the Senate be an obvious step up for Hinson, but she may be figuring that getting elected statewide in Iowa could be less difficult than being re-elected in her marginal congressional district. There's a possibility that Hinson will have primary opposition from Iowa state House Speaker Pat Grassley. That last name may sound familiar. Patrick may choose to try to join his 92-year-old father in the Senate, but for now he is not running. Several low-level Democrat candidates are amassing funds to take on Hinson, and although they may be low-profile their campaign accounts are growing daily. This race is not likely to be the slam-dunk that some might anticipate, but Hinson is favored at this time.

Tags:

2026 Senate North Carolina Maine Georgia Michigan New Hampshire Ohio Texas Iowa

The election results from November 4, 2025 bear a striking resemblance to those from November 7th of 2017. In the aftermath of the 2025 Democrat sweeps in Virginia, New Jersey, New York City -- and elsewhere -- most right-wing analysts are trying to appear calm as they whistle past the graveyard in their attempts to dismiss the disaster as "completely expected", "limited to 'blue' states", "unimportant" and, most of all, "meaningless as far as next year's midterms are concerned".

If that's what most analysts are claiming, then most analysts are wrong.

The polls sure were wrong -- but not the way we wanted them to be.

"Completely expected":

An election day puff piece about new RNC Chairman Joe Gruters claimed there were going to be "close contests for Governor in New Jersey and Virginia" and Gruters trumpeted GOTV efforts by Republicans in those states. Of course the races turned out to be not so close except in some pre-election outlier polls like this one, and the GOTV effort was apparently quite insufficient. The margin of defeat was so great that even the usual "Frodd! Frodd! Frodd!" claims aren't being made, except by those for whom facing reality isn't exactly a strong point. This isn't 2020.

Numerous prognosticators understood that the GOP candidates were likely to lose this year in VA and NJ, but who the hell had 13 points as the margin of defeat in New Jersey? We sure didn't. One ridiculously biased Rutgers poll back in June had Ciattarelli losing by 21 points, however polls which showed him neck-and-neck with the Democrat Top Gun were also way off the mark. Most New Jersey pollsters had forecast a race that would wind up within, or close to, the margin of polling error.

In Virginia, only hardcore GOP surveyors such as Trafalgar ever had Winsome Sears coming within spitting distance of the Governor's mansion in Virginia, and as election day loomed, even they bailed on her chances. Trafalgar still had the Virginia Lt. Governor race being close (it wasn't), and had Jason Miyares being narrowly re-elected (he wasn't) as Attorney General against savage Democrat Jay Jones.

Possibly thinking: "Wow, the voters agreed with me! Republicans (and their children) DO deserve to die!"

Regarding the Republicans' gubernatorial defeats: it's one thing to be expected to lose, it's another thing to be completely obliterated and to have the calamity permeate the entire election ballot to the point where Republicans also hemorrhaged seats in the Virginia House of Delegates and the state Assembly in New Jersey.

Given the Democrat gerrymander of the state House maps in Virginia, we mentioned that Republicans had done well to keep the partisan balance close in prior elections. It ain't close no more. Democrats picked up 13 seats.

In New Jersey the GOP, which came into November with only 28 out of 80 Assembly seats, has lost at least 3 more and 4 races (all seats held by Republicans) are still uncalled so there is the potential to wind up at minus-7 though a more likely end result is minus-5 (23 R, 85 D). The degree of Democrat gerrymandering in New Jersey state-level districts points to 23-25 R seats as an approximate expectation, which means -- like in Virginia -- Republicans had actually been slightly overachieving before 2025.


"Limited to 'blue' states":

Pennsylvania is a state Trump won twice, and there has been considerable publicity over Republican voter registrations growing while Democrats lag. Twelve short months ago Pennsylvania also ousted a well-entrenched liberal Democrat from the Senate, and somewhat thwarted the PA Democrat gerrymander of U.S. House seats by finally winning a couple of closely-balanced districts in the eastern part of the state after failing to do so in three previous attempts. The Keystone State is supposed to be "purple" now, not blue.

Last week there were crucial elections regarding three geriatric ultra-liberal justices on the PA Supreme Court. These three, and their liberal colleagues, are wholly responsible for (among other atrocities) the hyper-partisan Democrat gerrymanders which exist at all levels in Pennsylvania. These gerrymanders were dictated by the court, which:

1. In 2018 overthrew the legitimate congressional district map which had been created by the GOP state legislature in 2011.

2. Replaced that map with a Democrat gerrymander which was put into effect for the 2018 midterms. It cost Republicans 4 House seats and almost became 6.

3. Overruled the GOP legislature and sided with Democrats again in 2022. First, they used the Democrat-gerrymandered 2018 map as a basis for the new districts, and then revised that map to take away one more seat from Republicans. Secondly, they overruled the legislature's state-level district maps and replaced them with Democrat gerrymanders which cost the Republicans 13 seats in the state House when that map was first used in 2022 -- 13 being exactly the number of flipped seats which was required to give Democrats control.

In 2025, Democrats cemented their control of the PA Supreme Court for years to come.

Pennsylvania voters had the opportunity to send those judges packing. Instead, all three judges who were up for retention were overwhelmingly returned (by nearly 25-point margins) to the court for another 10-year term. The PA Democrat Supreme Court thus maintains its 5-2 majority, and one of the two Republicans on the court barely qualifies as such; there is only one true Republican out of seven judges on the PA Court.

In Georgia, which like PA is hardly a solid "blue" state (yet), Democrats scored shocking upsets in two statewide races for the unimportant-sounding office of Public Service Commissioner. Republican incumbents in Districts 2 and 3 were up for re-election, and both got stomped by 25 points with over 1.5 million votes cast in each race.

Pundits on the right have told us in the past that special election losses in tiny state House districts in which not even 3,000 votes were cast were actually of vital importance as far as the GOP "learning lessons" from the defeat. Would they now say we should ignore or deliberately misinterpret election outcomes (not just the ones from Georgia and Pennsylvania) in which millions of votes were cast?

• Dems' Election Day Sweep Is Not A Harbinger (The Federalist)

• Economic Issues Emerge As Most Important For Voters (Breitbart) "It's the economy, stupid". So that's what caused all this. Sure.

• The GOP Loss Is Not A Big Deal (American Spectator)

• Alternatively, there's this: Republicans Have Good Reason To Worry (Trump-haters at National Review blame everything on. . . guess who?)

