Weekend Open Thread for March 10-12, 2017

The state of Western Australia will go to the polls tomorrow to elect its state Parliament. Western Australia is the largest in area of Australia’s 6 states(about 4 times the size of Texas) and has a population of 2.6 million, slightly smaller than Kansas. Like the federal Parliament and every state except Queensland, it has a bicameral Parliament-a lower house called the Legislative Assembly, where government is formed, and an upper house called the Legislative Council. The 59 members of the Legislative Assembly are elected by districts through a full preferential voting system just like the federal House of Representatives, while the 36 members of the Legislative Council are chosen in 6 regions on a semi-proportional basis by the Single Transferable Vote method.

The current Liberal Party(center-right) government of Premier Colin Barnett has been in office since 2008 and is attempting to win its third term. Unlike at the federal level and in other states, the WA Nationals(who maintain an affiliation with, but a separate identity from the federal Nationals) are not in a formal coalition with the Liberals, although they support the Liberal government. They are opposed by Labor, led by Mark McGowan. Possibly the most interesting facet of this election is it’s the first test of the increasing popularity of One Nation. One Nation, founded and led by Pauline Hanson(an outspoken fan of Donald Trump) is a nationalist, populist party that began in the late 1990s and experienced some electoral success then, but had largely faded from the political scene until last year when they elected 4 Senators(1 from Western Australia) at the federal election, including Hanson. Since then, they have gained in the polls, registering in double digits in some nationwide polls.

The most important moment in the election campaign came last month when the Liberals and One Nation agreed to a preference deal where each would preference the other above other parties. The deal was expected to help the Liberals in the lower house and One Nation in the upper house, where the semi-proportional method of election gives them the best chance to win seats. The move was a huge turnaround for the Liberal Party as they had such disdain for One Nation previously that in 2001 then-Prime Minister John Howard said Liberal voters should preference One Nation last. When the deal was made last month, it was expected to aid both sides by giving the Liberals a fighting chance to retain government despite trailing badly in the polls and give One Nation an opportunity to possibly win enough seats in the upper house to hold the balance of power and even win a few seats in the lower house. As the campaign draws to a close however, the deal seems to be seen more as a desperate attempt by the Liberals to cling to power and has angered some One Nation voters and candidates who don’t like linking up with a mainstream political party. Some One Nation candidates have spoken out against the deal and have even refused to distribute cards guiding their supporters how to mark their preferences and have been disendorsed by the party. The deal has also caused friction between the Liberals and the WA Nationals as it asks Liberal voters to put One Nation ahead of their usual allies. A visit by Pauline Hanson to WA this week has appeared to hurt One Nation too as she made several controversial statements and displayed a lack of knowledge of local issues. Labor, already favored to win has been helped by all of this and now seems to be poised to win in a landslide. They currently hold 20 seats in the Legislative Assembly and need a gain of 10 seats to take control-projections have them possibly gaining as many as 20 seats or more with a double digit swing. A Liberal victory at this point would be considered a huge upset. Analysts will be watching the strength of One Nation support as well to see for its implications for the nation as a whole, and especially for Queensland, Hanson’s home state where One Nation support is strongest and they are expected to have state elections later this year. Results should be clear tomorrow morning in the US-polls close at 6 PM local time or 5 AM EST.

Now for this weekend’s questions:

1.  How do you see the upcoming special congressional elections coming out? Do Republicans win all the seats they previously held, or do Democrats pull off an upset or at least come close in any of them?

2. If you could pick one race in 2018 to guarantee a win for your side, what would it be?

And because an act of Congress will change the very fabric of time this weekend….we give you THIS

Previous Post Next Post


  • segmentation_fault March 10, 2017 at 5:46 pm

    1. I don’t think Republicans are going to win CA-34
    2. NV-Sen, because a winner there would likely represent my views more than any of the Romney state Democrats

    En Marche!

    • CTIronman March 11, 2017 at 7:58 am

      A) Labor won the WA election
      B) Judges in TX following the principle “whatever helps the Democrats” ordered a redraw of the US House map

  • edtorres04 March 10, 2017 at 5:50 pm

    1. I think MT At Large will be closer than people thing unless Gianforte starts emphasizing Quist’s views on guns. That should be on every single ad that he puts out

    2. The answer to number 2 is the Florida Governorship for the GOP. We need that for the supreme court appointments that will determine the next 2 cycles of redistricting. (though Rick Scott is going to try to appoint 2 of them on his way out if the GOP doesn’t win the governorship)

  • The Emperor March 10, 2017 at 6:06 pm

    1. I don’t think any of them flip.

    2. Illinois Governor. This would allow us to unravel the Democratic gerrymander of Illinois and further hurt the Democrat attempts to take the House

    male/21/R/TX-22, CA-52/originally CA-45, KS-03
    Rubio Republican

  • MaxwellsDemon March 10, 2017 at 6:10 pm

    Sessions has asked that all 46 remaining US Attorneys resign today, including Preet Bharara. While its not uncommon for Presidents to ask them to resign (Clinton asked for all 96 to resign in a single day), why now? And why after he gave assurances to Bhararahe wanted him to stay on?: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/10/ag-sessions-asks-remaining-46-us-attorneys-to-resign.html

    • FiveAngels March 10, 2017 at 6:49 pm

      Bharara seems to be remarkably popular on this site. As far as I’m concerned every single Chuck Schumer protege in the government can go do what Dick Cheney told Pat Leahy to do.

      • Izengabe March 10, 2017 at 8:02 pm

        Bharara is popular because he put Shelly Silver and Dean Skelos in jail and spends his time fighting the rampant corruption in NY. I say bravo!

        If Bharara is out of a job hopefully he will consider running for Mayor. He’s probably the only one who could beat deBlasio.

        Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

      • HS March 11, 2017 at 1:05 pm

        I can also attest to the fact that he is a very good guy. It is actually very strange he worked for Schumer, who is just the opposite.

        I am confused by this as well. I thought Trump was going to keep him on longer. He certainly has shown a willingness to go after both Democrats and Republicans. If i were Trump, I would allow him another year or so (obviously, at some point they want to reward their person in NY).

    • Wahoowa March 11, 2017 at 12:06 am

      It’s not an uncommon practice to ask for resignations from all of them but not accept certain ones. They could replace them all, but if history is any guide, a select few will stay.


  • FiveAngels March 10, 2017 at 6:44 pm

    Western Australia — this reminded me that my father’s first cousin actually served in the state parliament there (Liberals) and I have no idea if she still does. Not very close to that family branch. They live in the middle of nowhere, basically.

    1. I expect Team Red to hold GA-6 by 10 or more but I think MT-AL will be a much tougher race. Other House specials should be completely uneventful.

    2. MO-SEN. McCaskill is way too rabid to pretend she’s a moderate even for five seconds, and GOP has a perfect candidate in Ann Wagner.

    • The Emperor March 10, 2017 at 6:56 pm

      McCaskill is DOA this year. She was DOA in 2012 had it not been for Akin being a complete idiot

      male/21/R/TX-22, CA-52/originally CA-45, KS-03
      Rubio Republican

      • Tekzilla March 10, 2017 at 6:58 pm

        Good thing for McCaskill she isn’t up this year then! 😉

        36/M/NY-01 (D)

      • StatenIslandTest March 11, 2017 at 12:14 am

        Always one of my favorite electoral observations. Though Mourdock might be even dumber because he talked about it after Akin!

        My 2012 GOP autopsy was pretty simple: Talk about pretty much anything but “legitimate rape”.

        32, Jersey City

  • Ryan_in_SEPA March 10, 2017 at 7:15 pm

    1. I predict Republican holds.

    2. PA-GOV not just because of redistricting, but becauseWagner will be an awesome governor.

    31, PA-6, fiscally conservative communitarian, Giant Meteor 2020 - Just End It Already!

  • Tekzilla March 10, 2017 at 7:33 pm

    1. KS-4 Strong Republican hold, CA-34 Strong Democratic hold, GA-06 Extremely close Republican hold, SC-5 Moderately Strong Republican Hold, MT-AL Moderately weak Republican hold. So no changes, but the margins matter.

    2. If we are allowed to be unrealistic I’d say Castro or O’Rourke in TX-SEN, but if we are talking within the realm of the possible I’d say FL-GOV since it affects my parents. If Morgan or Graham don’t win the nomination I probably won’t feel as strongly, but I think one of them will.

    36/M/NY-01 (D)

  • Red Oaks March 10, 2017 at 7:39 pm

    1. I expect all special elections will be holds by the incumbent party but with modestly declining percentages for GOP candidates compared to 2016.

    2. I’m not 100% sure how to interpret this question. Is it the race that seems kind of competitive but that I would be most comfortable betting money on a sure Republican win? If so I would say McCaskill going down in MO-Senate. If it is the race I would most like to see a certain victory in, I would pick MI Governor because of the obvious personal effect on me. However, if I were to step back from the obvious selfish impact, then I would say Rauner hanging on as Illinois governor because of the huge impact on policy and redistricting in a such a large state.

