RightDataUSA

Demographics and Elections Commentary tagged with New

11/17/2025: Senate Prospects For 2026: Part One, The Flippables [RightDataUSA]

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.



It is not the same in the Senate, where an entirely different set of Senate seats from 2018 will be contested in 2026, and that makes specific comparisons to 2018 impossible. Members of the "Class of 2018" completed their six-year terms in 2024; it is the "Class of 2020" which is up next year. Only one incumbent Senator who was elected in 2018 -- Mississippi Republican Cindy Hyde-Smith -- will be on the ballot again in 2026. That's because her 2018 win took place in a special election for a 2-year term.

Unlike 2018, 2020 was not a good year at the Senate level for the GOP. They suffered a net loss of 3 seats, turning their 53-47 majority into a 50-50 tie which was broken by the newly-elected Democrat Vice President. The Republican majority was still intact (52-48) in November; GOP control wasn't actually forfeited until January of 2021 when Democrats won two runoff elections in Georgia. Republican incumbents had lost in two other states (Arizona, Colorado) in November but the GOP picked up Alabama.



Democrats tried to purchase a much better Senate result than merely +3 in 2020, spending ungodly amounts of money in losing efforts in states such as Alaska, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, North Carolina and South Carolina (outspending the victorious GOP candidate in every one of them). That was in addition to the ungodly amounts of money the Democrats spent in their winning efforts. According to OpenSecrets.org, Democrats in the 2020 general election spent over $1.1 BILLION dollars to acquire control of the Senate, an amount of money 60% higher than Republicans could come up with.

Campaign finance will be a recurring theme in the 2026 previews below, with Democrats just about 100% guaranteed to obtain more money than their Republican counterparts in every state where there is even the slightest chance that Democrats can compete -- -- unless the Democrats and their "ActBlue" money laundry are finally forced to obey the same campaign finance rules that Republicans have to live by.


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.



Liberal former congressman Wiley Nickel was the first to jump in on the Democrat side, but he was merely a placeholder until phony moderate ex-Governor Roy Cooper made his decision to go for the Senate. To nobody's surprise, Cooper declared his candidacy in late July and within hours received millions of dollars in possibly-legal campaign donations. The latest financial reports from the FEC show Cooper with nearly 8x the amount of cash as Whatley. Cooper will probably eventually raise and spend at least $100 million here; Whatley will never get close in that department.

Though out of office for nearly a year now, Cooper is still very popular in the Tarheel State -- at least with the liberal media, who never tire of reporting how popular Cooper is. For all his alleged popularity, Cooper's electoral record isn't very impressive in this closely-divided "purple" state. He was sufficiently well-liked to win 4 terms as state Attorney General, but his percentages as Governor were 49.0% in 2016 and 51.5% when being re-elected in 2020.

Cooper's first gubernatorial win was aided by hysteria over the so-called "Bathroom Bill" which was passed by the Republican-controlled North Carolina legislature and signed by Republican Governor Pat McCrory in 2016. A bathroom bill is legislation that protects the safety and privacy of girls and women in public bathrooms against intrusion by boys or men who claim (or pretend) to be transgendered. You can understand why Democrats would be indignant about something like that.

The liberal media concocted some figures purporting to show that the bill would cost North Carolina a hillion jillion dollars in lost revenue because woke companies (like PayPal and Adidas) and woke organizations (like the NCAA) would pull out of the state. The 2016 gubernatorial election turned on this single issue, with Cooper supporting the efforts of Organized Deviancy and McCrory supporting common sense. Common sense was defeated that November, 49.0% to 48.8% with a Libertarian spoiler taking enough votes from McCrory to hand the win to the Democrat without a majority. The Republican legislature caved early in 2017 and repealed the bill.



Cooper's far-left stance on most issues is well-known to North Carolina voters despite the best efforts of the media. Republican Lt. Governor Dan Forest challenged Cooper in 2020, but lost by 4.5%. Forest was banking on voter disapproval of Cooper's authoritarian tactics during the COVID plandemic, but the voters weren't disapproving enough. Natural (or even laboratory-made) disasters seem to work in favor of Democrats in North Carolina despite that party's inept or ham-fisted approach to the problems; for example, the inept and even criminally negligent response to Hurricane Helene in 2024 -- Joe Biden's FEMA refusing to help people who had "Trump" signs in their yards (they did the same thing in Florida too), and local Democrats' relief efforts discriminating against Whites -- was supposed to be a boon for the GOP in that year's elections; Trump did win the state, but the most-affected areas in Western North Carolina actually moved to the left. Trump's win was a close one, and other Republicans on the ballot received no boost at all from the Democrats' mishandling of the hurricane aftermath.

Speaking of disasters, Whatley is likely to help fulfill the media's mission of making Cooper look more popular than ever. The Republican nominee will be grossly underfunded and largely uninspiring to the voters. Early polls are exactly as one might expect: Cooper with a lead but running under 50% for now. At least 10-15% of the electorate is still undecided, which is also what one might expect. This race is, and always has been, Cooper's to lose.

Another potential dire consequence is this: if Whatley loses convincingly next November, there are several Republican House incumbents in North Carolina who could go down with him because most GOP districts in the state are either in the tossup range or very close to it.


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.



5. New Hampshire:

Seventy-eight-year-old Democrat Senator Jeanne Shaheen is ending her political career in 2026 after 6 years as New Hampshire Governor followed by 18 years in the Senate. After her 3 terms in Concord her string of election wins was interrupted in 2002 when she ran against incumbent Senator Bob Smith. Only it turned out that Smith wasn't her #1 opponent that year after all -- Smith lost in the primary to congressman John E. Sununu who, despite being outspent by both Shaheen and Smith, won just over 50% of the vote in the 2002 Senate election. He was the youngest member of the Senate during his term.

Shaheen won the rematch 6 years later and held the Senate seat for two more terms after that. Sununu had been out of politics since his 2008 defeat, but he's back for another go at it.

Do not confuse this Sununu with his younger brother Chris, who is the former Governor of New Hampshire (2017-2024). Also do not confuse him with his father John H. Sununu, who was George H.W. Bush's Chief of Staff. That Sununu is the one who gave us John Souter as a Supreme Court justice and who convinced his employer that "read my lips, no new taxes" was somehow not a good idea and shouldn't be taken literally. Sununu's employer's reward for following that advice was a trip to the unemployment line after 1992.


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.



Just as Sununu had to face an experienced senator (Bob Smith) in the GOP primary during his first run for that office in 2002, he will be facing another one in 2026 -- ex-Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown, who was a fluke winner in 2010 to replace the deceased Teddy Kennedy. Brown won 52% of the vote against Democrat Attorney General Martha Coakley. How repugnant do you have to be to lose to a Republican in Massachusetts? Coakley's done that twice. Brown started off as a moderate in the Senate, but even running hard to the left was not enough to save him in 2012. Brown did run well ahead of Mitt Romney in Massachusetts that year, and in both of his Senate races he showed an ability to run neck-and-neck against Democrats in terms of campaign cash.

Brown relocated to the north by 2014 and ran again for Senate in his new home state of New Hampshire. In that year's crowded GOP primary, one of the defeated candidates was good old (age 73) Bob Smith again. Brown came reasonably close to defeating Shaheen, but this time he was conclusively outspent and that was a major factor, as of course were the "carpetbagger" allegations though Brown was actually born in New Hampshire. Bob Smith, by the way, is still around and has endorsed Brown for 2026.

Instead of attacking each other too much (yet), both Sununu and Brown are training their artillery mainly on presumptive Democrat nominee Chris Pappas, who is currently the congressman from New Hampshire's 1st District. Pappas is in his fourth term and, like so many other liberal Democrats who seek higher office in states which are not solid "blue", has suddenly pretended to discover moderation after being nearly a 100% party-line liberal vote prior to 2025.

Sununu, who only jumped into the race recently, is the current favorite for the GOP nomination and matches up better against Pappas in general election polling. New Hampshire is about as closely divided a state as there is, but Democrats always seem to eke out victories and 2026 isn't likely to be any different. This race is definitely a toss-up, but there's a strong likelihood that the Republican will be the one getting tossed (out), albeit not by a very large amount.


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.



Brown's luck -- but not his money -- finally ran out in 2024. Brown and the Democrat Money Machine spent over $100 million to repurchase his Senate seat, but Republican Bernie Moreno was able to ride Trump's coattails to a 3.6% win after trailing in all polls until October. Moreno, though outspent 4:1 and overwhelmed by Brown's advertising presence in all types of media, won every Ohio county except the urban ones, one suburban county (Lorain) near Cleveland, and the academic wasteland of Athens County (University of Ohio). Moreno prevailed by over 200,000 votes in all.

With Ohio Democrats having nowhere else to turn in 2026 -- ex-congressman Tim Ryan declined and so did a couple of ghetto congresswomen -- Brown was tabbed to try to regain the Senate seat he occupied as recently as a few months ago. Ryan had run for the Senate in 2022 against Vance and suffered a humiliating loss despite having the usual astronomical cash and media advantages which accrue to Democrats even in GOP states.



It's not quite accurate to say that Ohio Democrats had nobody else willing and (financially) able to oppose Jon Husted. A Cleveland-area millionaire Democrat named Fred Ode jumped into the Democrat primary back in August and prepared to invest $5 million of his own money to show he was serious. Ode entered the Democrat primary because he feels that "old-school" Democrats like Sherrod Brown are not filled with sufficient hatred of Donald Trump and all other Republicans. For that reason, Ode believed that someone like Brown was unlikely to win against Husted next year. Ode definitely has a point about hatred being the ultimate motivator for Democrat voters (or have we already forgotten the election results from earlier this month?).

However just a few days ago Ode suddenly and mysteriously aborted his campaign which was still in its first trimester. Clearly angry (apparently as usual for him), Ode still did not give a reason. Perhaps Ode made his decision after finding a decapitated horse's head in his bed one morning? The Democrat establishment is every bit as capable of hatred and violence as the insurgents from the far left. Radicalism may work well for Democrats in New York City and California and (soon) Maine or even Texas -- and don't forget Virginia now -- but not necessarily in middle-America, apple-pie Ohio. Democrat leaders feel that their chances in Ohio are much better with Brown than with Ode or someone like him.



For 2026, early polls showed Husted moderately ahead of Brown but recent Democrat-leaning polls have it pretty much a tie. Ohio, along with Maine and North Carolina, could flip from R to D next year and result in a 50-50 tie for the Republicans in the Senate if those losses are not offset elsewhere. Any additional Republican losses in the Senate would hand control to Democrats. With the Senate almost within their grasp, Democrat billionaires will be tossing around campaign cash like never before, and things like a Republican being outspent only by a margin of 4:1 will seem quaint.


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.


On the GOP side in Texas in 2026, we'll have incumbent senator John Cornyn vs. state Attorney General Ken Paxton vs. congressman Wesley Hunt. On the left, we'll have ex-congressman Collin Allred (back for a second try at higher office) vs. state House member Holy James Talarico. A late addition to the tag team could be congresswoman Jasmine Crockett, the self-appointed moral voice of the shrieking, hysterical (but dominant) wing of the Democrat party, and darling of the radical-left media. She believes herself to be the Texas version of AOC, and presumably considers that designation a complement.

Crockett already has raised at least $6.5 million (which is more than Talarico or Allred have done), and that's far more money than necessary for her to run in some little House district which is rated at least D+10 and will have no viable GOP alternative. It certainly looks like she's running for the Senate, but we'll have to wait to find out for sure. Queen Latifah Crockett has declared that she will make her solemn pronouncement at the filing deadline, which is December 8.

What reason would there be for her to not run for Senate? Aside from avoiding the risk of losing in the Senate primary, Crockett may realize that another easy House win in her district -- combined with the reasonable likelihood of Democrats taking control of the House after 2026 -- would give her a position of greater power and perhaps a juicy committee chairmanship. Worst-case scenario for Crockett is that she loses the Senate primary, is out of Congress starting in 2027, but then is hired by "The View", which obviously can never have enough shrill, unattractive women on its panel.


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.



Senator Cornyn is a squish but he is always a well-funded one. The 73-year-old has been in the Senate since 2003. He compiled a conservative voting record during his first two terms, but now has become so unreliable (i.e. "moderate") that he was actually eligible to apply for the job of Senate Majority Leader after Mitch McConnell stepped aside. No true conservatives need apply for that position, which was won by John Thune in a November, 2024 secret ballot of GOP senators. The outcome was said to be close. Cornyn has been in a panic throughout 2025, awkwardly trying to appear conservative (at least through next March's primary), furiously raising money and becoming more popular with the media as he and his allies toss allegations at his closest challenger, Ken Paxton.