• NJ Governor: D+14.1%, 2.15 million total votes
• NJ Senate: D+1 seat
• NJ Assembly: D+2 seats

• VA Governor: D+8.9%, 2.61 million total votes
• VA Lt. Governor: D+5.5%
• VA Attorney General: D+6.7%
• VA Senate: no scheduled elections in 2017
• VA House of Delegates: D+15 seats

Happier days: 2021 gubernatorial election results in Virginia

2021:

• NJ Governor: D+3.2%, 2.61 million total votes
• NJ Senate: R+1
• NJ House: R+6, resulting in more seats for the GOP in the NJ Assembly than anytime since 2003

• VA Governor: R+2.0%, 3.29 million total votes
• VA Lt. Governor: R+1.5%
• VA Attorney General: R+0.8%
• VA Senate: no change
• VA House of Delegates: R+7 seats, retaking control

• NJ Governor: D+14.1%, 3.23 million total votes so far
• NJ Senate: no scheduled elections in 2025
• NJ Assembly: D+3 seats at least, giving Democrats their highest total since 1973

• VA Governor: D+14.8%, 3.38 million total votes so far
• VA Lt. Governor: D+11.1%
• VA Attorney General: D+6.2%
• VA Senate: no scheduled elections in 2025
• VA House of Delegates: D+13 seats (all of them tossup districts, only 1 of which was an open seat)

Artist's conception of the GOP's 2018 election results

Back to 2018:

A preview of the upcoming Republican disaster came one month before 2018 got underway, when Judge Roy Moore lost the special U.S. Senate election in deep "red" Alabama. Senator Jeff Sessions had resigned the seat early in 2017 to become Trump's first Attorney General, and Luther Strange was appointed as Sessions' replacement. An acrimonious 3-way Republican primary occurred, in which congressman Mo Brooks was relegated to third place due to demonstrating insufficient fealty to President Trump. Moore and Strange slugged it out in the runoff with Moore advancing to face unknown liberal Democrat trial lawyer Doug Jones.

Moore, a controversial figure to begin with due to his conservative views, was falsely accused of sexual indiscretions during the 2017 campaign. Five years later, well after it mattered electorally, Moore won his defamation lawsuit against a Democrat PAC. Five days before the December, 2017 election the Democrats ousted their own sexual predator, Al Franken, from the Senate (knowing he would be replaced by another Democrat, without an election being held) in order to try to obtain "credibility" for their attacks on Judge Moore. Mo(o)re importantly, they outspent the GOP nominee in Alabama by a factor of over 4:1. Jones won by 1.7% and was a reliably liberal senator for three years before his inevitable defeat in 2020 by Republican Tommy Tuberville in a 60%-40% landslide as Alabama returned to normal.

Senate results from 2018

The House went up in flames but Election Night 2018 was a good one for Republicans in the Senate. Good, but not great. The 2017 GOP defeat in Alabama had left the Republicans with a narrow 51-49 majority. In 2018 they picked up 4 Senate seats (FL, IN, MO, ND) but also lost a pair of seats which they had previously held (AZ, NV) for a net +2. For a little while there also seemed a possibility of the GOP losing Thad Cochran's seat in Mississippi.

The two defeats combined with their fumble of two other anticipated pickups (MT, WV) to render the overall Senate outcome as a significant disappointment for Republicans. There were unrealistic prospects of seizing other Senate seats (MI, OH) as well, leading some dreamers to anticipate up to an 8-seat gain. Viewed in that light, +2 tasted rather bitter indeed and Democrats were relieved that it hadn't been worse.

Somewhat lost in the mourning over the House catastrophe and the missed Senate opportunities were major Republican losses at the state level in 2018. Not only did the GOP suffer a loss of 7 governorships (IL, KS, ME, MI, NM, NV, WI) but they were decimated in state legislatures as well. Republicans went a net minus-66 in state Senate seats that year (losing control in CO, ME, NH & WA), and minus-251 in state Houses (losing control in MN and NH).

If 2026 turns out to be a 2018-type bloodbath, don't discount the impact further down the ballot.

• 27 favored Democrats, 10 were rated as completely even, and 43 were Republican-leaning

• 23 districts had a Democrat incumbent who ran again and won
• 16 districts had a Republican incumbent who ran again and won

• 5 districts had a Democrat incumbent who did not run again -- Rats held all 5
• 10 open Republican seats were won by Democrats

• 1 Republican was able to hold an open GOP seat (Paul Ryan's old district, WI-1)
• 2 Republicans won open Democrat seats, both of which were in Minnesota
• 23 Republican incumbents were defeated

The likely effects of the ongoing redistricting currently are:

• California: + 4 safe Democrat seats, and there is only 1 marginal seat (Democrat-leaning, that's how they figure +5 in all) in the entire state; it's now held by a Republican. This leaves 47 (!) almost perfectly-safe Democrat seats here, barring any miracles. This is an incredible accomplishment -- screwing Republicans massively while at the same time shoring up every single Rat incumbent who might have been even remotely endangered (e.g. Josh Harder, Adam Gray, Jim Costa, George Whitesides, Derek Tran, Dave Min). All six Democrats on that list are breathing much easier as of last Tuesday.

• Missouri: +1 safe GOP seat, 1 currently marginal GOP seat becomes slightly safer and just barely exits tossup range.

• North Carolina: Nothing much happened here despite all the wailing from Democrats and high-fiving from Republicans. One marginal Rat-leaning seat becomes a marginal Republican-leaning seat -- but numerous GOP seats in North Carolina (practically every single one of them) are marginal too or very close to that threshold, so if there is ever a "blue wave". . . look out.

• Ohio: No substantial changes to any district, much to the disappointment of Republicans. GOP cowards (fearing some black-robed tyrant, perhaps?) created a new map which doesn't ensure their party any gains at all. They can still pick up 2 or 3 seats anyway, but they could have done that even in 2022 or 2024. The seats were there for the taking, but Republicans blew it both times in CD-1, CD-9 and CD-13.

• Texas: +1 safe Republican seat (yes, only 1), but 4 current Democrat seats are turned into Republican-leaning tossups which the GOP is counting on winning. Assuming no liberal judges say otherwise.

• Alabama: 2 seats (Republicans should be able to get one back)
• Florida: 4 seats
• Georgia: 5 seats
• Louisiana: 2 seats (one of which is the subject of this court case)
• Mississippi: 1 seat
• Missouri: 2 seats (the GOP will gain one with their new map)
• North Carolina: 2 more seats (after taking NC-1 with the new map)
• South Carolina: 1 seat

Tags:

2025 2026 (uh oh) Virginia New Jersey And just about everywhere else

Although the elections may be tantalizingly close (in truth, they probably won't be that close), the likeliest outcome for the Republicans is. . .

The races have generally (but not consistently) been tightening in both states, especially according to polling organizations which are classified as Republican-leaning by liberal media sources. Some hardcore leftists (e.g. Washington Post) are cheerleading for a Democrat blowout in Virginia, but the ones who attempt to be less transparently liberal forecast the contests as being moderately competitive. Close though the races may be, as things stand now both Jack Ciattarelli (NJ) and Winsome Earle-Sears (VA) appear to be heading for losses. It's up to the good voters of New Jersey and Virginia to get out and vote and prove the pollsters wrong.

We'll start with a look at New Jersey.

Photo credit: inquirer.com

Background:

In 2025 Ciattarelli is making his third attempt for Governor of New Jersey. The three-term state legislator ran in 2017 and finished second in the Republican primary to Kim Guadagno, the two-term (2010-2017) Lt. Gov. under Governor Tubba Goo.

In 2021 Ciatterelli came closer than expected to an upset victory after starting 15 to 20 points down in early general election polls. Even polls taken in late October (by Democrat-college groups such as Emerson, Rutgers, Farleigh Dickinson & Monmouth) anticipated incumbent Democrat Phil Murphy being victorious by 6 to 10 points. Only the Trafalgar Group (R) came close to getting it right, predicting a 4-point loss for the challenger; Ciattarelli lost by 84,000 votes (3.2%).