    MI-03: Tired of Presidency; Focused more on downballot races; Chris Afendoulis for State Senate

  • Izengabe March 10, 2017 at 8:04 pm

    1) Incumbent party will hold all upcoming special elections.

    2) If I could pick one race in 2018 to guarantee a win for my side it would be NY-Gov because I live here!

    Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

  • CTIronman March 10, 2017 at 8:10 pm

    1. No changes but some closer margins ala CT State Sen 32
    2. CTGov, obviously. Though shocking Chris Murphy would be mui bueno

  • Izengabe March 10, 2017 at 8:14 pm

    This is a really good article:
    Republicans should blow up the entire health-care system.
    The gist is the GOP will be blamed and pay the political price for whatever they do with Obamacare so they might as well go for broke and propose a truly conservative and radical health-care solution.

    Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

    • CTIronman March 10, 2017 at 8:25 pm

      Which 50 of the 52 GOP Senators will vote to “blow up the health care system” #sigh

      • GOPTarHeel March 10, 2017 at 9:37 pm

        Most won’t-we’re still the small-c conservative party.

        R/NC. Waiting for a non-ossified establishment or sane populists. Not optimistic.

      • jncca March 10, 2017 at 10:28 pm

        Wouldn’t you need 60 for many of the changes?

        24, CA-6. Part Obama, Part May, Part Christian Democrat.

        • Izengabe March 10, 2017 at 11:15 pm

          The point is the GOP will pay the price no matter what and chances are they wont be able to get anything pass and will even get blame for that. If that’s the case and all options are politically terrible then they might as well go down swinging and present good ideas that if passed would make American healthcare great again and if they fail to pass it would at least be a platform to run on in future.

          Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

  • Republican Michigander March 10, 2017 at 8:21 pm

    1. Special elections all depend on organization. I wouldn’t be shocked to see at least one upset based on turnout alone.

    2. If I had to keep it to one – MI-SEN. I can’t stand Stab-me-now and have been voting for her opponents for 20 years going back to her time as MI-08 Congresscritter.

    MI-08 - Michigan is a red state again. We need a 50 state strategy and an 83 county strategy.

  • Ryan_in_SEPA March 10, 2017 at 9:03 pm


    Republican only candidate on 197th ballot. I expect the Dem to win as a write in if “the Hispanics” get their act together.

    31, PA-6, fiscally conservative communitarian, Giant Meteor 2020 - Just End It Already!

  • w920us March 10, 2017 at 9:27 pm

    Ambassador to Israel vote

    David Friedman Wins 12-9 Senate Committee Vote — Democrats Vote No

    Menendez voted with the Republicans

    R, South Philly, 47, Gay, WFU Alum
    #TrumpVoter #NeverHillary

  • Greyhound March 10, 2017 at 9:37 pm

    Andrew Sullivan makes a rather effective case that you have to start looking at the new-wave Campus Progressivism (in the form of Intersectionality) as a kind of religion:

    He kinda meanders into Trump-bashing at the end, but this is actually a decent analogy.

    R, 27, CA-18. Anti-Anti-Trump

    • Ryan_in_SEPA March 12, 2017 at 12:07 pm

      Sullivan’s problem, like that of the many of the #NeverTrump movement, is they refuse to acknowledge the Puritan Left is a far greater threat to American society than the Trumpistas, who are merely transactional players and reactions to the first waves of the intersectionality.

      31, PA-6, fiscally conservative communitarian, Giant Meteor 2020 - Just End It Already!

  • Manhatlibertarian March 10, 2017 at 9:39 pm

    End of Week NY Tidbits:

    Is Sessions asking Bharara to resign as US Attorney just a pro forma thing and then will the resignation be rejected or is it for real? Bharara is close to setting up the schedule for top Cuomo aide Joe Percoco’s bribery and bid rigging trial and is also in the midst of investigating possible law violations in Mayor deBlasio’s fundraising. Not clear why Sessions would want him out when he is the midst of these cases but we should soon know what the story is.

    Nassau County Dem Chair Jay Jacobs has indicated that the County Dem Organization will likely back past Syosset School Board President Marc Herman for the position of Oyster Bay Town Supervisor (a huge Township with close to 300,000 people). The 2015 Dem candidate, attorney John Magnelli (who lost by only 99 votes), has indicated he may force a Dem primary for the position and that he may also seek the Independence Party nomination. The incumbent GOP Town Supervisor is former Assemblyman Joseph Saladino, who was picked by Repubs for the post when Town Supervisor John Venditto resigned after being indicted for corruption. Since Saladino had to resign his Assembly seat there will be a special election in the GOP leaning Assembly District on May 23.

    New York and North Carolina are the only 2 states that treat 16 and 17 year olds as adults when they commit non violent offenses. There is bipartisan legislation in the NC House to raise the age to be treated as an adult to 18, but the situation is less clear in NY. Although the NY Dem Assembly wants to raise the age to 18, NY GOP State Senator Pat Gallivan, Chair of the State Senate Crime and Corrections Committee, would only state that he will look at different proposals to raise the age to 18, but he wants to feel “… comfortable that public safety is preserved” if the State Senate is to pass any of these proposals. Cuomo is also in favor of raising the age to 18, and IMO the GOP State Senate might go along with raising the age but will want something in return from Cuomo, the way Albany works.

    all at:


    • kewgardens March 10, 2017 at 9:59 pm

      Bharara is collateral damage in the increasingly hostile relationship between Trump and Schumer. Back in November Trump and Schumer were in the midst of an era of good feelings, and Trump (probably) agreed to keep Bharara on as the US Attorney for SDNY as a goodwill gesture. Remember, Bharara is Schumer’s protege.

  • jncca March 10, 2017 at 10:25 pm

    Weekend Question:

    Who is your…

    1) Favorite Incumbent Politician in Your Home State?

    2) Favorite Incumbent Politician Nationally?

    3) Favorite Retired/Dead Politician of the post-WWII Era?

    4) Favorite Foreign Politician, Active, Retired, or Dead?

    24, CA-6. Part Obama, Part May, Part Christian Democrat.

    • Tekzilla March 10, 2017 at 11:14 pm

      Some very good questions!

      1. With Bishop gone this is tough for me. Probably a toss up between Kathy Hochul, Tom Suozzi and Kathleen Rice. I would lean towards Rich if I had to pick one though.

      2. Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota is my top overall and in the Senate. Favorite Governor would be Steve Bullock and my favorite house member would be Pramila Jayapal. Ok, kidding on the last one. Seth Moulton is my favorite house member for sure.

      3. Really tough one. A toss up between Sam Rayburn, Mike Mansfield and Scoop Jackson. Probably lean Rayburn but it would be a tough call between them.

      4. Active – Justin Trudeau, Retired – Tony Blair, Dead – Mahatma Gandhi

      36/M/NY-01 (D)

      • jncca March 10, 2017 at 11:54 pm

        Good call on Moulton. I like Moulton.

        24, CA-6. Part Obama, Part May, Part Christian Democrat.

    • The Emperor March 10, 2017 at 11:19 pm

      1) Greg Abbott. He has a firm spine.

      2) Marco Rubio. Smart on policy, cares about people, and seems like a genuinely decent man.

      3) Ronald Reagan. No question about it.

      4) John Howard. Basically the Ronald Reagan of Australia, even considering his gun control push.

      male/21/R/TX-22, CA-52/originally CA-45, KS-03
      Rubio Republican

    • Izengabe March 10, 2017 at 11:24 pm

      1) I’m from NY so everyone is kind of horrible. For old time sake I will say John Faso although Steve McLaughlin has his good days. Lee Zeldin is also not bad.

      2) Right now I would say Ben Sasse.

      3) Does William F. Buckley count as a politician? He did run for Mayor. If not, Barry Goldwater (although Ronald Reagan and Jack Kemp also get a mention)

      4) Margaret Thatcher

      Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

    • VastBlightKingConspiracy March 11, 2017 at 12:00 am

      1) Devin Nunes. A really great Congressman who would be considered a “future rising star of the GOP” along with people like Tom Cotton and Marco Rubio if he were in a redder state.

      2) Donald Trump (duh?). If that’s too obvious, then either Tom Cotton or Mike Lee. If I need a Governor, than either Doug Ducey or Terry Branstad.

      3) Hard call. Either Eugene McCarthy, Newt Gingrich, and of course, Ronald Reagan.

      4) Narendra Modi, Rodrigo Duterte, or Viktor Orban.

      I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Republican.

      • jncca March 11, 2017 at 12:57 am

        What do you like about your three for #3?

        24, CA-6. Part Obama, Part May, Part Christian Democrat.

        • VastBlightKingConspiracy March 11, 2017 at 1:35 am

          Oh boy, this is gonna be too long.