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


11/13/2025: An Electoral S.A.T. Math Question: "2025 Is To 2017 As 2026 Is To ____ ?" [RightDataUSA]

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?



"Unimportant". . . "Not a big deal":

Virginia, like some other solid "blue" states, is considering congressional re-redistricting. Virginia Democrats, soon to be in complete control of state government, would like to imitate California and disenfranchise Republicans via extreme gerrymandering. The results from last Tuesday surely embolden those Democrats. A small minority of New York City voters just elected a radical alien socialist as mayor. Tell the good people of California, Virginia and New York City that these results are "not a big deal".

But the tiny, fragile twig that GOP pundits are seriously attempting to hang their hats on is this one:

These results mean nothing for the future because "things change", "twelve months is an eternity in politics", blah blah blah.

Platitudes, wishful thinking and other drivel are a poor substitute for actual analysis. On this website, we look at data rather than "feels". With the results from 2025 being so uncannily similar to the ones from 2017, it would be idiotic not to examine the results from 2018 and see how they might be pertinent to the upcoming 2026 midterms even if those midterms are "an eternity" away at this moment.

The similarity of 2017 to 2025 is parallel to the relationship between 2016 and 2024. In 2016 Donald Trump won the presidency with 304 electoral votes and took 30 states. He won 45.9% of the popular vote. In 2024 Trump won the presidency again, this time with 312 electoral votes and 31 states (adding Nevada). He received 49.7% of the popular vote, the improvement coming not at the expense of his Democrat opponent but from the deterioration of third-party candidates, whose vote share was 4% less in 2024 than it had been in 2016. Kamala Harris actually took a greater percentage of the popular vote (48.2%) than Hillary Clinton had (48.0%).

The parallel doesn't quite carry over to the House, where Republicans were in much better shape after 2016 than they are after 2024 (a net loss of 21 seats). But that's mainly because of what happened in 2018 -- which is the whole point here -- with the GOP losing many seats. Those losses were only partially offset in 2020 and 2022. After 2016 Republicans controlled the Senate by 52-48. After 2024 they now have a 53-47 advantage. That's pretty similar.

Having compared 2024 to 2016, let's now shift one year and consider 2025 vs. 2017. Because 2021 was a significant factor in the false optimism which accompanied future elections in New Jersey and Virginia, we will show data for that year as well.

2017:
  • 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

Adding to the false hope in NJ was Trump losing by "only" 5.9% in 2024 and Curtis Bashaw losing by only 9.7% for the Senate. Also there was a voter registration shift to the right, a net change of 100K between 2022 and 2024, but the Rats were still up 900K (13.5%). In 2025 things improved, with the GOP being down 855K and 12.9%. Whoopee. As far as the 2025 elections in New Jersey were concerned, that wasn't false hope -- that was no hope. Turnout helped Republicans overcome some of their disadvantages in NJ in 2021 (registration deficit and state-level gerrymander) but things would return to normal in 2025 despite the indications from some occasionally cheery -- but sadly inaccurate -- pre-election polls.

In Virginia there was an actual basis for hope after 2021 -- for a little while. There are no partisan voter registration stats to go by, however the election results were so encouraging that Republicans were expecting further gains in 2023 and 2024. In 2023 they failed to pick up the one state Senate seat they needed to get to 20-20 (GOP Lt. Governor would break the tie), and they lost 3 seats in the state House of Delegates, which was the exact number required to lose the House, giving Democrats full control of the state legislature and derailing any agenda GOP Governor Glenn Youngkin may have had.

In 2024 Trump reduced his deficit from 10.1% to 5.7%, but his margin of defeat (260,000 votes) was still the second-worst of any GOP candidate in Virginia history, second only to Trump in 2020. Even in percentage terms it was the worst (aside from 2020) of any GOP nominee since Goldwater in '64. False hope extended to the 2024 senatorial campaign of Republican Hung Cao, whose 2022 showing as a House candidate in CD-10 was considered to be impressive. He lost by merely 6.5% that year in a district which was designed to give the Democrat a 10-12 point win. Whoopee again. Many delusionals thought that Cao could keep it close against Timmy Kaine in 2024, but few polls ever had him within single digits. Cao "overachieved" again. He only lost by 9 points.

There was no false hope regarding GOP chances in Virginia in 2025; there was no hope at all aside from perhaps the Attorney General race. Polls showed a tossup but it turned out that a majority of Virginia voters agreed with the Democrat candidate on the pertinent topic of slaughtering Republicans and their children.

2025:
  • 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)

Republicans can be thankful for the lack of state Senate contests in NJ and VA in November, 2025; they couldn't lose more seats there if there weren't any elections.


2025 New Jersey gubernatorial results by region:

Region 2021 Gov 2024 Pres 2025 Gov
R% D% R% D% R% D%
South 48.9% 50.3% 44.8% 53.4% 42.2% 57.2%
Central 42.2% 56.8% 40.8% 56.2% 35.8% 63.5%
West 58.7% 40.4% 53.4% 44.3% 52.4% 47.0%
Coast 62.9% 36.3% 60.7% 37.5% 60.4% 39.2%
North 47.1% 52.2% 47.9% 49.4% 43.7% 55.7%
Ghetto 29.2% 69.9% 32.1% 65.6% 26.2% 73.1%

The above results for the 2025 Governor election are of course still unofficial (data as of 11/10) but are at least 95% complete in most counties. We defined the regions of New Jersey here: November 2025 Gubernatorial Elections -- New Jersey & Virginia.

The Republican percentage of the vote collapsed to pre-2021 levels in all regions, even if not quite (in some areas) as bad as the GOP percentages from 2017 . Only in the Central Coast area did Jack Ciattarelli compare favorably at all to his results from 2021. In every other region of the state he finished well behind not only his surprisingly competitive 2021 performance but also behind Trump's mediocre showing in 2024. GOP results in the critical (and supposedly right-trending) northern part of New Jersey were especially disappointing. South Jersey was also a disaster for Ciattarelli. He had come barely one point away from winning that region in 2021 but lost it by a whopping 15 points last week. As we predicted, turnout in the ghetto areas of New Jersey returned to normal from the 2021 dropoff. That certainly wasn't good news for the Republican, but his problems were hardly confined to the worst areas of the state. Also, slightly-improving voter registration figures apparently aren't a guarantee of electoral success -- especially when those voters decline to participate.


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.



An ongoing story throughout 2018 was the number of Republican incumbents in the House of Representatives who suddenly decided that they would not seek re-election in November. There were 23 Republicans who declined to run again for any office, and 11 other House Republicans who chose to run for a different office. Many of these 34, such as former House Speaker Paul Ryan, were anti-Trump moderates or liberals in marginal districts who were content with the prospect of potentially being replaced by Democrats.

When trying to explain the debacle which resulted that November, with the GOP losing 40 House seats, the voluntary exodus was a convenient excuse albeit a false or at least incomplete one. Of the 34 Republicans who walked away in 2018, only 10 of them were replaced by Democrats. That's a considerable number, but a far cry from 40.

The far bigger reason for the Republican party demise was the 30 incumbents who ran for re-election and lost. Seven of the total of 40 GOP losses occurred in California, which had just legalized a new form of Democrat electoral chicanery known as "ballot harvesting". That tactic allows ballots to be collected and counted for weeks after election day. Of the 7 Republican seats which evaporated in CA, at least 5 of them required "extra time" for the Democrat to eventually prevail.

In 2018 the Real Clear Politics generic congressional polling final averages were GOP 44.9%, Democrat 53.3%. That polling could hardly have been more accurate -- after all the ballots were finally counted, the House vote share was GOP 44.8% (was 49.1% in 2016), Democrat 53.4% (was 48.0% in 2016). In case you're wondering about 2026 at this point, the current RCP congressional polling averages are GOP 42.0%, Democrats 46.1%. There are still lots of undecideds 12 months out from the election, but that 42.0% mark is abysmal. The whistlers past the graveyard now have another data point to ignore if they intend to remain adamant that 2026 can't possibly be as bad as 2018 was.


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.



Here, at last, is how the playing field stands as we head into 2026:

Before we look at the prospects for the House in 2026, let's quantify what happened in 2018. In 2018 there were 80 districts (out of 435) across the nation which we would classify as marginal -- being in the range of D+5 to R+5. Those 80 are worth examining because they were the districts most likely to change hands. During any kind of "wave" election, as we saw in 2018, obviously more of them will change hands. Districts which are outside the marginal range are normally considered safe unless there is a wave of unusual intensity or there are other circumstances which make an incumbent vulnerable despite the lean of his district.

Some facts about those 80 marginal districts in 2018:
  • 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

Additionally, Republicans lost 8 House seats which were not in the marginal range and were assumed to be at least moderately safe. Six of those 8 districts saw GOP incumbents bite the dust; only 2 were open seats (one more dagger in the feeble "we lawst just coz of all the re-tyre-mints!" argument).

The above data illustrates the impact of the 2018 "blue" wave in the House. Even though the 80 marginal districts tilted slightly to the right on average, Republicans still managed to lose 61 of the 80. And on top of that the 8 others which were supposed to be safe-ish. That's what a massacre looks like, so you'll recognize it if you see one again in 2026.



As noted, the "marginal playing field" was tilted towards the Republicans in 2018. If the parties had won every tossup district in which they were favored and then split the 10 even districts, Republicans won have won 53 out of those 80 districts instead of just 19 of 80, a difference of 34 seats. Give the GOP 34 more House seats in 2018 (they would've had control, 234-201) and suddenly the second half of Trump's first term looks a lot different.

We have looked at all House districts for 2026, factoring in new maps in Texas, Missouri, Ohio, North Carolina and California and we are assuming they are not overturned in court prior to ever being used. Try to look surprised when the partisan Democrat gerrymander in California passes judicial muster but Republican maps elsewhere do not.

A new Democrat gerrymander was just approved on November 11 by a liberal judge in heavily-Republican Utah, which creates two more marginal districts (not being counted here yet) and very well could cause two Republicans to lose in 2026.

In Utah.

Pending upcoming Democrat gerrymanders which are still on the drawing board in states like Virginia, Maryland, Illinois and Colorado, and pending the much-anticipated Supreme Court ruling which may remove the requirement for certain states to create anti-White districts, here is how the House battleground is taking shape for 2026:

There are currently 91 House districts which fall into the D+5 to R+5 range according to our ratings. We count 41 of those districts as having GOP incumbents and 41 with Democrat incumbents. The remaining 9 districts have no incumbent running, and that number will increase over the next few months. Including currently open seats, Republicans must defend 45 districts and Democrats 46. That's about as even a breakdown as can be.

District PVI Incumbent Party
AK-00 R+5 Nick Begich III R
AL-02 D+3 Shomari Figures D
AZ-01 D+2 open R
AZ-02 R+4 Eli Crane R
AZ-06 D+2 Juan Ciscomani R
CA-48 D+2 Darrell Issa R
CO-03 R+3 Jeff Hurd R
CO-08 D+1 Gabe Evans R
CT-02 D+3 Joe Courtney D
CT-05 D+2 Jahana Hayes D
FL-09 D+5 Darren Soto D
FL-14 D+5 Kathy Castor D
FL-15 R+5 Laurel Lee R
FL-23 D+4 Jared Moskowitz D
FL-27 R+3 Maria Salazar R
GA-02 D+5 Sanford Bishop D
IA-01 R+2 Mariannette Miller-Meeks R
IA-02 R+3 open R
IA-03 even Zach Nunn R
IL-06 D+5 Sean Casten D
IL-14 D+5 Lauren Underwood D
IL-17 D+3 Eric Sorensen D
IN-01 D+4 Frank Mrvan D
KS-03 D+4 Sharice Davids D
KY-06 R+2 open R
MD-06 D+2 April Delaney D
ME-02 R+3 open D
MI-03 D+4 Hillary Scholten D
MI-04 R+3 Bill Huizenga R
MI-07 D+2 Tom Barrett R
MI-08 D+2 Kristen McDonald-Rivet D
MI-10 D+1 open R
MN-01 R+4 Brad Finstad R
MN-02 D+3 open D
MN-08 R+5 Pete Stauber R
MT-01 R+3 Ryan Zinke R
NC-01 R+3 Don Davis D
NC-03 R+4 Greg Murphy R
NC-07 R+4 David Rouzer R
NC-09 R+5 Richard Hudson R
NC-11 R+3 Chuck Edwards R
NE-01 R+5 Mike Flood R
NE-02 D+2 open R
NH-01 R+2 open D
NH-02 R+1 Maggie Goodlander D
NJ-02 R+5 Jeff Van Drew R
NJ-03 D+5 Herb Conaway D
NJ-05 D+3 Josh Gottheimer D
NJ-07 R+2 Tom Kean, Jr. R
NJ-11 D+5 open D
NM-02 D+1 Gabriel Vasquez D
NM-03 D+5 Teresa Fernandez D
NV-01 D+4 Dina Titus D
NV-02 R+5 Mark Amodei R
NV-03 D+2 Susie Lee D
NV-04 D+3 Steven Horsford D
NY-01 R+3 Nick LaLota R
NY-02 R+4 Andrew Garbarino R
NY-03 D+3 Thomas Suozzi D
NY-04 D+5 Laura Gillen D
NY-17 D+4 Mike Lawler R
NY-18 D+3 Pat Ryan D
NY-19 D+1 Josh Riley D
NY-22 D+4 John Mannion D
OH-01 even Greg Landsman D
OH-07 R+5 Max Miller R
OH-09 R+3 Marcy Kaptur D
OH-10 R+3 Mike Turner R
OH-13 D+3 Emilia Sykes D
OH-15 R+4 Mike Carey R
OR-04 D+5 Val Hoyle D
OR-05 D+2 Janelle Bynum D
OR-06 D+4 Andrea Salinas D
PA-01 D+3 Brian Fitzpatrick R
PA-07 D+1 Ryan Mackenzie R
PA-08 even Rob Bresnahan R
PA-10 even Scott Perry R
TX-09 R+3 open D
TX-15 R+2 Monica De La Cruz R
TX-23 R+5 Tony Gonzales R
TX-28 D+5 Henry Cuellar D
TX-34 even Vicente Gonzalez D
TX-35 R+3 open D
VA-01 R+5 Rob Wittman R
VA-02 R+1 Jen Kiggans R
VA-07 D+1 Eugene Vindman D
VA-10 D+5 Suhas Subramanyam D
WA-03 R+3 Marie Gluesenkamp Perez D
WA-08 D+1 Kim Schrier D
WI-01 R+1 Bryan Steil R
WI-03 R+2 Derrick Van Orden R