Murphy was first elected in 2017 by vastly outspending Republican nominee Guadagno, as well as by capitalizing on the massive unpopularity of outgoing Republican Governor Chris Christie, to whom Guadagno was constantly linked. That election result maintained New Jersey's habit of alternating parties every 8 years in gubernatorial elections, a pattern which has held since 1993 when ultra-liberal Republican Christine Todd Whitman denied Democrat Jim "Flimflam" Florio a second term by eking out a surprising 1-point victory. Florio later claimed that he was "one of the first victims of modern right-wing talk radio", LOL. Democrats appear likely to break that alternating pattern in 2025.

Photo credit: app.com

The 2021 election was mainly a referendum on Murphy's first term, with Ciatterelli being regarded as sufficiently bland and moderate to avoid alienating potential crossover Democrat voters which any Jersey Republican requires in order to have a chance of winning a statewide election. Murphy is a huge supporter of the illegal importation of new Democrat voters from foreign countries, and he designated New Jersey as a sanctuary state. He also took several steps to hinder the deportation of illegals, such as not permitting law enforcement to ask about immigration status. By 2021 many New Jersey voters had grown weary of the invasion and their disaffection hurt Murphy's re-election chances. Nor were the voters pleased with the numerous tax increases which were passed by the overwhelmingly Democrat NJ legislature.

Unlike 2017, Republicans were able to compete on almost equal financial footing in 2021 in the expensive gubernatorial election. The same applies in 2025, though as we head into the final days of the race the Democrat has substantially more cash on hand, and therefore will likely be more visible in the media than Ciatterelli (nevermind the media bias advantage the Democrat already holds for free).

Ciattarelli won 6 of New Jersey's 12 congressional districts in 2021 -- including the one represented by 2025 Democrat nominee Mikie Sherrill. Sherrill is currently in her fourth term in the House, and is a member in good standing of the far-left wing of her party. She was first elected in the anti-Trump year of 2018 in what at the time was a tossup district (NJ-11) centered on upscale, suburban Morris County.

Until 2018 Morris County had been forever represented in Congress by liberal Republicans such as Rodney Frelinghuysen. Like several other squishy Republicans in the House, the staunchly anti-Trump Frelinghuysen picked 2018 to retire. The 72-year-old, 12-term representative was not comfortable being "forced" to toe the party line and support a president whom he despised. Frelinghuysen abandoned his House seat, hoping (or knowing) that he would be replaced by a Democrat who would help the new Democrat majority thwart Trump's legislative agenda and begin Trump's congressional persecution. Sherrill filled that role nicely.

Morris County seems to have recently begun a journey away from the left and back towards the center, voting for Trump in 2024 after giving Joe Biden a 4.2% victory in 2020. Morris is reliably Republican in other statewide elections too (Murphy lost there twice and it wasn't particularly close), even selecting hapless Curtis Bashaw over Andy Kim in the 2024 Senate race. In 2022 Democrat gerrymanderers added a larger portion of ghetto Essex County to the Eleventh District, taking it from being a complete tossup to favoring Democrats by 5 points. Republicans face an uphill battle to win NJ-11 in 2026 from either Sherrill or whoever her special-election replacement is if Sherrill becomes Governor as expected.

2024 presidential election results in New Jersey

Geography:

We have divided New Jersey into the six geographical regions listed below, shown with the counties which correspond to those regions:

• South Jersey: Atlantic, Burlington, Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Gloucester, Salem
• Central Jersey: Mercer, Middlesex, Somerset
• West Jersey: Hunterdon, Morris, Sussex, Warren
• Central Coast: Monmouth, Ocean
• Urbanized North: Bergen, Passaic
• Ghetto Jersey: Essex, Hudson, Union

Photo credit: redlineheadlines.com

Scott Presler and his organization have worked diligently over the past couple of years to increase Republican voter registration counts in certain states. Presler focused on Pennsylvania during 2024 and has been given inordinate credit for the GOP victories which occurred there -- Trump's win along with that of Senator Dave McCormick, and the important pickup of two House seats (CD-7 and CD-8) in Eastern PA.

While it is true that the Democrat registration advantage in PA was reduced to 3.1% from 5.6% during 2024 (a net GOP gain of 165,000 registrations in 12 months), the trend in PA has been significantly in the R direction for over 15 years now. Between November of 2008 and November of 2023 the GOP added 210,616 voters in the Keystone State while Democrats diminished by 579,285, a net change of 789,901 in the positive direction for Republicans.

Pennsylvania has apparently "cleaned up" its voter rolls in 2025, with both parties seeing a reduction in registrations:

2024:

• 3,710,290 R (40.5%)
• 3,991,381 D (43.6%)
• 1,460,307 I (15.9%)

• 3,642,630 R (40.9%)
• 3,811,262 D (42.8%)
• 1,448,470 I (16.3%)

2024 PA voter registration, by county

After 2024, Presler and his vote registrars moved east to New Jersey in an attempt to turn that state "red". As in PA, trends in New Jersey were already favoring Republicans, although these trends have not manifested themselves in any victories. Trump's loss by 5.9% here in 2024 was actually the best showing for a Republican candidate since George Bush lost by only 2.4% in the 3-way election of 1992. Prior to 1992, the GOP won 6 presidential elections in a row in New Jersey before the state's demographics began to head rapidly south.

Recent results have been no better down the ballot, with Chris Christie the only Republican to win statewide since Christie Whitman in 1997; the GOP has not elected a U.S. senator from the Garden State since ultra-liberal Clifford Case in 1972, and the U.S. House districts have been gerrymandered to an amount which limits Republicans to just 3 districts out of 12 (and at least one of those GOP districts, CD-7, is very marginal). Those factors notwithstanding, Trump did a little better statewide than expected in 2024, Jack Ciattarelli almost pulled off a major upset in the most recent gubernatorial election, and there appears to be reason for some optimism on the Republican side going forward.

The trend is also apparent in the New Jersey voter registration figures, to a minor degree.

November 2023:

• R: 1,541,158 (23.7%)
• D: 2,504,294 (38.6%)

• R: 1,628,633 (24.2%)
• D: 2,534,932 (37.7%)

• R: 1,670,297 (25.3%)
• D: 2,525,346 (38.2%)

2024 presidential election result in Virginia

Background:

Although Trump lost the Commonwealth of Virginia in 2024, his margin of defeat (5.7%) was a distinct improvement over 2020 when he lost by over 10 percent; the 2024 outcome was in line with other recent presidential elections in Virginia. There was false optimism in the 2024 U.S. Senate race, where many wishful thinkers believed that Hung Cao would defy the polls and score a major upset over incumbent radical leftist Timmy Kaine, or at least make it a close call. Cao did neither of those things, losing by 9 points which was just a slight tick better than the polls predicted.