          Ronald Reagan was the last Republican President to actually be serious about peace through strength. Was able to both fiercely oppose the USSR in the early 80’s and make peace with the USSR and effectively end the Cold War in the late 80’s. The collapse of the USSR was a geopolitical catastrophe insofar that Cold War ended years before the collapse of the USSR. A lot of great ideas that we take for granted today are also a product of the Reagan Administration, and we really just don’t really talk about them because they’re so well-accepted. Like not having 70% marginal tax rates, OIRA, etc. etc. And declaring war on the liberal legal establishment. We just ruminate on the bad stuff he did, and I do agree they were bad. The endresults of neoliberalism and Reaganomics looks pretty awful today, but we aren’t comparing what we have today to stagflation. Obviously, my belief that Reagan was a good president doesn’t mean I think we’ll fix the problems of 2016 with Reagan’s solutions in 1980,

          Gingrich came in with a clear agenda, he was willing to completely set the D.C. consensus to get it done, and he was doing it with a party that had never governed for more than one cycle since 1928. And he did it. Gingrich was a pretty amazing fighter. And he’s shown that he’s willing to go “off the reservation” if he thinks an idea is good, even if its not “traditionally conservative”. I actually think that’s the real driver of his big support for Donald Trump. I appreciate that he’s a solid intellectual conservative (probably one of the smartest people on the right), but not an inflexible ideologue like Ben Sasse. If movement conservatism was more Newt Gingrich than Ben Sasse, we wouldn’t even have needed a Trump. I also like him a lot more Paul Ryan, who seems to be just repackaging old ideas from 1981 with a Gen X sheen.

          Eugene McCarthy was actually an example of someone who was too smart and iconoclastic for politics. Obviously, he’s best known for torpedoing LBJ 3.0, but similarly, if more people were listening to McCarthy, we wouldn’t have needed a Trump. His opposition to LBJ was honestly more from pre-1960’s good-government progressivism, not the miserable New Left identity politics of the Democratic Party after that. The tragedy of American politics is that we have been increasingly divided in two camps, an out-of-touch gaggle of holier-than-thou incompetents still living in 1981, that refuses to advocate for any its voters (the refusal of the GOP to stand up for the economic needs of its middle-class base is definitely why I can’t condemn the epithet “cuckservative”) and a genuinely totalitarian and elitist cult of Marcuse-acolytes that actively hates and wants to destroy the national body politic. You might say a showdown between the Stupid Party and the Nasty (read: Evil, in a Hannah-Arendt-style banal way at best) Party.

          I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Republican.

    • HS March 11, 2017 at 2:33 pm

      1. In terms of being a good guy, Charlie Dent R-PA. In terms of my ideological favorite, Pat Toomey R-PA.
      2. Tom Cotton R-AR He is tough, holds similar positions to me, and is a good guy personally. He also has a record as an actual American hero.
      3. Ronald Reagan. Even though I started off as a more moderate Republican who thought he was overrated, as I have become more conservative, and more knowledgeable about him, I have come to realise just how unique and excellent he was. I wish he was President now.
      4. Easy – Winston Churchill. For all the reasons everyone already knows.

    • Ryan_in_SEPA March 11, 2017 at 3:53 pm

      Weekend Question:
      Who is your…
      1) Favorite Incumbent Politician in Your Home State? – Toomey
      2) Favorite Incumbent Politician Nationally? – Hatch
      3) Favorite Retired/Dead Politician of the post-WWII Era? – Stephen Harper
      4) Favorite Foreign Politician, Active, Retired, or Dead? – Active, Theresa May

      31, PA-6, fiscally conservative communitarian, Giant Meteor 2020 - Just End It Already!

    • Mugwump March 11, 2017 at 3:58 pm

      1. Probably David Clarke
      2. Trump with shout outs to Rand Paul in the Senate and Clay Higgins in the House.
      3. Ross Perot
      4. Nigel Farage or Geert Wilders.

      Trumpocrat who wants to MAGA WI-06

    • GOPTarHeel March 11, 2017 at 4:10 pm

      1. Thom Tillis.
      2. Marco Rubio, also a fan of Tom Cotton, Susan Collins, and Scott Walker
      3. Gov. Jim Martin, Reagan.
      4. Active: Theresa May.

      R/NC. Waiting for a non-ossified establishment or sane populists. Not optimistic.

      • rdelbov March 11, 2017 at 5:02 pm

        Big fan of Thom Tillis as well. For that matter Richard Burr who took so much heat for his campaign last year is also a favorite of mine.

        I like Lamar and Corker but I would probably trade my two home state senators for Tillis and Burr

        • GOPTarHeel March 11, 2017 at 9:30 pm

          Tillis>Burr in my book. He did a great job leading the NC House campaign arm and transformed NC policy as Speaker. I’d give anything to have a Speaker now with the same level of political skill. Also unlike Burr he really cares about what is happening in NC. Burr is very much a creature of Washington now.

          R/NC. Waiting for a non-ossified establishment or sane populists. Not optimistic.

    • Red Oaks March 11, 2017 at 4:27 pm

      1) Oakland County Executive L Brooks Patterson. My all time favorite Michigan politician too. Fantastic administrator, leader, and defender of suburbanism.
      2) Ron Johnson or Pat Toomey. Solid economic conservatives winning twice in states that have historically been light blue. I predicted they would lose last year and was happy to be proven wrong.
      3) I’m not sure if he would count himself as a politician but I’m grateful for the work Ward Connerly has done in fighting racial preferences.
      4) Active foreign politician – Daniel Hannan for his long-time advocacy of Brexit. Retired foreign politician – John Howard of Australia for excellent leadership of a major Western country for almost 12 years. Dead foreign politician – Carl Mannerheim for basically saving an entire country against enormous odds.

      MI-03: Tired of Presidency; Focused more on downballot races; Chris Afendoulis for State Senate

    • SlippingJimmy March 11, 2017 at 5:08 pm

      1) Will Hurd. A McMullin-esque conservative with a focus on national security (w/ background to match) without the theatrics.

      2) Ron Johnson. A compelling story as a self-made businessman. Principled, conservative stands on the everyday, pocketbook issues which impact all Americans. A stunning but nonetheless unambiguous victory over a heavily favored Democrat. A pledge to only serve two terms in the Senate. A true ‘Mr. Smith goes to Washington’ story.

      3) Richard Nixon. A qualified conservative with a strong sense of pragmatism in both foreign and domestic affairs. He took the fight to the liberal media and the liberal consensus and he NEVER GAVE UP, not when he first ran for Congress, not when he took down Alger Hiss, not when he took down a Hollywood liberal to secure his Senate seat, not when he took to the airwaves to defend his own honor against unjust accusations, not when he lost the 1960 election due to fraud, not when he lost CA-GOV in 1962 and could have ended his political career then and there, not when he crushed the standard-bearer of socialism in America, not until he could fight no more. Nixon brought peace to tens of millions and initiated the geopolitical realignment which would leave the Soviet Union friendless and pave the way for victory in the Cold War. He ushered in the electoral realignment which destroyed the Liberal Consensus and paved the way for the Reagan Revolution.

      4. Angela Merkel

      Republican, TX-22.

      • The Emperor March 11, 2017 at 6:48 pm

        Nixon was always a very underrated President, his legacy tarnished by the way Watergate turned out. He basically was the one that ended segregation in the South and had snatched victory from the jaws of defeat in Vietnam (which the Watergate Congress then pissed away). Plus, he came in just in time to appoint four Supreme Court justices to block the Warren Court drift to the left

        male/21/R/TX-22, CA-52/originally CA-45, KS-03
        Rubio Republican

        • Izengabe March 11, 2017 at 8:03 pm

          I’m sure as time goes by leftwing historians will find more respect for Nixon. As president he handed over Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia to communist butchers, created the EPA, abolished the gold standard, froze wage, imposed price control, slapped a 10% import surcharge on goods coming into the US and appointed the author the the Roe v. Wade decision to the Supreme Court.

          Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

    • Republican Michigander March 11, 2017 at 5:59 pm

      1. Tough one and a cop out answer, but the local reps in my county who do a good job year after year. There’s little drama here, because there is no need for it. We’ve been at a 9-0 county commissioner sweep for I believe 20 years.

      2) Scott Walker if we go governors. Mike Pence for federal. They aren’t afraid to stick their necks out, but at the same time they work to get things done instead of just running the mouth.

      3) Real tough one. John Engler stayed one term too long, but there would not be any conservative party in Michigan if it wasn’t for Engler. People like Engler and Richard Headlee built it up, and then took control away from the corporate left RINO (in the real sense) Bill Milliken who was worse than most D’s.

      4) Michael Collins

      MI-08 - Michigan is a red state again. We need a 50 state strategy and an 83 county strategy.