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.

We will cover the Senate prospects for 2026 in a commentary which will shortly follow this one.


Conclusion:

With even more re-redistricting to come, forecasting the outcome of the 2026 U.S. House elections from this far out is just a guessing game. Democrat-controlled states including (but not limited to) Virginia, Maryland, Illinois, Colorado and New York are lining up to disenfranchise Republicans further whether the law permits them to do so at this time or not. Maryland has only one GOP congressman left to be exterminated, but those other states can do much more damage. As we've mentioned, even rock-solid Republican Utah is being forced by a liberal black-robed tyrant to hand over 1 or perhaps even 2 House seats to Democrats (Utah only has 4 altogether).

Some Republican states, perhaps including Florida, Kansas, Nebraska and Indiana can do unto Democrats as Democrats in other states will be doing unto Republicans. But deep-"red" Indiana has already chickened out, Kansas (like Indiana and Missouri) could gain only 1 seat at most -- they all count, so don't scoff too much -- and the GOP can't gain any in Nebraska but can save one which otherwise is about to go down the toilet. Only in Florida is there the potential for a Republican state to get some "California-style" revenge on Democrats, but they could overextend themselves and wind up worse off than where they started (as could easily occur in North Carolina).

The Supreme Court may come to the rescue. Do not hold your breath waiting for that.

A case is pending, brought by a group of White voters in Louisiana who are challenging the racist congressional district map which was demanded by a judge and then used for the 2024 House elections. These disenfranchised voters are suing in an attempt to strike down a map which created a second black-majority district in their state. If the USSC rules in favor of the plaintiffs, professional racists are concerned that all racist Democrat gerrymandering everywhere -- which has been "the law" since at least the early 1990s -- will collapse, thereby eliminating several districts ("19" is the magic number they keep quoting) which are currently held by black Democrats, and those Democrats will all be replaced by White Republicans. As a result, the GOP would firm up its control of the House such that no amount of Democrat gerrymanders in California, Virginia, New York, Illinois or wherever can offset.

This is utter nonsense.

First the case has to actually be decided and the Supreme Court is in no hurry, especially in an election year; it will surely be 2026 before anything happens.

Secondly, the court has to decide the right way. Does anyone really expect there to be 5 votes for doing the right thing here? John Roberts can almost certainly be relied upon to do the wrong thing. Again.

Then there has to be sufficient time to draw new maps in the affected states. And sufficient time for the immediate Democrat lawsuits to be heard. And then those suits must be rejected so the new maps can be implemented. Good luck with all that.

And then things have to work out the way panicky Democrats fear they will. Let's take a look at how the Democrat crystal ball came up with this cockamamie number of "19" seats which they claim are in jeopardy if the USSC disallows racist (i.e. Democrat) gerrymandering in certain southern states. Remember: this stuff was never about race; it was always about partisan politics. Whenever you see the word "black" or "minority" in some racist court ruling, replace that word with "Democrat" if you want to know the truth.

As best we can guess from trying to interpret the feverish nightmares of Democrats, here are the Magic 19:
  • 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

So there you have it: 19 House seats which are currently held by black Democrats. If the recently created maps in MO and NC hold up in court, then the GOP will be +2. If the Supreme Court does the right thing and does it promptly, there is a good chance for Republicans to reclaim the two seats (AL-2, LA-6) which black-robed leftist dictators stole from them in 2024. There will be no further developments in Missouri or North Carolina. That leaves Florida and Georgia as the only hopes for inflicting some damage on the Rats. That's much easier said than done.

No matter what lies Democrats are telling about this upcoming court ruling, Republicans will never get anywhere near +19. Doing so would require them to eliminate most or all of the above districts and then create ones which will elect a Republican. And then have those district maps persist despite Democrat lawsuits. That's completely impossible, and Democrats know it. But they never fail to play the race card or the victim card whenever they can, the media swallows that shit up and then regurgitates it for the purpose of bamboozling low-info, low-intelligence voters into voting (D).



The fluctuating re-redistricting landscape is making 2026 a unique year for which to forecast House elections, and that will be true until all maps are final.

Even ignoring that factor for the moment, there is already substantial evidence to conclude that the 2026 results will mirror the results from 2018; conversely, at this time there is zero evidence (wishful thinking is not "evidence") that the 2026 results will not mimic 2018, at least as far as the general direction those results will take. To what degree that will happen is something that can't be anticipated with any precision yet. It's very possible that Congress in 2027-28 will look very much like the one from 2019-20, with Democrats -- no matter how slender their majority -- marching in lockstep in full control of the House ("Peach Mints are back on the menu immediately!") while disunited Republicans perhaps cling to nominal Senate control with a lame duck in the White House.

Tags:

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


10/24/2025: November 2025 Gubernatorial Elections -- New Jersey & Virginia [RightDataUSA]

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

West Jersey and the Central Coast are the most Republican areas of the state; together they normally cast 28-30% of the statewide vote.

Unsurprisingly, Ghetto Jersey is by far the most Democrat area of the state; it delivers about 18% of the statewide vote and gives a tremendous margin to whatever Rat is running. Of the three recent elections (2017 Governor, 2021 Governor, 2024 President) which we will be focusing on for the purpose of establishing trends, Trump did the best of any GOP candidate in this region, but still received only 32% of the vote.

Central Jersey (epitomized by places such as Trenton, New Brunswick and Princeton) is consistent in its anti-Republicanism and provides approximately a 16-point margin for the Democrat while accounting for 16-17% of the statewide vote.

South Jersey is the largest region both in land area and in number of votes. It accounts for about 22% of New Jersey's votes and can be marginal. It was heavily against Ciatarelli in 2017 but he nearly won there in 2021 before the region swung back a few points to the left against Trump in 2024.

The Urbanized North is the most marginal region now and is the one which is moving most noticeably to the right although still slightly favoring the left. It is this area which GOP analysts see as the key if they are to win in New Jersey. Republicans have recently been competitive in the 9th congressional district which lies almost entirely in this region, despite being grossly outspent and despite a Democrat gerrymander which deliberately omits the better parts of Passaic County. Ciattarelli improved here by 12 points (net) between 2017 and 2021 and Donald Trump nearly won this region, losing by only 1.5% in 2024.

Region 2017 Gov 2021 Gov 2024 Pres
R% D% R% D% R% D%
South 40.1% 57.6% 48.9% 50.3% 44.8% 53.4%
Central 40.4% 57.3% 42.2% 56.8% 40.8% 56.2%
West 56.0% 41.5% 58.7% 40.4% 53.4% 44.3%
Coast 58.2% 39.7% 62.9% 36.3% 60.7% 37.5%
North 40.5% 57.7% 47.1% 52.2% 47.9% 49.4%
Ghetto 22.7% 75.4% 29.2% 69.9% 32.1% 65.6%

The next table shows the margin of victory (or defeat, if the number is negative) by region for the GOP candidate in these three elections:

Region 2017 Gov 2021 Gov 2024 Pres
South -81,257 -8,373 -78,803
Central -60,958 -61,910 -109,316
West 38,021 61,422 46,721
Coast 63,646 121,577 162,470
North -55,546 -19,767 -9,766
Ghetto -207,433 -177,235 -263,804

Finally, the number of votes cast by region, along with the region's percentage of the statewide vote:

Region 2017 Gov 2021 Gov 2024 Pres
Votes % Votes % Votes %
South 465,678 21.7% 577,652 22.1% 915,264 21.3%
Central 361,063 16.8% 424,344 16.2% 708,761 16.5%
West 261,908 12.2% 334,158 12.8% 512,610 12.0%
Coast 342,862 16.0% 455,910 17.4% 699,631 16.3%
North 323,578 15.1% 388,855 14.9% 664,036 15.5%
Ghetto 393,936 18.3% 435,454 16.6% 787,438 18.4%

One of the keys to the near-upset in the 2021 gubernatorial election was the fact that many ghetto voters (Democrats, obviously) chose to sit that one out rather than vote for Murphy. The share of the statewide vote from Essex, Hudson and Union counties dropped nearly 2 percent. Those voters were re-energized in 2024 to vote against Trump and the statewide vote share from the 3 ghetto counties rebounded to where it had been in 2017.

Anti-Murphy apathy will not be on the ballot in a couple of weeks, but anti-Trump motivation will be -- here and everywhere else where an election is taking place (at least in "blue" areas). As was the case in the disastrous election years of 2017-18, Trump is always "on the ballot" as far as the left is concerned. Turnout in these off-year races isn't quite as meager as it is for little-publicized special elections which often take place at odd times (i.e. not November), but turnout still does not approach presidential-year levels. That means motivation, organization and money are the key factors to generating turnout; Democrats are normally substantially ahead in all 3 of those factors, and it shows.

Voter Registration:


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%)

2025:
  • 3,642,630 R (40.9%)
  • 3,811,262 D (42.8%)
  • 1,448,470 I (16.3%)

The last time Republicans achieved a 40.9% or greater share of voter registrations in a November election in PA was 2003.

This November, Pennsylvania voters will have the chance to oust 3 Democrat members of the state Supreme Court. Those members, along with their liberal colleagues, are responsible for the hyper-partisan gerrymander which has affected not only congressional districts in Pennsylvania but state legislative districts as well. These gerrymanders cost Republicans 4 U.S. House seats (and almost 2 others) from 2019-2024 and cost 12 state House seats -- exactly enough to give Democrats control. Republicans have a chance to eliminate some of the justices who caused those events to happen, and perhaps gain a majority on the PA Supreme Court in the process.


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%)

November 2024:
  • R: 1,628,633 (24.2%)
  • D: 2,534,932 (37.7%)

October 2025:
  • R: 1,670,297 (25.3%)
  • D: 2,525,346 (38.2%)

It is worth noting that a sizable number of New Jersey voters are neither Republicans nor Democrats. If the polls are correct, independents are favoring the Democrat by a substantial amount in the 2025 gubernatorial race.

Going back to 2008, Republicans have added 614,894 voters in New Jersey and Democrats have added 742,790. However the recent data is more affirmative with the GOP registering large gains during 2024 and then almost as many again in 2025. Democrat registration has been stagnant during the past two years. Will the "Presler bump" in 2025 be enough to put Ciattarelli over the top on November 4? Current polling suggests it will not. He may be fortunate to lose by only as much as he did in 2021.

Conclusion:

It is being reported, even by far-left sources, that all is not well in Camp Sherrill despite her clear lead in nearly every poll. There has also been fear that black voters and other minorities will turn out at less than their usual rate, as occurred in 2021 (spoiler alert: that isn't going to happen again in 2025). The Naval Academy cheating scandal in which both Sherrill and her husband are allegedly involved isn't resonating at all with voters and (shockingly!) isn't being covered in the so-called mainstream media.