Trump's sizable step in the right direction, along with the surprise victory by Republican Glenn Youngkin for Governor in 2021, helps to create the illusion that Virginia is a "purple" state where Republicans have almost as good a chance at winning as Democrats do. In reality, Virginia is slipping behind the rest of the country and becoming "bluer" by the day. Relative to the nationwide percentage of the Republican presidential vote, Trump's 4-point underachievement in VA in 2024 was the worst showing here for a GOP candidate since the 1940's when Virginia was solidly Democrat across the entire ticket. Although Virginia does not register voters by party, recent estimates of party affiliation indicate that Democrats have nearly a 2:1 advantage over Republicans. That's not very purple-ish.

Speaking of Governor Youngkin, his win in 2021 was primarily the result of the stars and planets aligning in his favor, and it is now abundantly clear that Youngkin's electoral success (and that of his party, which gained 7 seats and took control of the state House that year) was a temporary phenomenon.

Youngkin benefited from several factors, which have some parallel to Donald Trump's surprise victory in 2016, and those factors may have also helped Republicans in races down the ballot in Virginia in 2021:

Photo credit: washingtonmonthly.com

• Youngkin, like Trump in '16, was a political outsider and not a career politician, and both were fortunate to be able to run against the single most repugnant and unlikeable Democrat available at the time (Terry McAuliffe, Hillary Clinton). Former Governor and Clinton crony McAuliffe was a godsend for Youngkin. McAuliffe's abrasive personality and his far-left political positions proved to be quite helpful to the moderate Republican candidate. Furthermore, the Republican was able to compete financially against the Democrat's massive fundraising advantages by contributing significantly to his own campaign. Youngkin distanced himself from Trump (while McAuliffe was not able to distance himself from Joe Biden) enough to keep moderate and independent voters from bolting to the left.
  
  The 2021 Republican nominee was aided in great measure by voter revulsion against local school boards (notably in Loudoun County) which were defying parents -- and common sense -- by welcoming the presence of boys in girls' bathrooms and by continually "overstepping parental rights during the pandemic". When a male student raped a female student in a Loudoun County school bathroom in 2021, the incident and the school's mishandling of it rightfully became a national scandal -- at least in the "right wing" media. The liberal media downplayed and/or ignored the story after an initial cursory report, with a majority of voters in upscale, liberal Loudoun County probably being totally unaware of what had occurred right in their own backyard. But many good voters in the rest of the state were aware of this atrocity, and their logical reaction to it helped Youngkin considerably.
  
  
  
• Virginia is not exactly known for the cleanliness of its elections in recent years, but Youngkin was perhaps not taken as seriously by Democrats as he should have been even though he was close or even slightly led McAuliffe in polls which were taken in the closing weeks of the race. Trump also was not given a serious chance to win in 2016, and liberal pollsters right up to election day helped the Democrats maintain their (false) overconfidence; Democrats and Deep Staters of both parties did prepare for the eventuality of Trump's election by fabricating the "Steele Dossier" and all the phony "Russia, Russia, Russia" crap to attempt to hamstring him after the fact, but they apparently didn't put as much -- let's call it "extra effort" -- as usual into achieving their desired electoral outcome in the first place.
  
  Underestimating the amount of voter support which both Trump and Youngkin actually had, the Democrats apparently did not feel the need to ensure victories by their usual methods (cough, cough). Trump was able to achieve narrow victories in critical states such as Pennsylvania (by 0.7%), Michigan (0.2%), Wisconsin (0.7%) and Florida (1.2%) and thus win the electoral vote despite losing the popular vote by 2.1%. Youngkin improved his party's showing from 2017 in several areas of the state, winning major portions of the Tidewater and Greater Richmond areas, and vastly reducing the deficit in NOVA -- even in Loudoun County, but still lost by 11 points there.
  
  In the aftermath of that glorious 2021 outcome it was reported that one of the main reasons for it was the "Virginia Project", a Republican effort to increase election integrity (something Democrats always oppose) by, for one thing, recruiting poll watchers for as many precincts as possible. With 36% of the votes in the 2021 Virginia gubernatorial election being cast early or absentee, the impact of GOP poll watchers was somewhat muted unless they were present when the envelopes were being opened and the ballots counted; their presence on election day was still helpful, though.
  
  With it seeming to work so well in Virginia that year, the Virginia Project (we were told) would serve as a model for helping ensure the honesty of future elections, and would be expanded to states beyond Virginia. Looking at many important outcomes from 2022 onward, the proponents of the Virginia Project either never implemented their model or it didn't function as well as expected. In any event, there's much more to the concept of election integrity than poll watchers can accomplish.
  
  
  
• Even with all of those advantages, both Trump and Youngkin won rather unconvincingly. The mistakes which national Democrats made in 2016 at the presidential level were "rectified" in 2020; the mistakes which Virginia Democrats made in 2021 began to be rectified almost immediately: the 7-seat gain which gave Republicans the Virginia state House starting in 2022 was partially offset in November of 2023 when Democrats added 3 seats and seized control of the House, 51-49; they have held the state Senate throughout Youngkin's term, by a 21-19 margin.

Photo credit: lifenews.com

GOP nominee Winsome Earle-Sears is an immigrant from Jamaica who arrived in the U.S. at the age of 6. She served in the United States Marine Corps for 4 years in the 1980's and became an American citizen during that time. Her political career commenced in the early 2000's when she won a race for the state House, upsetting a black Democrat who had been in office for two decades. She was the first Republican to win a state House seat in a majority-black district in Virginia since 1865. She later became the state's first female Lieutenant Governor (elected in 2021) and is the first black female to be elected to any statewide office in Virginia.

Although Sears endorsed Donald Trump in 2020 and served as the chairman of a PAC called "Black Americans to Re-elect the President", she broke with Trump in 2022 because she believed that the candidates Trump had endorsed that year were too conservative and therefore unelectable (in fact they weren't elected, but Sears was wrong about the reason for their defeats). At that time Sears declared she would not support Donald Trump's election bid if he were to run in 2024.

Probably for this reason (yeah, "probably"), Trump for a long time refused to support Sears for Governor in 2025, though he belatedly came through with an endorsement earlier this week. That endorsement, however, seemed to focus more on Spanberger being a "disaster" for Virginia than it did on Sears being Trump's choice for the job.

Sears also has the endorsements of Governor Youngkin, state Attorney General Jason Miyares, the entire Virginia Republican congressional delegation, and some congressmen from other states. Sears is pro-life, supports "common sense" tax cuts and government spending cuts, and opposes Democrats' radical pro-crime policies such as "catch and release" and sanctuary cities. She opposes incompetent (but powerfully unionized) teachers and favors school choice and parents' rights. Sears also strongly supports Virginia's "right-to-work" law. These positions stand in stark contrast to that of her allegedly "moderate" Democrat opponent, Abigail Spanberger.

Photo credit: twitchy.com

Spanberger, a native of New Jersey, went from being a substitute schoolteacher and a postal inspector to (as of 2006) being a spy for the Central Intelligence Agency; a rather interesting career change, to say the least. When she first entered politics, Spanberger's CIA resume was sanitized so that it could be declassified and, according to ABC News, the former spook stuck "to carefully scripted lines, approved by the agency, when talking about her work" on the campaign trail.