      • The Emperor March 11, 2017 at 6:49 pm

        Not familiar with Michigan politics from that time (all I know is that William Milliken endorsed Kerry over Bush). How did Engler do that?

        male/21/R/TX-22, CA-52/originally CA-45, KS-03
        Rubio Republican

        • Red Oaks March 11, 2017 at 7:36 pm

          Milliken has endorsed lots of Democrats during his time out of office. During his long reign (1969-1982) the state income tax went from 2.7% to 4.6%. He promised multiple times that the hikes were temporary only to later make them permanent. In the mid 1970’s he put through the Single Business Tax (SBT), which was such a terrible business tax system that not one state has ever passed anything like it. On a good day you could call him a Red Tory. When he retired in 1982 Jim Blanchard won the open seat gubernatorial race and Democrats had the trifecta. After being coy about the tax issue leading up to the election, Democrats shifted gears once they had power and pushed through a large income tax increase (from 4.6% to 6.35% retroactive to the beginning of 1983). Milliken, as usual stabbed his own base in the back by supporting it. However, this time there was a major revolt. Engler and other Republicans supported recall elections against many of the tax hikers. Ultimately in early 1984 Democratic State Senators Phil Mastin and David Serotkin were recalled by wide margins and Republicans flipped control of the Senate from 18-20 to 20-18. Engler became Senate Majority Leader and Blanchard’s main political rival. Engler was able to hold together a small Republican majority for the rest of the decade and eventually forced Blanchard to allow the rate to come back down to 4.6%. Then in 1990 Engler pulled off a late comeback and defeated Blanchard in the 1990 Gubernatorial race. John Engler would go on to not only responsibly push for and enact tax cuts, welfare reform, and school choice but also encourage the development of a more conservative Republican Party within the state. His massive reelection victory in 1998 helped swing the State House to the GOP which among other things, paved the way for the red legislative and congressional maps we see today. It’s hard to exaggerate the significance of the man on the politics of the state.

          MI-03: Tired of Presidency; Focused more on downballot races; Chris Afendoulis for State Senate

          • w920us March 11, 2017 at 7:45 pm

            The GOP hasn’t lost control of the Michigan State Senate since 1984 correct?

            R, South Philly, 47, Gay, WFU Alum
            #TrumpVoter #NeverHillary

            • Red Oaks March 11, 2017 at 7:54 pm

              Yes, the margins were usually pretty narrow until the 2010 wave but this past February 6th was the 33rd anniversary of the takeover.

              MI-03: Tired of Presidency; Focused more on downballot races; Chris Afendoulis for State Senate

              • w920us March 11, 2017 at 7:58 pm

                Here in PA, we would have stretched back to 1981, if not for the nightmare year of 1993. Thankfully Democrats only held onto the PA State Senate for that one year and refused to convene the State Senate for a good portion of the year to prevent leadership change. Courts basically forced them to convene to swear in new Republican Senators, resulting in a new majority.

                R, South Philly, 47, Gay, WFU Alum
                #TrumpVoter #NeverHillary

                • HS March 11, 2017 at 10:55 pm

                  That would be the year they stole a state Senate race. It was so egregious that a judge actually removed the Democrat who cheated and replaced him with the Republican.

        • Republican Michigander March 11, 2017 at 8:06 pm

          Milliken was an R because he was out of Grand Traverse County which has been R probably since the Civil War. I’m not even sure if FDR even won there.

          Red Oaks covered it. Engler was possibly the best tactical pol Michigan’s had on the R side in modern times. He won his first race in 1970 at 22 as state rep, and was elected to the state senate in 1978. He became majority leader in 1984 after the tax recalls.

          In 1990, he ran for governor and was expected to lose by 12% if you believed the polls. Blanchard, the arrogant “Boy Governor” at the time ticked off Coleman Young, then mayor of Detroit. Young refused to support him and told his people to skip the governor’s race. Engler won in a gigantic upset by 17000 votes. http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=1990&fips=26&f=1&off=5&elect=0

          https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/public-perspective/ppscan/22/22028.pdf – Polling story.

          MI-08 - Michigan is a red state again. We need a 50 state strategy and an 83 county strategy.

          • rdelbov March 11, 2017 at 8:14 pm

            Milliken was Romney’s LG(George) was never expected to be Gov. He narrowly beat Sander Levin in 1970-1974 but finally won his relative landslide in 1978. At age 94 he has to be certainly among our oldest living governors. I liked him and yes I checked his age as I did recall his passing.

            He was solid and was helpful to the GOP in 1970 and 1980 redistricting cycles. I know he drifted away from the GOP but I still like him.

            Engler was a superstar Governor and super smart pol!!!

        • Conservative First March 11, 2017 at 9:52 pm

          In addition to what Red Oaks and RM said…
          Dick Headlee, an anti-tax activist, beat Milliken’s LG for the R nomination for governor in 1982. Once Milliken was out of office, Engler, Dick Posthumus, and Dick Devos worked to take over the GOP for (relative) conservatives. Posthumus was Engler’s first campaign manager and became a state senator in 1982 and later Engler’s LG. Devos financed their efforts. The biography of John Engler has all the details of this era.

    • roguemapper March 11, 2017 at 6:17 pm

      1) Jeff Jackson
      2) Kamala Harris
      3) Harry Truman
      4) Pericles

      Dem NC-11

      • Greyhound March 11, 2017 at 8:16 pm

        I’m intrigued by the Harris pick. I’ve certainly got nothing nice to say about her, so I’m kind of curious why she’s your favorite incumbent politician.

        R, 27, CA-18. Anti-Anti-Trump

        • roguemapper March 11, 2017 at 9:44 pm

          I like that she’s pushing back against the We Will Replace You Berniebots, saying that progressives shouldn’t apply purity tests to red state Democrats and vowing to campaign for them if asked. Kamala Harris is pretty much painted as a total moonbat around here but to me she has always seemed to be a very polished and pragmatic politician. To be sure, my “favorite” current politician could easily change from one week to the next. There are a dozen or so Democrats that I like about the same.

          Dem NC-11

      • GOPTarHeel March 11, 2017 at 9:17 pm

        Oh man Jeff Jackson. He’s great at social media but has zero substance as a legislator.

        R/NC. Waiting for a non-ossified establishment or sane populists. Not optimistic.

        • roguemapper March 11, 2017 at 9:35 pm

          Well, I’m a NC Democrat so it’s not as if I have much to work with these days. His social media skills are what I like though. If the future belongs to twitter then he’s obviously one of our more promising politicians. I didn’t realize substance still matters, but Ds are pretty much locked out of legislating regardless. I could just as well have picked Josh Stein, though for different reasons.

          Dem NC-11

          • GOPTarHeel March 11, 2017 at 10:00 pm

            You have Cooper! Though I can’t imagine many Democrats or anyone else being excited about him for anything other than the fact that he isn’t McCrory.

            R/NC. Waiting for a non-ossified establishment or sane populists. Not optimistic.

      • fzw March 12, 2017 at 4:36 pm

        Jackson seems like probably the most formidable Senate candidate NC Dems could put up in 2020. He reminds me a lot of Jason Kander and Joni Ernst in that it’s hard for the median voter to not like them. Like Ernst, I could see him being on a national ticket some day.

        Currently MO-5. From MO-3.

        • GOPTarHeel March 12, 2017 at 7:24 pm

          He’s too liberal to run statewide. Stein and Cooper had to make nice with the business community for decades before they ran. But if there’s a mid-decade map redraw I 100% guarantee though that he’ll be double bunked in a new East Charlotte minority opportunity district instead of his current white liberal seat.

          R/NC. Waiting for a non-ossified establishment or sane populists. Not optimistic.

          • fzw March 12, 2017 at 7:58 pm

            I don’t know if I buy that him being a die-hard liberal kills his chances. From numerous races over the past several years, likability, charm, and charisma are probably the most underrated aspects of candidates who buck their state’s leans. Kander and (arguably) Ernst are out of the main-stream in their states, yet people like them. Factor in that North Carolina is still a swing state that has voted for prominent liberals and conservatives, and I don’t believe for a second that Jackson is too liberal to win a Senate race.

            Regardless, I stand by my thinking that he could be a catch-fire Senate candidate in 2020. I would not underestimate a candidate with his background. If North Carolina is competitive in 2020 at the Presidential level, which I see no reason why it wouldn’t be given its extreme polarization, he would only need a small overperformance to win.

            Currently MO-5. From MO-3.

            • GOPTarHeel March 12, 2017 at 8:01 pm

              Tillis is far stronger than Blunt though. I’m not that worried about him. He has zero connection to rural North Carolina and a hard left voting record. Deborah Ross 2.0

              R/NC. Waiting for a non-ossified establishment or sane populists. Not optimistic.

              • GOPTarHeel March 12, 2017 at 8:04 pm

                Also Kander lost. Who cares if he only barely lost? He did not win. And he didn’t turn into the social media darling until after that loss.

                R/NC. Waiting for a non-ossified establishment or sane populists. Not optimistic.

                • fzw March 12, 2017 at 8:17 pm

                  Yeah, Tillis>Blunt, maybe, but it wouldn’t take much of an overperformance to beat Tillis. Kander and Jackson have almost the same profiles, and charisma (from what I’ve seen). If Jackson can even overperform PresiDem by a fraction of what Kander did in the rural areas (not unreasonable; people seem to love young candidates who are veterans…), he could definitely win. And NC is much bluer than MO. I also fail to see how an Army JAG officer who is telegenic is comparable to a former ACLU lawyer with no charisma whatsoever (and a woman who lost by “only” 6 points against a more entrenched incumbent).

                  Not saying he’d be favored, but I think it would be one hell of a race.

                  Currently MO-5. From MO-3.