Even lefties concede that Sherrill does not generate much enthusiasm, but the fact that New Jersey has nearly 1 million more Democrats than Republicans makes "enthusiasm" a rather moot point in the face of that landslide registration advantage. Furthermore, while comparatively few Democrat and independent voters may be excited about voting for Mikie Sherrill, they are probably quite motivated to vote against Donald Trump clone Jack Ciattarelli. Of course Ciattarelli is no such thing, but hatred is a powerful motivator for Democrats and no facts are going to be allowed to impede that hatred.

Final prediction: Sherrill prevails by 2 to 4 points, with a decent potential for an even greater margin (say, 4-6 points). We'd positively adore being wrong about this outcome, but even if she only wins by 1 then we're still not quite wrong enough.


Virginia:


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.

The candidates:


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

Taking some of these regions together, Virginia can be divided into three pieces of approximately equal electoral weight. Two of the three nearly always favor Democrats.

NOVA is of course the most Democrat-infested area, teeming with people whose livelihoods depend on the federal government taxpayer. If it were a congressional district it would be rated approximately D+17 based on recent results. It is also the most populous region, casting just under one-third of the state's votes in most elections. The large number of votes which must be counted here undoubtedly explains why NOVA is typically the last area of Virginia to report on election night, wink wink.

The portion of the state which is included in the Piedmont / Southside / Shenandoah / SW Virginia regions accounts for just under 30% of the statewide vote and gives Republicans their biggest margins of any region. The statistically insignificant (barely 2% of the vote), lightly populated Chesapeake Bay counties also support Republicans lately, by almost exactly the same percentages as obtained in the Piedmont / Southside areas.

The Greater Richmond and Hampton Roads regions together outnumber NOVA in total voters, though not by a lot. They solidly favor Democrats in most races, and if a Republican is going to win a statewide election he needs to come close to getting 50% here. Youngkin did that in 2021 (he received about 48%) but Ed Gillespie didn't in 2017 nor did Donald Trump or Hung Cao in 2024. The latter 3 GOP candidates mustered only about 42% or 43% there; Youngkin won statewide, the others did not.

Conclusion:

Unlike in North Carolina in 2024, where the unpopularity of one GOP candidate (Mark Robinson) dragged down the entire statewide Republican ticket although some Republicans won anyway, the presence of violent, feral racist Jay Jones as Democrat nominee for Attorney General has had no impact on other Virginia Democrats in 2025; in fact, Jones still retains about a 50-50 chance of winning himself according to left-wing pollsters. So any Jones Effect on the gubernatorial race which would assist Sears can likely be discounted as non-existent.

As of October 15, campaign finance reports showed that CIAbby had raked in $53.8 million and disbursed $48.4 million. The Sears campaign lags far behind, running on about half of what the Democrat has done in both of those categories. There is also a wide disparity between the two candidates in terms of remaining cash-on-hand, with about a 3:1 advantage to Spanberger as we head into the final days of the campaign.

The Lieutenant Governor race and the one for Attorney General will end up closer than the Sears-Spanberger duel, but Republicans are likely to lose at least one of those two downballot tilts, and quite possibly both. There is some chance that they could win both (while still losing for Governor), but that is less likely barring a significant change in fortunes between now and November 4.

The Virginia state Senate has been in Rat hands since they picked up the two seats they needed in 2019. It's been status quo since then, with the Republicans needing one seat to forge a tie and two to take control. With the L.G. probably going Democrat in 2025, one seat isn't going to be enough. The state Senate map for this decade has been gerrymandered to favor Democrats, and under those conditions the GOP is doing well to merely be down 21-19. A similarly gerrymandered state House map also strongly favors Democrats; again, the GOP has done well to even keep it close. The forecast for this November is not sunny for Virginia Republicans at the state legislative level, and they are going to need to overachieve a little more if there is any hope of thwarting the agenda of "Governor Spanberger". Ugh.

Tags:

2025 Governor New Jersey Virginia


7/2/2024: Virginia: Not "Good" At All; New York: Fire (Chief) Has Been Extinguished; Colorado: Democrat Manipulators Invade GOP Primaries Again [RightDataUSA]

In Virginia the results were literally "not Good", as staunch conservative Bob Good (100% lifetime ACU rating through 2023) was narrowly defeated in the CD-5 GOP primary by state Sen. John McGuire, who also purports to be a conservative. Bob Good (not to be confused with former congressman and presidential candidate Virgil Goode, who represented this same district from 1997-2008) was first elected in 2020 when he beat incumbent moderate Denver Riggleman -- who later bolted from the GOP -- at the party convention and then prevailed over black liberal Democrat Cameron Webb in the general. The national Democrat party saw to it that Webb had nearly $6 million to spend (vs. Good's barely $1 million) and dumped even more into the pot via an additional $4.6 million in "independent" expenditures against the Republican. Good fit the district reasonably well and had no trouble being re-elected in 2022.

Good is a leader of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, and was supported in his contentious 2024 primary by all the right people, including Matt Gaetz, Steve Bannon and Byron Donalds. Good has never been popular with the liberal establishment wing of the GOP however, and they had the knives out for him in much the same way as they treated another 100% conservative in Virginia -- Dave Brat -- back in 2018 (see below).


Photo credit: Evan Vucci/AP

Walking hand-in-hand with liberal GOPeers such as Kevin McCarthy this time around was a guy by the name of Donald Trump, who declared war on Bob Good because the 100% conservative congressman had violated Trump's First Commandment: "Thou shalt have no other gods before Me". Good, you see, endorsed Ron DeSantis for president over a year ago but then switched back to Trump and even went so far as to show up in person in New York City to support Trump during the former president's political persecution trial in Juan Merchan's Kangaroo courtroom.

Lord Trump was not forgiving, however, and He smote Good while waving off the Virginian's support as coming "too late".



Hillary Rodham Clinton, among her numerous repulsive traits, is petty, vengeful and unforgiving -- or worse -- to those who cross her; Vince Foster, Ron Brown and Jim McDougal were unavailable for comment on that subject. Bill had nothing to say either.

Although the Clintons do possess an "enemies list", Hillary never acted upon that list -- at least not in any way which would deprive her congressional enemies of their jobs. She did not wreak vengeance on the ultra-liberal members of her party who endorsed Barack Hussein Obama over her in 2008, nor on those who endorsed Bernie Sanders against her in 2016. That's not because Hillary has any kind of warm and forgiving side, it's because only the Stupid Party is stupid enough to deliberately sabotage those who represent its ideological and electoral base. Democrats, like Communists, always put the Party first; RINOs would rather see aggressively conservative Republicans like Bob Good defeated whenever possible. The RINOs got their wish in Virginia last month.

While Trump had his own petty reason for attempting to terminate the career of this particular conservative, the rest of the GOPe had another reason. The squishes don't find themselves allied with Donald Trump very often (but still more often than we would like), but because Good had voted to topple RINO McCarthy as Speaker last year -- and because of Good's resolutely conservative record -- the GOPe were all-in against him alongside the former president.


Photo credit: Steve Helber/AP

The backstabbing of Good was reminiscent of prior events in the Old Dominion, such as when conservative Dave Brat was abandoned by the GOPe and hung out to dry, allowing him to be outspent heavily and defeated by Abby "Deep State" Spanbarger in congressional district 7 in the anti-Trump wave election of 2018.

Brat was first elected in 2014 in a shocking primary win over Eric Cantor, a one-time conservative who became a squish after he was elevated into the GOP leadership. Cantor was the House Majority Leader when Brat stunned him and the establishment in the '14 primary. Cantor spent nearly $8 million in that primary while Brat, relying on conservative grassroots support instead of GOP party and PAC funding, raised and spent only a tiny fraction of Cantor's amount. Brat won the general election by over 20 points and was re-elected in 2016 as well. In those two terms he took the conservative position on every single key vote.

The establishment never forgave him for taking out their Golden Boy.

In 2015, partisan Democrat judges threw out the district map which had been used in Virginia since 2011 and mandated an immediate partisan Democrat gerrymander which altered several districts in the southeastern part of the state. Brat's district, based mainly in the Richmond suburbs, was one of those affected.


VA-4 results in 2014


VA-4 results in 2016

The goal of the gerrymander was to obliterate the 4th district as previously drawn (see above maps), and cause it to expel a White Republican incumbent (Randy Forbes) and replace him with a black Democrat. This was easily accomplished. However a side effect was to significantly alter Brat's 7th district, much to his detriment, as you can see from the following maps.


VA-7 results in 2014


VA-7 results in 2018

Bad areas of Chesterfield and Henrico counties in the Richmond suburbs were added to VA-7, causing their proportion of the district vote to increase to around 60% from 50%. Brat still won in 2016 fairly easily, but with a margin (15 points) that was noticeably down from what it had been in 2014 (24 points). Prior to redistricting CD-7 was rated as R+10; after redistricting it was closer to R+2. Then came the 2018 election, the district flipped from blue to red (proper color usage) where it has remained, and Brat was finished. Democrats were happy; the GOPe was elated.


Photo credit: David Zalubowski /AP

In Colorado, Lauren Boebert took the first successful step in her bid for re-election in her new district (CD-4) as she easily defeated 5 other Republicans in the June 25th primary. Boebert, the current incumbent in CD-3, did not run in the special CD-4 election to replace Ken Buck, the formerly righteous conservative who ran shrieking to the left and exited a few months ago in order to hamstring the narrow GOP House majority even further than it already was.

Boebert is forever a prime target of liberals and other haters in both parties. Because winning the primary in the heavily-Republican 4th district should be tantamount to re-election, the haters are going to have to deal with Boebert in Congress for another two years. Ha ha.

Democrats are not entirely conceding the seat, although they suffered a setback when their Chosen One, liberal Ike McCorkle, was unexpectedly defeated in the Rat primary. McCorkle had all the money he needed, and was going to wrap himself in the American flag and try to pose as a moderate, pro-military Democrat. Instead, the Dem candidate will be Trisha Calvarese; she's from the far-left wing of the party and just lost the CD-4 special election by almost 25 points. She'll almost certainly do better in November, assuming the Democrats (motivated, along with the RINOs, by their intense hatred of Boebert) feel like wasting money to achieve a 10-15 point loss instead of a 25-point landslide defeat which they can get for free.



Federal Election Commission reports concerning Colorado's 3rd district show that something called the "Rocky Mountain Values" PAC spent nearly $200K against conservative Ron Hanks, who was able to raise only $22,000 himself to fight back against the liberals -- Democrats and Republicans -- who supported his main primary opponent, moderate-liberal lawyer Jeffrey Hurd. The left-wing media claims that Rocky Mountain Values actually spent $500,000, and that the funds were spent supporting Hanks, because the PAC calculated that the conservative would be easier to beat in November. This Democrat PAC exists for the sole purpose of collecting and spending money to manipulate Republican primary outcomes in Colorado, one way or the other.

He could have had an impact, but Donald Trump was silent in the CD-3 primary race and avoided endorsing the conservative; probably because that woefully-underfunded conservative was likely to lose the primary anyway. Which he did, by about 13 points in a 6-way race; current figures show Hurd as the winner with 41.3%, to 28.5% for Hanks.

This is not the first time Democrats have openly tried to sabotage Republican primaries in Colorado. In numerous states in 2022, Democrats cleared the field for their chosen candidates in winnable statewide elections, thereby averting needlessly expensive and divisive primaries. That tactic also frees up Democrat voters who, because they have no real contests of their own to vote in, are able to cross over and manipulate the outcome of GOP primaries. Colorado state law even allows "independent" voters to participate in Republican primary elections without having to bother to re-register (no matter how temporarily) as Republicans.



In 2022, only in the Pennsylvania Senate race (among all truly contested two-party races for Governor or Senate in the entire country) did Democrats allow the possibility of an acrimonious primary election. But it never happened because all of the party's heavyweights -- and their money -- were on the side of radical leftist candidate John Fetterman instead of the slightly less liberal candidate, Conor Lamb. Lambykins was never close in any primary poll, usually not even within 20-30 points of Fetterman, so there was never any doubt as to who the winner would be and the puppetmasters could afford to let the voters appear to "decide" that election.

It's more of the same in 2024, where Democrats have once again cleared the field in every primary election where it matters, while Republicans still regularly wage war against each other in their primaries. On the GOP side the primary winner is often mortally wounded heading into the general election, and the RINOs refuse to unite with the conservatives whenever the primary voters have the temerity to select the less liberal candidate.

In no state were liberal manipulations of GOP primaries more blatant than in Colorado in 2022. Democrats, often uniting with anti-conservative Republicans, spent inordinate amounts of money to get their way.