In 2018 CIAbby was recruited to run against Republican incumbent Dave Brat for a seat in Congress. Brat had irritated many GOP bigwigs by daring to oppose -- and defeat -- golden boy Eric Cantor, a squish who was a member of the GOP leadership (House Majority Leader) when he was shocked by Brat in the 2014 primary. We wrote at length about Brat's situation here, and his parallels to ex-congressman Bob Good. Good, a very solid conservative like Brat, fell out of favor with his party's leadership in 2024, and irritated the biggest bigwig of them all (Donald Trump). Good was defeated in the 2024 primary.

VA-7, the formerly Republican-oriented district in which Brat toppled Cantor and then 4 years later was defeated by Spanberger, was altered to give Democrats a much greater chance of success after 2014. Brat survived in 2016 because the Democrats pretty much gave him a free pass, but in 2018 Spanberger was able to raise and spend over $7 million dollars to purchase that House seat. That was more than double the amount which Brat could raise (or obtain from his indifferent party leadership). The surplus millions which Deep State Abby was able to throw around proved to be critical as she eked out a 1.9% win in the recently-gerrymandered district; her margin of victory came almost exclusively from the new Democrat areas in the Richmond suburbs which were added after 2014.

Democrats spent lavishly while procuring numerous House seats in 2018 and, coincidentally, another new Democrat who was the recipient of an astronomical "investment" that year was New Jersey's Mikie Sherrill who is now her party's gubernatorial nominee in that state.

Photo credit: NRCC

Republicans picked up 13 House seats in 2020 but Spanberger's wasn't one of them although a serious effort was made. Her district, which had been rated as R+10 prior to the 2016 Democrat gerrymander, was still slightly "red" and Republicans had it high on their list of potential pickups. Spanberger, then as now, occasionally talks like a moderate and did cast a highly publicized (and highly choreographed) vote against Nancy Pelosi for Speaker in January, 2019. Spanberger then spent the remainder of her first term in Congress establishing her liberal bona fides, but was able to conceal that fact from the voters as she reverted back to her faux-moderate persona.

Nick Freitas, a solid conservative, defeated squishy John McGuire (now a congressman from Virginia's Fifth District) in a contentious Republican party primary convention in July of 2020, and won the right to oppose Spanberger in November. As in 2018, the Republican carried all areas of the district aside from the deteriorating Richmond suburbs, but that was not sufficient to prevail district-wide. Or was it?

On the afternoon of the Wednesday following the 2020 election, Freitas had a lead of a little more than 1,300 votes over Spanberger. Then came the discovery of a "flash drive" in Henrico County by the husband of a Democrat operative, and that flash drive miraculously contained over 14,000 as yet uncounted votes in the 7th District. Just as miraculously, Spanberger happened to receive a tremendous percentage (64%) of those flash votes. The Democrats later found even more votes for CIAbby, making sure that her final margin was outside the range which would require an automatic recount. In 2022, Spanberger spent over $9 million dollars to successfully retain the 7th District seat; redistricting by that time had moved the district even further left in order to help ensure her another term. Spanberger did not seek re-election in 2024 in order to focus on her gubernatorial run.

Geography:

As we did with New Jersey, we have split Virginia into 6 regions:

• Rural Chesapeake Bay area
• Greater Richmond
• Hampton Roads
• Northern Virginia
• Piedmont / Southside
• Shenandoah Valley / Southwest Virginia

Tags:

2025 Governor New Jersey Virginia

Over the past few days, two moderate Republicans have announced that they will not be seeking re-election in 2026: Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska and Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina. Both of these anti-conservative politicos have taken great pride in being a thorn in the side of the majority of their party, and they bask in the positive media attention they get when they oppose President Trump.

Trump normally saves his greatest degree of vengeance for those who oppose him from the right (such as ex-Rep. Bob Good or current Rep. Thomas Massie) while going easier on Republicans who come at him from the other direction (such as Impeachment RINO Dan Newhouse of Washington), and he nearly always endorses squishy moderate incumbents over conservative challengers even in the safest of Republican districts. However, Trump recently declared War on Tillis and, probably as a result of that, Tillis has decided to scram. Trump's reaction notwithstanding, Tillis did not become a darling of the left only recently; he had already sealed his probable re-election fate months earlier.

Fried Bacon:

Photo credit: AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

Although he did not make the official announcement until June 30, there had already been chatter that Bacon was through after this term. He was first elected alongside future nemesis Donald Trump in 2016, defeating erratic Democrat incumbent Brad Ashford by 1.2%. Ashford started out as a Democrat, switched to Republican, then became an Independent, then back to Democrat again. He used his scattershot background to provide cover for his natural liberalism; although Ashford campaigned as a moderate he nearly always voted as a liberal during his lone term in Congress.

Bacon survived the anti-Trump liberal landslide of 2018 because the so-called moderate Ashford was edged out by far-leftist Kara Eastman in the Democrat primary that year; Ashford would have likely won the general election rematch, but Bacon lucked out by having a more "progressive" opponent who repelled enough moderate voters to seal her defeat.

Bacon was truly a moderate during his first term and part of his second one (2017-2019) but he began to panic and/or seek liberal media approval for his "maverick" status during the COVID year, and his voting record jumped noticeably to the left. His record has stayed that way ever since. It could be successfully argued that, as bad as Bacon is, he remained a good fit for his ever-deteriorating district (NE-2) which is based in and around the city of Omaha. Bacon won 5 times without ever getting even 52% of the vote in this highly marginal district, which is impressive in its own way.

Bacon's greatest achievement was his most recent victory in 2024. It's rare that a long-term House incumbent suddenly becomes an underdog absent some scandal or adverse redistricting (neither of which applied to Bacon in 2024), but liberal Democrat Tony Vargas was leading in every poll taken from mid-August on and nearly every prognosticator -- including us -- expected Bacon to lose; he won by 1.8% in one of the most surprising outcomes on election night.

Nebraska congressional district 2

Nebraska's Second Congressional District contains all of Omaha, and the city comprises 75% of the district. It is the other 25% which (so far) has kept this a Republican seat in the House. By 2024, the White percentage of the district was down to approximately 65% (it had been 80% as of the early 2000s) while the Hispanic percentage continues to rapidly increase. This district -- which awards its own Electoral Vote in presidential elections -- not only has rejected Trump twice in a row now, it also voted heavily against incumbent Republican Senator Deb Fischer in 2024, preferring "independent" Dan Osborn by a whopping 12 points. NE-2 did vote Republican for Governor in 2022 and for the other Senate seat (Ricketts) in 2024, however it was by the narrowest of margins. Led by Omaha, the district is obviously trending leftward and is now rated as D+2. Even as recently as 2020 it was rated as leaning to the right by a miniscule amount, but those days are gone.

Photo credit: 3newsnow.com

Minor error #1: former Omaha Mayor and nominal Republican Jean Stothert (elected in 2013, 2017 and 2021) is not a transvestite and therefore is not a "he" as a quote from the article states; a minor error but one which reveals a certain amount of cluelessness on the part of the quoter, who was a former chairman of the Nebraska Republican party. That guy did get one thing right -- Stothert is surely no conservative. Stothert had her easiest election in 2021 when three liberal Democrats split the primary vote and could not reunite in time for the general election one month later. Stothert lost in May of 2025 by almost 13 points to a liberal black Democrat, conclusive evidence of how the city of Omaha has finally completed its journey to the dark side. Even granting that Stothert's general election campaign in 2025 was sabotaged by Republican primary loser Mike McDonnell (who spitefully endorsed the Democrat), it seems that even moderate Republicans no longer need apply for electoral employment within the city limits.