                  • rdelbov March 12, 2017 at 9:15 pm

                    I suspect with 40 million in outside spending in 2020 on the D side anyone Ross or Jackson or RM for that matter could make it a tight race. Any D with 40 million behind can count on 45% of the vote against Tillis.

                    Depending on what Collins does either Iowa or NC will be the less R state with a GOP senator up in 2020. Goes without saying that NC will be a target.

                    MS Ross was not without her charms. I can’t tell you that a blank slate like Jackson would be any more appealing then her. I could dozens of her ads that were highly effective and very appealing to the same type of voter that Jackson would need to win.If I was the type to throw stones I would suggest that its a sexist to suggest that a man in uniform is a better vote getter then a caring female.

          • rdelbov March 12, 2017 at 8:08 pm

            The D party for someone like him for a statewide run is the obstacle. The D base is much centered in Eastern NC. Mecklenburg county has big swath of D primary voters but clearly more Ds are in rural and urban Eastern NC.

            I don’t see Jackson climbing higher in state senate leadership anytime soon and there are 4 or 5 others who seem more likely to try for statewide office in 2020. Clearly Tillis will be the big target in 2020 but Jackson does seem to be the top tier guy for that race as of yet. But who knows?

    • Upstater22 March 11, 2017 at 8:06 pm

      1) My NY state senator Fred Akshar. Put him in with Astorino, Gibson, and Katko
      2) With all the years of drama and whatnot, it seems like hes been around forever, but…Scott Walker in a short period of time implemented his agenda, greatly benefitted Wisconsin, and helped it turn red in 2016. He is a superstar.
      3) Ronald Reagan of course
      4) Winston Churchill. How is this ever a question.

      Conservative, because facts are more important than feelings

    • shamlet March 11, 2017 at 8:21 pm

      1. Hogan
      2. Hogan
      3. Cecil Underwood
      4. Outside of ones that have been already said, Lech Walesa.

      R, MD-7. Put not your trust in princes. Process is more important than outcome.

  • jncca March 10, 2017 at 10:27 pm

    Top guarantee win would probably have to be the Michigan governorship, unless I’m blanking on one. I think redistricting would make a huge difference there if it was court-drawn, and Whitmer seems like a strong candidate with some national potential down the road which is also nice. I’d also like Sherrod Brown to hold on.

    24, CA-6. Part Obama, Part May, Part Christian Democrat.

    • StatenIslandTest March 11, 2017 at 12:36 am

      Its still NJ Gov or NYC Mayor for me as long as the odds are. DeBlasio is the third incarnation of Beame-Dinkins incompetence. Massey seems decent but he has to convince enough Dems that party loyalty asks too much NJ Gov may be even tougher thanks to compete neglect by Christie but Murphy seems like possibly the worst kind of person to be running the state right now.

      In the Senate Missouri should be target one. McCaskill was a hypocrite on Hillary and is hostile to our agenda. At least we can work with some other red-state Dems. Honorable mention would be Rick Scott taking out Bill Nelson (D-Insomnia Tapes).

      32, Jersey City

  • VastBlightKingConspiracy March 11, 2017 at 1:47 am

    A great media study that confirms what a lot of people here I have pointed out.


    The Clinton campaign was truly historically unprecedented. They were able to dominate the air waves like no candidate in history ever has done before, but they also pretty much wasted almost all of it on identity politics. Which isn’t to say that Clinton didn’t have a policy platform of her own – in fact, I still believe she would have been a better President than Obama and many of her policy proposals are things the GOP should be looking at. But her campaign was run almost entirely based on identity politics and racial/ethnic/gender hatred.

    The more people I talk to, the more it seems obvious that even someone who only sorta paid attention to the election knew what Trump stood for “build a wall. fix horrible trade deals. an originalist justice!” Clinton didn’t make any visceral impression besides “you’re a racist!”.

    I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Republican.

  • VastBlightKingConspiracy March 11, 2017 at 2:34 am

    Oh wow. Another election that sort of took place today is coming in. And by sort of take place, it was earlier but the votes weren’t released until today.

    In Uttar Pradesh, a ridiculously large Indian state with over 200 million residents, the BJP has apparently scored a shocker landslide victory which means all the more in India’s largest state where BJP has historically been a third-party at best. http://www.livemint.com/Politics/LHGy2ZPUbn8dvxcciWWw9O/Uttar-Pradesh-election-results-2017-live-Counting-of-votes.html

    I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Republican.

    • Greyhound March 11, 2017 at 4:35 am

      Damn. Well, considering they have such a large majority in the Lok Sabha (Indian version of the House or Representatives) that no party meets the 10% threshold to be a formal opposition, that is not entirely unexpected. Uttar Pradesh is basically the Indian equivalent of Ontario in Canada–its not the BJP’s base (which is more Western India like Gujarat) but its where you build Majorities in Indian’s huge hodgepodge of a parliament.

      R, 27, CA-18. Anti-Anti-Trump

    • Red Oaks March 11, 2017 at 4:43 pm

      The BJP also won a landslide in Uttarakhand, a “small” state of over 10,000,000 people. Interestingly India states report specifically how many men, women, and “third gender” voters there are – http://ceo.uk.gov.in/files/UK_VS_Election_2017/COMMISTION__ER_REPORT_Final_Pub__(1).pdf

      MI-03: Tired of Presidency; Focused more on downballot races; Chris Afendoulis for State Senate

  • rdelbov March 11, 2017 at 8:43 am

    Court ruling on TX redistricting lawsuit


    not unexpected based on Alabama ruling as TX lines were drawn to accommodate VRA preclearance rules. There was no remedies suggested and no timeline for future actions.

    There are some very simple solutions to this ruling but appeals will be made. The question is whether CD23 can be saved by moving it out. I think it can be done but clearly there will be appeals. The key is whether you can take the R rural areas of CD 15-CD28-CD34 and shift CD23 around that way. The court did not suggest a remedy and I would prefer a map that preserves CD23

    • krazen1211 March 11, 2017 at 8:57 am

      Well, the TX-23 in the plan C-185 was already changed. One of the main complains there was the splitting of Maverick County, which was put back together in plan C-235. Stay tuned for the Supreme Court!

    • shamlet March 11, 2017 at 10:06 am

      I wouldn’t. I think conceding another seat will ultimately help us, particularly with 7 and 32 looking iffy. I think the best, albeit radical, option is to blow up TX-3 and give it as a new seat to Hurd and then rearrange the entire map to make the suburban seats stronger.

      R, MD-7. Put not your trust in princes. Process is more important than outcome.

      • CTIronman March 11, 2017 at 10:18 am

        At some point we need to simply quit dogging Doggett & just draw a D vote sink completely within Travis County

        • rdelbov March 11, 2017 at 10:23 am

          No doubt about it. Vote sink time for Travis county. CD23 will likely end up a bit more R IMO but CD27 will likely shift a bit to the west.

          • rdelbov March 11, 2017 at 10:28 am

            I note as that since the 2011 map was modified by the 2013 court/legislative map no remedy was given by the court. I am not sure if the defendants or plaintiffs will appeal to the high court for action?

            A bit of a confusing ruling. As noted twice already IMO there are several easy solutions to draw maps to comply with this ruling if the basis of the ruling was to avoid using race as a factor.

        • krazen1211 March 11, 2017 at 10:38 am

          I think the time has come and gone for that, right?

          Condensing TX-35 into Travis County allows TX-10 to relieve the pressure on TX-07, allows TX-25 to relieve the pressure on TX-32 (domino effect here), and also fixes TX-21. It also makes sense to split up Williamson and Bell Counties.

          • rdelbov March 11, 2017 at 11:12 am

            For sure–Doggett getting all of the D part of Travis allows for some relief for several R seats.

            When and if the GOP has to redraw the lines.

      • rdelbov March 11, 2017 at 10:21 am

        There is plenty of GOP area in CD15-CD34-CD28.

        The easiest solution is to have two hispanic seats in Rio Grande valley(take some area from CD23 plus San Antonio area as well GOP area north of the valley) Plus two hispanic seats in Bexar county as well as Doggett’s seat in Austin.

        CD27 will get area from CD15/CD34 that is GOP. Smith who is 71 might have to retire or Hurd will have to move but you can draw seats.

        As noted the court forced changes on CD23 that was related to race.

        We saw in NC congressional map. If you decide to draw lines that favor a particular and do not use race as a basis it okay with the courts.

  • cer March 11, 2017 at 9:27 am

    I guess if the left can’t win at the ballet box, this seems to be their alternative. I hope this is appealed to the SCOTUS!

    Conservative first, Republican second!

    • cer March 11, 2017 at 9:40 am

      I have to say though the court order district redraw in Florida didn’t really hurt the GOP that badly in FL… they only lost 1 seat in 2016. Rep. Mica’s seat, I’m sure with the right candidate, the GOP could win back.

      Conservative first, Republican second!

      • Izengabe March 11, 2017 at 6:34 pm

        I would argue that the GOP would have won the Graham and Murphy seats under the old lines and held maybe every seat other than Mica’s. GOP could have been +1 or +2 in FL instead of -1. Redistricting was at least a 2 to 3 seat swing in the Dems favor.

        Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

    • krazen1211 March 11, 2017 at 11:33 am

      Well, they tried this before.

      This same panel created an incredible Dem gerrymander back in 2011 during the initial rounds of litigation on the maps. Thankfully, Greg Abbott quickly appealed and the Supreme Court tossed this map.


      Looking at that map, the TX-23 map cuts out some of Hurd’s best areas in Bexar. TX-10 there is only 52% McCain, and with the way Travis County is moving, probably voted for Hillary. Minor differences in TX-32. This TX-06 also looks rather weak with all those portions of Dallas County.

      • The Emperor March 11, 2017 at 12:11 pm

        Since there’s no preclearance issues, I say they nix the three baconstrips and just create one seat in the inner Rio Grande Valley, one seat in the outer Rio Grande Valley/Laredo, and one tossup seat in the parts of the three districts in the northern portions of the baconstrips and southern Bexar that the GOP can win. If you remove the need Doggett to come take the Dem parts of Bexar then you could create a compact seat in San Antonio for Castro, then push Hurd into the most GOP parts of Bexar while removing the small 70% D counties in the southern part of the district to the outer Rio Grande Valley district.

        male/21/R/TX-22, CA-52/originally CA-45, KS-03
        Rubio Republican

        • rdelbov March 11, 2017 at 2:47 pm

          Even you move southward Nueces county there is a ton of GOP area leftover from TX27-plus the northern area of TX15-TX34-TX28.

          I might add that IMO you actually attach the upper Rio Grande area and the rest of El Paso county to TX11. Let’s be clear TX23 IMO is not a defendable seat.

          You can make CD27 more hispanic and still have it elect a republican.

          If the GOP has to redraw and I am not sure the high court will order it–this order does not order a redraw as technically it was a lawsuit against the 2011 and not the 2013 map. I stick to my thought that a second SA seat plus a Travis county seat solves the problem. I would not give up CD23 unless forced to.

    • shamlet March 11, 2017 at 2:46 pm

      I would imagine Ballet patrons lean pretty strongly left =)

      R, MD-7. Put not your trust in princes. Process is more important than outcome.

  • Tekzilla March 11, 2017 at 11:58 am

    Haberman – HOLDOVER: Bharara is not submitting his resignation, according to several ppl briefed – WH not responding to what they’ll do next.

    36/M/NY-01 (D)

    • GOPTarHeel March 11, 2017 at 12:28 pm

      If he’d simply submitted his resignation and worked backchannels they might have kept him. No he has to be fired. The way he’s doing this suggests he’ll be running for office this cycle-perhaps against Cuomo?

      R/NC. Waiting for a non-ossified establishment or sane populists. Not optimistic.

  • Mayor Perk March 11, 2017 at 12:36 pm

    UT-03: Physician Kathryn Allen (D) announced her bid against Rep. Jason Chaffetz last week and has already raised $410k from small, out-of-state donors.


    30. OH-12. Establishment Republican.

    • GOPTarHeel March 11, 2017 at 12:50 pm

      Lol. Obama got 19% of the vote here. Hillary came in third behind McMullin.

      R/NC. Waiting for a non-ossified establishment or sane populists. Not optimistic.

      • CTIronman March 11, 2017 at 1:06 pm

        Want D’s to spend all their $ in Provo

      • Mayor Perk March 11, 2017 at 1:20 pm

        Oh, she has no chance. I posted mostly to illustrate Dems/progs misallocating resources.

        30. OH-12. Establishment Republican.

    • cer March 11, 2017 at 7:54 pm

      If the Dems want to waste their own money in that district, by all means go for it.

      Conservative first, Republican second!

  • GoBigRedState March 11, 2017 at 12:46 pm

    Labor wins Western Australia in a landslide as expected. One Nation only got 4.7% of the vote in the lower house after polling as high as 13%-Pauline Hanson blames the Liberal preference deal for the lower than expected showing.

    45, NE-1, #NeverTrump in 2016, support Trump now as situation warrants

    • GOPTarHeel March 11, 2017 at 12:51 pm

      The coalition is going to be wiped out next election at this rate.

      R/NC. Waiting for a non-ossified establishment or sane populists. Not optimistic.

      • The Emperor March 11, 2017 at 1:28 pm

        All Australian states elected Labour governments in the early 2000s while the Howard Government won solid reelections in the 2001 and 2004 general elections. Turnbull has two years to go in his term. A lot of things could happen.

        male/21/R/TX-22, CA-52/originally CA-45, KS-03
        Rubio Republican

        • GoBigRedState March 11, 2017 at 3:24 pm

          New South Wales and Tasmania are the only states left with Liberal/Coalition governments now. Interestingly, when the current Liberal government in Western Australia was elected in 2008. it broke a complete stranglehold Labor had on all state governments and the federal government since the previous year when Labor defeated the Howard government.

          45, NE-1, #NeverTrump in 2016, support Trump now as situation warrants

          • The Emperor March 11, 2017 at 3:56 pm

            The New South Wales Coalition government is very popular right now and secure. Tasmania’s is probably secure as well (last time I checked) while I saw in the latest polls the Queensland and Victoria Labor governments were in trouble.

            male/21/R/TX-22, CA-52/originally CA-45, KS-03
            Rubio Republican

            • GoBigRedState March 11, 2017 at 4:20 pm

              Queensland’s Labor government is a minority government, so it would be easy for the LNP to take that one back. Victoria’s Labor government has had some scandals-the Speaker had to resign recently.

              45, NE-1, #NeverTrump in 2016, support Trump now as situation warrants

              • The Emperor March 11, 2017 at 4:45 pm

                South Australia has been Labor for a while, and is in a minority government too. Could endure fatigue.
                Well, it isn’t like Victoria Labor is a stranger to scandal. A huge one in the early 1990s brought a Coalition landslide on the state level and nearly destroyed the Hawke Government on a federal level.

                male/21/R/TX-22, CA-52/originally CA-45, KS-03
                Rubio Republican

                • cer March 11, 2017 at 7:56 pm

                  Is it time for another leadership contest in the Fed liberal party!?

                  Conservative first, Republican second!

                  • GOPTarHeel March 11, 2017 at 9:14 pm

                    Abbot has been making noises, but Bishop is the obvious successor there.

                    R/NC. Waiting for a non-ossified establishment or sane populists. Not optimistic.

  • Ryan_in_SEPA March 11, 2017 at 1:59 pm


    Trump and Trudeau

    31, PA-6, fiscally conservative communitarian, Giant Meteor 2020 - Just End It Already!

  • HS March 11, 2017 at 2:13 pm

    1. I suspect the Dems will get closer in all the special elections because they are the “out” party and because they will spend more on these races. The one race i think they might win is MT, where they have always been competitive and it looks like they have a good candidate.
    2. The Goverships of FL and IL. For redistricting purposes.

    • Izengabe March 11, 2017 at 6:39 pm

      The Dem candidate in Montana is a BerinieBro entertainer who is on record calling for the registration of guns, socializing medicine and opposed local control of federal land. Quist is probably the worst ideological fit for Montana that you could find whose name is not Amanda Curtis.

      Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

  • davybaby March 11, 2017 at 2:54 pm

    When you said “WA Nationals” I instantly thought of the baseball team.

  • Mayor Perk March 11, 2017 at 3:45 pm

    USA-SDNY: Preet refused to resign. He was fired today. Tweeted out this afternoon.

    30. OH-12. Establishment Republican.

    • MaxwellsDemon March 11, 2017 at 3:48 pm

      Absolutely pointless move by Trump, could have just called Preetand told him to stay on or just told him 2 months ago he wanted him to resign in favor of Mark Musaky or something.

      • krazen1211 March 11, 2017 at 6:18 pm

        Meh. Had to be done, same as Sally Yates. Some will grandstand.

        Preet lives in Westchester County…….of course I thought Chelsea was going to claim that seat. Popcorn?

        • CTIronman March 11, 2017 at 6:22 pm

          Could easily rent an apartment in Manhattan

      • Izengabe March 11, 2017 at 6:41 pm

        Unless the Trump White House wants to squash Preet’s investigation into Fox News and the entire mass firing of the US Attorney’s was a way to get Preet out.

        I dont think that is what happened but it is a theory that’s floating around.

        Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

    • FiveAngels March 11, 2017 at 8:43 pm

      What a classless whiny prima donna. Such a tragedy he can’t use his law enforcement job anymore to prepare for his political career. Firing Preet is right up there with the travel ban as my favorite thing about last 50 days.

      • Izengabe March 11, 2017 at 10:00 pm

        1) Preet took down the most powerful (and most corrupt) politicians in NY.
        2) Donald Trump told Preet in person to his face that he will be keeping him on as US Attorney
        3) Like Schwarzenegger in CA this so-called “fight” with Trump would be the best thing for Preet’s political career and I’m sure Trump would cry crocodile tears if this could help Preet defeat deBlasio for Mayor.

        Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

        • w920us March 11, 2017 at 10:16 pm

          As much as these “fights” Trump initiates seem impulsive or not planned, at times it makes me wonder if they aren’t actually concocted given the predictable end result for the person facing his wrath or ridicule.

          R, South Philly, 47, Gay, WFU Alum
          #TrumpVoter #NeverHillary

          • TexasR March 11, 2017 at 10:43 pm

            I think it should be pretty well established at this point that the Donald isn’t some grand master of eight-dimensional chess. This is the way the man has behaved for half a century, and there’s plenty of evidence to back that up.

            Whatever we're talking about, it's all Frank Meyer's fault
            Be careful what you wish for

            • TheWizardOf144 March 11, 2017 at 11:17 pm

              Hey, remember when Preet said “this is my personal account, stay tuned”?

              He knew.

              Days ago.

              This was planned.

              • TexasR March 11, 2017 at 11:24 pm

                Do you have any actual proof that the Donald planned this? I ask because that would be literally the first time he’s ever planned something like that out.

                Whatever we're talking about, it's all Frank Meyer's fault
                Be careful what you wish for

                  • TexasR March 12, 2017 at 12:13 pm

                    That’s completely unresponsive. A single tweet, which you had already posted when I posted my original comment, does not count as evidence.

                    Whatever we're talking about, it's all Frank Meyer's fault
                    Be careful what you wish for

                • Mugwump March 11, 2017 at 11:41 pm

                  Trump’s complicated actions are either planned or part of him wanting to get revenge on somebody. Here’s a good clip of Trump on revenge: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rd0AdArPjqU&t=524s
                  Really puts the Mitt courtship for SOS in perspective.

                  Trumpocrat who wants to MAGA WI-06

                  • TexasR March 12, 2017 at 12:15 pm

                    All this proves is that the Donald is vindictive, which we already know from nearly half a century of behavior. Again, this is not what I asked for.

                    Whatever we're talking about, it's all Frank Meyer's fault
                    Be careful what you wish for

        • FiveAngels March 12, 2017 at 5:34 am

          1) I’m sure Sessions will find someone who can do the basic job of U.S. Attorney as well as Preet but without the opportunistic headline-grabbing and blatant political ambitions that pretty much create reasonable doubt for deBlasio and Cuomo if he ever managed to indict one of them.

          2) Yeah, allegedly. And that was before Preet’s patron declared jihad on Trump administration.

          3) Sure, maybe.

          • Izengabe March 12, 2017 at 2:35 pm

            I’m sure Sessions will find someone to do the basic job of US Attorney for the SDNY but I doubt that person will have Preet’s zeal for fighting corruption. Its not a coincidence that Obama put a corruption fighter in the US Attorney’s office in NY and not in Chicago. My guess is the last thing Donald Trump wants is a US Attorney poking around at corruption in NY politics. As a New Yorker I’m grateful to Preet for getting rid of Silver and Skelos and will be disappointed when his successor refocuses the direction on the office.

            Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

  • CTIronman March 11, 2017 at 3:48 pm

    So running against deBlasio or against Cuomo?

    • Izengabe March 11, 2017 at 6:43 pm

      Hopefully deBlasio. Preet can beat deBlasio.

      Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

  • RogueBeaver March 11, 2017 at 4:10 pm

    IN-SEN: Rokita strongly considering. http://howeypolitics.com/Content/HPI-News/HPI-News/Article/Rep-Rokita-strongly-considering-2018-U-S-Senate-race/39/123/15002

    QC/Blue Tory/M

  • Izengabe March 11, 2017 at 7:01 pm

    Trump makes a great pick to head the FDA. He choose Scott Gottlieb to be the next commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration. Gottlieb has been a conscientious conservative critic of the way the FDA has been run and will now have the opportunity to hopefully bring much needed changes to the agency:
    Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/445699/trump-chooses-scott-gottlieb-fda-commissioner-yuval-levin

    Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

  • cincojotas March 11, 2017 at 8:21 pm

    There have been a lot of theories on why the democrats have collapsed as badly as they have in places like West Virginia. The main theory I’ve heard is that there were a lot of unionized coal jobs in the past and that that was sort of a dam that was preventing them from voting how there psychology would predict (i.e. republican) and once the unions were gone – they reverted to there political instinct.

    My take on that theory has always been – if being in a union or lack thereof was the only thing preventing you from voting republican – wasn’t it only a matter of time before a place like West Virginia would flip? More than anything else, it meant that the state was a sort of time-bomb. I mean there was a lot of valid criticism for Mook/Podesta and those types who ignored advice by Bill Clinton to campaign in more “hardhat” type of areas. But at the same time – maybe the dems were right to switch there focus to places like Montgomery County, PA – because the dem coalition is more reliable/sturdy in those places than in WV.

    As I have mentioned before, the democrats over the past 20-25 years have been attempting (and mostly failing) to tread water by losing rural/working class areas and gaining in bedroom communities of most cities. Maybe they felt that at this point, it was a lot more feasible to stop stanching the bleeding to identify who in there coalition was loyal and who was a weak link. Maybe it also was an attempt to give them a geographic advantage – if you lose rural areas by the same margin you win cities – maybe it could cancel out the whole geographic concentration issue.

    With that said though – the thing I like about rural politics is that elected officials tend to know there constituents on a much closer basis while urban politicos (outside of a few white ethnic areas in the northeast and midwest) seem to have a much more distant relationship with there constituents (who tend to be more transient than rural voters).

    Any of you guys agree with this theory?

    • rdelbov March 11, 2017 at 8:28 pm

      The D war on coal-the D disconnect between the coasts and small town rural america where yes even union democrats go to church and carry guns. Not a hit on Beyonce but she is not a cultural icon in Mingo county WV or Garland county AR or Casey county KY.

    • Son_of_the_South March 12, 2017 at 2:53 pm

      Eh, sorta. While running my last campaign in the fall (in Indiana), I asked a colleague (who has about thirty years of experience in Southern Indiana politics) why the City of Terre Haute was still so Democratic. I said I understood why it still voted for Dems, but the margins seemed way too high for a city in that area that was so white and had so few white-collar jobs. His reply? “Force of habit, mostly.” He explained to me that basically the city would come around to being swingy, but it would take the march of time or some special push to stop the old yellow dogs from padding the margin. A few weeks later, Hillary carried Terre Haute by 17 votes. Trump (and a true hatred of Hillary) was that final push.

      24, R, TN-09
      Classical liberals are a minority. Fusionism is the answer.

  • CTIronman March 11, 2017 at 8:26 pm

    A lot of what happened in the rural South & Rust Belt was generational. The New Deal generation associated the Democrats with delivering deliverables to less affluent communities. As they passed on these places were bound to return to the mean and other factors (social conservativism) kicked in for voters DOB 1950+. Then under Obama era these folks felt someone else was getting deliverables from Democrats & the backlash was on.

    • GOPTarHeel March 11, 2017 at 9:10 pm

      My great grandmother in Southeastern Nc used to regularly refuse to vote for local Republicans because “Hoover about starved us to death” and my great grandfather got a shipbuilding job in Wilmington, NC during the war. In election years silent generation grandmother would then remind her of modern Democratic positions on social issues and she’d flip back to voting conservative at most levels.

      R/NC. Waiting for a non-ossified establishment or sane populists. Not optimistic.

      • segmentation_fault March 12, 2017 at 12:44 am

        My grandmother in NC is one of the few white evangelical Democrats out there. The only time she voted Republican was 1972. Not a huge fan of Hillary – voted Bernie in the primary – but hates Trump. A lot of that side of my family has similar politics – but many are more Blue Dog types than her. I bet there are some Obama/Trump voters in my extended family but I haven’t talked about it with them.

        En Marche!

        • Republican Michigander March 12, 2017 at 12:54 am

          I know quite a few Obama/Trump voters. Most of them were socially moderate to conservative union folks who voted against Romney (“Let Detroit go bankrupt” column) and voted against Hillary (NAFTA was and is still a big issue here).

          I know very few Romney/Hillary voters, although I do know some Romney voters who did vote for blank/Castle/Johnson/write-in Cruz/Carson/Kasich/Rubio

          MI-08 - Michigan is a red state again. We need a 50 state strategy and an 83 county strategy.

          • segmentation_fault March 12, 2017 at 1:04 am

            Interestingly the (only) loyal Republicans in my family, my grandparents on my father’s side, didn’t vote at all for the first time. So out of my immediate family, uncles, aunts, grandparents, and cousins I think there were 14 votes for Hillary and 2 for Trump.

            En Marche!

            • FiveAngels March 12, 2017 at 5:50 am

              People like your grandparents will be an interesting demographic in 2020: missing Romney voters (I include those who didn’t vote at all and those who voted for Johnson or McMuffin). While the more intellectual #NeverTrump types will never vote for him, I think Trump gets most of these rank and file voters he didn’t get the first time.

              • GOPTarHeel March 12, 2017 at 9:34 am

                Yeah. Trump won over the few Democratic relatives I have in my extended family (mostly older rural Christians without college degrees) but lost several votes in my immediate family of college educated, urban county registered Republicans. None voted for Clinton and all turned out for McCrory/Burr-a couple voted Johnson and one wrote in Rubio of all things. (The write in voter voted for Cruz in the primary. People make strange choices.) Trump has won over half of the defecting Rs but one or two are probably trending Democratic.