In CD-3 in 2022, Democrats pulled out all the stops to either defeat or severely injure Lauren Boebert in her primary election against RINO Don Coram. They failed to defeat her at that time, but they were able to inflict sufficient damage which -- combined with the vast amount spent by liberal Aspen Democrat Adam Frisch, including over $2 million of his own money -- almost got the job done in November. Boebert narrowly escaped with a 50.1% to 49.9% win. Frisch spent over $6 million in all in 2022, which is chump change compared to what he and the Rats are spending in one more attempt to buy this congressional seat in 2024.

Though failing in CD-3 in 2022, Democrats did get the outcomes they wanted in the more important Governor and Senate elections in Colorado, not to mention the really important Secretary of State election. Though it is not clear why they felt the need to go to so much trouble influencing Republican primaries for offices which the Democrats were always highly likely to win regardless of who the GOP nominee turned out to be.

In the gubernatorial and senatorial Republican primary races, big-money Democrats funneled lots of $$$$ to the more conservative GOP candidates with the idea that they would be easier to defeat in a general election. The conservative who was running for Governor, Greg Lopez, was defeated in that primary by liberal Republican Heidi Ganahl, who was obliterated by almost 20 points by the incumbent Democrat rump-ranger in November. Lopez was elected to Congress last week in the special election in Colorado's 4th congressional district. His tenure in the House will be brief, as he did not choose to run for the full term which begins in 2025.

In the 2022 GOP Senate primary, the puppetmasters feared squishy Republican Joe O'Dea and tried to boost Ron Hanks -- the same Ron Hanks who ran in the 2024 primary in CD-3. Once again the string-pullers failed to drag the conservative across the finish line, but they need not have feared O'Dea -- he lost by over two touchdowns in November to the incumbent liberal Democrat. But not before those same puppetmasters invested over $16 million dollars in "independent" expenditures against O'Dea; O'Dea himself was only able to raise $10 million altogether and $4 million of that came out of his own pocket. He never had a chance, though GOP leaders talked bravely (and stupidly) about supporting him with money -- however little that amount was, it would have been much better spent on Senate races practically anywhere else, like Georgia, Arizona or Pennsylvania.

The biggest liberal coup of all in Colorado in 2022 was capturing the vital Secretary of State office, which is the office in charge of counting votes and abetting Democrat vote fraud (and helping persecute those who call it out). The GOP primary in that race was quite mysterious: How Did A Zuckerberg Charity Stooge Win A GOP Primary In Colorado? Subtitle: "Pam Anderson won a race with no money and very few visible voters".



Photo credit: NY Post

On June 25, Jamaal "Fire Chief" Bowman (D-NY) was soundly defeated in the Democrat primary in New York's 16th congressional district by Westchester County executive George Latimer (D-Israel). Bowman thus becomes the first member of the radical leftist Democrat coven known as "The Squad" to be defeated in a re-election bid.

Bowman was first elected to Congress in 2020 after he surprised 16-term incumbent Democrat Eliot Engel in the primary. No Republican bothered to run, so Bowman won 84% to 16% against a Conservative party candidate in November. The elderly incumbent lost because of being allegedly out of touch with the district, and he was thought to be insufficiently dedicated to racist causes like "Black Lives Matter"; BLM's largely-unprosecuted violence, rioting and destruction were enormously popular among the far left in 2020, in New York's 16th district and elsewhere.

The GOP did field a token candidate against Bowman in 2022, but almost no money at all was raised on her behalf, and Bowman cruised to another easy general election win (64% to 36%) although he did struggle somewhat in the primary, taking barely 50% of the vote in a 3-way race.

As the Washington Times noted while patriotic Americans were celebrating Bowman's defeat, the Congressman's antics had gotten him in mild trouble even before his racist rhetoric against Israel and his support of the Hamas terrorists after their October 7 attack.

    Known for his loud theatrics off the House floor, Mr. Bowman pulled a fire alarm in a U.S. Capitol office building in September [2023] -- a false alarm that delayed a critical spending vote that House Democrats wanted to delay. He previously endorsed 9/11 conspiracy theories and recently said reports of Hamas terrorists raping Israelis on Oct. 7 were "propaganda".

Fire Chief Bowman falsely claimed that he turned in the alarm because he was trying to open emergency doors so he could hustle to the important vote which was taking place elsewhere in the Capitol building -- a phony fire alarm is more dangerous than any alleged "crime" committed by the J6 political prisoners. Bowman was facing a six-month jail term for this stunt, but charges were quickly dropped by Washington D.C. authorities (go figure). The House Ethics Committee, which is led by GOP milquetoasts, also immediately declined to recommend any punishment for Bowman.

New York's 16th district was rated by Charlie Cook as D+25 in 2020 and D+20 after redistricting reduced the Bronx portion of the district to practically nothing; CD-16 is now contained almost entirely (~95%) within suburban Westchester County and remains utterly safe for Democrats. The new Democrat congressman from CD-16 will be just as liberal as Bowman, so don't expect any improvement there; he probably won't be as obnoxious, though.


Westchester County, NY

People who get their demographic information from television sitcom reruns may believe that Westchester County is a bastion of upscale White Republicans in a bucolic setting of well-manicured lawns and endless golf courses. To them, it must be confusing that such an area would have elected and then re-elected a black racist who is one of the most far-left Democrats in the entire House.


Photo credit: Bettmann Archive

In the early 1960's, Hollywood ultra-liberal Carl Reiner placed the main character's home in New Rochelle in "The Dick Van Dyke Show". A decade later, Hollywood ultra-liberal Norman Lear created a spinoff of "All in the Family" based around the strident liberal character of Maude Findlay. The show, called "Maude", was set in the village of Tuckahoe.

"The Dick Van Dyke Show" was generally non-political, but by the time "Maude" hit the airwaves in the early 1970's, it was fashionable in Hollywood to portray women as powerful and influential liberal shrews rather than as dowdy housewives. The writers and producers of "Maude" decided to forego entertainment in order to positively address trendy left-wing issues on a weekly basis, with the main character consistently and courageously taking unpopular (i.e., liberal) stands in supposedly ultra-conservative Tuckahoe. As with "All in the Family", Lear was shrewd enough to know that the audience would eventually balk at being fed foul-tasting medicine all of the time, so the writers of Lear's programs portrayed Maude (and Rob "Meathead" Reiner's character on AITF) as being wrong on rare occasions.


Photo credit: YouTube

When Rob and Laura Petrie and their son Richie were living in Westchester County in their early 60's sitcom world, the county was over 90% White and gladly voted for Republicans -- albeit liberal Republicans. Westchester's influence in New York elections peaked in Maude's 1970's, at which time demographic deterioration was picking up speed as refugees from New York City invaded in larger numbers. This naturally caused many of the good people of the county to flee to more distant places such as the Hudson Valley, further Upstate, or Florida, the mass exodus serving to push Westchester further left.

Formerly rock-solid Republican Westchester became Democrat-friendly territory during the 1980's and 1990's though it did support liberal GOP Governor George Pataki three times. By the early 2000's political sanity in Westchester had vanished and the area has been continuing to move ever leftward since then -- accelerating even more during the Trump years. In 2024, Whites comprise at most about 50% of the population, and voter registration figures also tell an ugly story. The once-overwhelming GOP majority disappeared for good at least 35 years ago, and Republicans now account for less than 20% of all voters in Westchester County while Democrats exceed 50%. Why did folks like Rob and Laura vote with their feet and forsake Westchester County? Because they weren't idiots, that's why.

Tags:

2024 U.S. House Virginia Colorado New York


3/4/2024: [New York] NY Dems adopt new redistricting map with no threat of GOP lawsuit, ending 3-year saga [Lohud]


Photo credit: NY "Independent" Redistricting Commission

There's considerable talk about how the Democrats played nice this time by not screwing Republicans as hard as they were expected to (i.e. as hard as possible). Doddering old NYGOP chairman Ed Cox -- yes, THAT Ed Cox, Tricky Dick's son-in-law -- believes that his party was merely bent over to a small degree, therefore he has unilaterally declared that there will be no lawsuits filed against this Democrat gerrymander.

Even though Democrats never had any reason to fear a challenge to their latest attempt to seize control of the U.S. House of Representatives, they wanted to implement a plan which would be described by the always-cooperative media as "modest" yet still be highly effective. This modest Rat plan rigs the election outcomes against the four remaining vulnerable freshmen GOP incumbents in New York as much as necessary, while mostly leaving the other districts alone. Aside from the one formerly represented by George Santos and recently lost in a special election; the Democrats are taking no chances of that district flipping back to Republican control in November.

Here is an article which reveals Democrat gaslighting regarding their New York gerrymander, with a surprisingly fair (by far-left media standards) account of the situation in between all of the usual drivel supplied by the quotes of liberal Democrats:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/02/new-york-redistricting-maps-democrats-gerrymandering-house-majority.html

Their punch line is that this gerrymander is plenty good enough for Democrats -- which it is -- and if it had been rejected and replaced by a more aggressive Democrat gerrymander authored by the state legislature, even sleepy Ed Cox would have been inspired to take action. The resulting lawsuit would have possibly required that the current (2022) district lines be used in the meantime, and even worse (for Democrats) the suit may have succeeded and caused a fairer district map to be created. By reaching just enough, but not overreaching here, liberals have greatly increased their chances of House control in 2025 despite their crocodile tears.

The significantly endangered New York freshmen Republicans are Anthony D'Esposito (CD-4), Mike Lawler (CD-17), Marc Molinaro (CD-19) and especially Brandon Williams (CD-22). They were significantly endangered even before having to deal with newly-gerrymandered districts, as we have written several times. Each of these four are cowardly liberal backstabbers -- just ask George Santos -- but at least they're our cowardly liberal backstabbers; they have R's after their names and that's a lot better than having a D there.

Well, it's a little better anyway. Maybe.



As to the argument that squishes like these guys are the best we can do in marginal or left-leaning districts, sometimes it's better to keep your enemies as far away as possible rather than letting them pretend they're "team players". They may be team players, but they aren't necessarily playing for the team whose uniform they are wearing at the moment.

For example: there's a liberal Republican stooge in the House from Pennsylvania by the name of Brian Fitzpatrick. He represents a marginal district in the rapidly-deteriorating suburbs of Philadelphia, and Democrats are so satisfied with this RINO that they don't seriously oppose his re-election bids.

Fitzpatrick's late brother Michael once served in Congress from this same district. Michael was no conservative by any means, but at least he never forgot which party he belonged to. However in 2023 there was exactly one member of the House of Representatives who voted against his own party more often than he voted with his party. That turncoat was Brian Fitzpatrick, who, over 50% of the time, voted exactly the way the Democrats wanted him to vote.

Last week, Brian came in for some flattery from the liberal media when he stated that he and several like-minded traitors in the so-called "bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus" were preparing some shenanigans to do an end-run around Speaker Mike Johnson unless the reluctant Speaker permits a vote on a bill which would send even more American money to the corrupt Democrat money-laundering regime known as "Ukraine". This must happen, so say the RINO scum, without any linkage to legislation which would address real problems of actual concern to the good people of America -- like the unabated sewage flowing north from Mexico which will adversely affect our economy and the integrity (LOL) of our elections.

If the Democrat coup is successful in November, look for this traitor to collect his 30 pieces of silver and switch over to the new majority party in the House. BTW, the filing deadline in PA has passed and Fitzpatrick has no viable primary challenger (just one woefully underfunded opponent) and the same Democrat loser who ran halfheartedly in 2022 is running again, albeit with more money this time. So "prymarry hiz azz!!!" isn't going to work this time around; it rarely ever works at all.

Speaking of liberal credentials, guess which "Republican" supported President Alzheimer the most in 2022? Actually Fitzpatrick was only second on that list. Number 1 was the late (but not lamented) drooling Trump-hater Adam Kinzinger, who supported the Biden agenda fully 80% of the time with his votes in the House.

Here are the 2023 Party Unity scores for the Dirty Dozen who top the RINO charts:

  1. Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-1): 47%
  2. Lori Chavez-DeRemer (OR-5): 64%
  3. Mike Lawler (NY-17): 65%
  4. Tom Kean, Jr. (NY-7): 67%
  5. Mike Turner (OH-10): 70%
  6. Don Bacon (NE-2): 71%
  7. Anthony D'Esposito (NY-4): 72%
  8. Young Kim (CA-40): 72%
  9. Kevin Kiley (CA-3): 72%
  10. Andrew Garbarino (NY-2): 72%
  11. Marc Molinaro (NY-19): 73%
  12. David Valadao (CA-22): 73%

By way of contrast, Santos, whom many of his GOP colleagues abhorred and voted to expel back in December, voted with his party 92% of the time in 2023. He also voted the conservative position on 91% of key votes according to our calculations, so you can see why RINOs and other liberals wouldn't want him around. We'll post Santos' American Conservative Union score along with the scores of all other Congressmen and Senators if that organzation ever gets around to releasing its 2023 ratings of Congress.