The mayor of Omaha is technically a non-partisan position (like the state legislature) but the parties of the candidates and officeholders are rarely a secret.

Major error #2: Gizzi's own blunder in the article is a real howler: claiming that Brett Lindstrom, the presumptive GOP nominee for the open NE-2 seat in 2026, is "considered a strong conservative". In reality, Lindstrom is just so much leftover Bacon. He can usually be found on the left flank of the Republican party in Nebraska and at one time was the most liberal Republican in the Nebraska state legislature. During his time in Lincoln, Lindstrom's conservative ratings from CPAC were:

2015: 64%
2016: 54%
2017: 75%
2018: 73%

Having moved to the right while running for re-election for the first time in 2018, Lindstrom was safely returned to office for a second term -- and safely returned to being the liberal which he really always was. When he decided that he wanted to be Governor and would therefore have to appeal to conservative voters statewide by moving rightward (if he could win the primary while running to the left) -- a neat trick, but a common one for liberal Republicans -- Lindstrom began moderating his voting record in 2020.

2019: 52%
2020: 63%
2021: 64%
2022: 80%

In 2022 Lindstrom was absent (or failed to take a position) for nearly half of all key votes including one on abolishing the state income tax and another vote on preventing election fraud.

In 2022 Lindstrom finished third in the GOP primary for Governor. Moderate Jim Pillen won that primary (and then the general election, easily) and conservative Charles Herbster finished second after leading in the polls; he was slimed with some Clintonian-type accusations of sexual indiscretions. Herbster was endorsed by Donald Trump and others on the right; Pillen had all the moderates in his corner; Lindstrom was supported by some ex-Republicans who became Democrats, and he was endorsed by moderate-liberal Omaha Mayor Jean Stothert.

Even a squish like Pete Ricketts (a Pillen supporter) considers Lindstrom to be too liberal. Here is a quote from Ricketts which appeared during the '22 gubernatorial campaign: "Brett Lindstrom raised the gas tax 23%, opposed voter ID, gave taxpayer benefits to illegal immigrants, repealed the death penalty, and even tried to gut the Property Tax Credit Relief Fund. It's no wonder Democrats are supporting Lindstrom -- his liberal record speaks for itself."

And this guy is the best we can do while trying to hold the NE-2 House seat? Sadly, that may be the case.

Photo credit: Washington Post

Business executive Thom Tillis was elected to the North Carolina state House in 2006 after one term as a city commissioner. Tillis compiled a conservative voting record (but was a more bipartisan type aside from some of his positions on key votes) during his 4 terms, and was Speaker of the NC House from 2011 through the end of his tenure there. True conservatives very rarely ascend to the position of Speaker even in the most conservative of states, and North Carolina isn't one of those anyway.

Liberal Democrat Kay Hagan, defeater of Elizabeth Dole and a rubber stamp for the Obama agenda in the Senate, was up for her first re-election bid in 2014. Polls showed her as being increasingly vulnerable heading into that election year, and numerous Republicans were considering opposing Hagan. Tillis jumped into the GOP primary as the favorite and received endorsements from high-profile squishes like Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush. Tillis' major opponent for the nomination was conservative "activist" and physician Greg Brannon. But Brannon was not a serious threat, never led in any poll against Tillis, and finished second in the primary, with 27.1% to 45.7% for Tillis.

For the general election, Democrats flooded the state with oodles of money on behalf of their doomed candidate and additionally invested $36 million in "independent" expenditures against Tillis. Despite the massive disparity in funding in favor of the Democrat (an extremely common occurrence in Senate elections in recent years), Tillis eked out a 1.5% upset victory over Hagan.

North Carolina Senate election results, 2014

Tillis carefully walked a line down the middle of the road during his first two Senate years (2015-2016) which corresponded with the final two years of the Obama administration. Desperately seeking to project an image of moderation in his sharply divided state, Tillis supported Obama somewhat more often than he opposed the president on Senate votes. Tillis was a staunch (though not entirely reliable) supporter of Donald Trump during Trump's first term in office.

In 2020 Tillis faced another big spender, Democrat Cal Cunningham. Cunningham, a former U.S. Army lawyer, tried to portray himself as a sensible, patriotic moderate who was not on board with fashionable radical leftist causes like "Black Lives Matter" and "Defund the Police". As in 2014, Tillis -- though now having the advantage of incumbency -- trailed throughout the COVID summer and into the fall. Even the final polls predicted a 2-4 point win for Cunningham. A month before the election, the married Democrat patriot was found to have engaged in "sexting" with a woman not his wife. These revelations were typically downplayed by the media and Cunningham suffered no damage in the polls. But just like in 2014, Tillis pulled off the upset and prevailed by a small margin in November.

Romney and Tillis: Birds of a Feather
Photo credit: newsmax.com

With Trump safely out of the picture now, Tillis emerged as even more moderate (actually, liberal) than he had been in the past; his support for the Biden administration's policies and his opposition to conservative principles were both running in the 40% range from 2021-2024; that's Mitt Romney territory, though not quite as reprehensible as Susan Collins or Lisa Murkowski.

Trump's return to the White House has caused Tillis to largely abandon whatever was left of his principles. All politicians (not just Donald Trump) have massive egos, and few of them have larger egos than the "Elite 100" who occupy the United States Senate. Tillis, among some others, objects to the pressure to blindly obey the president's every wish regarding legislation. Occasionally in 2025 this is a good instinct for a Republican, but most of the time it is not. Tillis began the second Trump administration by railing (and voting) against worthy presidential nominees like Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense and Ed Martin for U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. Tillis singlehandedly derailed the Martin nomination and his ex-sister-in-law was the driving force behind the smear campaign against Hegseth. So Tillis wasn't just voting the wrong way -- he was doing much more damage than that, whether directly or indirectly.

Those actions, along with his other recent anti-conservative tendencies, made Tillis' 2026 re-election prospects quite dubious. The last straw was his vote against the "Big Supposedly-Beautiful Bill", which triggered Trump's wrath. Tillis The Moderate would be highly vulnerable in the Republican primary while remaining an underdog in the general, still reviled by North Carolina Democrats no matter how much of a centrist he thinks he is now.

Photo credit: Carolina Journal

The Republican side is wide open. Lara Trump, chairman of the Republican National Committee for a little over 10 months in 2024-25 (and the daughter-in-law of President Trump) is the heavy favorite for the GOP nomination if she chooses to seek it. A native of the Tarheel State, Trump will still face allegations of carpetbaggery because she has spent much of her adult life elsewhere.

A hypothetical matchup between Trump and Cooper shows -- guess what? -- a close race! Lara Trump will face unprecedented amounts of hatred in 2026 if she is on the ballot, but Roy Cooper is far from unanimously popular despite a media-burnished image as an alleged moderate. Cooper would probably win against any Republican, but November, 2026 is an eternity away and gleeful Democrat prognosticators may find 17 months from now that their crystal balls weren't so accurate.