                R/NC. Waiting for a non-ossified establishment or sane populists. Not optimistic.

              • segmentation_fault March 12, 2017 at 4:22 pm

                I think today, grandfather would vote for Trump, and grandmother would not. Both were for Rubio in the primary.

                En Marche!

            • Tekzilla March 12, 2017 at 6:50 pm

              In my family I don’t think we had a single crossover from the 2012 election.

              Amongst close family it was 9 Clinton to 1 Trump. 2 That I don’t know, but I believe were Johnson voters though, They don’t talk politics so its hard to get a feel for them.

              My Grandfather who was the worlds biggest Bob Grant fan and passed away in 2000 probably would have loved Trump.

              36/M/NY-01 (D)

          • VastBlightKingConspiracy March 12, 2017 at 3:51 am

            IIRC, my extended family went 11 Obama, 2 Romney in 2012, and 7 Clinton, 6 Trump, and 1 Stein. After breaking 9-1 for Sanders and splitting 1-0 for Trump. Probably defying the national trend, all of the Obama/Trump voters were wealthy, older, and had advanced degrees.

            In fact, the Trump/Clinton split was a perfect division between advanced/professional degree holders and normal degree holders/students. Even more bizarre, the only Clinton primary voter ended up voting for Donald Trump, which definitely has to be an aberration.

            I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Republican.

  • RogueBeaver March 12, 2017 at 11:05 am

    CA-SEN: Ahnuld still out. https://twitter.com/Politics1com/status/840941370521063424

    QC/Blue Tory/M

    • Left Coast Libertarian March 12, 2017 at 2:03 pm

      The Arnold senate rumors seem to me to be an attempt by Arnold to either 1) see how he’d be received if he decided to run 2) boost him up at a time he’s in a fight with Trump. He probably was never really interested but that doesn’t mean it didn’t come from his camp.

    • Izengabe March 12, 2017 at 2:27 pm

      If true that’s a shame. Schwarzenegger is the GOP’s only shot at not getting a Democrat in that Senate seat (barring a top two miracle). Hopefully he’s just letting a little air out of the trial balloon because it is so early in the cycle and will reassess entering the race some time down the road.

      Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

  • Manhatlibertarian March 12, 2017 at 12:56 pm

    Found this Politico/Morning Consult poll of 1791 RV from mid Feb that I don’t recall seeing posted here before. What caught my eye was although it showed a generic Dem would beat Trump 43%-35%, if Elizabeth Warren was the Dem candidate, Trump would beat her 42%-36%. She is the big bold progressive favorite, but considering the Trump Admin has endured a lot of criticism in the media the last few weeks, I think this shows there is a limited appeal for her leftwing rhetoric and agenda. Surprisingly, although he does poorly against a generic Dem, Trump has a 49/45 fav/unfav job approval rating.


    • MikeFL March 12, 2017 at 1:07 pm

      I think I posted it a couple weeks ago, but yeah, nominating Warren would be a disaster for the Dems unless his approval rating is in the tank.

      26 | FL-16/27 | FisCon

      • Manhatlibertarian March 12, 2017 at 1:29 pm

        There is also a March 7 Suffolk Univ/USA Today poll that shows Warren has 34% fav, 34% unfav, and 32% don’t know enough about her. While Warren has an opportunity to make an impression on those who don’t know her, the fact that among those who feel they know her as many have an unfavorable view as a favorable one is not a good sign for her. Running as an identity politics bold progressive may work in Mass and Cal, but it is far from clear that you can assemble a EC victory nationwide with that type of agenda.

        • Ryan_in_SEPA March 12, 2017 at 2:57 pm

          Running as such a candidate probably moves the Romney / Clinton voters firmly back in the Republican camp and flips Minnesota, New Hampshire, Maine, Nevada, New Mexico, and maybe Colorado and Virginia.

          31, PA-6, fiscally conservative communitarian, Giant Meteor 2020 - Just End It Already!

      • VastBlightKingConspiracy March 12, 2017 at 3:29 pm

        As someone who also doesn’t like Liz Warren, I feel we’re underestimating her here. The “Generic Republican” crushed Obama in every poll until we had to nominate a real Republican. I see a poll where Trump is at +4 approval and leads Warren by 6. That makes a lot of sense. With such approval ratings, he is naturally a favorite against Elizabeth Warren., a relatively weak challenger. However, if Trump is at 45-49 instead, Warren is probably favored to win. Ugh.

        I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Republican.

        • rdelbov March 12, 2017 at 4:28 pm

          Warren has a different feel then Bernie Sanders. Sanders was old and seems cranky grandpa (we all love cranky grandpas) while Warren is a lecturing old college professor type. Whinny professor type-I can imagine her with a ruler in her hand rapping the hands of stubborn students.

          She loses a lot of voters to Trump.

          • Republican Michigander March 12, 2017 at 4:55 pm

            Bernie comes across as an actual populist who isn’t part of the system. Warren comes across as the system (professors are part of the system).

            MI-08 - Michigan is a red state again. We need a 50 state strategy and an 83 county strategy.

  • MosheM March 12, 2017 at 1:08 pm

    Happy Purim, folks!

    29, M, R, NY-10

  • Republican Michigander March 12, 2017 at 4:54 pm

    USElectionAtlas has the results of some of the Michigan Communities updated that I didn’t know about.

    I think it was Twin Pines who mentioned Trump’s improvement in Native American communities. That probably is the case at least to some degree. I think it depends on the location.

    Mackinac County – 60.94% Trump overall (56% Romney), 17% Chippewa – Trump won everywhere except Mackinac Island which Clinton barely won. Mackinac Island is always a close vote. Obama won it twice. Bush won it in 2004. Trump flipped swingish St Igance and dem leaning St Ignace Twp, both of which are about 25% Chippewa (plus those mixed race which here is mostly white and Chippewa). He got 54% in the township. Romney and Bush got 47% Snyder got 46%. Snyder got 46% in the city, Romney 48%, and Bush 54%. Trump got 51%. There’s modest but noteworthy Chippewa populations in the other townships as well, and Trump improved 10% in some of the townships overall.

    Chippewa County – 59% Trump (53% Romney) – 16% Chippewa
    Trump won everywhere except Bay Mills which has a Chippewa majority and is the home of a reservation. He got 39% there, which is about the same as Romney. Stein got 5% there. Trump did flip Raber Twp, Sugar Island Twp, and Sault Ste Marie (despite Lake Superior State University). He got 58% in Raber Twp compared to Romney’s 47%. Raber is over 90% white, which is high for the Eastern UP. Sugar Island was 58% Trump as well compared to 43% for Romney. It’s 30% Chippewa and holds part of a reservation. Sault Ste Marie is about 17% Chippewa. It went 51% Trump compared to 48% Romney. Superior Twp next to Bay Mills and 20% Chippewa was 53% Romney and 55% Trump. Kinross Twp (11% Chippewa and 17% black including the prison) was 54% Romney and 65% Trump)

    Bay Mills is a bit more geographic isolated than St Ignace or The Soo. Sugar Island Twp is next to the Soo. Bay Mills is away from I-75 or M-28 and slightly off the beaten path of the tourist areas. There’s a casino there, but there’s also casinos in the Soo and St Ignace.

    Trump flipped EVERYTHING in Gogebic County. Ironwood. Bessemer, Wakefield. All of it. Watersmeet (17% Native American) went from 53% Romney to 58% Trump. The other areas were 90%+ white. The townships were all 55%+Trump or more. (Romney lost all except Watersmeet). Ironwood and Bessemer was 49% Trump. (40% and 43% Romney), Wakefield was 54% Trump. (41% Romney)

    The only places in the UP that Trump lost were :

    Alger County – Mathias and Grand Island Twp (both Obama areas). Rock River and Munising flipped to Trump
    Chippewa County – Bay Mills Twp
    Houghton County – Houghton and Hancock which are both influenced by Michigan Tech University. Adams Twp flipped to Trump
    Keewenaw County – Grant Twp (which Romney won by 12 votes).
    Mackinac County – Mackinac Island (Not in the UP, but part of the UP’s county)
    Marquette County – Clinton hung on to Champion Twp, Ishpeming, Negaunee, Marquette, Marquette Twp, and Richmond Twp, all with reduced numbers from 2012 (even Marquette despite NMU). Trump flipped 10 townships here and hung on to Romney’s.
    Ontonagon County – Bohemia Twp which Romney won by 2 votes. Interior Twp flipped to Trump.
    All other counties in the UP were sweeps for Trump, including the areas that supported Obama.

    Keep in mind that Carter won 5 UP Counties, Mondale won 3, Dukakis won 9, and Bill Clinton won all of them. Even Gore and Kerry won 3, and Obama 8 (the first time).

    MI-08 - Michigan is a red state again. We need a 50 state strategy and an 83 county strategy.

  • Leave a Reply

    Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!