Of the 25 representatives who deviated from their party most often last year, 24 of them were Republicans. This helps explain why even with a (miniscule and getting smaller) numerical majority in the House, Republicans do not truly have "control". The same phenomenon applies in many state legislatures, particularly out West, where the GOP appears to have tremendous numerical advantages. Those tremendous advantages are often caused by Democrats masquerading as Republicans in order to get elected -- and then, to their delight, these Democrats discover that as moderates/liberals they are comfortably in line with the ideological majority in their GOP caucuses.

There was only one House Democrat in 2023, Jared Golden of Maine (72%), who was disunited from the rest of his Democrat comrades at a similar level to those Republicans who are listed above. He represents a Republican-leaning district which voted twice for President Trump but has also voted 3 times for Golden. Between his ability to fool a sufficient number of constituents into thinking that he's a moderate, and having Rigged Choice Voting around to save him when necessary, Golden has managed to be continually re-elected.

Maybe that will change when he faces former NASCAR driver and current freshman Maine legislator Austin Theriault in November. Don't get your hopes up too high though; Golden currently has nearly 5 times the amount of money as his Republican challenger. As anyone who looks at candidate financial reports can easily discern, there's not a House district or Senate seat in the U.S. where Democrats can't outspend Republicans by incredible margins if they want to. We're probably going to see more evidence of that in 2024 than ever before.

Tags:

2024 U.S. House New York Democrat gerrymander Say goodbye to Speaker Johnson


1/19/2024: [New York] Third District Poll: Democrats with Edge to Pick up Congressional Seat [Emerson]


Photo credit: WABC

On Thursday, Emerson College released numerous 2024 election polls including one for the mid-February special election in New York's 3rd Congressional District. That election was necessitated when freshman Republican George Santos was expelled from Congress last December at the behest of his own party, so as not to serve as a distraction from Republican efforts (to lose?) in November.

The special election pits liberal Democrat Thomas Suozzi, a former Congressman, against Nassau county legislator Mazi Melesa Pilip. Suozzi opted to run for Governor in 2022 rather than seek re-election to the 3rd district; Suozzi knew full well that he had zero chance of winning the Democrat gubernatorial primary, and finished a dismal 3rd with only 13% of the vote. So why did he even run?

Pilip has a fascinating background: she is of Ethiopian-Israeli descent and moved from Ethiopia to Israel at the age of 12. She later joined the Israeli Army as a paratrooper. She is the mother of 7 children and immigrated from Israel to Great Neck (Long Island). Although allegedly still a registered Democrat, she ran on the Republican and Conservative tickets in 2021 and won a seat in the Nassau County legislature in a heavily Democrat district.

The Emerson poll, which was taken from January 13-15, has Suozzi only narrowly ahead of Pilip, 45% to 42% among registered voters. However: among likely voters Suozzi's margin increases to 14 points (51% to 37%). This reflects typical Democrat motivation and organization in an important special election, and reflects typical lack of same in the Republican party.



As if to prove the above statement, national Democrats wasted no time in fundraising or attacking the Republican candidate. It was announced in early January that the Rats had purchased $5.2 million worth of local advertising, and in fact ads supporting Suozzi (and hating Pilip) are saturating the airwaves; in contrast, national Republicans had reserved the paltry sum of $0.2 million in advertising as of January 2.

The local liberal media has rolled out the red carpet for Suozzi by offering to schedule and broadcast as many as four rigged debates in his favor. Pilip has astutely declined most of the invitations to those "gotcha" sessions.

Recent history: After liberal Democrats had been in control locally in Nassau County for years, Republicans began to claw their way back in 2021. In 2022 they captured all four Long Island congressional districts including the two Democrat-oriented districts in Nassau County (CD-3 is one of those). In 2023 Republicans reclaimed all significant county-level offices on Long Island, and so would appear to have momentum there.

Santos was expelled from Congress mainly because his skittish New York colleagues feared he would break that momentum and cause their fluke victories in 2022 to be reversed in 2024. That's very likely to happen anyway and always was likely, Santos notwithstanding. Even if George Santos had never existed in Congress, a GOP bloodbath in New York in 2024 was inevitably in the cards based on the narrow upset outcomes in 2022 in several districts, and a new hyper-partisan Democrat gerrymander which will be implemented before November.



Many have suggested that we never should have reached this point, and the GOP should have supported Santos instead of shunning him -- just like the Rats support their sleazebags (such as Senator Menendez) no matter what.

They support them unless there's something to be gained by a "loss" like when they jettisoned Al Franken (D-MN) in 2017, knowing he would definitely be replaced by another Democrat. Then the Rats could virtuously claim that all other Democrats in office were squeaky clean while they slandered Republican judge Roy Moore who was running for the Senate in Alabama at the time (and lost). Moore faced similar allegations to Franken. The difference is that the charges against Moore were false. Five years after that election, far too late, Moore won his defamation lawsuit.

Comparing the Santos situation to Menendez is apples and oranges. If Menendez goes, the liberal Democrat Governor of New Jersey immediately appoints a liberal Democrat replacement (just like what happened in Minnesota with Franken) and New Jersey then compliantly votes for a Democrat whenever the special election comes around. There is nearly zero risk if the Rats ever do the right thing and throw Menendez into the nearest dumpster.

However when Santos left, it opened up a valuable House seat in a district that voted for Biden by 8 points in 2020 (using current district lines), and one where Democrats outnumber Republicans by 11%. There's considerable risk that Santos will be replaced by a Democrat, but the liberal GOP establishment calculated that there was greater risk in allowing Santos to remain. For every Democrat crime that comes to light (rare though such exposure is), the leftists could always say "Oh yeah, but what about Santos???"



More polling details: Biden is hideously unpopular in NY-3 (59% disapproval, 26 points under water) and Governor Hochul (66% disapproval) fares even worse. People in this district wouldn't cross the street to spit on her if she were on fire. Actually, that might be fun to see. However, the one politician who is way more unpopular than both of those is Santos (83% unfavorable rating).

This election is meant to be a referendum on Santos. Period.

The GOP candidate is a good one, and Suozzi probably inspires about as much enthusiasm as Basement Biden does though he does have name recognition, tons of money and lots of hateful (but influential) ads running 24/7. If the current polls are accurate to any degree, instead of an 85% chance of losing this seat, maybe the probability of Republican defeat is down to around 65% now?

The media and other liberals insist that the voters in New York's 3rd Congressional District be ashamed of their earlier election of Santos and demand that those voters cleanse their consciences by going for the Democrat this time around and in November as well. We'll see in about a month if they obey those demands.

Will a plurality of the voters (however slight that plurality might be) let this election outcome be what the Democrats and the media want? Hopefully not, but probably so.

Tags:

U.S. House 2024 New York Special election The 'shame' of the Republicans


1/19/2024: [New York] 'She's a killer': Trump eyes Rep. Elise Stefanik as a potential VP pick [NBC News]


Photo credit: ANNA MONEYMAKER/THE NEW YORK TIMES VIA REDUX

We like her aggressive attitude.

Nobody should like her voting record in Congress.

She's been a complete squish through most of her career, and nobody needs to wave that off and bother pretending that it's because "Duh, sheez frum Noo Yawk" and therefore must automatically represent some liberal district in the middle of a ghetto (which would somehow elect a Republican???) or some demographically deteriorating soccer mommy/country club suburb in Westchester County.

Stefanik's district is at the far northern end of the state, far away from all of the above, and is solidly Republican. It never elects a Democrat.

Well, except for a couple of terms starting in a 2009 special election in which establishment putzes like Newt Gingrich tried to foist a left-wing Republican named Dede Scozzafava upon the area. A good conservative, Doug Hoffman, had the support of lots of voters but not the GOPe, so he had to run on the Conservative ballot line only. Her support dropping to almost zero (actually 5.7%), Scozzafava spitefully withdrew from the race at the last minute, endorsed liberal Democrat Bill Owens (thanks again, Newt) and took just enough votes away from Hoffman to prevent him from winning.

Other than that and the two elections which followed, when Owens somehow eked out two more wins before fleeing, you have to go back to the 1800s or earlier to find a Democrat U.S. House member from this part of New York. And you may not even find one then.

In this district Stefanik doesn't need to run shrieking hysterically to the left in order to get elected. But she does so anyway. Or at least she used to -- that may be changing.



Stefanik's voting record has taken a noticeable jump to the right in recent years, but that is not as impressive an accomplishment as it may sound; we'll explain below. In her first two terms (2015-2018) she voted the conservative position on key issues 37% of the time which is an abysmal rating for any Republican.

In her next term at the end of the first Trump administration (2019-2020) she improved to 58% which is somewhat less abysmal but still quite weak.

From 2021-2022 Stefanik voted the right way 73% of the time. All of those percentages are based on key votes as determined by the American Conservative Union (ACU). They have not yet released their data for 2023, but we here at RightDataUSA.com have identified 34 key votes from last year -- a greater number than the ACU normally focuses on per year -- and Stefanik grades out at 88% (!). She will probably get a correspondingly high figure from the ACU when they get around to calculating one for 2023.


Why is Stefanik's improvement not as impressive as it looks? During the Trump and Biden administrations, the Democrats have become more polarized -- and polarizing -- than ever before. They vote in perfect lockstep on nearly every issue except for when certain members are allowed to dissent for tactical purposes. In response most Republicans, even ones with long-term liberal tendencies like Elise Stefanik, have found themselves voting in opposition to Democrats as a bloc too.

As a result, Republican ratings have become almost as extreme as Democrat ratings. Nearly all House Democrats have conservative ratings near 0%. Anything even as high as 10% is rare (it's mainly those "tactical" votes).

Democrat polarization has been customary for decades and is not something that only began with Trump in the White House; their extremism gained momentum with the extinction of that species of politician known as "Conservative Democrat". Even "Moderate Democrat" is highly endangered and practically extinct now. Its population is down to a small handful.

But "Liberal Republican" and "Moderate Republican" have generally been as healthy as ever. There are GOP Senators like Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski and Light Loafers Lindsey Graham who vote more with the Democrats than with their own party. Even Mitt Romney doesn't do that.

Such a thing as a Democrat voting mostly with the GOP is unheard of. No, not even Joe Manchin at his grandstanding finest; he's not even close to doing that anymore. "Independent" Kyrsten Sinema? Get real. Sinema voted 95% of the time with her fellow Democrats in 2023. She's a total IINO (Independent in Name Only).

However many Republicans are clustering in the 90-100% conservative range on key votes at a rate higher than usual. This is a very recent development and does not even go back as far as the Trump days. All of that notwithstanding, Stefanik is still quite an unusual case. It's as if she's strategically trying to position herself as a VP candidate by showing that she can act as a conservative if necessary.



Hers is not a normal progression for a member of Congress. A Republican from a relatively safe House district often starts out as an enthusiastic conservative bent on keeping the campaign promises he made. As time goes on the Representative normally caves in to the Uniparty establishment and moves to the left -- "going along to get along" -- otherwise career advancement is impossible.

Not only that, if someone sticks to his principles he is merely asking for disillusionment and frustration: frustration as he sees his legislative objectives watered down or failing entirely; frustration as he sees even his most patriotic colleagues corrupted by lobbyists and big-$$$$$ anti-conservative campaign contributors; and frustrated by that Beltway Culture which keeps him permanently on the outside unless he waives those principles he brought to D.C. with him -- "no fancy Georgetown cocktail party invitations for you, Neanderthal!"

Furthermore, with rare exceptions such as Jim Jordan, you do not get to be in the Republican Party leadership or advance towards it unless you are a squish. Stefanik currently holds a minor leadership position as Chair of the House Republican Conference, which may not sound like much but it makes her the 4th-ranking Republican in the House.



Trump and the GOP have lately realized that their appeal to urban and suburban racists and femiNazis is limited if they insist upon a presidential ticket consisting of two White males. There is a significant probability that Trump will select a female as a running mate, or one will be selected for him.


Photo credit: J. Scott Applewhite/AP; Leah Millis/Reuters

Even given her recent rightward trend and her gender, that hardly means Stefanik is the best possible option. [Sacrilegious though it is, we've liked Tulsi Gabbard for a while despite her congressional voting record -- we feel she has "evolved". But we don't completely trust her.]