Other potential Republican Senate candidates include a large number of opportunistic congressmen, several of whom are still in their first term:

• Pat Harrigan, newly elected in the 10th district (mostly suburban areas like Mooresville, but also part of urban Winston-Salem) and one of the best of the non-Trump alternatives. Harrigan is a young military veteran, a Green Beret who served in Afghanistan and a solid conservative so far in Congress. Harrigan has declared that he will not run for the Senate if Trump does, so as not to split the right-wing vote.
  
  
• Tim Moore, newly elected in the 14th district (Gastonia, Shelby, Charlotte suburbs). He is a lawyer and career politician with a resume much like that of Thom Tillis (uh oh). Moore spent 22 years in the N.C. state House before moving up to D.C. He was the Speaker of the House for 10 years but is still thought to be somewhat conservative.
  
  
• Greg Murphy, currently in his fourth term in the House after winning a 2019 special election to replace the late Walter Jones in the 3rd district. Murphy has been re-elected easily three times and has compiled a record which began as fairly conservative but has moved a bit to the left since his initial term.
  
  
• Addison McDowell, another very young (31 years old) freshman House member from the 6th district (suburban areas around Concord, Greensboro, High Point and Winston-Salem). McDowell's main electoral challenge came during the 2024 primary where he narrowly defeated former congressman Mark Walker. Walker was the true conservative in the race. McDowell faced no Democrat opposition in November, but a Constitution party candidate received 30% of the vote (which is a lot for a penniless third-party candidate) and even won the portion of the district closest to Greensboro. McDowell has been a reliable party-line voter in the House so far, but it's early yet.
  
  
• Dan Bishop, former 2½-term congressman and one of the most conservative representatives during his 6 years in D.C.; he along with Harrigan would be the most conservative Senate options if Lara Trump takes a pass. Like Murphy, Bishop was initially elected in a 2019 special election. He opted to seek higher office (NC Attorney General) in 2024 but was dragged down by the Mark Robinson Debacle and lost to liberal Democrat Jeff Jackson for that important position.
  
  
• Brad Knott, the fourth freshman congressman on this list. He represents a suburban/rural ring of territory around Raleigh. Knott's voting record is indistinguishable from that of his freshman Republican colleagues -- loyal, but not enough data to draw conclusions from yet. Knott finished second to Kelly Daughtry in the 14-way House primary in 2024. She had more money and openly supported conservative/Christian values; he had Donald Trump's endorsement and also that of Senator Ted Budd. Daughtry graciously declined the runoff election and backed Knott.

Tags:

U.S. House Senate 2026 Nebraska North Carolina

Photo credit: CPAC.org

There is more to a congressman than his voting record -- there is his role in sponsoring or facilitating legislation; his role in various committees and subcommittees; providing services for his constituents, and other duties. Only the voting record provides a significant amount of quantifiable data about where he stands on the important issues of the day. Congress takes numerous votes over the course of a year. Many votes are not even officially tabulated -- these are "voice votes" -- but others ("roll-call votes") require an explicit enumeration of the Yeas and Nays.

In 2024 there were 516 roll-call votes conducted in the U.S. House of Representatives. Many of these were on topics that are frivolous, or they pertain to issues on which the correct position is so obvious as to be almost unanimously supported by our elected representatives. Some of these frivolous or obvious votes included:


Billie Jean King Congressional Gold Medal Act for the purpose of "recognition of her courageous and groundbreaking leadership" in being a non-heterosexual female who participated in professional athletics (paving the way for today's WNBA, though we are aware of no evidence that Ms. King was a hardcore racist against Whites). Also, at the age of 29, she once beat a 55-year old man in a highly publicized tennis match.

Enhanced Presidential Security Act, which was passed in September after a few assassination attempts were made against one particular 2024 presidential candidate. Even the most Trump-hating Democrats didn't want to be on the record against this bill (it passed 405-0).

A mandate for alarmist labeling on packages of pre-moistened baby wipes, a clear-cut issue of major importance which 56 Republican meanies still voted against.


The majority of House votes each year are far from frivolous, and there are hundreds of them. Therefore it is not possible for voters to keep detailed balance sheets in their heads regarding how each congressman voted.

Various special interest organizations such as the AFL-CIO, ACLU, League of Conservation Voters, pro-abortionist groups and numerous others (not all of them are on the left) try to help their followers know which politicians they should like and which they should hate, by producing narrowly-focused ratings of congressmen every year. These groups select a tiny subset of votes which are of interest to them, and they grade members of Congress based on the percentage of the time the member's vote aligned with the wishes of the group doing the rating.

There are two groups which produce more broadly-based ratings -- Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) on the left, and CPAC (formerly known as the American Conservative Union) on the right. Neither of these organizations exactly provide up-to-the-minute data; the ADA has published one set of yearly ratings since 2021, and here in June of 2025 CPAC has finally released its ratings for 2024.

Like all other ratings organizations, both of these groups identify certain important ("key") votes and compute the percentage of the time that each congressman voted their way. CPAC selected 23 key votes which took place in the House in 2024, and has issued ratings based on those votes.

Photo credit: c-span.org

At RightDataUSA.com, we have a complete record of CPAC/ACU key votes and their results going all the way back to 1970, which is when the ACU began issuing ratings. We have also created our own ratings, based on likely ACU criteria, for the years 1961-1969 for those who are interested in ancient history.

More pertinently, we generate our own House ratings during each year, while those two higher-profile organizations do not release their data until well into the following year (if at all, in the case of the ADA). Our source for data is voteview.com, which is typically updated every few weeks and contains information on every roll-call vote taken in Congress. Aside from identifying what we consider to be key votes, we use this data to calculate Party Unity scores along with the percentage of the time each representative actually showed up for work (their Voting Percentage). An example is shown here, for Representative Elise Stefanik (R-NY)

Explanations of the various columns are provided underneath the data table. The numbers in the last two columns represent the percentage of the time which Stefanik voted liberal (according to the ADA) or conservative (according to CPAC). These numbers, for recent years, are linked to their corresponding data sets. For example, click on the number "71" in the "Conserv." column for the year 2024, and you will be taken to a page which lists all 23 CPAC key votes -- one of which was so important to them that it is double-counted -- and how Stefanik voted on those 23 issues. Her rating of "71" means that CPAC believes she voted the conservative position 71% of the time in 2024.

As noted in the explanations, the liberal and conservative figures for a year do not necessarily add to 100% because ADA and CPAC use different sets of key votes for their evaluations.

Click through to this page to see details regarding all CPAC key votes for 2024. The subject of the first one was the Biden administration exempting electric vehicle chargers from "Buy American" requirements. Stefanik voted the right way on this issue. To see how the entire House voted, click on the Result ("Passed 209-198"):

Vote Data for SJRES38 (118th Congress) Subject: Waiver of Buy American Requirements for Electric Vehicle Chargers

That page is sorted by Yeas/Nays by default, but can also be sorted alphabetically, or by party or state. A green check next to a member's name indicates that he voted the right way; a red X means that member voted the wrong way. There are pages such as this on RightDataUSA.com for every single key House vote since 1961, but probably few users have discovered them up to now.