It should be noted that a truly conservative woman probably need not apply for the position. The Republicans aren't going to make that Sarah Palin "mistake" again, regardless of the fact (which the GOPe refuses to accept) that the only reason John McCain got any conservative votes at all was the presence of Palin on the ticket. That plus the sheer odiousness of the Democrat puppet which opposed him in '08.

There is likely a desire to select a female VP strategically, i.e. one from a liberal state, in the completely futile hope that her presence will flip that liberal state's electoral votes to Trump. If someone along those lines is absolutely necessary, better to make a choice from a critical swing state than one from a totally lost cause like New York or even Hawaii. Are any ladies from Pennsylvania, Michigan or Wisconsin available?



Working against this supposedly clever approach is the fact that the GOP has never learned the lesson that tokenism and pandering pay off only for Democrats, not Republicans. For example, when they nominate black candidates for statewide office in anything other than the most Republican states, the strategy almost always fails. If a non-White -- or non-male -- is truly the best possible candidate for a Senate seat in 2024, like James Craig (Michigan) or David Clarke (Wisconsin, but not yet officially in the race) then so be it. Always go with your best regardless of race or sex; anyone except a liberal would agree that's how society should work. However if the minority is not truly the best candidate, then this tactic is truly idiotic.

Of course the voters are the ones who pick the candidates, but the Republican party has a lot to say about who is encouraged to run, who is NOT encouraged to run, and who gets the logistical and financial support if they do run (and, of course, who does NOT get that support). Most of the time the voters merely select from the choices the party offers. Insurgents, normally conservative challengers, are unwelcome and are pushed aside from important statewide elections whenever possible. If one of them happens to win a primary election against the wishes of the establishment, they are hung out to dry in the general. You only need to look back to 2022 for considerable evidence of this.

The theory that "urban" (i.e. racist) voters will leave the Democrat plantation in significant numbers and vote for a black statewide Republican nominee is patently false in the vast majority of cases. If a black Republican gets elected statewide, e.g. Tim Scott in South Carolina, he does so almost exclusively on the votes of Republicans and not Democrats. If an "Uncle Tom" GOP candidate needs Democrat votes to win statewide.... he loses, simple as that.



As far as Trump's VP goes, there has been considerable chatter in the liberal media about Stefanik over the past few days. In an attempt to sow even further dissention and get Trump supporters sniping at each other, they are now even floating trial balloons for the most objectionable possible VP nominee short of Trump picking Big Mike Obama for the job. Or Governor Krispy Kreme.

In the end, some adult in the room needs to select the best person for the job regardless of their melanin content or genitalia. The best person is probably not Elise Stefanik and it's sure as hell not Nimrod Randhawa. Hint: if those who control the media approve of whoever it is, it's definitely a bad choice.

Tags:

Trump 2024 Veep Elise Stefanik New York Anybody but Nimrod


12/19/2023: Democrats Stage a Congressional Map-Making Coup in New York [Wall Street Journal]

Another domino falls against the probability of the GOP continuing to maintain House control after 2024. Maybe a house of cards would have been a better image for the fragile and timid Republican majority in Congress.

On December 12 the Wall Street Journal published an article which noted that a cadre of liberal Democrat judges in New York has given their party a significant opportunity to seize control of the U.S. House of Representatives in November of 2024. They did this by green-lighting a hyper-partisan Democrat gerrymander -- a belated re-drawing of congressional district lines -- which is likely to result in the ouster of four Republicans (not to mention the already-departed George Santos) from the New York delegation.

With the GOP having only the most narrow margin to work with the House, not that it's often easy to tell that they actually have control at all, a swing of four seats from R to D is extremely important. And that's only a portion of what Democrats in black robes are doing to help their party's cause (see below).

The WSJ article notes that "The [previous] map resulted in Republicans winning 11 of 26 seats" in New York in 2022. That statement is completely wrong insofar as it implies a favorable "map" had anything whatsoever to do with Republicans overachieving and winning those 11 seats.

In 2020 Democrats won 19 out of 27 congressional districts in New York. The map which was used in 2022 was even better for them, favoring Democrats in 19 or 20 out of 26 seats. The GOP merely got lucky in 2022 and won nearly every close race in marginal D+ districts (CD-3, CD-4, CD-17, CD-19, CD-22).

Even with no new Democrat gerrymander, they were highly likely to lose most of those next year anyway. The bloodbath will commence next February with the special election in CD-3, where Santos was ousted by his liberal RINO colleagues such as his next-door "neighbor" in CD-4, Anthony D'Esposito, who is the most likely of all the remaining NY Republican freshmen to get his ass kicked next November. But the Rats ain't taking any chances of more fluke GOP wins and are going to rig the game to pick up numerous House seats in NY next year.



You may wonder why Republicans normally do not bother to seek redress from the courts when they are screwed by Democrats in redistricting. Here's an example of what happens when they try:

In November of 2020 Democrats vowed to get revenge on GOP Rep. Yvette Herrell in New Mexico because she had the audacity to defeat a Democrat in a House race that year, and they got their vengeance by redistricting her out of the House; Herrell narrowly lost in 2022 in a district which was substantially altered from the one in which she had prevailed in 2020. In late November of 2023, the 100% Democrat New Mexico Supreme Court unsurpisingly ruled that the partisan gerrymander which the Democrats in the NM legislature created was 100% legal despite the fact that the NM state Constitution explicitly forbids such spiteful partisan gerrymanders.

In cases like these, Democrat judges are all about upholding the party -- as opposed to upholding the law. When a law unfavorable to Democrats exists, they simply ignore it; when no law favorable to Democrats exists, they simply "legislate from the bench" and invent one out of thin air as was done in North Carolina in 2022.



Because the House landscape will probably be constantly undergoing changes between now and next November, we will periodically publish an updated scorecard to show how the GOP majority is being eroded by Democrat gerrymanders.

New districting maps mandated by racist Democrat judges will cost Republicans one U.S. House seat next year in each of Alabama and Louisiana, and they are also trying to gerrymander Georgia (+1 for the Rats), South Carolina (also +1), and Tennessee (ditto) along similar racist lines. They will try for +2 in Wisconsin by insisting that Republicans were not sufficiently screwed by the Democrat-drawn map which was used in 2022. And don't rule out Democrat shenanigans in Florida, similar to what occurred in that state during the previous decade.

In Alabama, judges have eliminated a White (Republican) district from the face of the earth and replaced it with one which must elect a black Democrat, or else. The GOP has recruited a good candidate who possesses the required melanin content (former University of Alabama and NFL defensive lineman Wallace Gilberry) but he is hardly likely to prevail in the new ghettofied version of CD-2 and he is just as unlikely to get much in the way of help from the national Republican party, which knows quite well how to "take the L" gracefully.

Republicans are clinging desperately to the hope that they will offset some of these disasters by going +3 or so under a new North Carolina map that might be installed to replace the one which was illegally mandated by Democrat judges on the NC Supreme Court in 2022. But don't count on that new NC map being used in 2024 just yet. All it takes is one partisan liberal judge somewhere to put a stop to it.



Liberals are swinging for the fences as well in Republican strongholds such as Kentucky, Arkansas and Utah, where they hope to locate some compliant black-robed tyrants who will put partisan election outcomes above the law. When it comes to redistricting, the Democrat motto is "sue everywhere!"; the GOP leadership grumbles a little but then bends over as they usually do.

In Utah, where an independent commission created the map which was used in 2022, Democrats are whining (and, of course, suing) because they claim that the Democrat mecca of Salt Lake City was purposely split up in order to dilute the concentration of leftists in any one congressional district. The extremely partisan League of Women Voters was offended by the map the independent commission created, and has taken up the Democrat cause as is customary for that "nonpartisan" (LOL) organization.

To see something quite similar you need only to look slightly to the west of Utah where, in Nevada, the Democrat legislature carved up the city of Las Vegas in order to dilute Republican strength in each of the three districts in which Las Vegas lies. We're patiently waiting for the League of Hysterical Harpies to discover this particular injustice and file suit accordingly on behalf of the GOP.

Tags:

U.S. House Redistricting New York Gerrymander New Mexico


12/11/2023: It's a "Special" Time of Year [RightDataUSA]


Photo credit: AP

In 2024, mainly early in the year, a quartet of special elections will be held to fill four U.S. House vacancies which have already occurred or are upcoming. Cowardly Republicans expelled their conservative colleague George Santos (R-NY) on December 1, and three other Representatives have announced their pending retirements: Brian Higgins (D-NY), Bill Johnson (R-OH) and Kevin McCarthy (Squish-CA).

The special election to replace Santos was hastily called -- it will take place on February 13 -- by Democrats who rightfully anticipate an easy pickup of a House seat that will reduce the margin of GOP control to 7 seats (221-214). The remaining three special elections, as yet unscheduled, are unlikely to alter the balance of power any further.

Santos' election in 2022, like those of most other NY freshmen that year, was a fluke. Santos' district (NY-3) is a Democrat district and not even particularly marginal; Rats outnumber Republicans by over 10% and that fact will be apparent both in the special election and in November, 2024. Republicans normally come closer than 10% in most elections in NY-3, which means that more Democrats than Republicans cross party lines and/or "independents" break slightly more to the right than the left, however all indications point in the direction of an uphill climb for the GOP to win anything here.

Particularly the February special election, where Rat voters and the Rat party organization will be highly motivated while the RNC as usual will likely sit on its hands and blame Santos for ruining the district -- when it simply reverts to what it has always been in recent years. In special elections, low voter turnout is the norm and motivation/organization is everything.

Some have suggested that the series of fluke GOP House wins in New York in 2022 was a coattail effect from having a popular GOP nominee for Governor (Lee Zeldin was not quite popular enough, unfortunately) at the top of the ticket. Nothing like that is going to happen again in NY in 2024, and after the Democrats take the NY-3 special election barring a major upset, they will be significantly favored to hold it next November.

Anthony D'Esposito, the liberal "Republican" Santos-backstabber from the next-door 4th district in New York will (along wth some other GOP House members from New York) probably be ousted in 2024 too, but count on him running hysterically to the left even more so than he already is over the next several months in his frantic effort to keep his cushy job.



As to the other special elections, the Republicans have zero chance for a pickup in Higgins' district which includes the ghetto area of the city of Buffalo, however the GOP should easily hold the other two soon-to-be-vacant seats in California and Ohio.

Well, maybe California. Squish McCarthy's district (CA-20) is the most Republican in the entire state, so it's not a question of a Democrat winning here unless that Democrat puts an "R" after his name (see below) and runs on the GOP ticket. The question, at this moment anyway, is whether there will even be a special election. With the outcome a foregone conclusion, the Democrats are not anxious to send a new Republican to Congress, particularly one who may not be as accommodating as McCarthy was.

The Republicans, bless their hearts, are making plans as if there will be an election early next year and have already formed the customary Circular Firing Squad. The establishment is specifically aiming their fire at MAGA conservative state Senator Shannon Grove, who was the first to announce her candidacy for the opening in CA-20 [Update: After "prayerful considerations and thoughtful discussions" with her family, i.e. after the CAGOP explained to her that conservatives need not apply, Grove has withdrawn from the race.]. A couple of McCarthy-type moderate state legislators are also expected to jump into the race. The filing deadline is only a couple of days away, so we'll know soon.

In Ohio, Rep. Bill Johnson is resigning from Congress sometime before March in order to become President of Youngstown State University, much to the chagrin of the snowflakes at that institution and the ones in the local media. More information on that special election will come later.

Tags:

2024 Special election George Santos Kevin McCarthy Bill Johnson New York California Ohio


11/8/2023: Election 2023 -- It Wasn't ALL Bad News [RightDataUSA]

Yesterday's outcomes were almost entirely predictable yet were considered disappointing by the good people of America -- the same phenomenon as occurred in 2022 when the mis-named "Red Wave" never materialized and even positive developments were considered to be crushing defeats because those positive outcomes did not occur on the massive scale which many people ridiculously expected.

Of course there were lots of adverse outcomes yesterday to be gloomy about:

In Kentucky, GOP gubernatorial candidate Daniel Cameron was heavily outspent and allowed his opponents (Governor Andy Beshear and the liberal-Democrat media) to define him, primarily in a manner which made Cameron unpalatable to the rabid single-issue pro-abortionists of the suburbs. Being outspent and being ceaselessly under attack by the media have always been twin burdens for Republican campaigns, which normally leaves the GOP candidate two options:

1. Spend all of the time (and money) reacting and playing defense instead of attacking and playing offense, or

2. Lay down and give up entirely.

Cameron's 2023 campaign seems to have selected the latter option. The Kentucky election outcomes exactly mirrored 2019 as anticipated, with the Republicans sweeping every one of the other statewide elections including the important Attorney General office.

Back to the bad news, though there's really nothing here which should be considered surprising:

Some disgusting Democrats including one in-your-face transvestite won spots in the Virginia legislature as the Rats expanded their hold on the Senate (as expected) while also seizing control of the House (that was thought to be a tossup). Your political career was nice while it lasted, Governor Youngkin. Actually, Youngkin may have a chance (a small chance) of ousting radical leftist Timmy Kaine from the Senate in 2024 if Youngkin chooses to enter that race. Some Republican should.

New Jersey was another disappointment with the GOP expecting gains but getting zilch in the state Senate, and actually losing seats in the state Assembly. They're still counting votes, so the Republicans may not be done losing yet.

An abortioNazi won the Pennsylvania Supreme Court election, keeping the PA Democrat Supreme Court at a 5-2 partisan breakdown.

Finally, the solid "red" state of Ohio was bamboozled into voting for unlimited abortion. Whether most voters knew it or not, they simultaneously opted to bypass parental consent for their underage daughters to receive abortions. The new law also bypasses parents when young children are brainwashed by adult perverts (such as schoolteacher-groomers and the liberal media) regarding how wonderful it would be for the children to mutilate themselves via sex change operations. Read the fine print next time, Ohioans.



Now on the positive side, Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves (R squish) defeated a faux-moderate Democrat who claimed to be kin to the beloved peanut-butter-and-banana sandwich eater, Elvis Presley. Apparently that's worth some votes in Mississippi. Republicans also increased their already-substantial majorities in the state House and Senate and swept all statewide offices.

In Suffolk County, New York (Long Island) the GOP cruised to a "landslide" 56% victory in the race for County Executive, which means that Republicans now hold 100% of the important offices on Long Island including the area's four seats in Congress (for one more year). GOP gains in 2021 on Long Island foreshadowed congressional success here in 2022; this win in 2023, unfortunately, will very likely not mean anything as far as GOP chances of success on Long Island in 2024.



Another race which was perhaps not of national import, but was something we touched on previously:

A significant upset occurred in a local race in Allegheny County, PA (Pittsburgh) where long-term incumbent Democrat Stephen Zappala -- now running as a Republican -- defeated ultra-liberal Soros stooge Matt Dugan for District Attorney. Pending any post-election shenanigans by Democrat vote-counters, anyway. Results in Pennsylvania very often change significantly after election night as more mail-in ballots are fabricated received.

This happy result in the D.A. contest took place even as Democrats were sweeping the rest of the county offices, as always, though the race for County Executive was closer than usual. A moonbat Democrat won by barely 2% in a county where Democrats outnumber Republicans 2:1.

The Rats, who have re-elected Mr. Zappala every 4 years since he first took office in the late 1990s, have suddenly discovered some issues with him, now that he is a Republican albeit in name only. They tried the always-popular Race Card, accusing Zappala of desiring to bypass the black (Democrat, obviously) mayor of Pittsburgh and take control of the police department; they also falsely accused him of going easier on White criminals than black ones.

The Dugan campaign, which needless to say outspent Zappala exponentially, also dredged up a tangentially abortion-related case from over 15 years ago in which Zappala's office charged a woman who'd had a miscarriage with a crime because she then kept the fetus in a freezer. The resurrection of this story was meant to, and did, trigger the pro-abortionists who don't wish to suffer any consequences regarding their own dead fetuses.

Despite the massive Soros-funding advantage for the Democrat woketard, Zappala appears to have prevailed yesterday 51.6% to 48.4% with an estimated 30% of Zappala's support coming from Democrats.



When we referenced this election and the possibility of a miracle upset previously, the hypothesis was that perhaps blue-collar moderate Democrats would cross over to assist Zappala. In light of recent events in Gaza and the unwavering Hamas terrorist support from the national Democrat party -- including their local racist Congresswoman -- we surmised that Allegheny County Jews, particularly in the Squirrel Hill area of Pittsburgh, might be sufficiently appalled to do something other than vote straight-ticket D for a change, even though yesterday's elections had nothing to do with Israel.

So what did those voters do?

Squirrel Hill is contained within the Fourteenth Ward of the city of Pittsburgh. For some context, in 2020 that area voted soundly against President Trump by a margin of 70% -- it was 84% for Biden, 14% for Trump. In 2016, that region's love for Hillary and hatred of Trump was expressed in nearly identical proportions (83% Hillary, 14% Trump).

Yesterday the vast majority of Squirrel Hill voters again showed themselves to be atheistic, secular, ultra-liberal and self-loathing -- they are not concerned one whit about Israel as long as Netanyahu is in charge -- by demonstrating their allegiance to the Democrat party. But not by quite the normal amount.

There was approximately an 11-point swing to the right in the Fourteenth Ward, with Dugan getting 74% of the vote to Zappala's 26%. Eleven points may not sound like a lot, but in this area it is significant. In terms of raw votes, Zappala got at least 1,500 more votes in the Fourteenth Ward than he would have if the usual percentages had applied. That number by itself did not alter the outcome of this election, however it was a welcome (though almost certainly temporary) development.

Tags:

2023 Kentucky Missisippi New Jersey Virginia Abortionist Ohio Daniel Cameron Pittsburgh


9/20/2023: Republicans Just Got Blasted in a New Hampshire Special Election Because Zero Lessons Have Been Learned [Redstate]


Photo credit: AP Photo/Charles Krupa

The Trump-haters and GOP establishment shills who run "RedState.com" have decided that Donald Trump blew it again. It happened yesterday in a tiny New Hampshire district in which a liberal Democrat defeated a MAGA Republican in a special election that most voters ignored. Trump himself likely wasn't even aware of the election, much less involved in it in any way.

The author of the article (someone called "Bonchie") believes that the results of this bellwether (LOL) election, in which approximately 0.00000001% of the U.S. electorate participated, portends certain doom for the GOP in 2024 because we haven't learned the "lesson" that conservative candidates simply cannot win anywhere. He may not be wrong about what will occur in '24, but his reasoning is quite faulty; inferring anything from an ultra-low turnout special election in a microscopic state House district (don't get confused and think this was a Congressional election) is moronic.

Well, unless it suits your agenda.

Remember in 2022 when the GOP won an actual Congressional special election in south Texas and that result -- historic though it was -- was supposed to mean "muh Red Wave" in November as opposed to being just an isolated fluke outcome which was reversed in November? How'd that wave work out?

Regarding yesterday's irrelevancy in New Hampshire, the author's hyperventilating assertion that because Governor Squish Sununu had a 22-point margin of victory last November in this district meant that it should have been a slam-dunk for Republicans is deliberately misleading. Instead of pretending that this is some "dark red" district, which it damn sure is not, if the author was interested in the truth instead of trying to induce panic, he would have pointed out that although Trump won this district in 2020.... it was by a whopping 26 votes which is less than 1 percent. And that result is much more in line with the true current political leaning of the district than what Squish got.

This is a marginal, slightly right-of-center, wimpy/moderate district at best, consisting of a couple of tiny towns in Rockingham County. That doesn't mean the GOP couldn't have won yesterday, but Itchy or Scratchy or Poochie or whatever the author's name is should drop the stupid fallacy that this was supposed to be an easy win, much less extrapolate from what a few hundred voters did in New Hampshire yesterday to nationwide calamity in 2024.

As to the quality of the GOP candidate, of course the Democrat media is going to take every opportunity to slime all Republicans who are running for office (no matter how small the office), and there's no sense in making it easier for them by exclaiming that "Jeebus told me Trump really won in 2020!!!!", something along the lines of which the GOP candidate, pastor James Guzofski, is alleged to have done here. Or by being set up for a grope date in a movie theater with the Democrat cameras running (Lauren Boebert).

In the end, what this miniscule election means for 2024 all by itself is absolutely nothing, despite the hysteria.

Tags:

New Hampshire State House election 2023


4/28/2023: Massive Supreme Court Rulings in North Carolina May Have Just Saved Republicans in 2024 [Redstate]


Photo credit: AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana

The article states, quite accurately, that a "prior left-wing court invented out of whole cloth a constitutional provision that forced the legislature to create so-called fair districts."

Last November the voters in North Carolina delivered a 5-2 Republican majority to the state Supreme Court, and today that court came through by not merely overturning the illegal judicial interference with last year's redistricting, but also restoring a voter ID law which was duly passed by the voters in 2018 before being thrown out by partisan Democrat judges.

This is all great news, although the hyperventilating in the article about the GOP picking up 4 House seats in the Tarheel State in 2024 after the maps are redrawn is not terribly realistic, however a gain of 2 or even 3 might be. On the flip side of the coin, Democrats in New York are suing because they were not allowed to implement the most ridiculously partisan gerrymander (with all due respect to Illinois) in the entire nation. The lawsuit seeks to restore that gerrymander or something very close -- if not worse.

Many of the series of fluke U.S. House victories the GOP attained in New York in 2022 -- CD-3 (Santos), CD-4 (D'Esposito), CD-17 (Lawler), CD-19 (Molinaro) and CD-22 (Williams) -- were likely to be undone in 2024 even without a new gerrymander, plus CD-1 (LaLota) and CD-11 (Malliotakis) aren't exactly 100% safe either; Malliotakis may appear safe due to the margin she received in 2022, but that's only because the Democrats ran a complete stooge against her and they will not make that mistake again.

If the Democrats prevail in New York court, it will offset the presumed North Carolina gains, and more.

Adverse changes will also be coming to the district map in Ohio and possibly other states, with South Carolina as another example. If those changes in Ohio are not implemented for the 2024 election then they definitely will be by 2026. Republicans expected to pick up 2 House seats in 2022 in Ohio while maybe sacrificing one seat (that sacrifice was pretty much mandated by liberal court order when the court rejected the Republicans' original Ohio map); what actually happened was that the Republicans picked up nothing while losing one seat, as the much ballyhooed (and mis-named) "red wave" became not even a trickle, though at least they held the U.S. Senate seat with J.D. Vance.

Because the expected gains never materialized, even a less favorable district map might do little or no damage to the composition of the Ohio congressional delegation, in which the Republicans currently hold a 10-5 edge.

Tags:

North Carolina Redistricting Democrat gerrymander overturned New York Democrat gerrymander restored


8/24/2022: Pat Ryan (D) defeats Marc Molinaro (R) in special election in NY-19 [Albany Times Union]


Photo credit: Tony Adamis/Special to the Times Union

Anyone assuming that Republicans are going to win most of the close ones in November is delusional. We have to turn out in numbers that make these races far less close.

Four years ago, in the highest-turnout midterm election in U.S. history, the GOP was annihilated and some presumed it was because Republicans weren't motivated (wrong) while the Rats were highly motivated by their hatred of Trump (bingo). R turnout was actually up substantially that year over where it had been in 2014; but D turnout was absolutely off the charts.

The days of Republicans being able to run the table in comparatively low-turnout midterms such as 1994, 2010 and 2014 are over. 2018 is the new midterm turnout model, and 2022's turnout in November (at least on the left) is going to be "2018 on steroids".

The GOP establishment, the ones who control the ad buys and the purse strings and who normally support only liberals and moderates while giving the shaft to conservatives, better get on the ball and run good, effective, hard-hitting ads anywhere the Democrat-controlled media will permit them to run -- and run them for ALL candidates, not just their RINO pets -- and try to get Republican enthusiasm to be as great as Democrat enthusiasm. It wasn't in 2018, it wasn't in 2020, and we're heading for a repeat in 2022.

If they don't get on the ball (and surely we can count on Ronna Romney, Mitch McConnell and the RNC/NRSC to do the right thing, LOL) then there are going to be a lot of so-called experts with dazed expressions on their faces on November 9th, looking around helplessly and wondering where "muh red wave" disappeared to.

Tags:

U.S. House New York Special election 2022 Bad candidate Narrow loss


7/27/2022: GOP activists: Let's vote in NY Democratic primaries to elect moderates [NY Post]


Photo credit: Getty Images

With Democrats sabotaging Republican primaries all over the map in 2022, it's refreshing to see someone in the GOP finally taking the initiative to turn the tables. Unfortunately it's going to be a complete dud here in New York. The filing deadline was nearly two months ago, so there is no way to get a Republican onto the ballot as a fake Democrat and we're stuck picking from the Dems who have already filed. And how many of them qualify as "moderate"? Probably zero.

Of New York's 26 U.S. House districts, only 13 of them are currently held by Democrats and have multiple Democrats running. In the other 13, either Democrats are unopposed in the primary or the districts are already held by Republicans (so who cares which Rat wins the primary?). At the state Senate level, there are only two districts in the entire state in which multiple Democrats filed to run. Nice try, though.

Tags:

New York 2022 GOP "tricks" Too late