• Economic
• Social
• Foreign

• 62.5% Economic
• 29.2% Social
• 8.3% Foreign

• 20.5% Economic
• 59.0% Social
• 20.5% Foreign

1. Denouncing the Biden administration's open-borders policies
2. Impeaching Alejandro Mayorkas, Secretary of Homeland Security
3. Extension of continuing appropriations for 2024
4. Laken Riley Act
5. Denouncing the Biden administration's immigration policies
6. Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act
7. Denouncing the Biden administration's anti-American energy policies
8. Cutting Green Corruption and Taxes Act
9. Prohibiting warrantless searches of U.S. personal communications in the FISA database
10. Renewing FISA (the FBI's tool often used against conservatives) for 5 years
11. Expanding prohibited disclosures of stored electronic communications
12. Rescinding Biden's waiver of Iran sanctions
13. End the Border Catastrophe Act
14. "Emergency" spending on Ukraine
15. Alaska's Right to Produce Act (also selected by CPAC as a key vote)
16. Reinstating Migrant Protection Protocols
17. Hands Off Our Home Appliances Act
18. Equal Representation Act (also selected by CPAC as a key vote)
19. DC CRIMES Act
20. Security assistance for Israel
21. Banning non-citizens from voting in DC elections
22. Sanctions against the International Criminal Court
23. Defense Department funding of sex change operations
24. Defense Department funding of abortions
25. Eliminating DEI in the Defense Department
26. Requiring proof of citizenship to vote
27. Finding Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt
28. Condemning "border czar" Kamala Harris for dereliction of duty
29. Obedience to the World Health Organization
30. Chinese spying and other issues pertaining to Communist China
31. No Foreign Election Interference
32. Violence Against Women by Illegal Aliens Act
33. FY 2025 continuing resolution
34. End Woke Higher Education
35. No Bailout for Sanctuary Cities
36. Accountability for key officials in the Biden-Harris administration
37. Leaking the Ethics Committee report on Rep. Matt Gaetz
38. Midnight Rules Relief Act
39. American Relief Act

Tags:

U.S. House Ratings CPAC

Not all House districts are created equally, in partisan terms. Some are designed to elect Democrats, some are designed to elect Republicans, and a comparatively small handful could go either way. When U.S. House elections roll around, as a couple of special ones did in Florida earlier this month, there is a desire to quantify districts so that people can anticipate the outcomes. Does Candidate A have any chance at all against Candidate B? How close should the race be? Could there plausibly be an upset?

Analysts often describe the direction (and degree) to which a House district leans by referring to something called a PVI, which stands for Partisan Voting Index. Here is a rare example of an unbiased and almost factual statement (which references PVIs) from a typically biased article published by a thoroughly left-wing source:

"The Cook Political Report's partisan voting index (PVI) classifies both [Florida special election] districts as Republican-favored, with FL-1 as R+22 and FL-6 as R+7."

Florida congressional district 1

Let us illustrate. Both Republicans on April 1st won easily in their respective Florida special elections, however given the lean of their districts they appear to have underachieved. This enabled the media and other Democrats to claim hollow "moral" victories in the wake of Democrat defeats, because the GOP candidates did not obliterate their liberal rivals by as much as they were supposed to.

Nevermind that at least one feverish poll in late March -- this one by the rabidly liberal "St. Pete Polls" -- was gleefully anticipating a possible actual Democrat victory in FL-6 and not merely a moral one. Sounds more like the Democrat was really the true underachiever in that case, seeing as how he ended up losing by almost 15 points; but only if you believe polls which are published in the liberal media for no purpose other than gaslighting -- energizing Democrat voters and attempting to suppress Republican turnout. The gaslighting in Florida, along with astronomical Democrat funding by wealthy out-of-state contributors, certainly did have an effect on these outcomes.

How do we know how much the two Republicans were "supposed to" win by? The PVI of the districts tells us.

Using FL-1 as an example, its rating of R+22 does not mean "a Republican typically wins this district by 22 points". What R+22 does mean is "a Republican in this district typically does 22 points better than average". Those are hardly equivalent statements.

In any 2-way race the average is 50%. If the Republican does 22 points better than average, he gets 72% of the vote. Which means the Democrat gets 28%. The Republican therefore does not win by a margin of only 22% in a typical 2-way race in an R+22 district; he wins by 44%. Winning by only 14%, as Patronis did in FL-1, was indeed a substantial underachievement. Sub-par Republican performance is a regular occurrence in special elections and, as we have pointed out many times, does not necessarily portend anything for the future. Neither FL-1 nor FL-6 are suddenly lurching leftward, and even the Democrats know it.

Florida congressional district 6

Randy Fine won FL-6 (PVI of R+14) by exactly 14 points, which sounds like a precisely typical result there. But R+14 does not mean the Republican should win by 14%; it means the Republican should win by 28%. So yeah, another "moral defeat" (LOL) for the GOP. Once again, this outcome is not a harbinger of future performance. In November of 2026 the GOP will win that district every bit as easily as it usually does, and Democrats will not be pissing $10 million of billionaires' money down the drain as they did a few weeks ago, no matter how easily they can afford to do so.

• 2020 presidential election result in the district
• 2024 presidential election result in the district

Map of 2026 battleground districts, created using mapchart.net

First, a note about the most competitive districts: Battleground districts are highlighted in the map above and in the table of all House districts which appears further down this page. It is unusual for a House member to win election in a district which tilts 6 points or more towards the opposite party although it does occasionally happen, so we define a "battleground" district as one in the range from D+5 through R+5. When upsets occur in House elections, they normally take place in these marginal districts, and therefore aren't truly "upsets".

Twelve House districts flipped (switched from one party to the other) in the 2024 House elections, not counting those flips which were solely caused by 2024 redistricting. We omit the court-ordered gerrymandered Democrat victories in AL-2 and LA-6. We also exclude the three North Carolina districts in which Democrats were replaced by Republicans after the N.C. Supreme Court discarded a couple of Democrat gerrymanders and allowed the state legislature to handle the drawing of the district map in accordance with state law. The previous Democrat-controlled court had appropriated that task for itself in 2020 and 2022. Here are our ratings for the other 12 flippers:

• AK-at large (went from D to R): R+5
• CA-13 (R to D): even
• CA-27 (R to D): D+2
• CA-45 (R to D): even
• CO-08 (D to R): D+1
• MI-07 (D to R): D+2
• NY-04 (R to D): D+5
• NY-19 (R to D): D+1
• NY-22 (R to D): D+4
• OR-05 (R to D): D+2
• PA-07 (D to R): D+1
• PA-08 (D to R): even

• AZ-01 (Schweikert): D+1
• AZ-06 (Ciscomani): D+2
• CA-21 (Valadao): D+1
• ME-02 (Golden): R+3
• MI-10 (James): D+1
• NE-02 (Bacon): D+2
• NH-01 (Pappas): R+2
• NH-02 (Goodlander): R+1
• NY-17 (Lawler): D+4
• OH-09 (Kaptur): R+1
• PA-01 (Fitzpatrick): D+3